Is Hyundai the new Honda?
11-30-2011, 12:30 PM
#101
Are you sure? As much as I hate to admit it the Mazdaspeed3 is the S2000's equal around most road courses. I don't think it has a torsion beam in the rear but otherwise it's similar, nevermind much heavier.
11-30-2011, 12:36 PM
#102
Originally Posted by JonBoy' timestamp='1322684093' post='21198603
Torsion beam rear axle + moderately high power/torque + skinny tires + FWD + unequal length halfshafts does not equal an FRS/BRZ-beating vehicle.
It's the general equal of an S2000 around many road courses, stock for stock, though I'd give the edge to the S2000 on most courses that don't have a big straight. It doesn't have a torsion beam rear suspension, though, so comparisons to the Veloster are pretty much useless. An MS3 will eat a Veloster for lunch in any contest of speed or handling.
Will a Veloster turbo beat an FRS? Possibly, in a straight line. However, the FRS will undoubtedly handle far better, have better balance and generally be a more fun car to drive. That is its intent.
Initial reviews of the Veloster have been ho-hum. It's an okay car but it's not that sporting and not particularly fun. It's just quirky, has lots of features, is practical and is moderately priced. A sports car it ain't!
11-30-2011, 12:40 PM
#103
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: West Henrietta UPSTATE NY
Posts: 58,680
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by JonBoy' timestamp='1322684093' post='21198603
Torsion beam rear axle + moderately high power/torque + skinny tires + FWD + unequal length halfshafts does not equal an FRS/BRZ-beating vehicle.
I know not about the MS3, but yes, the Veloster is a beam axle
JON-
I would also like to say, just because something has a rear beam axle does not mean it is chit...
I have been around Watkins Glen, and at an amazing pace in a car with a Torsion-Beam Rear Suspension, and no matter what, it WAS NOT THE REAR SUSPENSION that was the weak link, it was the pathetic understeer, it was the lousy front suspension on that car that was the weak link. Oh, and for the record, that vehicle was a Honda Fit that I'm referring to
11-30-2011, 01:07 PM
#104
Was the Fit set up for the street or set up for the track? Because if it wasn't stock, why are we talking about it?
The Veloster is not set up to be a sports car. It's not even a good sporty car. It's just a decently fun hatchback.
Per Car and Driver:
And Road and Track
And Inside Line
The Veloster is not set up to be a sports car. It's not even a good sporty car. It's just a decently fun hatchback.
Per Car and Driver:
Now, let’s get one thing straight: Hyundai never explicitly said that its four-seat Veloster was the spiritual replacement for the two-seat CRX Si. But given its size and shape, people have been drawing the comparison ever since the Veloster concept first appeared, and the company sure didn’t discourage the impression. Now that we’ve driven the production version over hill and dale, we can say, in our snappiest Lloyd Bentsen impersonation, that we worked with the CRX Si, we knew the CRX Si, the CRX Si was a friend of ours. Veloster, you’re no CRX Si.
While it may look like a sports coupe, the intent of the Veloster is more sporty economy car. And in fact, the MacPherson strut front suspension and the torsion beam rear axle do an adequate job of keeping the car flat and level on twisty roads. On bumpier tarmac, you can tell the rear shock absorbers don’t have quite enough rebound damping to keep the body under control, but at this price point, it’s almost a moot point. The brakes work well enough, although the softish brake pedal was a bit grabby once you passed through the free travel. And the 215/40VR18 sized tires equipped on our test car are definitely not performance rubber. It’s easy to invoke ABS and howl the tread on brisk corners.
Carving through hairpin switchbacks scrawled on either side of the Columbia River, we find the 2012 Hyundai Veloster's suspension more willing than its benign engine. In the curves, it's settled and balanced, with plenty of warning leading up to the limit (consisting mostly of manageable understeer). The Achilles' heel in this package is the torsion-beam rear suspension; a carryover from the economical Elantra on which it is based. And really, those shortcomings are only apparent when setting up a turn under hard braking. Big weight shifts will move the rear end, but there's ample control.
11-30-2011, 01:49 PM
#105
Originally Posted by sparrow' timestamp='1322681858' post='21198493
I saw a veloster on the road yesterday. It looked like shit to be honest. Good concept, medusa styling.
HONDA SALES OCTOBER - 289 CR-Z
HYUNDAI SALES OCTOBER - 3,724 Veloster
Those numbers though are facts, not opinion, and I believe they sort of make an interesting point
12-01-2011, 08:36 AM
#107
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: West Henrietta UPSTATE NY
Posts: 58,680
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Comparing a Veloster Turbo to a CRX-Si will be more fair, however, that car has yet to be released
But please, continue to trash all things non-Honda, it's amusing stuff to read
12-01-2011, 08:48 AM
#109
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: West Henrietta UPSTATE NY
Posts: 58,680
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Now that we know what the 2013 Hyundai Genesis Coupe is going to look like, our speculation as to what will be under the hood can also end. Hyundai has officially announced that the new Genesis Coupe will come with a 2.0 TCI base engine and a direct-injection version of the Lambda 3.8. The 2.0L turbo will pack 275-hp while the 3.8L GDi will come with 350-hp – even more than the Genesis Sedan, which is rated at 333-hp.
Both engines will be offered with an eight-speed automatic transmission or a six-speed manual option. What is most impressive is that the V6 Genesis Coupe will pack more horsepower than the Dodge Challenger, Ford Mustang and Chevrolet Camaro.
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2...-0l-turbo.html
12-01-2011, 03:25 PM
#110
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,462
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts