Simonwpb
Been here awhile...
2009 Hyundai Genesis: A Car Detroit Can Now Only Dream of Building?
http://blogs.motortrend.com/6459838/new-cars/2009-hyundai-genesis-a-car-detroit-can-now-only-dream-of-building/index.html
I'll let you into a little secret: the Hyundai Genesis came close to winning the 2009 Motor Trend Car of the Year title. You will recall Hyundai's big rear drive sedan secured votes from two of the COTY judging panel. But what you won't know is that it was the second choice of six of the judges. (In case of a tied vote, I ask each judge to nominate their top three cars, in order.) Counting first and second choice ballots, the Genesis nailed eight votes to the Nissan GT-R's 10. It was a very strong performance.
What cost the Genesis the COTY title was detail stuff, like the overwrought grille, the limited rearward travel of the front seats, and a ride that was deemed too jittery for a luxury car. Nit-picking, to be sure, but such is the nature of the COTY judging: the Infiniti G37's poorly matched clutch take-up and throttle tip-in, for example, robbed it of an almost certain COTY win in 2007, as the car was simply impossible to drive smoothly. (Nissan engineers later quietly changed the too-aggressive throttle calibration.)
The Genesis is a great car. And after a week at the wheel of a 4.6-liter V-8, I'm convinced it's only a few developmental tweaks away from being truly outstanding. My tester had fewer than 1000 miles on the odo, yet the engine felt crisp and smooth, and delivered impressive fuel economy -- 22 to 23mpg cruising at 80mph or so on the freeway. Overall noise levels are low, the equipment levels high, and the cabin oozes quietly understated quality.
So what would I change? Well, that grille for a start. Its center bar and the odd profile of the blades introduce a visually jarring vertical artifact to a front end graphic that is otherwise horizontal in nature. I'd like more linearity in the weighting of the steering (Hyundai, here's a tip: get a Jaguar XF onto your benchmarking fleet), and the front seats to be mounted lower to the floor and given longer runners.
It wasn't until I was idling through my local shopping mall parking lot that the likely cause of the Genesis' ride problem revealed itself over a couple of speed bumps -- the rear springs and shocks are way too stiff. I suspect Hyundai's engineers opted for the stiffer rear end in a bid to reduce the pronounced understeer noted by a number of Korean journalists driving their more softly sprung domestic market versions of the car. Whatever the reason, they've overcooked it -- you feel the Genesis' rear end pogoing on L.A.'s thumpety-thump freeways, and jiggling around almost everywhere else. It needs more compliance and better rebound control.
All of this stuff is easily fixed, though, and as Kim Reynolds noted in our COTY story: "...Deutschland's and Japan's brightest engineers ought to be sensing the hot breath of their South Korean counterparts on their necks right about now." But what of Detroit's brightest auto engineers?
The shocking reality dawned on me during the week: the Hyundai Genesis is a car that's perhaps now beyond the capability of GM, Ford, or Chrysler. All three, of course, are broke or mortgaged to the hilt, and fighting for survival. Large, rear drive luxury cars are therefore a low priority: GM has put the rear drive Cadillac STS/DTS replacement on hold, and axed the program to replace the quad-cam Northstar V-8; Ford's large rear drive sedans are built on a platform that was old-fashioned when it was introduced in 1978, and has stopped work on its new global rear drive architecture; Chrysler is eking out hand-me-down architecture from Mercedes-Benz.
But even if they had the money, all three Detroit automakers have effectively been out of the large rear drive luxury sedan business for so long now, I'm not sure any of them could build a car that would be demonstrably better than the Genesis in terms of smoothness, refinement, performance, or efficiency. And while a big Caddy or Lincoln or Chrysler may look more attractive than the Hyundai -- after all, Detroit still has some of the best designers in the business -- I doubt any of them would be better built, either.
America's automakers once owned this segment of the market; now, if they were to return, they'd be regarded as underdogs next to the Europeans, Japanese, and -- yes -- the Koreans. I guess that's what happens when you spend 30 years concentrating on churning out cheap, unsophisticated, yet highly profitable trucks, while allowing most of your car business to become globally irrelevant.
http://blogs.motortrend.com/6459838/new-cars/2009-hyundai-genesis-a-car-detroit-can-now-only-dream-of-building/index.html
I'll let you into a little secret: the Hyundai Genesis came close to winning the 2009 Motor Trend Car of the Year title. You will recall Hyundai's big rear drive sedan secured votes from two of the COTY judging panel. But what you won't know is that it was the second choice of six of the judges. (In case of a tied vote, I ask each judge to nominate their top three cars, in order.) Counting first and second choice ballots, the Genesis nailed eight votes to the Nissan GT-R's 10. It was a very strong performance.
What cost the Genesis the COTY title was detail stuff, like the overwrought grille, the limited rearward travel of the front seats, and a ride that was deemed too jittery for a luxury car. Nit-picking, to be sure, but such is the nature of the COTY judging: the Infiniti G37's poorly matched clutch take-up and throttle tip-in, for example, robbed it of an almost certain COTY win in 2007, as the car was simply impossible to drive smoothly. (Nissan engineers later quietly changed the too-aggressive throttle calibration.)
The Genesis is a great car. And after a week at the wheel of a 4.6-liter V-8, I'm convinced it's only a few developmental tweaks away from being truly outstanding. My tester had fewer than 1000 miles on the odo, yet the engine felt crisp and smooth, and delivered impressive fuel economy -- 22 to 23mpg cruising at 80mph or so on the freeway. Overall noise levels are low, the equipment levels high, and the cabin oozes quietly understated quality.
So what would I change? Well, that grille for a start. Its center bar and the odd profile of the blades introduce a visually jarring vertical artifact to a front end graphic that is otherwise horizontal in nature. I'd like more linearity in the weighting of the steering (Hyundai, here's a tip: get a Jaguar XF onto your benchmarking fleet), and the front seats to be mounted lower to the floor and given longer runners.
It wasn't until I was idling through my local shopping mall parking lot that the likely cause of the Genesis' ride problem revealed itself over a couple of speed bumps -- the rear springs and shocks are way too stiff. I suspect Hyundai's engineers opted for the stiffer rear end in a bid to reduce the pronounced understeer noted by a number of Korean journalists driving their more softly sprung domestic market versions of the car. Whatever the reason, they've overcooked it -- you feel the Genesis' rear end pogoing on L.A.'s thumpety-thump freeways, and jiggling around almost everywhere else. It needs more compliance and better rebound control.
All of this stuff is easily fixed, though, and as Kim Reynolds noted in our COTY story: "...Deutschland's and Japan's brightest engineers ought to be sensing the hot breath of their South Korean counterparts on their necks right about now." But what of Detroit's brightest auto engineers?
The shocking reality dawned on me during the week: the Hyundai Genesis is a car that's perhaps now beyond the capability of GM, Ford, or Chrysler. All three, of course, are broke or mortgaged to the hilt, and fighting for survival. Large, rear drive luxury cars are therefore a low priority: GM has put the rear drive Cadillac STS/DTS replacement on hold, and axed the program to replace the quad-cam Northstar V-8; Ford's large rear drive sedans are built on a platform that was old-fashioned when it was introduced in 1978, and has stopped work on its new global rear drive architecture; Chrysler is eking out hand-me-down architecture from Mercedes-Benz.
But even if they had the money, all three Detroit automakers have effectively been out of the large rear drive luxury sedan business for so long now, I'm not sure any of them could build a car that would be demonstrably better than the Genesis in terms of smoothness, refinement, performance, or efficiency. And while a big Caddy or Lincoln or Chrysler may look more attractive than the Hyundai -- after all, Detroit still has some of the best designers in the business -- I doubt any of them would be better built, either.
America's automakers once owned this segment of the market; now, if they were to return, they'd be regarded as underdogs next to the Europeans, Japanese, and -- yes -- the Koreans. I guess that's what happens when you spend 30 years concentrating on churning out cheap, unsophisticated, yet highly profitable trucks, while allowing most of your car business to become globally irrelevant.
