Hyundai: Genesis News
04-22-2009, 08:27 AM
#2201
Fahrvergnügen'd
Glad to hear you love your S4.
Those are hot rides. I totally agree you don't want your dogs to mess up your nice leather... I don't even my cat in my IS350 as it can stink up my fresh leather. I put her in the trunk if I have to transport her...
The 4.7 sec is best I got out of my IS350, completely stock, stock tires, no weight reduction of any kind. Got the number using my g-meter on a flat, bump-less leveled road. It was the launch that made the difference. Brake-torqued at only 1000 rpm and go. Gas at 1/8 tank. My video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj-ZvmRivzg Be sure to watch Part 2 to see the 0-60 number.
Those are hot rides. I totally agree you don't want your dogs to mess up your nice leather... I don't even my cat in my IS350 as it can stink up my fresh leather. I put her in the trunk if I have to transport her...The 4.7 sec is best I got out of my IS350, completely stock, stock tires, no weight reduction of any kind. Got the number using my g-meter on a flat, bump-less leveled road. It was the launch that made the difference. Brake-torqued at only 1000 rpm and go. Gas at 1/8 tank. My video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj-ZvmRivzg Be sure to watch Part 2 to see the 0-60 number.
Oh, and that music is horrible
04-22-2009, 01:39 PM
#2203
I'm the Firestarter
My video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj-ZvmRivzg Be sure to watch Part 2 to see the 0-60 number.
04-22-2009, 02:55 PM
#2204
10th Gear
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rice or not I still have to say that front end looks a lot better than the stock.
As for the turbo kit, I'm sure they'll have some bigger ones that will pump out more hp and especially the torque.. Maybe you need to jump on to V6 platform and turbo it? i donno.
I would also like to know the gear ratios on this car. I have a feeling the gear ratios are tall, hence it got mopped by 370z and modded Mustang GT the MotorTrend tested at the track 0- quarter mile. I mean this really isn't a problem if you turbo the GeneCoupe with more torque.. I can't wait to see the review by Road&Track cause they provide every bit detail on the test setup and full specs on the car including gear ratios and shift points.
Glad to hear you love your S4.
Those are hot rides. I totally agree you don't want your dogs to mess up your nice leather... I don't even my cat in my IS350 as it can stink up my fresh leather. I put her in the trunk if I have to transport her...The 4.7 sec is best I got out of my IS350, completely stock, stock tires, no weight reduction of any kind. Got the number using my g-meter on a flat, bump-less leveled road. It was the launch that made the difference. Brake-torqued at only 1000 rpm and go. Gas at 1/8 tank. My video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj-ZvmRivzg Be sure to watch Part 2 to see the 0-60 number.
No weight reduction? Running on an empty fuel tank would be considered a weight reduction.
The Genesis Coupe in that Motor Trend video has a problem with the ECU cutting off power with fast shifting.
You can hear the engine lose power from 2nd to 3rd gear at 0:57 second mark.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77MstcS02Z8
05-05-2009, 11:08 PM
#2205
Comparo of Genesis and V6 Camaro
I posted this in the Camaro thread, too.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison_test/coupes/2010_chevrolet_camaro_v6_lt_vs_2010_hyundai_genesi s_coupe_3_8_v6_comparison_test/(page)/1
Originally Posted by C&D
We expect your palms are all clammy in anticipation of the predictable Detroit Three muscle-car comparo, in which belching V-8s reduce tires to a gray haze that hangs on the horizon like a thousand dirty sweat pants. We’ll produce the gray haze in due course.
But first, let’s be responsible by looking at where most pony-car transactions transpire—that is, in the V-6 trenches, accounting for 65 percent of sales—and then let’s be irresponsible by celebrating this: The 2010 Camaro V-6 is 0.7 second quicker to 60 mph than, say, a Camaro SS 396 we tested in 1968. Heck, it’s quicker and faster through the quarter-mile than a BMW 328i. No chicken coupe, this.
So we sent out invitations, but Ford and Dodge didn’t RSVP, choosing silence instead. Here’s why: The Camaro LT and the Hyundai Genesis Coupe 3.8 are both spanking-new four-valve twin-cammers with independent multilink rear suspensions, and their outputs are on top of each other: 306 horsepower for the Genesis, 304 for the Camaro. Neither Ford nor Dodge can make like claims. It’s more than a little frustrating that the V-6 in Ford’s latest Mustang produces a pitiful 210 horses from greater displacement than either Chevrolet or Hyundai requires. Unless Ford equips the Mustang with, say, an EcoBoost V-6, Dearborn simply won’t have a horse in this race. Dodge’s V-6 Challenger—automatic only—isn’t much better off, producing 250 horsepower from 3.5 liters. A V-6 Challenger we tested achieved 60 mph in 7.5 seconds, leaving it embarrassingly in the wake of the two cars gathered here, in part because the Dodge is one big lunker—more than 15 incheslonger than a Genesis coupe. Which left us with this unlikely but toothsome twosome: a 3.6-liter V-6 Camaro versus a 3.8-liter Genesis coupe. America versus Korea. Except the Camaro is built in Oshawa, Ontario. So let’s call it Oshawa versus Ulsan.
If you squint at this new Genesis—and if you’ve had a shot or two of tequila—you can make out some of the pugnacious lines that emboldened the little front-drive Tiburon, which this coupe replaces. The new car rides on the rear-drive Genesis sedan’s platform, minus 4.6 inches of wheelbase, and feels nothing like the Tib. It feels far more confident, more substantial, and more aggressive in all its moves. What the Genesis coupe is, in fact, is a pony car.
Our version arrived with the Track pack, including 19-inch Bridgestones; Brembo brakes; beefier springs, shocks, and bars; a brace between the front shock towers; a limited-slip differential; and a vaguely tacky rear spoiler that fortunately was 90-percent invisible in the rearview mirror.
The Track pack certainly tracks. Body motions are rigidly disciplined, and this Hyundai’s 0.88 g of skidpad grip felt more like a full g in the hills, where the car took a confident, firm set and exhibited excellent path control. Like the Camaro, a steady throttle through a turn induced mild understeer, but a sudden wallop of horsepower could rotate the tail, especially when the overly aggressive stability control was disabled. And when matters got too exuberant, the Brembos brought the action to a halt, like, yesterday. The brake pedal doesn’t offer the greatest feel, but 70 mph is dissipated in 161 feet—sports-car territory.
The Genesis proved 0.4 second quicker to 60 mph than the Camaro and 0.3 second quicker through the quarter-mile. You can spin the rear tires right to redline in first gear and provoke a satisfying bark while slamming into second. Those straight-line bona fides are likely the upshot of a Slim-Fast engineering diet. This coupe is 315 pounds lighter than the Camaro. Nice detail: Regular unleaded works fine in both engines.
Although the steering is a little heavy, it’s quick. Turn-in is sharper than the Camaro’s, and freeway tracking is superb. Too bad there’s an odd engine drone at interstate speeds. Any throttle dithering lends that drone a persistent on/off quality, drawing even more aural attention. Otherwise, the V-6 is mechanically thrashy only near redline, where it is largely drowned out by a booming exhaust snarl.
The front seats are firm and aggressively bolstered, tethering your torso securely in place. The rears are habitable by children only. If you’re taller than about five-seven, your hair will rub against the rear window. Plus, there’s the inevitable fight getting through the front seatbelts.
Despite its 32 buttons and switches, the center stack is satisfactorily understandable, and the four IP gauges feature legible white lettering on black backgrounds. The pedals are arrayed for those who care to heel-and-toe. Cabin surfaces are just as hard and plasticky as the Camaro’s, but they’re more pleasing because they’ve been twisted into interesting compound shapes. As is true of all pony cars, rear three-quarter visibility is grim, and the trunk is less a trunk than, say, a metal briefcase that, in this instance, swallows 10 cubic feet of stuff versus the Camaro’s 11.
Although it delivered better test-track numbers, the Genesis coupe lost major points to the Camaro for two reasons. First, its ride is harsh. Every heave, crack, dimple, and hummock in the tarmac finds its way into the cabin and up your spine. So firm is the ride that, at the limit, the chassis feels jittery, nervous. Even under light braking, we’d often feel a pulse of the ABS from whichever wheel had most recently lost touch with Mother Earth. If you live in a ravaged-road state, forgo the Track pack.
Second, although Hyundai’s manual six-speed shifter offers short and direct throws, the clutch is too heavy and, worse, the driveline and engine aren’t talking to each other. The transmission is overeager to bind, wind up, and snatch if the driver too quickly tips in or out of the throttle. It’s annoying to have your head snap with every shift. No car should actively resist a driver’s attempts at smoothness. At the very least, this trait must be introducing needless shock to the gear teeth and half-shafts.
This sporty coupe is direct and visceral, the first Korean car to get our blood pumping. It’s a little rough around the edges, but Hyundai has a habit of catching up. Fast.
Climbing out of the Hyundai and into the Chevrolet is a night-and-day shocker, the difference between the Appalachians and the Alps. The Camaro feels big because it is: 8.1 inches longer than the Hyundai, 2.1 inches wider, heavier by the weight of two healthy humans. Hey, it’s a half-foot longer than that SS 396 we tested in 1968.
Well, sometimes it pays to aim big because onlookers simply go all teary-eyed when they encounter the Camaro, rushing up to snap pics and peer through the gun-slit windows. Which perhaps suggests the styling will pass the test of time. God knows the Camaro’s visage has been relentlessly reproduced in magazines since the concept car’s debut some 40 months ago.
We cycled through five Camaro V-6s before eventually settling on a test car: an LT with leather and 19-inch Pirellis. Although the base LS would have saved us $1635, we didn’t care for its cloth seats, whose overly soft cushions were wadding and bunching after only a couple days’ use. Neither were we crazy about the base 18-inch rubber, which slightly degraded the otherwise crisp turn-in and added to some minor on-center steering slop. Plus, our well-equipped LT included that cool quartet of center-console gauges, which not only recall the ’69 Z28 but also help mitigate this latest Camaro’s interior monotony. The passenger-side dash, for instance, is an expanse of flat, cheaply pebbled vinyl so vast that you’ll consider hanging a painting there. While we’re carping, what’s with the dull, flimsy plastic around the shifter and HVAC controls? And why are the steering wheel’s spokes so ridiculously wide?
Fourteen-thousand folks have already laid down earnest money to secure a Camaro, but we hope none of them is taller than five-ten. That’s because the roof has been seriously slammed. If you’ve got anything resembling Dog the Bounty Hunter’s pompadour, prepare to leave an oily spot on the headliner. Sunroof? Just say no.
Otherwise, this new Camaro won us over. As much as we love this direct-injection V-6 in the Cadillac CTS, we love it more in the Camaro because it’s finally married to a manual transmission that’s endearing. Its clutch is lighter than the Hyundai’s, the shift linkage travels more effortlessly and intuitively through its gates, and the engine requires fewer blipping revs to ensure seamless downshifts. It’s a forgiving drivetrain that, unlike the Hyundai’s, goes to lengths to hide the driver’s mistakes. Too bad the pedals are so far apart. Heel-and-toeing is confined to size-13-and-above clodhoppers.
On our handling loop, the Camaro delivered enough grip to excite, and though the body moved around more than the Genesis coupe’s, it rarely seemed to disrupt the assigned path. What’s more, the Camaro offers two different shots at eliminating the steady-state understeer. Push a button to disable the traction control; press it again (for five seconds) to kill the stability control. After which, a heavy foot will swing-dance the tail.
Best of all, the Camaro proved calm, relaxed, and surprisingly serene for a pony car. It soaked up the pockmarked tarmac that was launching the Hyundai in multiple directions, crash-through was infrequent, there were fewer shivers up through the steering column, and wind noise was less pronounced. Our sound-level measurements didn’t show much difference between these cars, but it’s the quality of noise that matters: A lion screaming is sort of nice. Joan Rivers screaming isn’t. On freeway slogs, it was the Camaro you wanted to inhabit, and it was always the Camaro that was unintentionally hoofing along at about 20 mph beyond the legal limit—a good sign. Someone at GM sweated this car’s ride-and-handling trade-off.
The Camaro’s back seat was only marginally better than the Genesis’s, with one’s cranium scraping the cushy headliner rather than the hard rear window. And we especially appreciated the telescoping steering column, a feature that Hyundai forgot to offer. GM says 55 percent of its early Camaro buyers are “conquests” or “winbacks”—nice news for a company currently applying tourniquets to all of its appendages. All we know is that the Camaro V-6, a car so smartly and enjoyably couped up, is a bargain. In the end, that alone might have carried the day. The Camaro won by one point.
But first, let’s be responsible by looking at where most pony-car transactions transpire—that is, in the V-6 trenches, accounting for 65 percent of sales—and then let’s be irresponsible by celebrating this: The 2010 Camaro V-6 is 0.7 second quicker to 60 mph than, say, a Camaro SS 396 we tested in 1968. Heck, it’s quicker and faster through the quarter-mile than a BMW 328i. No chicken coupe, this.
So we sent out invitations, but Ford and Dodge didn’t RSVP, choosing silence instead. Here’s why: The Camaro LT and the Hyundai Genesis Coupe 3.8 are both spanking-new four-valve twin-cammers with independent multilink rear suspensions, and their outputs are on top of each other: 306 horsepower for the Genesis, 304 for the Camaro. Neither Ford nor Dodge can make like claims. It’s more than a little frustrating that the V-6 in Ford’s latest Mustang produces a pitiful 210 horses from greater displacement than either Chevrolet or Hyundai requires. Unless Ford equips the Mustang with, say, an EcoBoost V-6, Dearborn simply won’t have a horse in this race. Dodge’s V-6 Challenger—automatic only—isn’t much better off, producing 250 horsepower from 3.5 liters. A V-6 Challenger we tested achieved 60 mph in 7.5 seconds, leaving it embarrassingly in the wake of the two cars gathered here, in part because the Dodge is one big lunker—more than 15 incheslonger than a Genesis coupe. Which left us with this unlikely but toothsome twosome: a 3.6-liter V-6 Camaro versus a 3.8-liter Genesis coupe. America versus Korea. Except the Camaro is built in Oshawa, Ontario. So let’s call it Oshawa versus Ulsan.
If you squint at this new Genesis—and if you’ve had a shot or two of tequila—you can make out some of the pugnacious lines that emboldened the little front-drive Tiburon, which this coupe replaces. The new car rides on the rear-drive Genesis sedan’s platform, minus 4.6 inches of wheelbase, and feels nothing like the Tib. It feels far more confident, more substantial, and more aggressive in all its moves. What the Genesis coupe is, in fact, is a pony car.
Our version arrived with the Track pack, including 19-inch Bridgestones; Brembo brakes; beefier springs, shocks, and bars; a brace between the front shock towers; a limited-slip differential; and a vaguely tacky rear spoiler that fortunately was 90-percent invisible in the rearview mirror.
The Track pack certainly tracks. Body motions are rigidly disciplined, and this Hyundai’s 0.88 g of skidpad grip felt more like a full g in the hills, where the car took a confident, firm set and exhibited excellent path control. Like the Camaro, a steady throttle through a turn induced mild understeer, but a sudden wallop of horsepower could rotate the tail, especially when the overly aggressive stability control was disabled. And when matters got too exuberant, the Brembos brought the action to a halt, like, yesterday. The brake pedal doesn’t offer the greatest feel, but 70 mph is dissipated in 161 feet—sports-car territory.
The Genesis proved 0.4 second quicker to 60 mph than the Camaro and 0.3 second quicker through the quarter-mile. You can spin the rear tires right to redline in first gear and provoke a satisfying bark while slamming into second. Those straight-line bona fides are likely the upshot of a Slim-Fast engineering diet. This coupe is 315 pounds lighter than the Camaro. Nice detail: Regular unleaded works fine in both engines.
Although the steering is a little heavy, it’s quick. Turn-in is sharper than the Camaro’s, and freeway tracking is superb. Too bad there’s an odd engine drone at interstate speeds. Any throttle dithering lends that drone a persistent on/off quality, drawing even more aural attention. Otherwise, the V-6 is mechanically thrashy only near redline, where it is largely drowned out by a booming exhaust snarl.
The front seats are firm and aggressively bolstered, tethering your torso securely in place. The rears are habitable by children only. If you’re taller than about five-seven, your hair will rub against the rear window. Plus, there’s the inevitable fight getting through the front seatbelts.
Despite its 32 buttons and switches, the center stack is satisfactorily understandable, and the four IP gauges feature legible white lettering on black backgrounds. The pedals are arrayed for those who care to heel-and-toe. Cabin surfaces are just as hard and plasticky as the Camaro’s, but they’re more pleasing because they’ve been twisted into interesting compound shapes. As is true of all pony cars, rear three-quarter visibility is grim, and the trunk is less a trunk than, say, a metal briefcase that, in this instance, swallows 10 cubic feet of stuff versus the Camaro’s 11.
Although it delivered better test-track numbers, the Genesis coupe lost major points to the Camaro for two reasons. First, its ride is harsh. Every heave, crack, dimple, and hummock in the tarmac finds its way into the cabin and up your spine. So firm is the ride that, at the limit, the chassis feels jittery, nervous. Even under light braking, we’d often feel a pulse of the ABS from whichever wheel had most recently lost touch with Mother Earth. If you live in a ravaged-road state, forgo the Track pack.
Second, although Hyundai’s manual six-speed shifter offers short and direct throws, the clutch is too heavy and, worse, the driveline and engine aren’t talking to each other. The transmission is overeager to bind, wind up, and snatch if the driver too quickly tips in or out of the throttle. It’s annoying to have your head snap with every shift. No car should actively resist a driver’s attempts at smoothness. At the very least, this trait must be introducing needless shock to the gear teeth and half-shafts.
This sporty coupe is direct and visceral, the first Korean car to get our blood pumping. It’s a little rough around the edges, but Hyundai has a habit of catching up. Fast.
Climbing out of the Hyundai and into the Chevrolet is a night-and-day shocker, the difference between the Appalachians and the Alps. The Camaro feels big because it is: 8.1 inches longer than the Hyundai, 2.1 inches wider, heavier by the weight of two healthy humans. Hey, it’s a half-foot longer than that SS 396 we tested in 1968.
Well, sometimes it pays to aim big because onlookers simply go all teary-eyed when they encounter the Camaro, rushing up to snap pics and peer through the gun-slit windows. Which perhaps suggests the styling will pass the test of time. God knows the Camaro’s visage has been relentlessly reproduced in magazines since the concept car’s debut some 40 months ago.
We cycled through five Camaro V-6s before eventually settling on a test car: an LT with leather and 19-inch Pirellis. Although the base LS would have saved us $1635, we didn’t care for its cloth seats, whose overly soft cushions were wadding and bunching after only a couple days’ use. Neither were we crazy about the base 18-inch rubber, which slightly degraded the otherwise crisp turn-in and added to some minor on-center steering slop. Plus, our well-equipped LT included that cool quartet of center-console gauges, which not only recall the ’69 Z28 but also help mitigate this latest Camaro’s interior monotony. The passenger-side dash, for instance, is an expanse of flat, cheaply pebbled vinyl so vast that you’ll consider hanging a painting there. While we’re carping, what’s with the dull, flimsy plastic around the shifter and HVAC controls? And why are the steering wheel’s spokes so ridiculously wide?
Fourteen-thousand folks have already laid down earnest money to secure a Camaro, but we hope none of them is taller than five-ten. That’s because the roof has been seriously slammed. If you’ve got anything resembling Dog the Bounty Hunter’s pompadour, prepare to leave an oily spot on the headliner. Sunroof? Just say no.
Otherwise, this new Camaro won us over. As much as we love this direct-injection V-6 in the Cadillac CTS, we love it more in the Camaro because it’s finally married to a manual transmission that’s endearing. Its clutch is lighter than the Hyundai’s, the shift linkage travels more effortlessly and intuitively through its gates, and the engine requires fewer blipping revs to ensure seamless downshifts. It’s a forgiving drivetrain that, unlike the Hyundai’s, goes to lengths to hide the driver’s mistakes. Too bad the pedals are so far apart. Heel-and-toeing is confined to size-13-and-above clodhoppers.
On our handling loop, the Camaro delivered enough grip to excite, and though the body moved around more than the Genesis coupe’s, it rarely seemed to disrupt the assigned path. What’s more, the Camaro offers two different shots at eliminating the steady-state understeer. Push a button to disable the traction control; press it again (for five seconds) to kill the stability control. After which, a heavy foot will swing-dance the tail.
Best of all, the Camaro proved calm, relaxed, and surprisingly serene for a pony car. It soaked up the pockmarked tarmac that was launching the Hyundai in multiple directions, crash-through was infrequent, there were fewer shivers up through the steering column, and wind noise was less pronounced. Our sound-level measurements didn’t show much difference between these cars, but it’s the quality of noise that matters: A lion screaming is sort of nice. Joan Rivers screaming isn’t. On freeway slogs, it was the Camaro you wanted to inhabit, and it was always the Camaro that was unintentionally hoofing along at about 20 mph beyond the legal limit—a good sign. Someone at GM sweated this car’s ride-and-handling trade-off.
The Camaro’s back seat was only marginally better than the Genesis’s, with one’s cranium scraping the cushy headliner rather than the hard rear window. And we especially appreciated the telescoping steering column, a feature that Hyundai forgot to offer. GM says 55 percent of its early Camaro buyers are “conquests” or “winbacks”—nice news for a company currently applying tourniquets to all of its appendages. All we know is that the Camaro V-6, a car so smartly and enjoyably couped up, is a bargain. In the end, that alone might have carried the day. The Camaro won by one point.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison_test/coupes/2010_chevrolet_camaro_v6_lt_vs_2010_hyundai_genesi s_coupe_3_8_v6_comparison_test/(page)/1
05-06-2009, 10:01 AM
#2207
Fahrvergnügen'd
Originally Posted by The Shit People Care About
Genesis Coupe:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 14.2 sec
Zero to 140 mph: 32.0 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 6.1 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.2 sec @ 100 mph
Top speed (governor limited, mfr's claim): 152 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 161 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.88 g
Lane Change: 66.0 mph
Camaro V6:
Zero to 60 mph: 5.9 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 14.7 sec
Zero to 140 mph: 35.9 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 6.4 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 14.5 sec @ 99 mph
Top speed (governor limited, mfr's claim): 157 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 173 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g
Lane Change: 63.7 mph
05-06-2009, 10:25 AM
#2208
Senior Moderator
05-06-2009, 10:31 AM
#2209
Camaro SS on the other hand..... no brainer. Looks and probably sounds better, and definitely goes better. And just a wild guess, but its probably cheaper to and you'll have more options to make it go even better.
Time to get flamed by msl and the Hyundai brigade
Time to get flamed by msl and the Hyundai brigade
05-06-2009, 03:11 PM
#2212
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
gotta have it factor
22 vs 16
and there's a 1 point difference between the two vehicles.
i dont really care who wins, but that's just too funny. gotta have it factor? wtf is that? lol
22 vs 16
and there's a 1 point difference between the two vehicles.
i dont really care who wins, but that's just too funny. gotta have it factor? wtf is that? lol
05-06-2009, 03:14 PM
#2213
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
370Z
13.3 sec @ 107 mph
that is very fast
13.3 sec @ 107 mph
that is very fast
05-06-2009, 05:51 PM
#2214
Pro
Join Date: Jan 2009
Age: 42
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about handling? Even the V6 Camaro did not handle as well as well as the Genesis. The extra weight of the V8 should make the difference in handling even more significant.
05-06-2009, 06:42 PM
#2215
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
05-07-2009, 01:15 AM
#2218
The V6 Camaro is not meant to be the performance car.... in the Camaro lineup, the LT is like a Civic EX.... and the SS is like the Civic Type-R (GM's way) and then some. They didn't just drop in an LS3 and slap on a few SS badges.... there's uprated springs, better shocks, larger sway bars and more chassis tuning, stiffer bushings, beefier LCAs, etc. Then there's the tranny oil cooler and Brembo 4-pistons..... you get the point. In the car and driver review SS badged vehicles have to endure 24 hours of racetrack hotlapping.
So in actuality, you're right.... the V8 does indeed make the difference in handling more significant
05-07-2009, 09:05 AM
#2219
Pro
Join Date: Jan 2009
Age: 42
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Edmunds ran a 68.4 mpg in the slalom with the SS, which I admit is pretty impressive. Regardless of the suspension, however, a 3900 lb. vehicle is never going to feel particularly nimble. The Genesis 3.8 track ran a 68.2 mph, so it is essentially identical to the Camaro SS. However, with a 500 lb. weight advantage, the Genesis will be more nimble and enjoyable to throw around corners. So please tell me again how the Camaro has better handling? Also, if you want to compare the SS to the Genesis, the Genesis has a significant price advantage.
OT: Based on principle alone, I'd never buy a car from a manufacturer that is currently alive only because of taxpayer money. As long as they don't pay back their taxpayer loans, I have no desire to look at any GM products.
OT: Based on principle alone, I'd never buy a car from a manufacturer that is currently alive only because of taxpayer money. As long as they don't pay back their taxpayer loans, I have no desire to look at any GM products.
05-07-2009, 10:06 AM
#2220
Fahrvergnügen'd
Edmunds ran a 68.4 mpg in the slalom with the SS, which I admit is pretty impressive. Regardless of the suspension, however, a 3900 lb. vehicle is never going to feel particularly nimble. The Genesis 3.8 track ran a 68.2 mph, so it is essentially identical to the Camaro SS. However, with a 500 lb. weight advantage, the Genesis will be more nimble and enjoyable to throw around corners. So please tell me again how the Camaro has better handling? Also, if you want to compare the SS to the Genesis, the Genesis has a significant price advantage.
OT: Based on principle alone, I'd never buy a car from a manufacturer that is currently alive only because of taxpayer money. As long as they don't pay back their taxpayer loans, I have no desire to look at any GM products.
OT: Based on principle alone, I'd never buy a car from a manufacturer that is currently alive only because of taxpayer money. As long as they don't pay back their taxpayer loans, I have no desire to look at any GM products.
As far as your comment on the Camaro goes, I couldn't agree more. The idea that GM is going to charge $30k for a V6 Camaro that is "not supposed to handle that well" is exactly what I've been grousing about.
The Big 3 think they can put a lot of HP in a boat and people will buy it all day long.
Ridiculous and just more of the idiotic thinking that got them where they are in the first place. At least the Mustang has a V8 for $30k and apparently a chassis to go along with it now.
I'd love to see a Camaro V6 and a Genesis 3.8 lap the same track. I bet the Hyundai would be at least a second ahead of the Camaro on a track the length of the Top Gear track.
05-07-2009, 02:51 PM
#2222
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 41
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well they can carry that debt for a while but as long as they are fulfilling their obligations, I see no need to be concerned about it.
As far as your comment on the Camaro goes, I couldn't agree more. The idea that GM is going to charge $30k for a V6 Camaro that is "not supposed to handle that well" is exactly what I've been grousing about.
The Big 3 think they can put a lot of HP in a boat and people will buy it all day long.
Ridiculous and just more of the idiotic thinking that got them where they are in the first place. At least the Mustang has a V8 for $30k and apparently a chassis to go along with it now.
I'd love to see a Camaro V6 and a Genesis 3.8 lap the same track. I bet the Hyundai would be at least a second ahead of the Camaro on a track the length of the Top Gear track.
As far as your comment on the Camaro goes, I couldn't agree more. The idea that GM is going to charge $30k for a V6 Camaro that is "not supposed to handle that well" is exactly what I've been grousing about.
The Big 3 think they can put a lot of HP in a boat and people will buy it all day long.
Ridiculous and just more of the idiotic thinking that got them where they are in the first place. At least the Mustang has a V8 for $30k and apparently a chassis to go along with it now.
I'd love to see a Camaro V6 and a Genesis 3.8 lap the same track. I bet the Hyundai would be at least a second ahead of the Camaro on a track the length of the Top Gear track.
Camaro is an American Muscle car in which, its importance is on brute HP and TQ for straight lane. Obviously the designers of Camo didnt put too much emphasis on handling/cornering, or else why would they make Camaro SS 4100 curb weight!!!! Its a fat boat!!
Therefore, I think your wrong to EXPECT Camaro SS to have better handling capability than Hyundai Genesis Coupe. Hyundai Genesis coupe is a sports car, in which balance of speed and handling is considered.
The bottome line factor, If you want straight line speed with American V-8 rumble, crappy low quality interior, and an option of hair mullet, go for Camaro SS. (and yes, I saw the interior of Camaro on the auto show...all I have to say is LOL)
If you want a balance of speed and handling of a sports car, great reliability and quality (Hyundai > GM), get Hyundai Genesis Coupe.
05-07-2009, 03:05 PM
#2223
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
^ blah blah blah blah
I love Hyundai.
mkay
I love Hyundai.
mkay
05-07-2009, 06:05 PM
#2224
Edmunds ran a 68.4 mpg in the slalom with the SS, which I admit is pretty impressive. Regardless of the suspension, however, a 3900 lb. vehicle is never going to feel particularly nimble. The Genesis 3.8 track ran a 68.2 mph, so it is essentially identical to the Camaro SS. However, with a 500 lb. weight advantage, the Genesis will be more nimble and enjoyable to throw around corners. So please tell me again how the Camaro has better handling? Also, if you want to compare the SS to the Genesis, the Genesis has a significant price advantage.
As far as your comment on the Camaro goes, I couldn't agree more. The idea that GM is going to charge $30k for a V6 Camaro that is "not supposed to handle that well" is exactly what I've been grousing about.
The Big 3 think they can put a lot of HP in a boat and people will buy it all day long.
Ridiculous and just more of the idiotic thinking that got them where they are in the first place. At least the Mustang has a V8 for $30k and apparently a chassis to go along with it now.
I'd love to see a Camaro V6 and a Genesis 3.8 lap the same track. I bet the Hyundai would be at least a second ahead of the Camaro on a track the length of the Top Gear track.
The Big 3 think they can put a lot of HP in a boat and people will buy it all day long.
Ridiculous and just more of the idiotic thinking that got them where they are in the first place. At least the Mustang has a V8 for $30k and apparently a chassis to go along with it now.
I'd love to see a Camaro V6 and a Genesis 3.8 lap the same track. I bet the Hyundai would be at least a second ahead of the Camaro on a track the length of the Top Gear track.
I suppose you would be happier if they used the pre-existing F-Body platform to save a few hundred pounds?
Compare the Camaro's V6 to the Mustang's current V6 with a whopping 210 horsepower. It seems Chevrolet is trying to follow Acura's strategy with the TL marketing-wise. The most powerful Acura yet, with a 305 hp V6......... in a 2-ton package.
The reason it weighs so much is because its based on Aussie architecture. They used the new Zeta platform which the G8 and its Holden counterparts are based off of.... it saves money, and at the same time they're using a new platform. And all the reviews are saying the Zeta cars handle great.
need anyone say more? haha.
05-07-2009, 06:18 PM
#2225
Pro
Join Date: Jan 2009
Age: 42
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Um.... have you ever driven in a slalom? It IS a test of agility..... so you just contradicted yourself. Despite being 500 lbs more, the Camaro SS performed the same as the Genesis 3.8 Track. But because this is the Genesis coupe thread, everyone is downplaying the Camaro and raving about how MORE nimble the Genesis coupe is, despite the fact that they are literally right next to each other on that plane.
05-07-2009, 06:25 PM
#2226
No, I didn't. Having a big, powerful engine will improve the slalom time coming in and out of the cones, partially skewing the slalom time. Consequently, two cars with equal slalom speeds will not necessarily have the same handling characteristics. A larger, heavier car will not be as agile as a lighter car, regardless of slalom time. It's basic physics.
Oh, physics.... that explains the GT-R too, then
05-07-2009, 07:04 PM
#2227
Pro
Join Date: Jan 2009
Age: 42
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regardless of what you want to think, a lighter car is going to be more nimble. The GTR has an AWD system that affords it a tremendous amount of grip, but it would certainly handle better if it weighed a few hundred pounds less. Ask some S2000 owners if their car would be as enjoyable if it weighed 3500 lbs.
05-07-2009, 09:54 PM
#2228
Fahrvergnügen'd
I saw a black 2.0T today ... Nice looking car. It appears to be smaller than a G37 but "familiar" looking nevertheless.
A chick was driving it ... I guess that means it's off everyone's list now.
A chick was driving it ... I guess that means it's off everyone's list now.
05-08-2009, 03:11 AM
#2231
I drive a Subata.
iTrader: (1)
seriously. that was totally unexpected.
msl82, shouldn't you be in the Nissan 370Z thread preaching everyone that Nissan 370Z is the best car in the world?
I mean how can you purchase 370Z after all that I-Love-You-Hyundai-Please-Marry-Me type of talk?
Totally weird.
msl82, shouldn't you be in the Nissan 370Z thread preaching everyone that Nissan 370Z is the best car in the world?
I mean how can you purchase 370Z after all that I-Love-You-Hyundai-Please-Marry-Me type of talk?
Totally weird.
05-08-2009, 05:16 AM
#2232
hail to the victors
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPP6U...eature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Erezd...eature=related
Motor Trend
gen coupe vs. camaro v6
gen coupe wins easily. gen coupe looks better IMO. camaro is way too macho american muscle look for my taste.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Erezd...eature=related
Motor Trend
gen coupe vs. camaro v6
gen coupe wins easily. gen coupe looks better IMO. camaro is way too macho american muscle look for my taste.
05-08-2009, 08:28 AM
#2235
Pro
Join Date: Jan 2009
Age: 42
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Watch part 2 of the Motortrend review. Note that the reviewer repeatedly mentions that the Genesis handles better and is far more nimble than the Camaro. He also mentions that the American companies should be moving in the direction of the Genesis, with smaller and lighter sports coupes. I don't understand why some people fail to understand that sports cars about more than pure power.
05-08-2009, 08:59 AM
#2236
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 41
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets not jump into conclusion without even knowing the real reason behind it, what a impulsive little kid....
I still regard Hyundai Genesis Coupe as the best sports car in the price range $21,000 - $30,000. However, I have gotten promoted couple of month ago, so I could afford 30,000 - 50,000 sports cars. Thats why I bought 370z because I believe its the best sports car in that price range. Its as simple as that.
And think about this folks, If i was really Hyundai fanboy, I would have bought GenCoupe regardless, but I didnt because I am reasonable and rational person. I am not like those mullet trailer park guys that only buys American Mustang or Camaro, regardless how crappy they are. They are irrational and being dumb. I don't think thats being patriotic, they are just being too prideful and blinding their reasoning. I don't care where that car originated from, as long as it will give me the best value for my hard earned MONEY!!
And for the most part, thats excately what Hyundai cars are, they are trully one of the best value cars. Many months ago, most of the people in this board always looked down upon Hyundai cars regardless of how of a good car it was. They would just say, "its a just a Hyundai", and making false statements about its reliability and dependability, while in fact, its better than most American cars out there.
I was the only one who always suggested Hyundai car whenever there was car comparison. To other Koreans in this board, DID YOU HAVE THE GUTS TO DO THAT?
By the way JS + TL, I guess your favorite sport to watch is female figure skating based on your avatar...lol, you like when Kim Youn A does triple-double spin and splits?
05-08-2009, 09:22 AM
#2237
Burning Brakes
Edmunds ran a 68.4 mpg in the slalom with the SS, which I admit is pretty impressive. Regardless of the suspension, however, a 3900 lb. vehicle is never going to feel particularly nimble. The Genesis 3.8 track ran a 68.2 mph, so it is essentially identical to the Camaro SS. However, with a 500 lb. weight advantage, the Genesis will be more nimble and enjoyable to throw around corners. So please tell me again how the Camaro has better handling? Also, if you want to compare the SS to the Genesis, the Genesis has a significant price advantage.
OT: Based on principle alone, I'd never buy a car from a manufacturer that is currently alive only because of taxpayer money. As long as they don't pay back their taxpayer loans, I have no desire to look at any GM products.
OT: Based on principle alone, I'd never buy a car from a manufacturer that is currently alive only because of taxpayer money. As long as they don't pay back their taxpayer loans, I have no desire to look at any GM products.
05-08-2009, 09:32 AM
#2238
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Stockton, CA
Age: 36
Posts: 806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't care where that car originated from, as long as it will give me the best value for my hard earned MONEY!!
I'm a Korean on the board but I don't automatically support the Hyundai in every comparo just because it is a Korean car..
05-08-2009, 09:41 AM
#2239
Watch part 2 of the Motortrend review. Note that the reviewer repeatedly mentions that the Genesis handles better and is far more nimble than the Camaro. He also mentions that the American companies should be moving in the direction of the Genesis, with smaller and lighter sports coupes. I don't understand why some people fail to understand that sports cars about more than pure power.
I saw that part. I still wouldn't classify it as "wins easily". Please tell me what it is about the V6 Camaro that makes you think "pure power".
The Gen coupe has the track package, so of course it will be more nimble. The fact is, the Camaro, which is not a track-tuned car, performs just as good or better than the car with a $4K track package.
