By on March 9, 2009

In comparison to the Genesis sedan, the Genesis Coupe has appeared on dealer lots like a Stealth bomber sliding into Whiteman Air Force Base. Either Hyundai thinks their new two-door makes such a strong impression it doesn’t need a huge marketing campaign to jump-start the public imagination or they blew their wad with the sedan. Whatever Hyundai’s intentions, the Genesis Coupe speaks for itself, surpassing its current competitors in the pony car market. (2010 Ford Mustang test to follow.) If you’re looking for a rear-wheel drive, high-powered, sporty car with a recession-friendly price, exodus forms on the right.

Hyundai took a few risks with the Genesis Coupe’s styling, but receives extra credit for staying away from The Temple of Bangle. The Korean car’s clean lines, balanced proportions and captivating details form a design language that mimics Infiniti, without the full-on bug-eyed look. Of note: the Hyundai Coupe’s rear quarter windows. They sport a lower edge dip that’s somewhere between interesting and plain old weird. I like it; it’s not the split window of a Stingray, but at least its something.

The Hyundai Genesis Coupe’s cabin welcomes refugees from the plastic armageddon known as the [current] Ford Mustang GT and Dodge Challenger R/T. My Hyundai tester’s two-tone brown and black interior offered rich textures and a solid build. Okay, the silver accents around the center stack are formed from discarded Revell pieces, but at least they don’t try to look like aluminum. Meanwhile, melted Barbie doll crept up the door panels and the center tunnel, awaiting their fate of permanent scuffing.

The Coupe’s interior ergonomics are spot on if a bit unusual. Stacked or not, duplicate controls belong in an aircraft with a co-pilot, not an automobile. Still, everything works well enough, with Accord-compliant haptic feedback. If you’ve rented a Hyundai Sonata, you’ll find it all a bit familiar. Honda owners will yawn. Charger owners will feel under-dressed.

The Genesis Coupe’s heavily bolstered seats are a genuine highlight. The chairs cradle drivers like the Spine-Melter 2000, caressing their keisters with the perfect amount of padding, support and contours. Think Recaros built for crossing the country instead of an autocross.

Hyundai did not bless the Genesis Coupe with the remarkable V8 powering its Lexus-wannabe brother. Fortunately, the Hyundai’s 312 bhp (on premium gas) DOHC 3.8-liter V6 screams loudly enough to drown out the “Doh, I could’ve had a V8″ crowd. Fitted with the Aisin six-speed manual transmission, the Genesis two-door keeps up with its V8 competition. The mill’s good for a sub-six second dash to 60 mph.

Better yet, the Korean Coupe delivers a superior transmission feel, with short throws, precise engagements and one of the best clutches you can buy this side of $30K. The track version of the Genesis Coupe’s available with a ZF six-speed automatic. If you can drive a stick, do; the “cheaper” unit suits the car’s engine and character well enough.

So the Genesis keeps up with its pony car competitors in a straight line. And? And the Hyundai also provides more than merely adequate stoppers, standard strut tower braces and an [available] Torsen limited-slip differential. So equipped, the Genesis Coupe will literally run rings around anything else in its class.

The biggest surprise in this entire package: the Genesis Coupe’s steering. While the Europeans seem to favor lighter and lighter steering feel (to disguise their model’s increasingly obese if safety-oriented curb weight), the Genesis feels perfectly weighted and precise. BMW’s M3—yes, that one—should take lessons from the Genesis Coupe’s steering rack. It serves-up Porsche-level feel, with just a tad less precision.

The Genesis Coupe is one of those cars that’s constantly urging you to waste gas in the senseless pursuit of pleasure. The harder your push the engine, the throatier and lustier it sounds. The faster you push the chassis, the more athletic it feels. Until it all goes wrong.

The Genesis’s Achilles’ heel lies just beyond the limits of adhesion. When the back end lets loose, you’d better be right with your god as the car becomes all but uncontrollable. The traction control jumps in like an unwanted sidekick only to muck up the mess. Although I didn’t get a chance to test the theory (the Hyundai salesman looked green and saw red), I assume that turning it off might prevent a hit on your insurance deductible.

For the past 20 years, Hyundai has progressed as an automaker. The Genesis Coupe is another step Fordward. It’s a fast, well priced, well-built, generally competent, comfortable and good looking car. But the Genesis fails in the one key area, where its competitors excel: smoky powerslides [NB: not the nightclub singer from the forties]. Is the lack of tail-out expertise a big deal? Probably not. Will the Genesis Coupe find happy homes? Definitely.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

112 Comments on “Review: 2010 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 3.8 (Grand Touring)...”


  • avatar
    TVC15

    Yea, I saw one the other day at our Hyundai store…very impressive in person. I look forward to driving one soon, though I doubt I’ll be tempted to trade in my current ride (Evo MR).

  • avatar
    WaftableTorque

    An unfortunate use of a brand name, Genesis brings back memories of the Cutlass name to bring unity to models that had little in common. I think the sedan and coupe are probably miles apart in image and target audiences.

  • avatar

    I still find it amazing how far Hyundai has come in the last few years. Initially I wrote them off as cheaper Toyotas, well assembled, competent, but bland to drive. Now Hyundai can turn up the heat and still compete as well… nice!

    The Genesis coupe, in my opinion, is far nicer looking then the new G37 coupe. I think the old G35 coupe was much more muscular and chiseled looking while the new G37 looks like a smiling fish from the front.

    Now if they can just convince Honda and Toyota faithful to give Hyundai a chance.

  • avatar
    ca36gtp

    The interior is surprisingly attractive, although I just can’t stomach the exterior design.

    Sadly, it’s the crappy at the limits handling that kills this car for me. For as long as GM’s still around, the Zeta is king of the pony cars.

  • avatar
    rpol35

    Check out the Hyundai website; there is a great video of the Genesis “Track” whipping around Road Atlanta.

    http://www.hyundaiusa.com/vehicle/GenesisCoupe/GenesisCoupe.aspx

    Also, how in the world did this car suddenly appear from virtually nowhere when one of its closest competitors, the nascent 2010 Chevrolet Camaro, is “still a comin’” after three years of over-hyped braggadocio?

  • avatar

    My main issue with the side window dip is that it makes no sense. Or does it? My first thought was that there would hardly ever be people back there, so why give an empty seat larger windows? But I suppose that if there are people back there, they’ll likely be children–who will benefit from a lower rear beltline.

    Or maybe it was done just to do something different.

    My main issue with the car itself–the Genesis name makes no sense here. Virtually nothing aside from the basic platform is shared with the sedan. Giving both cars the same name dilutes what “Genesis” stands for and is bound to confuse people.

    TrueDelta provided reliability stats for the Genesis sedan before any other source–it’s about average so far, pretty good for an all-new luxury sedan–and aims to do the same with the Genesis Coupe.

    For information about our research, and to sign up to participate (for free access):

    http://www.truedelta.com/reliability.php

  • avatar
    Strippo

    Also, how in the world did this car suddenly appear from virtually nowhere when one of its closest competitors, the nascent 2010 Chevrolet Camaro, is “still a comin’” after three years of over-hyped braggadocio?

    GM sells anticipation. Hyundai sells cars.

  • avatar
    jerseydevil

    the mustang/camaro/challenger triplets are still prettier from the outside. Way prettier. Or tuffer, or whatever.

    I think tho that this car would make a better dance partner.

    I want a Fiat 500 cabrio or an Abarth. I suppose I am not the correct buyer for this car.

  • avatar
    mtypex

    Pony car? Doesn’t this coupe have an independent rear suspension?

  • avatar
    SpacemanSpiff

    I can’t wait to check out the cheaper turbo-4.
    I’ll ditto the kudos to Hyundai for getting this into production quickly. If Nissan continues to drag their feet on a 240SX successor and Toyo-Baru delays/cancels their RWD coupe, then I’ll darn well buy a Hyundai instead. I’d rather it was a little lighter and had a NA engine, but I’ll take what I can get… I just can’t bring myself to buy a 20 year old 944.

  • avatar
    GS650G

    And they did all this without my tax dollars.

  • avatar
    niky

    Two things stand out to me here…

    1. gearchange: really? I mean, every generation of Hyundai I’ve driven has been ten times better than the last… but I still haven’t driven a single one with a decent gearchange. If it’s anywhere near Honda levels… even at just half of them, I’m impressed.

    2. steering feel: no… really really? The Genesis sedan has decent steering, but it’s more akin to what you’d expect in a Merc than a real sports car… have they really done something that different between the sedan and the coupe?

    I’m salivating in anticipation of my first tester unit… I don’t think I’ll be able to return it to Hyundai in one piece…

  • avatar
    rpol35

    “Pony car? Doesn’t this coupe have an independent rear suspension?”

    Yes, it does, just like the “seldom seen” Camaro and the Dodge Challenger. I’m not sure about to ’10 Mustang; the older Cobra models did however.

  • avatar
    BDB

    An unfortunate use of a brand name, Genesis brings back memories of the Cutlass name to bring unity to models that had little in common.

    I’m a different generation, for me it brings back memories of a early 90s video game console. Even the font used for the logo is similar!

    http://www.gameconsoles.com/images/Genesis%20LOGO.jpg

    http://www.hariult.info/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/hyundai-genesis-logo.jpg

    I think the name is perfect, it is a “new beginning” for Hyundai after all.

  • avatar
    Steven Lang

    It just strikes me as an extremely incongruous design that tries to take little pieces of everyone elses DNA. Perhaps the pictures don’t do it justice.

    I really wonder if this is more of a ‘sports touring’ coupe than a pony car. The model reminds me more of Hyundais version of a modern day SC or even Mark VIII than a Mustang. The first two cars tend to feel more sporty as they’re driven faster while the Mustang is more of an unrefined jack-rabbit of a vehicle.

  • avatar
    John R

    Very Nice. I just don’t understand why this car is being positioned (by Hyundai and auto journos) against the domestics. Nissan has the most to fear from this. Fully equipped, this rig costs as much as a 370Z basic. Korea is doing to Japan what Japan does to the Germans. A G37 with a 100k warranty.

    I am really anxious to test drive one of these. I’m just afraid I might trade in my Sonata for one.

  • avatar
    unseensightz

    I’m glad to see Hyundai finally build a worthwile sports car.

    However, to me the Mustang, Challenger, and especially Camaro are better in their own rights. I feel that all three look better than the genesis coupe. The mustang has a better interior now that I personally like more than this one, the Challenger, well its a Challenger, it may not be the most sophisticated beast, but I would love to own one.

    And finally the Camaro, which I feel is the best match up for this genesis coupe. The Camaro is coming with independent suspension at all four corners, a base V-6 with 300 horsepower, a nice, interesting interior, and a V-8 optional. And even though it isnt out yet, official production starts March 16, from early indications it will be a great handler compared to anything in its class.

  • avatar
    BDB

    One thing I don’t get is, why didn’t Hyundai just start a separate Genesis luxury brand? The sedan and coupe would form a good backbone for a new brand.

  • avatar
    Lee

    That center stack is really awful.

  • avatar

    BDB — a new separate brand would be very expensive. No way the numbers would add up in the current market.

  • avatar
    TEW

    This might be the final nail in the coffin for the domestics. The Gen Y generation is being raised with the domestics begging for money and their parents owning a foreign car. BDB is right with the name Genesis. Hyundai is telling us that they can build a car that is fast and has luxury ushering in a new beginning. I have seen this car and I like it.

  • avatar

    I saw one of these in person this past Saturday and it is huge. Much larger than you’d think looking at the pictures. The interior isn’t what I would call premium either.

    The car is generating some buzz with the import crowd and tunerz crowd. But as evidenced by the road tests released by other outlets it is well behind the performance of the refreshed 2010 Mustang (which only has 315hp currently). The Camaro will further push it down the pack. Much of the import crowd doesn’t like the comparison for that reason and instead point to it compared to the G37 coupe. I guess that’s fair. Maybe.

    They also cry that the turbo four with modz will roast any American muscle car or true Japanese sports car. But then what of your 10 year/100,000 mile warranty everyone falls back on when defending the decision to purchase a Hyundai? That goes right out the window. I would hope that anything with thousands of dollars worth of tuning and parts would keep up with stock performance cars. Also unless you’re doing the work on the car yourself most tuning shops charge a pretty penny for the work they do, even if it isn’t much. Money you could have thrown at a faster American or Japanese car with a warranty in the first place.

    The biggest problem IMO though is the styling, it really isn’t anything special. In fact the one I saw at the dealer looked like a giant silver blob in person. This is really the best Hyundai could do? They could have at least aped a Ferrari’s styling and given everyone a true head turner.

  • avatar
    ktm

    Trishield, were you at the Irvine Cars and Coffee this weekend? I only ask because there was a silver Hyundai Genesis coupe there on display. The car looks great from the rear 3/4-view, but when looking at it from the front 3/4 position there is a design element that makes you think “something’s not quite right.” While the Challenger suffers from the fat-man on tippy toes look, the Genesis coupe has a tiny face.

  • avatar
    pariah

    I actually like the window profile; it reminds me of a kukri machete.

  • avatar
    toxicroach

    I think the point of the Genesis is to take the hyundai brand out of the gutter and place it among the real brands.

  • avatar
    jkross22

    Anybody know if the coupe and the sedan are built in the same plant? If so, how tough could it be to offer the sedan with a stick?

    Since Pontiac/Holden refuse to offer the G8 for under 40k with a stick, why not offer one up. It would be another way to prove the ‘driver’s car’ shtick that Hyundai is trying to sell.

  • avatar
    slateslate

    ***
    An unfortunate use of a brand name, Genesis brings back memories of the Cutlass name to bring unity to models that had little in common. I think the sedan and coupe are probably miles apart in image and target audiences.***

    LOL, right on. Marketers are dumb….the Genesis sedan will probably be most cross-shopped by Avalon buyers and used Lexus/Merc. buyers. Middle-aged/near-retirement/the type who used to buy Buicks in the 1950′s/

    Genesis coupe drivers….180-degree opposite.

  • avatar
    carguy

    While Nissan currently has no problems selling all the 370Zs they have, this is definitely worrying dealers. I was at a Nissan dealership some days ago for a look at the new 370Z and the sales people were all talking a lot about “heritage”. And as you know, when any marketing department talks of heritage, it usually is designed to divert your attention from the value equation of what they are actually selling.

    Every car maker in search of respect will eventually turn to making a performance sport car (Nissan did it with the 240Z, Mazda with the RX-7 and Toyota with the Celica/Supra) and now it may well be Hyundai’s turn with the Genesis coupe. In particular the R-Spec Turbo 4 that is just begging for some engine mods.

  • avatar
    frozenman

    This car seems to be good effort IMO, but is the styling any better than the tiburon? I’m not sure. Call me an old fuddy duddy but but if this car isn’t head and shoulders above the 2010 Mustang GT, I’ve gotta take a pass, and I get a little ‘guilt’ relief supporting Ford. That and I’m still not sure how to say “Hyundai” properly!

  • avatar
    Justin Berkowitz

    jkross22 :

    Anybody know if the coupe and the sedan are built in the same plant? If so, how tough could it be to offer the sedan with a stick?

    Since Pontiac/Holden refuse to offer the G8 for under 40k with a stick, why not offer one up. It would be another way to prove the ‘driver’s car’ shtick that Hyundai is trying to sell.

    The coupe and sedan are built in different places. Also, while they share a platform it’s not just a straight swap job to put a stick into the Genesis sedan. A lot of different metal between those two cars.

    Keep in mind that the Genesis is really not being marketed as a driver’s car, while the Genesis coupe is. Genesis sedan is being pitched at people thinking about Lexus or Mercedes.

    The Coupe is a branding mistake in my opinion, since the aim was to make Kia the sporty brand and Hyundai the luxury brand.

  • avatar
    rochskier

    The “Genesis” moniker isn’t that unfortunate for Hyundai.

    For Gens X and Y it is far more likely to bring back fond memories of time wasted on the Sega videogame console.

  • avatar
    SupaMan

    Good review Mike.

    I’ll have to check this baby out at the Hyundai dealership down the road.

  • avatar
    hwyhobo

    From the pictures, it just looks like a gussied up 2010 Huyndai Tiburon. The front is particularly off-note. Why did they change it so completely from sedan to coupe? It cheapens the whole car.

  • avatar
    psarhjinian

    Giving both cars the same name dilutes what “Genesis” stands for and is bound to confuse people.

    Possibly the intent is a sort of “new Hyundai” brand-within-a-brand. Think about the relationship between Macintosh and Apple. You had various, disparate Macintoshes (the SE/30 and IIcx, for example, were pretty different) but they all fell within the Apple brand, as did the Apple II. The Geneses could be the Macintosh to the Elantra and Accent’s Apple II.

    Admittedly it’s a weird thing to do in a car brand (a bizarro version of badge engineering, perhaps) but how much worse could it be than, say, the Cadillac Cimarron?

  • avatar
    B-Rad

    Back when there were just spy photos of this thing I didn’t really see it, but now every time I see this thing it reminds me of the Tiburon. And that wasn’t the prettiest car.

  • avatar
    Jeff G

    “GS650G :
    March 9th, 2009 at 10:06 am

    And they did all this without my tax dollars.”

    Not with your tax dollars, but South Korea has been propping it’s auto makers for quite some time.

    http://www.hybridcars.com/carmakers/hyundai.html

    How did Hyundai manage to get so much assistance from the Korean government? The slush fund controversy provides clues. Two steps forward and one big step back: the scandal has apparently delayed Hyundai’s hybrid plans.

  • avatar
    KnightRT

    > So the Genesis keeps up with its pony car competitors in a straight line.

    MT has the ’10 Mustang down for 4.9 to 60, and into the 13s through the quarter. The best they could do with the Hyundai was 5.5 and 14, probably because the it has a torque limiter that won’t let you put the power down after the 1-2 shift for four seconds. Now that’s a serious performance car.

    > It serves-up Porsche-level feel, with just a tad less precision.

    MT calls the rack gluey. Edmunds calls it isolated and overboosted. C&D calls it precise. Was anyone reviewing the same car?

    > The Korean car’s clean lines, balanced proportions and captivating details form a design language that mimics Infiniti

    No, it mimics a Photoshop filter. It looks for all the world like they took the front end of a Honda Accord and dragged the smudge tool down the hood. I have no idea what’s going with the random slash down the flanks. This car is nothing if not ugly.

    I’m looking forward to seeing if the domestic reviews are anywhere near as charitable as this one.

  • avatar
    galaxygreymx5

    I drove one of these on Friday at the Hyundai dealer near LAX. Very knowledgeable, polite staff there which caught me off guard.

    Anyhow, they had one car in stock, a black/black 3.8L 6A model, loaded to the gills with a $31k sticker.

    Juan, the sales guy, took it right off the showroom floor for me to drive even though I was upfront in that I’m not planning to buy a car until late summer. Impressive given that the Honda shop was “too busy” to get my butt behind the wheel of a Civic Si covered in dust on the front line.

    I thought the Genesis looked very good in person, much better than photos. It has a nice athletic hunkered-down stance, reminding me of another car that I still can’t quite place. To my eyes it looked a lot more sporty than a Camaro or Mustang. The Seoul-staring front end looks much better in person, at least in black. The rims were gorgeous, Brembos peeking through, and I think the spoiler gives it a nice wedge shape that completes the car.

    Interior materials were Toyonda-grade. So, better than the Camaro or Mustang, but BMW and Infiniti don’t have anything to worry about. The blue dash lighting was a little cheesy and I wish the wheel telescoped. The stereo rocked.

    The thing drove very, very well. Chassis rigidity felt on par with a 335i, the steering was almost as sharp as my Miata, the brakes felt solid and progressive. It barked the rear tires on takeoff without much prodding, leading me to believe the throttle tip-in might be a little hyper aggressive. No roll, squat, or dive to be found anywhere. Hit a huge pothole on accident and there were no chassis reverberations.

    Overall I was really impressed with the car. It has power to spare, a nice stance, an above-average interior, and proper handling dynamics. If the 2.0 Track with a manual gearbox is anywhere near as good this car will be at the top of my shopping list this summer.

  • avatar
    Kman

    Well. This sounds very desirable.

    Here’s an upside to the recent discussion about TTAC’s perceived negativity (or not). When a TTAC review is as positive about a car as this one is, then you know it is a well turned-out car!

    I want to test-drive (buy?) this thing. The interior is very attractive, and sounds like the manual tranny is satisfying. Looks pretty good too.

    A small part of me *does* wish that Hyundai had launched a new, upscale brand to showcase the Genesis sedan and this new coupe.

    Oh, and excellent prose in this review Mike (highlights: “Fordward” … “smoky powerslides … the forties nightclub singer…”)

  • avatar
    ajla

    @ Mike Solowiow:

    How does this compare to the 2004 GTO you bought at CarMax?

  • avatar
    buzzliteyear

    GS650G wrote:

    And they did all this without my tax dollars.

    Sadly, that’s not strictly true.

    While the US taxpayer was busy paying US troops to guard the DMZ, the Koreans were busy building up a near world-class automobile industry using trade barriers and government-supported industrial trusts.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaebol

    So why is what’s good for Pusan bad for Peoria?

  • avatar
    James2

    For a slightly different perspective, Inside Line just compared the Genesis against the G37. It won.

    BTW, according to their tests, it’s not capable of sub-six second 0-60 runs, not that I care, but there you go.

  • avatar
    don1967

    To say that the Genesis Coupe fails in the area of smokey power slides is like saying that Teri Hatcher fails in the area of cooking. Who cares?

    Hyundai is developing an uncanny ability to nail the market right in the sweet spot, with good-looking, high-quality products that do everything the average buyer wants for less money than anything remotely comparable.

  • avatar
    campocaceres

    My understanding is that originally Hyundai did want a new brand, but decided that creating a new seperate brand would be far too costly.

    I get the impression that “Genesis” refers to a new line of RWD cars that are aimed more upmarket than Hyundai’s previous offerings. This allows these new cars to essentially be seperated from the cheaper line of cars, but at the same time props up Hyundai as a whole.

    Of course, I’m not sure how well thats gonna work if even more upmarket cars come around, e.g. their new Equus. What are they gonna call that, the Genesis Executive?

    I’m excited about this car, but I don’t like the face. Looks more like a next-gen Tiburon than a Infiniti competitor. I would’ve liked to see an attempt at adapting the Genesis sedan’s grill in there, maybe that would have made it look a little less flat.

  • avatar
    toadroller

    Styling/artistic comment:

    Contemplating the semi-controversial rear-quarter windows… do they not mimic the shape they help form? Note the window sill and the crease line that flows from mid-door to the top of the tail lights. I think that’s fairly clever from a styling standpoint.

    I am looking forward to seeing one of these in real life. The Genesis sedan looks great in real life, with the possible exception of its too chromy front grill.

  • avatar
    Landcrusher

    Buzz,
    I have stood on that line, and I can tell you that South Korea has been doing much more of their fair share than most of our other allies when it comes to holding back the red tide. They do not deserve that comment. We only patrol a portion of the DMZ. The rest is patroled by other countries’ contingents, and South Korea patrols by far the most.
    I believe all males there still serve for at least 2 years, and there are military all over the place. I believe they sent troops to Iraq, and I know they sent troops to serve with us in Vietnam.
    I like to conserve ammo on the military spending issue, so that it’s ready to use when we really need it. No more shooting at the ROK’s, okay?

    Oh yes, the Genesis is a looker. :)

  • avatar
    06M3S54B32

    Eh, decent car but it’s nothing to get your panties in a bunch about unless it’s priced in the mid-upper $20s, then it’s a better car for sure than a G37. The power to weights are similar (.088 to .091 (G37), but the G37 is a heavy POS at 3,633. You can’t hide that girth, and they handle like shit. I drove one a guy owns where I work, and was appalled at how bad it under-steered (the interior was crap too). Moreover, paying $40K for a “performance” Nissan is retarded since you could get a used BMW 335i for that much. Jap cars are good for a couple of years before they go out to rusting pastures. You don’t see many old 350Zs.

  • avatar
    thetopdog

    06M3S54B32 :

    Japanese cars rust? You don’t see many old 350Zs? Where the f$#k are you getting this B.S. from?

  • avatar
    gaycorvette

    I haven’t seen this one in the flesh (no Hyundai dealer’s in West LA), but I’ll say from the photos the exterior is wildly overstyled, and way too Tiburon-on-crystal meth to really interest me. It looks like the official car of the Cartoon Network.

    The interior also seems dull and uninteresting, as understyled as the exterior is overstyled.

    Maybe it is a fantastic drive. I hope to verify that at some point, but you can keep the styling.

  • avatar
    06M3S54B32

    “Japanese cars rust? You don’t see many old 350Zs? Where the f$#k are you getting this B.S. from?”

    Any idiot knows jap cars are famous for thin body panels, and poor rust protection. I worked in a major body shop, and this was a common complaint.

    http://www.350zmotoring.com/forums/general-350z-discussions/2365-rust-spots-chrome-silver-paint.html

    http://books.google.com/books?id=9UGh_scdFQ4C&pg=PA193&lpg=PA193&dq=japanese+cars+rust&source=bl&ots=rBaHg5d_Ak&sig=WU2_ZWT8x_7QiWnOT_E6knHfwkg&hl=en&ei=Spu1ScHmDIrAMs3-oPkE&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=9&ct=result

  • avatar
    unseensightz

    @galaxygreymx5

    “Interior materials were Toyonda-grade. So, better than the Camaro or Mustang”

    So where and when did you drive a brand new 2010 Camaro and newly redesigned 2009(or is it 10?) Mustang. I’m just making sure you aren’t making an assumption based on pictuers. As far as I know everyone who has reviewed the new Mustang has been very impressed with the improved interior materials, and I haven’t heard anything on the Camaro yet. Last I checked you can’t tell material quality through pictures.

    On a side note I visited a dodge dealer today and checked out the Challenger, I was quite impressed with it, especially the interior. The design is a bit lacking, but the materials were top notch I thought.

  • avatar
    Victell

    We just got one of these in red at our dealer. Have not driven it yet.

    The styling is pretty good, except the front. Seems like they designed from the rear then ran out of money at the front end. Its really unfortunate. But the rest of the car comes together nicely in person, the proportions are correct also.

    I did notice a lot of unused clearance inside the rear wheelwells; our tire guy said you could probably fit a 275 tire back there.

  • avatar
    Victell

    06M3S54B32

    I process warranty claims for a Nissan, Hyundai and VW dealership here in Hawaii and I hardly see any perforation or rust claims. And Hawaii is especially tortuous with corriosion because of the humidity and salty beach air. We do see Frontier rust claims where the roof panels join up, but thats a sealer issue.

    Manufacturers offer at least 7 years rust protection and I still see few claims compared to how many cars are sold. From my experience I’d say its not much of an issue anymore, or if it ever was.

  • avatar
    galaxygreymx5

    unseensightz:

    The LA Auto Show had a gaggle of 2010 Mustangs to sit in and play with. It’s a step up from the current car, naturally, but still leaves me cold in a few areas. Whereas the 2005+ Mustang’s interior would keep me from buying the car, I can’t say the same about the 2010. I still feel the Genesis is a smidge better though.

    There were two open Camaros at the show, but they were up on turntables. You had to ask nice to peek your head inside and touch stuff :-)

    The Camaro’s ok inside as far as materials go. They were pre-pro cars so they might step it up a bit before the launch (now?) but the interior left me underwhelmed. Interesting style and clever lighting marred by nostalgia and cheap chintzy bits. I’d say it’s Malibu-grade which, in my opinion, is a step below Genesis-grade.

    So my opinion is the same: The Genesis is below the premium brands in interior quality, but better than the Camaro and Mustang.

  • avatar
    buzzliteyear

    @Landcrusher –

    I have great respect for South Korea and Koreans.

    However, facts are stubborn things.

    The USA helps subsidize the military defense of South Korea. No one does this for the USA.

    South Korea has significantly higher trade barriers than the USA.

    South Korea allows significant government-industry cooperation to develop industries they see as strategic. Here in the USA, we’re schizophrenic about it, ignoring some examples (the $150 billion tax break for banks) and scream bloody murder about others (the Detroit 2.7 bailout).

    My point is that South Korean automakers are not necessarily better, or smarter, or more morally pure than US automakers. They are just playing by different rules.

  • avatar
    agenthex

    Genesis is really turning out to be quite the halo car(s) for Hyundai.

    Compared to the japanese, whose halo sports cars have fallen by the wayside (except nissan), they’re doing hell of a job getting people enthusiastic about their brand.

  • avatar
    agenthex

    My point is that South Korean automakers are not necessarily better, or smarter, or more morally pure than US automakers. They are just playing by different rules.

    The anti-gov crowd needs to look at what happened in asia with the very successful creation of these industries from nothing.

    If the D3 had anywhere near the ambition to be at the vanguard instead of rear or mid-pack at best, they wouldn’t be in a hole. It should be taken as a lesson for all industries, especially developing ones.

  • avatar
    NickR

    Well, as the Mustang name has come up several times in this conversation I will point out some trivia. The very first Mustang rolled off the assembly line 45 years ago today (March 9, 1964).

    Hopefully, there will be lots more to come…interesting ones!

  • avatar

    This car will probably get CAR OF THE YEAR because of its price, just as its big brother did, but my problem is that:

    #1 Its still a small sub-compact car.

    #2 Navigation won’t be ready till mid-year.

    #3 You’ve got to spend around $35,000 to get it with all the options it needs to compete with the G35 – or else you get the 2.0L which is just “a car”

    #4 FOR $18,000 You can walk into a GM dealer and buy a MALIBU. This car’s cheapest model is still a few thousand more. The Malibu has more SPACE for small families and more power at the equivalent feature/options and price.

    On Ebay, they have a G.Coupe for$30,000 equipped like the one above. Grand Touring 3.8.

    The G.Coupe may be a great competitor for the G35/G37 – especially for thousands less but before I make any judgements, I want to see how the Sedan and the Coupe look after 5 years of ownership as they haven’t proven their reliability or their maintenance savings.

    I already know what a G35 looks like after a few years and user reliability has been high over the years – but Hyundai doesn’t have that capital yet.

    As far as I’m concerned, Hyundai is the Special Ed kid in the room who the teacher doesn’t expect much from. All the sudden, he studies with the A+ students, passes some tests, with B+’s, and the teachers shower him with rewards and praise because he accomplished what no one ever thought he could.

  • avatar

    Michael Karesh

    I would have named it the Exodus.

    #2…see you on epinions.

    In fact, you should file the Genesis Coupe so I can review it.

  • avatar
    Michael Ayoub

    What about the torque limiting system that Edmunds mentioned?

  • avatar
    Michael Ayoub

    @Flashpoint

    “#1 Its still a small sub-compact car.”

    Well, it’s not as big as your S550, but it’s not tiny. Definitely not sub-compact. Reading your post, I really don’t think you understand what’s going on with this car. What does this have to do with a Malibu?

  • avatar

    Ayoub

    The Malibu is cheaper and bigger than the base model of this car. Probably better made too but the Genesis and G. Coupe don’t have long term reliability ratings yet.

  • avatar
    Michael Ayoub

    That’s still completely irrelevant. Anybody seriously considering this car — a RWD 2+2 Coupe — is not cross shopping it with the Malibu. As long as we’re making stupid comparisons, why would anyone ever buy a Porsche 911, when the Cayenne is bigger and cheaper? I mean, that’s what’s really important right?

  • avatar
    davey49

    This car is ugggggly!
    Could be awesome though.
    Not sure I care.

  • avatar

    Michael Ayoub

    And what about the people who are shopping based on price? You telling me its not fair to consider a LARGER, LESS EXPENSIVE CAR that might give a consumer MORE FOR THEIR DOLLAR than a…ahem…Hyundai…with no proven long term reliability besides the POOR reliability given to older products?

    Is that what you are saying?

  • avatar
    bodayguy

    A 3.8L six and it can’t break 6.0 to 60 mph? Quarter-mile times in the 14s or 15s???

    Hate to think how slow the entry-level model is.

    Sorry, it’s styled like a performance car; with the big engine it’s near $30K; and it’s supposed to be this great new thing? Pfahhh.

  • avatar
    galaxygreymx5

    This whole business between the Malibu (!) and the Genesis Coupe reminds me of a little sarcasm I read way back when in a car rag.

    The spoof on a Consumer Reports car comparison went something like this:

    “The Porsche 911 Turbo and the Ford Taurus both have six cylinder engines, but the Taurus gets far better fuel economy.”

    I believe there will be precisely zero customers cross-shopping the Gen Coupe and the Malibu.

    bodayguy:

    Edmunds is the only testing group that couldn’t get it below 6.0 0-60. Most of the magazines have it in the mid to high fives. Maybe Edmunds got a green car or had trouble launching it properly.

  • avatar
    TonyJZX

    why would any sane person bring a Malibu into the conversation? it doesn’t even have a manual transmission! It’s wrong wheel drive! It’s a 4 door sedan!

    the fact is i think the Genesis is already a success… one can only assume that the generally positive reviews of both coupe and sedan is what they were after. I could never expect them to beat the G37 which has something like over 25 yrs heritage in RWD sports coupes. To get so close 1st time out is admirable.

    It’s clear they are eating the lunch of the traditonal small cars, minivans and SUVs. Now they are going after the harder targets.

    Imagine the Series II versions when GM and Chrysler are really really sick.

  • avatar
    V6

    i’m glad i am not the only one that does not agree with the sedan and coupe sharing the same name.

    overall i like the design. i would prefer a more normal side window, less sweptback headlights and a new front bumper, but overall it’s good. the rear is best angle

  • avatar
    Russell

    @buzzliteyear

    US budget for the Korea DMZ is about $1 billion. It’s hardly anything compared to $1 Trillion President Obama’s Porkulous.

    It’s very hard to imagine that the $1 billion spending is the reason why X is better than Y. There is no valid logic there. According to the latest report, S. Korea shares the nearly 50% of the DMZ cost.

    Korea doesn’t have trade barrier as you suggested on auto. Remember, GM owns Daewoo. Daewoo produces nearly 20% of GM Vehicles. All profits and loss goes toward GM’s final tally.

    S. Korea automobile import tax is at 8%.
    US automobile important tax is at 2%. This is hardly differentiable enough for disputes. The fact is. US automobiles simply cost more than Korean cars in Korea by a sizable margin.
    Europe automobile tax is at 10%. Means, that European buys Korean cars with 10% import tax. Hyundai/Kia sells just as many car in Europe as they do in US, if not more.
    The Korean cars are cheaper to maintain, buy, and operate in Korea. It’s like US cars are cheaper to maintain, buy, and operate than British, German, (some Korean), or Japanese cars.
    Korea tax car based on engine size. This is no different than US’s gas guzzling tax and luxury tax.

    If US Auto companies could export cars to Korea, what would they export? Chevy Cavalier, Neon, Focus? Why? Why would Koreans buy it when they got their own Cavalier, Focus, and Neon named Elantra, Spectra, Nubira, ect… Koreans do buy Cadillacs and 300c but those are big cars and probably prohibitive due to the engine size. However, there are Koreans who buy these cars…

    The idea that S. Koreans do not buy US car because of import taxes and other weak reasons are absurd with no foundation. This is the same argument that populist made during 90s. What have US automakers done about it? But, really, it’s not about X country’s automaker vs Y country’s automaker. Because they are essentially international business entities. And these national boundaries really do not mean much.

    US government supports and has supported US automakers even before current crops of bailouts, WW I and WW II enabled US automakers to build the economy of scales in terms of factory capacity. Chrysler was bailed out before. AM General’s Hummer is used in US military. These statement aren’t value judgments or one is better or worse. It’s a statement of facts regarding US automaker’s progression to what they are today.

    There is a fundamental economic reality that the sellers usually want money from the buyers. The buyers usually have the money for the sellers. Ultimately, the sellers are the servant of the buyers. You want to be the buyer. Most wealthy nations buy things from the less wealthier nations. Also, the buyers have significant capital surplus than the sellers. For example, most people buy things. They don’t sell things. Imagine, if every time a person has to buy an item, that person has to sell x 1.2 item to have a “trade” surplus. What that means is that the purchaser who has to sell x1.2 before buying a single item is poorer.

    Also, there is a common populist assumption that traders have even exchange or zero-sum gain. This is completely false. Because, we have more stuff than we had 10, 20, or 50 years ago. If things were zero-sum, we would still be driving the buggies and smell the horse manures. When an individual purchase 2 gallons worth of gas for $4, he gains approximately 40 mile travel ability/productivity. At 60mph, it would take 2/3 hours to travel 40 miles. I can’t think of that many things that can give this much productivity. Old days, people walked. At average of 3 miles per hour, 40 miles would take 13.3 hours. There is a significant personal gain by the oil trade of $4. The seller and buyer both gained from this transaction.

    Korea may have slightly different rules. However, in the competitive market space like auto industry, these rules are insignificant.. if not negligible. Hyundai/Kia have their own unions that are worse than US unions. So, every companies have their own difficult variables to deal with in their business. People looking at the company from the superficial level do not know what Hyundai/Kia or any entities have to do in order for them to maintain even before making profit or loss Other variables that are the determinants for the success and the failure are so great that the variables that you are lamenting are non seqiitur.

    I am not sure whether the Korean automakers are better, more morally pure, or smarter. But it seems to me that Hyundai has higher market value to GM. People are voting with their dollars. Regardless of your suppositions and populist beliefs you might have, I think the Market evaluations speaks itself of the current condition of US automakers versus foreign automakers, let be the Koreans, Germans, or Japanese.

    People scream bloody murder because tax break and bailouts distorts the market reality. By the principle of economics of profit/loss system, if the company isn’t allow to “lose”, then it breaks the system and distorts the price of the profit/loss system. This is like giving the loans to people who can’t afford the item that they are making loan on. So, the price of the real item and the loan are distorted. I think this is the reason why we are having this problem. As such, I don’t see anything wrong with the people who are screaming bloody murder. I think they should scream a bloody serial murder. It’s very damaging as you can see today. (03/09/2009) If the auto bailout was a good thing, the GM stock wouldn’t have gone down since the bailout. At the end the US auto companies has to file bankruptcy, (aka bankruptcy watch) seems that they really have no other options and that all these bailout meant nothing has Economists have suggested based on basic principles of economics of 1301 and 1302.

    @ agenthex
    ” The anti-gov crowd needs to look at what happened in asia with the very successful creation of these industries from nothing.”
    It’s much easier going from 0 to something than something to next-nth. Marginal effort is significantly greater from something to n-th then 0 to something. Because, the market player who is coming from 0 to something has templates, know-how’s, materials, engineerings/technologies, and other variables. That’s why innovation is difficult. Throwing money at it isn’t innovation. If that was the case, Hyundai would have succeed in 80s/90s.

    People would have argued that government is the problem with the Hyundai Excel, and “The pro-gov crowd needs to look at what happened in asia with the very unsuccessful creation of these industries from nothing.”

    @ Flashpoint
    Why don’t you compare it with the Minvan. Or better than big piece of metal. These do not have same value proposition nor do they aim for it. Arguments you make have no basis and they are nothing more than red herring.

    Hyundai has been on top of reliability charts for last several years. Maybe, you’ve been reading the Irritable monthly, a publisher of another magazine called the Menstruation Monthly.

    ” #1 Its still a small sub-compact car.”
    Most, if not all sports cars are sub compact. Is it suppose to be a large sedan 2 + 2 sports coupe? Who says. I don’t think Hyundai did. I think they make the Genesis coupe the last time I checked. I like to see you come up with the Minivan sized Supercar that cost $22K that can do 0-60 under 6 seconds.

    You aren’t going to buy this car anyway. There is nothing wrong with not having the Navigator during the first 6 months or so. Not bringing out the car because of the navigator has the greater opportunity cost than having one. It is better have something without the Nav than not having it at all. This is so basic, I can’t believe I have to explain this. You see why US automakers are struggling.

    ” You’ve got to spend around $35,000 to get it with all the options it needs to compete with the G35 – or else you get the 2.0L which is just a car”
    Who said that? You? You mean Hyundai won’t sell 3.8L V6 19inch wheel with zf-transmission, limited-slip diff for $22K? How dare they! Because we know that Mustang with all those technical equipment are sold for $22k brand new.

    I think Roush cost lot more than 22K and it can turn, too.

    In reality, US Automakers need to be making G8s, Flexes, ZR1, and CSTs. Not Cobalt, S10, or (not-so) Patriot. People don’t buy Cobalts and Aveos. Aveos do not inspire anyone. US per capita income is at $40K. Most people can afford $30K+ cars. Excitement that the Genesis is brining to the car market place and to itself is the testament to what GM should and shouldn’t do. I mean, Genesis is a RWD car with V4 to v8. I think that’s something to be proud. I am excited about Taurus SHO, G8 GXP, or Focus RS. I just hope GM and Ford can make some more kick ass cars like the G8 GT/GXP and Taurus SHO.

  • avatar
    TonyJZX

    let’s cut to the chase

    American manufacturers do not make cars that Americans want

    American manufacturers do not make cars that anyone else in the world wants

    American manufacturers do not make cars in RHD format

    American manufacturers can only succeed in non US markets with local content subsidiaries like Ford Europe, Ford Australia, Opel, Vauxhall that make cars that are usually superior to American offerings

    the fact of the matter is unless American manufacturers want to implant their engineers into the target market and spend a lot of money to establish a brand they will never be successful outside of America… isn’t that what Toyota, Honda, BMW, Mercedes, Nissan, BMW and Hyundai have all done in the US?

    I have to laugh at the pathetic efforts of Chrysler outside of America.

    You can buy a Honda Accord or Nissan Maxima or a Hyundai Sonata for the same money as a Chrysler Sebring.

    Why would you buy a Sebring? Only if you are completely retarded – and that’s insulting to retarded people.

  • avatar
    agenthex

    @ agenthex
    ” The anti-gov crowd needs to look at what happened in asia with the very successful creation of these industries from nothing.”
    It’s much easier going from 0 to something than something to next-nth. Marginal effort is significantly greater from something to n-th then 0 to something.

    This has nothing to do with the point. The basis of comparison is against non-intervention, whether the gov backing was effective, and it was undeniably so.

    S. Korea automobile import tax is at 8%.
    US automobile important tax is at 2%. This is hardly differentiable enough for disputes.

    Is it if you consider the profit margin for cars.

  • avatar
    Russell

    @agenthex
    You are falsely attributing and correlating two things that may not have anything to do with it.
    Government intervened in X therefore succeed in Y.
    South Korean government certainly helped to capitalize the Hyundai, Samsung, and others. Because there was no way for these companies do so. This type of function exists every country including US as a form of export/import banks. However, I am not sure whether I would attribute this as “intervening.” US government which consists of lawyers, lawyers, and more lawyers who has no expertise, experiences, and knowledge of running any businesses in this country is giving edicts to the automakers of what, how, when, where, and which cars to make which are mostly imaginary. They think they can just dream and hope away these things to happen. This is also known as “innovation.”
    Input { money, (day) dreams, wish } = output { innovation, something undesired and unwanted}
    US government is putting and betting the taxpayer money on cars that we do not know whether consumers want to buy. For example, the Volt. I am not saying the Volt is government sponsored but I have high suspicion that GM developed this car with many others reasons with a junction with the PR. This is GM desire to make cars to give them better image and shed some images of Suburban-monger. Because it seems that Chevy Volt was design with the PR and Image-buffing as the primary object, not the consumer demands, I find this project very government-project-esque. I can safely conclude this because the product is now estimated to cost $48K, a way up from the original $30K estimation. The final product isn’t going to do what it said it was going to do when GM started this project. This car is inferior to Honda Clarity in that there is no real clear innovation on Volt other than engine generating the electricity to power the car. This technique was used before with the Saturn-EV test prototypes, so, this particular is nothing new. Only the battery thing is new, which is challenging thing in itself. This sounds just like some xyz government program where the idea going in is different from the product coming out.
    I do not know how GM is going to sell Volt. I can’t imagine buying $48K Volt? Can you?

    S. Korean government did not intervened like how US government is intervening. In addition, I will reemphasize that, it is much easier to make Hyundai Pony/Excel than Honda Clarity/Chevy Concept Volt. Magnitude of difficult is huge and incomparable, where Pony/Excel had very conventional system that every automaker had done before and Clarity/Concept Volt had new technologies that these companies haven’t done before. From the Hydrogen tank, filling stations, fuel to electric conversion, and battery on Volt. It is much easier for the government to direct companies to do projects if the projects were all done before. Whereas, US government is trying to make companies do something that they haven’t done before and/or produce products that nobody end up liking, thus missing the equilibrium and resulting wasted scarce resources.
    Again, you missed the point that Europe had 10% import tax and Hyundai/Kia do fine there. People do buy BMW with or without the additional taxes. All the taxes are calculated as part of the cost. The profit after the cost is very similar whether you have taxation of 5% vs 10%. If anything, the lower taxing paying consumers are much better off. Because lower tax means lower transaction cost. So, car in Seoul is semi-luxury good. People do not really need to have it like NYC and San Francisco. The consumers of Semi-Luxury Good/Luxury good are not as price sensitive as people who buy Hyundai Accent here. The degree of which the price can go is not as painful. As such, price increase from $20,000 to $21,600 is not going to effect the purchasing decisions of the luxury good consumers. Therefore, that import tax argument isn’t valid. I would understand if the product was like $4 vs $5. For whatever reason, people hugely differentiate $2.99 as terribly more expensive than $1.99 for the movie rentals. In addition, in this price segment, any price delta is highly felt by the consumers. However, for luxury good items as a car in a $27,000 per capita income country, people who buy $21,600 cars will not really care if it originally cost $20,000 and that the import tax was $1,600. People who buy these cars make much more than the average. People do buy Mac computers versus PC. People do buy Escalade instead of Tahoe because of few more blings and the brand; they are willing to pay significantly more for small marginal utility for some fad/superficial satisfactions compare to the money spent. Meaning, people in this price area is not as price sensitive as you might think. There is whole book regarding this topic. Perhaps, the decisions made by the buyers can be said to be “Economic Bad.”

  • avatar
    don1967

    “Moreover, paying $40K for a “performance” Nissan is retarded since you could get a used BMW 335i for that much.”

    As much as I would love to spend my life savings trying to keep a used BMW from barfing fluids and expensive parts all over my driveway, I think I will pass.

    I’ll take a Genesis Coupe plus a $30,000 stock portfolio that buys me another new car every ten years for the rest of my life.

  • avatar

    don1967
    —-I’ll take a Genesis Coupe plus a $30,000 stock portfolio that buys me another new car every ten years for the rest of my life.—

    There’s something about the stock market you should know…

    I’d perfer a Mustang, or a new Accord to the Genesis coupe. Car And Driver has a list right now comparing these cars in this price range and the Stang’ is #2. But I already know about how reliable they are. The Genesis/G.Coupe HAS YET TO PROVE ITS LONG TERM RELIABILITY.

  • avatar
    energetik9

    don1967—

    Take the BMW. If you don’t want a “used BMW from barfing fluids and expensive parts all over my driveway”, then don’t buy a POS and don’t drive it over the curb. Have the car checked out or buy a decent BMW that’s still under warranty. If you just want a car with 4 wheels that’s sporty to drive, cheap and/or don’t care, get the Hyundai…and if your goal is to use your stock portfolio to fund your Hyundai purchases, you may want to plan for more frequency than 8-10 years.

    Other than that, IMO, this is a great improvement for Hyundai. I have no doubt that capability has improved substantially. But for me it all comes down to this…. take a look at who drives Hyundai. You always see some 20 year old girl with a couple baby seats, a 300 pound girl barely able to close the door, some kid with an aftermarket exhaust and tinted windows and a bad paint job, or where I live…people of, well…..questionable-american citizenship. I just cannot drive a car like that. The second point is that I know Hyundai is relatively new in the US (1985), but how many early Hyundai’s do you still see driving around?

  • avatar
    wsn

    06M3S54B32 :
    March 9th, 2009 at 4:29 pm

    Moreover, paying $40K for a “performance” Nissan is retarded since you could get a used BMW 335i for that much.

    Why does German fan boys have to use a used Bimmer for a comparison. What’s the motive? To hide the lack of value from BMW?

    No. The Bimmer is not better. Actually the Bimmer is crap. A Bimmer 323 can only eat the dust left behind by a G37, and oh, they cost the same (and thus it’s a fair comparison).

  • avatar
    wsn

    06M3S54B32 :
    March 9th, 2009 at 5:43 pm

    Any idiot knows jap cars are famous for thin body panels, and poor rust protection. I worked in a major body shop, and this was a common complaint.

    You are right. That’s indeed a popular belief among idiots.

  • avatar
    wsn

    Flashpoint :

    #1 Its still a small sub-compact car.

    #2 Navigation won’t be ready till mid-year.

    #3 You’ve got to spend around $35,000 to get it with all the options it needs to compete with the G35 – or else you get the 2.0L which is just “a car”

    #4 FOR $18,000 You can walk into a GM dealer and buy a MALIBU. This car’s cheapest model is still a few thousand more. The Malibu has more SPACE for small families and more power at the equivalent feature/options and price.

    1) So is a Porsche Cayman.
    2) They have time. It’s not like there will be a waiting list.
    3) We will wait to see the exact pricing and discount. By observing other models such as Sonata, Hyundai is price competitive.
    4) Why would any sane person choose a Porsche Cayman over a cheap and roomy Camry?

  • avatar
    Piston1047

    @ wsn

    Oh that’s just classic man, classic.
    I was laughing for a good minute after that.

    @ 06M3S54B32 Really one post about a rusty 350Z with NO replies is your hard fact. Ok thanks for that I think you just answered how frequent the rust problem is.

    Also what’s with all the used car arguments “for that price I could get a really used A10 war plane with some sweet missles at a way better value” Pa ching!

  • avatar
    don1967

    There’s something about the stock market you should know…

    Let me guess… after seeing the new Volt last year you ran out and wrote a naked put on GM stock? (Go ahead Mr. Buffett, look it up.)

    The Genesis/G.Coupe HAS YET TO PROVE ITS LONG TERM RELIABILITY.

    Um… so do the Ford Mustang and BMW 335i. And with half the warranty.

  • avatar
    don1967

    But for me it all comes down to this…. take a look at who drives Hyundai. You always see some 20 year old girl with a couple baby seats, a 300 pound girl barely able to close the door, some kid with an aftermarket exhaust and tinted windows and a bad paint job

    Man, it sounds like you need to move to a new neighbourhood! Either that or join 2009.

  • avatar

    Edmunds has now fully tested both the Genesis and refreshed Mustang. Here’s the nitty gritty and not-so-pretty.

    Genesis 3.8 Track

    60 mph in 6.4 seconds
    14.5-second quarter-mile at 97.9 mph
    68.2-mph slalom speed
    Skid Pad Lateral acceleration 0.88g
    60 mph to stop 111 ft.
    17.9 mpg overall

    Mustang GT Track Pack

    60 mph in 5.2 seconds
    13.5-second quarter-mile at 102.9 mph
    68.4 mph slalom speed
    Skid Pad Lateral acceleration 0.91g
    60 mph to stop 107 ft.
    17.1 mpg overall

    The Genesis 3.8 Track isn’t exactly cheap either. The one Edmunds had was within spitting distance of the upcoming Camaro SS.

    Yes I know the four cylinder turbo Genesis is cheaper but it performs even worse stock than the 3.8, it’s embarrassing. Oh but you can mod it! Well so can everyone else to any other American muscle car or turbo FWD pocket rocket.

    How much money is anyone really willing to throw into a 2.0T to get it to equal a stock Mustang GT, 370Z, Camaro SS, LSX GTO, or any other number of RWD performance cars out there? What about the current Cobalt SS turbo and old Neon SRT4s? All of these car will mince a Genesis in performance, which is pretty much why people buy cars like this.

    Even after making it fast you’re still driving a Hyundai, one that doesn’t have it’s vaunted 10 year/100,000 mile warranty once it’s modded. And it’s styled like a big silver blob.

    Sorry, but the appeal and buzz of this car is really lost on me.

  • avatar
    NoSubstitute

    This is yet another in the series of Korean knockoffs of Japanese cars, in this case the Infiniti G coupe. As with all of the other recent examples, it appears to be well done (although the modifications to the Infiniti design to avoid plagiarism charges render it a bit odd to these eyes.) That said, I doubt that anyone other than auto writers will consider it a “pony car”.

  • avatar
    don1967

    That said, I doubt that anyone other than auto writers will consider it a “pony car”.

    Agreed. RWD does not a Mustang competitor make. The Genesis Coupe 2.0 is more of a modern-day 240SX, while the 3.8 is clearly aimed at the 370Z and G37 market.

    I would not quite call it a Japanese knockoff, however… its look is distinctly Korean. For better or for worse, I swear I can see the first-gen Santa Fe in its curves.

  • avatar
    energetik9

    wsn :
    March 10th, 2009 at 11:51 am —- “No. The Bimmer is not better. Actually the Bimmer is crap. A Bimmer 323 can only eat the dust left behind by a G37, and oh, they cost the same (and thus it’s a fair comparison).”

    WSN….. Not sure when this article became a Infinity v BMW story, but you should at least try comparing something a little closer? 323? That was a whole generation ago. How about a 328 vs G35? Oh wait, they already did that comparison on this site and the 328 was the overall winner.

    So back to the Hyundai. It seems to have a rather large engine…but average in the performance? Where does it go? I think what is ultimately going to happen with this car is that it is going to be a strong choice for the under 25 and under $40k demographic.

  • avatar
    agenthex

    Government intervened in X therefore succeed in Y.

    That’s not what I’m arguing. I’m merely pointing out that the gov can provide a very useful role in the creation and growth of business because it’s not necessarily easy to privatize all profits from these high risk endeavors.

    In other words, the social benefits which people and therefore gov’s should care about, are not tangible figures on balance sheets. So the solution is to either internalize these “profits” or use alternative means or backing for finance.

    I’m not rationalizing about the current US auto situation. That’s more of a political decision than a financial one anyway. Everyone knows they are done for; the only impact for choices henceforth is how hard they fall, and falling on a cushion of money is easier.
    -

    Again, you missed the point that Europe had 10% import tax and Hyundai/Kia do fine there. People do buy BMW with or without the additional taxes. All the taxes are calculated as part of the cost. The profit after the cost is very similar whether you have taxation of 5% vs 10%.

    Sure it’s all built in. That’s why you’ll find imports have a much more difficult time penetrating that market. A small margin on products means it’s fairly price sensitive. If it’s not, everyone can just raise the price to make more.

  • avatar
    Macca

    # 06M3S54B32 :
    March 9th, 2009 at 4:29 pm

    Eh, decent car but it’s nothing to get your panties in a bunch about unless it’s priced in the mid-upper $20s, then it’s a better car for sure than a G37. The power to weights are similar (.088 to .091 (G37), but the G37 is a heavy POS at 3,633. You can’t hide that girth, and they handle like shit. I drove one a guy owns where I work, and was appalled at how bad it under-steered (the interior was crap too). Moreover, paying $40K for a “performance” Nissan is retarded since you could get a used BMW 335i for that much. Jap cars are good for a couple of years before they go out to rusting pastures. You don’t see many old 350Zs.

    Heh! Thanks for the laugh. Interior crap on the G37? Infiniti’s latest models boast some pretty nice interiors, unless of course your benchmark is a Maybach. I take it you hold BMW in much higher esteem – yet I find those sorely lacking for the asking price.

    Maybe some folks think spending $40k on a used BMW is ‘retarded’, you know? Some folks want a car that they can trust beyond a factory warranty.

    “Jap” cars only good for a “couple of years” before rusting? Is this 1985? My first car, a slightly-neglected-when-I-found-it 1993 Sentra XE didn’t have a trace of rust when I sold it in 2006 with 165k miles and no garage time in the 7 years I owned it. Funny enough, none of my or my family’s “Jap” cars have experienced rust issues.

    So you really think rust is killing used 350Zs? My buddy has an 06, still going strong with plenty of miles on the clock. I guess he better sell it though, might not last another year.

    I happen to see plenty of 350Zs in my area, not to mention quite a few 300Zs. Granted, I don’t doubt the early Z cars had their share of rust issues, but I think you’re reaching for straws to bolster your fading faith in Germanic supremacy. That’s typical when you test drive your buddy’s car and it scares you into thinking that you spent too much.

    The Genesis Coupe, by the way, sounds great. Should be considered a crowning achievement for the creators of the Excel.

  • avatar
    energetik9

    Macca :
    March 10th, 2009 at 9:19 pm “The Genesis Coupe, by the way, sounds great. Should be considered a crowning achievement for the creators of the Excel.”

    Don’t forget the first Hyundai Excel was designed and built by Mitsubishi. Hyundai didn’t design their own cars until almost 1990. Still shows lots of growth and forward momentum though.

    People, can we please stop using “Jap”. That hasn’t been politically correct since at least the 80′s and probably since WWII.

  • avatar
    wsn

    energetik9, my comment regarding Infinity vs. BMW was directed at another poster. Please read the whole thing.

    And no, BMW 323 is not a whole generations ago.

    My local “friendly” BMW dealer is selling new 323s at this very moment. It starts at $34,900. After options, discounts and expected repairs, it’s comparable to, if not more expensive than, an Infinity G37.

    http://www.bmw.ca/ca/en/newvehicles/3series/sedan/2008/carconfigurator/compare_models.html

  • avatar
    energetik9

    OK, I see you are looking at BMW’s in Canada and I really have no idea what the differences are there with the 3 series or the G. The BMW is a great car, the G is a great car and it sounds like the Hyundai might be a good option for some. The 323 hasn’t been sold in the US since 2001, so I am sure you can excuse my last post. As long as you like your car then great, it ultimately comes down to just what the driver prefers. I’m not trying to sound condescending, I do admit I don’t completely agree with your argument, but the final truth is this is a Hyundai thread, so maybe we can enjoy a good debate another time.

  • avatar
    Lbart

    Alot of automotive expert critics on this site!! Any of you Ford, G.M. or Chryler management? Bottom line is whatever Hyundai is doing they are doing it right. Maybe when they start faltering like the North American manufacturers we can all nit-pik over every little thing they do. At this point they are a car company that can not be ignored by any other car company.

  • avatar

    LBart

    I don’t think anyone here is an “automotive expert” per se, not unless they personaly worked in multiple factories of multiple makers and hold engineering degrees.

  • avatar
    davey49

    Of course us stupid Americans also don’t realize that the 3 series BMW is available worldwide and often is sold with a 4 cylinder engine with under 150HP.
    Of course the only thing important is 0-60 times and if a car goes 0-60MPH in over 5 seconds it must be a POS.
    Lbart- No one is really sure whether or not Hyundai is doing great. There’s a big difference between critical acclaim and sales. They are growing some, so it’s a start.
    Flashpoint- You could be a business guy and be an automotive expert. No engineering degree needed.
    wsn- the “expected repairs” and “discounts” claim is always a shady way to compare. There’s an assumption by Japanese brand fans that all US and European brand cars are going to be unreliable and/or dangerous and/or expensive to service so “repair costs are way too high, It costs xxx thousands of dollars just to do this!!!”
    As if the Infiniti dealer will not try to take all your money.

  • avatar
    niky

    Hyundai is actually doing pretty swell… all things considered… many of its new models have won awards of one sort or another, and it’s one of the few (very few) automakers not seeing sales drops in double figures (like VW, they were caught by the crisis in expansion mode, so sales drops aren’t as bad as more established brands).

    About the only new Hyundai model that seems to be a turkey, to me, is their new Starex (i80, issit?) van. Sure, it’s a whole lot better than the old one, but it rides like a pile of rocks.

  • avatar
    rtz

    I could have sworn back when this car was still a concept it was going to have a V8 in it?

  • avatar
    tankd0g

    Wouldn’t be a post about a new import if Trishield wasn’t here to try to tear it down. The big three antiques and tired and played out, and one of them hasn’t even hit the dealers yet! If you fear change, well that frankly doesn’t surprise me. If you want to be sporting the axle out of a pickup truck for the sake of nostalgia well Ford has your car. Those of us that like to drive somewhere other than a drag strip are thankful that someone has brought back the 1993 Supra.

  • avatar
    tankd0g

    “I could have sworn back when this car was still a concept it was going to have a V8 in it?”

    There were a pile of rumors surrounding this and the sedan. Hell, just a year ago everyone thought this was the Tiberon replacement. There’s no reason they couldn’t put the v8 in the coupe later on of course.

  • avatar
    blinkme323

    Seeing as how everyone keeps quoting the times from the Edmunds test and seemingly ignoring the much better times posted by C&D and Motor Trend – Edmunds has retested the Gen Coupe with the correct ECU mapping and got MUCH better numbers.

    I’m curious as to whether TAC tested theirs with the revised ECU?

  • avatar
    tankd0g

    Please get ahold of a 2.0L turbo model to test ASAP!

  • avatar
    Russell

    @ agenthex :
    In other words, the social benefits which people and therefore gov’s should care about, are not tangible figures on balance sheets. So the solution is to either internalize these ‘profits’ or use alternative means or backing for finance.

    Individual and government have very different interests. Most of the time, they go against each other. Individual and government do desire to gain most with the least effort. However, capital that they use to achieve these objectives and wealth are very different. Almost always, individual uses one’s own resources { own capital or borrowed } to acquire wealth. Government in the other hand acquire wealth and achieve objectives by taking capitals from others, individuals. They again this authority with their political capitals (votes). Note that unlike individual acquiring capitals which the individuals have almost 100% control over, government capitals are largely gain with less than 100% of the vote. Their capital produces a package of policies that are implemented to everyone. The package never, cannot, and does not satisfy everyone, and most of the items in a package are undesired by the large group of people. People who are dissatisfy with the package do not have choice in the matter. As such, the capital taken from the groups individual do not meet the desires of the group of individuals. Government gains (political) capital by catering to its constituencies, regardless of the outcome of their implemented policies. Thus, government tends to cater to the lowest common denominating intersection of these disperate and often opposing groups/constituencies.
    So, how does the government and the individuals “profit” together in cars? Looking at the record of US automakers, contribution of US automakers to the law makers, and the government implemented policies; can anyone say that they are working together? If they haven’t worked together, is it a good bet that somehow they could in the future? If so, on what basis or historical data that answer can be affirmative? What social benefits did the past government involvement brought the society? After all, when government implements 10% ethanol, CAFÉ standards, seat belt laws, and other often onerous laws, they are working together to benefit X.

    Also, the word profit implies that the people now need to spend time to acquire certain item. So, if you make $50 per hour instead $40 per hour, you are profiting $10 per hour in respect to the past wage. Did the cost of doing auto business went down due to the government involvements? Who profited from the government involvements in the auto business. I can say for sure that automakers did not get benefited. And the volt, boy, that’s a big bomb if I ever seen one coming through the future pipe of GM. If Volt doesn’t kill GM, nothing will. [side note: since the bitching law of price dynamics, hybrids aren’t selling very well due to the economic conditions and the gas prices.]

    Business isn’t just a profit system. It is a profit and loss system. As such, loss is just important as profit. Do government policies profit anyone? If so, how do anyone explain the growing debt and deficit? This isn’t really about Dem vs Rep. It is really about does the government entity create profits for people. If so, how do they? Affirmative cases are very rare and hard to find.

    In other words, the social benefits which people and therefore gov’s should care about, are not tangible figures on balance sheets. So the solution is to either internalize these “profits” or use alternative means or backing for finance.

    Your statement about “internalize these profits” is a loaded phrase and the phrase supposes that everything is profitable. Most thigns are not profitable. Most things lead to failure. AS such the free-market lessie-faire market allows these failures to occure in small scales instead of nationalized scales where the failure has to be shared with everyone (spreading the misery). Meeting the “tangible figures on balance sheets” is very critical. Because if the balance sheet is negative and it is keep going negative with no end in sight, that should tell the player to stop it all together. Instead, almost all programs that’s suppose to benefit and “profit” are continued indefinitely, thus the debt and deficit we have today. How does the debt of $11 trillion and $56 trillion SS liability profit anyone?

    I’m not rationalizing about the current US auto situation. That’s more of a political decision than a financial one anyway. Everyone knows they are done for; the only impact for choices henceforth is how hard they fall, and falling on a cushion of money is easier.

    You are implicitly rationalizing the current situation on everything because what you are saying is that the government should centrally manage the inputs and outputs of the goods and services either wholly and partially. Again, the political capital and productions are quite different from the individuals’ capital and productions. They often oppose and do not agree. As such, unagreeable do not “work-together.” How can they or should they? If so, why? The important part is that the business decisions shouldn’t be made based on a national political decisions mostly based on feelings, sentiments, and moods of the voting blocks. Instead it should be solely made by the billions of individual participants in the market. Another way to put it, the individuals should be allow to free to trade with its neighbors freely without government concerning with profit and loss. It is conceivable that the voting block do not have desires for GM, Ford, or any other companies to become profitable. If they do, they only want them to succeed to the certain point and stop. It’s like people wanting the US basketball team to win by 10 points but not more at the Olympics. It’s okay with x efficiency, don’t go any higher because its success on x efficiency would have unfair advantage. As such, it limits the innovation, success, growth, and profit… and ultimately the long term prospect and the life of the company.

    Sure it’s all built in. That’s why you’ll find imports have a much more difficult time penetrating that market. A small margin on products means it’s fairly price sensitive. If it’s not, everyone can just raise the price to make more.

    It is built in because it’s part of the tax. When people shop for a car, they calculate the TTL, don’t they? Even though the retail price doesn’t reflect the TTL, people calculate it nonetheless. Also, the reason the most producers/sellers can’t raise the price at will is because there is market clearing price not the price sensitivities or other factors. Because if the price of the product is higher than the what buyer is willing to pay then you don’t have equilibrium. If the seller continues to sell at the market clearing price then the you have loss. The loss tells the sellers to stop selling that product or do something to lower the production and transaction cost.

    Also, you make assumption that the imports have a much more difficult time penetrating a market. I think when Hyundai came on to the US scene, it had a booming sale. The price and demand met the equilibrium. The subsequent quality issues are another matter but your statement regarding the difficult market entry point isn’t true. The entry to the car market requires huge capital but this does not equate to your assertion. If the producer meets the demands of the consumer, it will clear all products. If the product has good quality and pricing but it can’t be cleared, there are other problems besides the quality and the pricing.

    I think our disagreement is based on your assumption that government does x then produces a profit y. Almost all cases, the result is the opposite. If the outcome is profitable, you wouldn’t have the government debts where the production y did not help the auto companies, hospitals, trains, ect… Because if government did help, Am-track would be running profit and the Medicaid/medicare would pay itself. The bus systems in the most cities run 1 to 9 profit to loss ratio. Meaning, every $1 they get, they spend about $9. All these government systems are loss system. Also, there are strong data that suggests that there is opposite corollation between the increase of public transportation system and the road traffic log. There are so many cases where the argument against such a government control actions, I don’t know why anyone would be for the government actions. As if the government is all sweetness and light. The fact is the government has the highest union membership. Unions are formed to fight against the “employers” from the bad practices. I think the ever growing government union number gives us a clear sign that the government isn’t the answer.

  • avatar
    agenthex

    Individual and government have very different interests. Most of the time, they go against each other.

    This is your first premise and the reason that post is wrong.

    The interest of gov is the benefit of collectivization, ie the greater good. Most of the that benefit are mutual to individual interests. Just down the list of gov orgs and agencies (FDA, CDC, EPA, edu, police), and the far majority of them benefit the vast majority of individuals. In fact, selfish self interest at others is the greatest one not commonly served. For example, the easiest way to obtain material goods is to steal it. For the greater good, we set laws, enforced by a force hired by the collective, to protect against this. Of course, there are always those who feel that a private vigilante force might be more profitable, and that the wealthy who can hire the most goons deserve the most justice, but that would go against the great collective interest vs. the interests of capital.

    The hilarious irony in this that the kind of doctrine you propagate to is one perpetuated by private parties for their own gain. If your capital constituents are hampered by the regulatory agencies, what better way than to create propaganda to “get government off your back”?
    -

    Do government policies profit anyone?

    Collectivization, for the most part, as shown above, benefit everyone. Capitalists, which are mainly corps these days, like to create the world view where laisse-faire is the law of the land, but note in this worldview, the gov still exists, but instead of serving the majority, the goal is that is serves the most wealthy. So don’t be confused, government is important to them, it’s just not for YOU.

    It’s quite ironic that contrary to that meme, democracy can be pretty anti-capitalist. It’s well known in most of the 3rd world that the desires of capital are best served by more authoritarian means. But since we’re stuck with that system in parts of the world, the best immunization against the masses is the disinformation that the capital interest IS THE MOST IMPORTANT collective interest. This is why the PR organization is one of the most powerful and funded parts of any such system, and their effectiveness is undeniable given the sheer numbers of outsiders to that group in our society who’ll bat for them, often so ironically against their own self interest.

    The result of such training is people would so freely give up the power to have capital serve at the pleasure of the public vs the other way around, without thinking twice.
    -

    Your statement about “internalize these profits” is a loaded phrase and the phrase supposes that everything is profitable.

    That’s not the point at all. You clearly don’t know much about econ, because external costs are integral to the capital discussion. The quintessential example generally use is the environment. Eg. dumping toxic material into the river is cheaper than proper disposal, which is why we regulate that externalization (ie which is why it’s called external costs, since that “cost” is to the society outside of the biz), or internalize that cost. By your incorrect understanding, even if the corp is still unprofitable, the damage is not automatically reversed.

    One of the more dramatic recent examples of external costs is the devastation to the economy as the result of the desire to profit from derivatives and many other forms of underregulated risk taking. The ultimate and often immense profit is usually to the few, and the great cost to the many. Of course, even at this stage, there are still the apologists trying to excuse or at least distance themselves in to order to save the worldview that from uncontrolled selfishness and greed comes our salvation.
    -

    You are implicitly rationalizing the current situation on everything because what you are saying is that the government should centrally manage the inputs and outputs of the goods and services either wholly and partially.

    That’s not what I’ve said, and it’s quite clear at this point the reason why you like to assume it in such a way is because the people who created your worldview also created this false dichotomy where the “gov” is the anti-thesis of individual freedom, when individual freedom is the artificial creation of our system of laws and backed by our government and governance, right along with a system that allows capitalism.

    That’s right, all those rubes have been had. For the more astute ones, time to rethink what else came from the sources of information they’ve trusted.

  • avatar
    toxicroach

    I kinda don’t get why people start comparing 0-60 times and quarter mile times.

    I mean, there’s the racetrack and there’s driving around town. If a cop sees you testing your quarter mile time, you will go to jail! Do you do many 0-60 sprints?

    Is the car fun? Does the car have enough power to put a grin on your face?

    If yes, hooray, 5 stars.

    I drove the GT coupe and the 2.0T; I’d rather have the 2.0T. The track pack is a must, it makes the car shine. The grand touring model is blah and doesn’t feel as good as the 2.0, even though it has 2 less cylinders.

  • avatar
    leftreasonlies

    when individual freedom is the artificial creation of our system of laws and backed by our government and governance, right along with a system that allows capitalism.

    That’s right, all those rubes have been had. For the more astute ones, time to rethink what else came from the sources of information they’ve trusted.

    Spoken like a true believer in your sources of information.
    That is your definition of individual freedom; if you are in the US, the government in question is a constitutional republic that, like it or not, has as its basis God-given individual liberty, and, plethora of demagogues lately who would redefine that according to their particular whim notwithstanding, the assurance of that God-given liberty is the primary purpose of this government. This government is not the anti-thesis of individual freedom, but there are always those within government who would abuse the reigns of power they hold to turn citizens into subjects in the name of the “collective greater good”. History is replete with examples of governments most brutal in the name of the “collective”, and history will repeat itself if those in government aren’t held accountable under the constitution as public servants, not masters, every bit as much as the greedy corporation is held accountable for dumping toxic waste or toxic debt onto the “collective”.

    Hope the Genesis is all it seems it may be; have been considering it along with the Camaro & WRX, but the Genesis seems to be doing what the original WRX did, raising the bar on affordable all-around performance, and with decent looks to boot.

  • avatar
    CapVandal

    All this talk about trade policy but take a look at currency.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=USDKRW=X&t=5y&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=

    It isn’t all bilateral — i.e. US/Korea. The USD is on a roll. Nothing is simple.

    Having said that, devaluing your currency is the protectionism 2.0.

    Japan is in worse shape vs Korea than the US.

  • avatar
    kzone86

    Every other review of this car (from C&D, to Motor Trend, to Edmunds, even Kelley Blue Book) mentions drifting ability as a highlight of the Genesis Coupe. There are countless videos on YouTube of the Genesis doing clean, even, smokey drifts and doughnuts. There’s even a video of Rhys Millen doing his stuff wonderfully in the car. But the reviewer here claims it fails at the key area of smokey powerslides, then admits that he didn’t even turn the traction control off because he was afraid of the salesman. What kind of reviews are you writing on this site?

  • avatar
    z4eva

    Just saw one of these on the road for the first time driving down Sunset in Beverly Hills. Very pleasantly surprised.

    I’ve always thought the pics looked ok, but the in-person impression was really something else. It looks pleasingly large and solid in person (visually looked a good bit larger than the V6 Mustang in front of me), and the downward-angled belt lines gave it a very imposing presence. The size and stance made it much more than a gussied-up Tiburon. Of course it helped a lot that the Hyundai “H” had been pried off of the hood and replaced with that cool winged Genesis logo they sport in Korea. The overall look honestly reminded me of a Ferrari F430 (I know, different styling details, different configuration, price is a different order of magnitude, but a similar visual feel). Before you flame me, I’m not saying the Hyundai is anywhere near a Ferrari-lite for 1/10 the price, just that the styling was a clear cut above the Mustangs, 370Zs, and even Camaros I would cross-shop it with. (Btw, who in their right mind would compare a Genesis to a G37? Totally different cars on so many levels…) It looks much fresher to my eye than just about any other mass-produced car.

    Haven’t driven it yet, but it’s on my short-list for when my lease is up next year.

  • avatar
    wiztom

    My son and I just got back from the Hyundai Adrenalin Tour here in Fort Worth. Drove the 2.0 turbo and 3.8 on a controlled course. The 2.0 turbo was less than stellar although maybe with some tuning it could be better. The 3.8 was full of torque and handled very well for a 3300 Lb car. They all were track models. The seats were very supportive. The suspension was excellent and the brakes were superb. All in all very impressed. The V-6 is the way to go in my opinion.
    We are both former Miata owners. My son has a 350Z and thought the V-6 was comparable. I have a GXP and I was still impressed with the V-6. For under $30k it seems a good value.

  • avatar
    NineInV8

    Got rid of my Tiburon by force of relocation a few weeks ago. Miss it already but the Genesis Coupe will easily get my readies despite not having even got my ass in it yet. The Tib was a ripper and my first Hyundai .. gotta say major league impressed. Ok, so it is not a Mangusta or a Murcielago but it is there every time I come back from doing the shopping, it threads through traffic like a 10 times more expensive two door and in Asia where I was living had the pull factor of a super exotic as most had no idea what is what except it is low slung, pretty quick and got two doors and that my old mates will get you laid twice a day ;)
    Now as for that dip in the rear side window: it has got to be for better exterior vision for the driver cause any Tib driver will tell ya, there is a blind spot the size of Beijing there that makes simple stuff like oh you know, turning onto a highway from an on ramp basically a pray and tromp the loud pedal affair cause you sure as hell couldn’t actually see if there was anything coming to hit you in that barn door sized blind spot !!
    Interested to hear how G~Coupe owners find the driving of this now that it has had 18months or so to get sorted with the reality and any issues. Thinking of a nice low mileage Track – Auto or Manual ? I like the 4 speed Shiftronic in the Tib but want to really be able to hammer this one.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India