Acceleration times

[Buckdes]

Has anyone got any ideas if Genesis will be able to tune the north american version to attain a better 0 to 60 0 to 100 time Genesis states the korean version at 4.7s 0 to 100 which depending on when the transmission shifts should equal to 4.5s 0 to 60mph but i have seen several youtube videos of koreans only able to get little over 5s which is slow for this category and cost. I did however see 1 video with a time of 4.27s 0 to 100km which would be pretty much class leading but there seems to be more videos with 5s plus would this be because of the type of fuel used maybe ?? Or maybe some of them were shifting manually ?? Any thoughts guys ?

 

[EdP]

You are tossing out some numbers but you don't specify the engine or model. Different countries have different emission and mileage standards and different tuning to meet them.
Not to mention, the difference between 4.5 and 4.7 can be the weather as temperature can make a difference. Unless you are on the drag strip, who can really tell the difference on the way to work. I look at the whole car when deciding what to buy and a half second on the 0 to 60 is not going to change my mind..

 

[Buckdes]

You are tossing out some numbers but you don't specify the engine or model. Different countries have different emission and mileage standards and different tuning to meet them.
Not to mention, the difference between 4.5 and 4.7 can be the weather as temperature can make a difference. Unless you are on the drag strip, who can really tell the difference on the way to work. I look at the whole car when deciding what to buy and a half second on the 0 to 60 is not going to change my mind..

You may be right about more to a car than a half a second 0 to 60 but alot of people pay thousands of dollars for a tenth of a second meaning they pay for more HP and tourque and a transmission to deliver it which judging by the attention this car is getting the things everyone is talking about is the styling and the Power so obviously most people droping 60000 are gonna want a quick car as for stating the engine in question i would have thought it pretty obvious that the 4 cylinder will not be making those times but i wish like you i did not care about half a second 0 to 60 because that 4 cylinder with 250 HP would look very good

 

[EdP]

You may be right about more to a car than a half a second 0 to 60 but alot of people pay thousands of dollars for a tenth of a second meaning they pay for more HP and torque and a transmission to deliver it which judging by the attention this car is getting the things everyone is talking about is the styling and the Power so obviously most people dropping 60000 are gonna want a quick car

For the price paid, I do expect a quick car. The difference from the 3.8 to the 5.0 is not enough for me to justify the price difference. It would have when I was in my 20's. I do want the car to move when getting on the highway but for me, anything under 6 seconds if pretty quick. The difference of $5000 for the V8 is enough to take me to Italy for a couple of weeks or damned goos steaks for a lot of dinners, and better than shaving a second off an pretty quick car already. We all have different priorities with our money but the cost benefit there is not enough for me. Your money, your choice.

 

[Buckdes]

For the price paid, I do expect a quick car. The difference from the 3.8 to the 5.0 is not enough for me to justify the price difference. It would have when I was in my 20's. I do want the car to move when getting on the highway but for me, anything under 6 seconds if pretty quick. The difference of $5000 for the V8 is enough to take me to Italy for a couple of weeks or damned goos steaks for a lot of dinners, and better than shaving a second off an pretty quick car already. We all have different priorities with our money but the cost benefit there is not enough for me. Your money, your choice.

Agreed i think Genesis has perfect options for everyone and no mateer what G70 people get it will be a great car i guess a test drive is a must as like mentioned above numbers on paper dosnt always mean anything as its about how you feel behind the wheel

 

[devellis]

For the price paid, I do expect a quick car. The difference from the 3.8 to the 5.0 is not enough for me to justify the price difference. It would have when I was in my 20's. I do want the car to move when getting on the highway but for me, anything under 6 seconds if pretty quick. The difference of $5000 for the V8 is enough to take me to Italy for a couple of weeks or damned goos steaks for a lot of dinners, and better than shaving a second off an pretty quick car already. We all have different priorities with our money but the cost benefit there is not enough for me. Your money, your choice.

Well, we differ there. The difference between a car that will do 0-60 in 3.8 vs 5.0 matters very much to me. It's not because I'll be actually timing the car or racing it but because that speed difference is reflective of real-world differences that matter to me. How quickly a car can pass, how nimbly it can pull onto a highway from an entrance ramp, the general quality of the driving experience -- those and more real world factors will correlate with 0-60 times. It's not that the 0-60 time per se is applicable to day-to-day driving but that it is indicative of real-world capabilities that are. And, as others have said, this is billed (so far, at least) as a sports sedan. I've owned and driven cars that span a pretty wide range of 0-60 times and I've noticed the acceleration capacity of the quicker ones in every-day driving, unmistakably. However, I do agree that a marginal gain in performance isn't worth $5000. If this car's price is too high, it will drop from consideration.

Compromises, such as a fairly tight back seat, a less compliant ride, and higher gas mileage, have been made in the interest of sportiness. Thus, how the car handles, accelerates, and brakes are expected by many purchasers to be sporty. Drivers who are insensitive to acceleration, handling agility, and other sportier elements of a car may be better served by something that is a bit roomier, uses less gas, and offers a softer ride. Not a thing wrong with preferring that sort of car and most people do. But I don't think that's the market Genesis is shooting for with the G70. To the extent that my assessment is correct, I think 0-60 times will be relevant to potential buyers.

As for what exactly those times will be, I think we'll just have to wait and see. Times reported for many cars are exaggerated. Oftentimes, cars that are made available to automotive journalists will be chosen and set up to show the vehicle at its best. I remember having an RX-7 twin turbo that was touted as having 0-60 times in the mid 4's but except for the cars used for the first handful of road tests that appeared in automotive magazines, real times were consistently in the low 5's. Also, as noted, weather conditions, track surface, driver skill, and testing methodology can all influence 0-60 times and the times that get reported out early by manufacturers typically attempt to optimize all factors to yield the best times. So, the numbers we've seen based on the Korean roll-out might be skewed in a similar fashion. On the other hand, the US-spec car may be tuned more aggressively than the cars intended for Korea. And then there's the shift point optimization. Getting the best 0-100 KPH versus the best 0-60 MPH may involve slightly different shift points. The goal is to avoid "one more shift" right at the end of the run while keeping engine revs and torque in the sweet band for as much of the run as possible. Depending on how the shift points are optimized and whether they're set differently for US- and Korean-spec cars, that may complicate extrapolation from KPH times to MPH. So, lots of potential variables. We'll just have to see how it all sorts out.

We know the car will be quick and reasonably nimble. We just don't know exactly how quick or nimble just yet, but we should be getting a better idea fairly soon.

 

[Mcc]

To the extent that my assessment is correct, I think 0-60 times will be relevant to potential buyers.

So I will put in my 2 cents here. I don’t think your assumptions are correct. I think you are confusing things that are as you say “indicative” (means corrated with) with things that are significant or relevant. I don’t think the potential G70 buyer will think a few seconds difference will be significant. It is disernable only on paper (yes it’s fun to read the specs) but you won’t be able to tell in real world driving unless the difference is huge. Finally I believe the G70 will marketed as a sports car (as much as some want) but as a Sport Luxuary car.so compromises will be made Official USA ads are sparse so we will have to wait and see. If you are looking for a pure sports car where the performance specs are everything, I think you are setting yourself up to be disapppointed. Just my opinion.

 

[devellis]

So I will put in my 2 cents here. I don’t think your assumptions are correct. I think you are confusing things that are as you say “indicative” (means corrated with) with things that are significant or relevant. I don’t think the potential G70 buyer will think a few seconds difference will be significant. It is disernable only on paper (yes it’s fun to read the specs) but you won’t be able to tell in real world driving unless the difference is huge. Finally I believe the G70 will marketed as a sports car (as much as some want) but as a Sport Luxuary car.so compromises will be made Official USA ads are sparse so we will have to wait and see. If you are looking for a pure sports car where the performance specs are everything, I think you are setting yourself up to be disapppointed. Just my opinion.

Far enough. We're all trading in opinions here.

But I would add a couple of data points.

First, many cars advertise their 0-60 times and make some effort (e.g., optimizing shift points so that the car upshifts immediately after attaining 60) to achieve shorter 0-60 times. I doubt they would do this if their marketing research showed that this information was irrelevant.

Second, if every time you're next to some other car model at a light and you find yourself behind, rather than in front of it, you quickly become aware of the fact that your acceleration is inferior to the other car's. This is very much a real-world phenomenon that I think lots of people in the performance-sedan segment are aware of. Likewise, if you find yourself behind another car on a two-lane road and fear that you can't get around that car in the space of a passing zone, it's pretty easy to want better acceleration. I haven't gotten a speeding ticket in decades but I can personally relate to these situations, as I suspect many others can. It's not just about some kind of macho desire to "beat the other guy." In many situations (like passing), better acceleration is in service to safety.

I consider these considerations both relevant and significant. "Significant" can have either an informal, "eyes of the beholder" meaning or a more formal statistical sense of demonstrably outside of the limits defined as attributable to chance alone. I think a half-second (or more in the case of 3.8 vs 5.0) difference in 0-60 times between two cars would likely satisfy either criterion, assuming that it's repeatable. I chose the word "indicative" carefully because the association between acceleration and other, real-world factors isn't perfect. But they do share a common underlying cause, i.e., more power in relation to weight, coupled with other features such as gear ratios. The fact that acceleration is correlated with these other factors doesn't reduce either its relevance or significance. On the contrary, it contributes to those attributes.

Also, I would argue that what differentiates the G70 from (perhaps) the G80 and (definitely) the G90 is the emphasis on performance. There are plenty of FWD cars with as much luxury as a G70 that sell for less. My brother recently bought a Mazda CX9 Signature SUV with heads-up display, lane departure, auto-braking, smart cruise control, three rows of seats, leather interior, genuine rosewood trim, solid aluminum interior details, rear window shades, rear HVAC controls, etc., etc. for far less than a G70. His car also gets better gas mileage. What sets the G70 apart is the balance between performance on one hand and comfort/luxury on the other. Sure, it's luxurious but it has made comfort and mileage concessions to better performance. And the cars it has identified as its primary competitors are also cars that make much of their performance credentials. This simply isn't a pure luxury car. It's smaller, stiffer, and more complex than it would need to be if it were purely a luxury car. Lexus, Acura, Mercedes, and other manufacturers make certain cars that are intended primarily as luxury vehicles and these aren't the models Genesis has chosen as comparisons for the G70 nor are they the models the automotive press has compared the G70 to. It's clearly intended as a luxury-performance vehicle. Even its relative, the Kia Stinger, makes more concessions to luxury (outside of the US market where features have been unceremoniously deleted) than the G70. Likewise, the G80.

But ultimately, this largely does come down to opinion and the characteristics one values in a car. I don't think I'm alone in valuing better acceleration but I'll certainly agree that not everyone shares that view.

 

[Sal Collaziano]

I don't have enough time to go through all the reading right now but I will say this... Most people don't care about 0-60 times. Most people don't care if one car is a half second faster to 60 than another. Some people do. No one way is right or wrong. People who bought the second generation Cadillac CTS-V had a car that hit 60 miles per hour in 3.9 seconds. The third generation does it in 3.7 seconds. Apparently, Cadillac feels that (amongst other things), .2 seconds to 60 is enough performance reason to buy the new one. It's a small difference - but it can mean a lot in the long run. Some people like doing 1/4 mile runs at the track. In the quarter mile, two tenths of a second is two car lengths. For some people it's the little things that count or add up. There's no wrong or right way to look at it.

 

[GV70GUY]

So I will put in my 2 cents here. I don’t think your assumptions are correct. I think you are confusing things that are as you say “indicative” (means corrated with) with things that are significant or relevant. I don’t think the potential G70 buyer will think a few seconds difference will be significant. It is disernable only on paper (yes it’s fun to read the specs) but you won’t be able to tell in real world driving unless the difference is huge. Finally I believe the G70 will marketed as a sports car (as much as some want) but as a Sport Luxuary car.so compromises will be made Official USA ads are sparse so we will have to wait and see. If you are looking for a pure sports car where the performance specs are everything, I think you are setting yourself up to be disapppointed. Just my opinion.

Sorry there is no way a 4 door sedan would be or could be called a "sports car" a corvette is a sports car a hellcat is not considered a sports car. A G70 is a sedan and might have a sport option like my G80 but no way is my G80 is a sports car. The G70 will compete with cars like the BMW 3 series but again a BMW is not a sports car.i

I do agree with with most not caring about a few tenths of a second with this class of car.

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[Mcc]

Sorry there is no way a 4 door sedan would be or could be called a "sports car" a corvette is a sports car a hellcat is not considered a sports car. A G70 is a sedan and might have a sport option like my G80 but no way is my G80 is a sports car. The G70 will compete with cars like the BMW 3 series but again a BMW is not a sports car.i

I do agree with with most not caring about a few tenths of a second with this class of car.

Agree 100%

 

[EdP]

I do agree with with most not caring about a few tenths of a second with this class of car.

Agree too, but we all know the guy that has to have the biggest and best camera, stereo, golf club, TV and whatever. Some never really get to use them in the way intended, but have to be able to point to the specifications.

My Sonatas had the V-6 over the four and the last one had the turbo over the standard and the performance was enough for me to justify the cost. When I bought a 2G Genesis, the V-6 is adequate and I could not justify the cost of the v-8. Others do. Personal choice. I want and will pay for good performance, but not a lot for extreme performance.

Good to have choices.

 

[devellis]

I think there are two market segments that a car like the G70 appeals to, those looking for a performance LUXURY sedan and those looking for a PERFORMANCE luxury sedan, if you get my drift. The same is true for many models of BMW, Mercedes, Infiniti, etc. For me, 0-60 times are more important than interior stitching or an extra cup holder -- probably more important than leather seats. But I certainly know plenty of people who are the opposite. The thing is, if even a significant minority of potential buyers care about "Feature X," whether that feature is a particular 0-60 time or ventilated seats, those customers will gravitate to cars that do offer that feature.

I would point out that earlier in this discussion we were talking about differences in 0-60 of more than a second, not a couple of tenths. While I agree that a couple of tenths may not be that noticeable to most drivers, I think a second or more from 0-60 is pretty evident not only in a timed run but in the everyday feel of the car. For me, this has nothing to do with bragging rights but in how much I enjoy driving the car on a day-to-day basis. I guess if I lived in a congested, heavily urban environment, I might feel differently. But I live in an area that is replete with low-traffic country roads and a car with more zip can make good use of the opportunities they afford. The odd tractor pulling a hay wagon will lumber down those roads from time to time and having the acceleration needed to pass them is not only fun but safer than making a try with less power.

As for how any specific "Feature X" will influence sales, we'll likely never have the data that would allow us to zoom in on the impact of any single characteristic, except possibly price. It's pretty rare for a car to go completely unchanged except for the inclusion or exclusion of one feature. Price does change, e.g., from a dealer who is discounting to one who isn't, for the same car. And we all know that a discount is likely to stimulate sales. But beyond that, it really is a matter of personal preference and left to the realm of guesswork. I take performance pretty seriously, handling probably even more so than acceleration. But I realize that many don't. I also like a car with amenities but am more willing to forgo a few of those in the interest of performance -- a view that not all others share. Obviously, a car that can deliver both performance and luxury amenities can appeal to a broader range of potential buyers and many companies have tried to do exactly that with their performance sedan offerings. Once we know exactly what the G70 is offering, we'll be in a better position to make our personal decisions. No car has everything. Pretty much every car will lack at least one attribute that is desirable. Each of us has to weigh the pluses and minuses and make a final decision. Soon, we'll have the information we need to make that determination for ourselves regarding the G70. I'm still optimistic that, on balance, it will have a very attractive mix of features.

- - - Updated - - -

Hey guys, I just re-read some earlier posts and realized something that I misunderstood that has probably thrown this discussion off track. When Ed was talking about the performance difference between 3.8 and 5.0, I now realize he was talking about the 3.8 liter V6 versus the 5.0 liter V8, not between 0-60 times of 3.8 vs 5.0. Apologies for missing what now seems like a rather obvious point and leading the discussion down a rat hole. Actually, I'd also be more inclined to go with a good, strong V6 than a V8 in the situation Ed described. So, again, I completely misinterpreted what he was saying and for that confusion, I do apologize.

 

[BlancaGenny]

People who buy the 3.3TT care about 0-60 times. The manufactures are actually underrating cars for insurance reasons. Perfect example; the Stinger GT. Advertised at 4.9 when debuting, then down to 4.7 and then Car and Driver tested and did a 4.4. Porsche does that all the time with their cars. What will be advertised by Genesis will be a higher 0-60 sec time for insurance reasons. Actual tests will be lower unless they figured out that they can't do it again after the Stinger.

 

[Bamm1]

In my experience the 0-60 time is not really a measure of real world performance. The G70 has launch control. That is not a feature one uses in “day to day” driving to help bolster your passing ability. Even if I am at a red light where two lanes become one, say 1000 ft. way (yes, you would be essentially drag racing). The proper timing required to engage launch control to coincide with the light turning green is all but impossible (even more so for lights with variable timing based on traffic patterns). If you do not time it correctly and end up holding launch control for too long the computer will either disengage it or you will possibly overheat and/or damage the transmission. Even brake torquing an automatic can be troublesome in those situations.

¼ mile times are a different animal as you CAN use launch control at a track.

I tend to look at 5-60 times, 30-50, 50-70, etc. if I am trying to assess if my car will be “quick”. If I am at a stop light and just mash the throttle what times do I get? Almost all of the magazine times involve some kind of “optimized” launch that uses every available aid (like TC fully off, launch control, etc.). It can get downright strange sometimes. For example, the Subaru Forester XT produces the best times when you brake torque in manual mode. Perform the 1-2 shift manually well before redline and then put the shifter back into drive to allow it to shift itself for the rest of the acceleration run. The average person who owns an XT doesn’t know they need to do that for the best times. They just mash the throttle.

PS Every time I discuss this kind of topic I can’t help but think of that kid from Home Improvement in F & S: Tokyo Drift talking about how fast his Viper goes 0-60………

 

[Buckdes]

In my experience the 0-60 time is not really a measure of real world performance. The G70 has launch control. That is not a feature one uses in “day to day” driving to help bolster your passing ability. Even if I am at a red light where two lanes become one, say 1000 ft. way (yes, you would be essentially drag racing). The proper timing required to engage launch control to coincide with the light turning green is all but impossible (even more so for lights with variable timing based on traffic patterns). If you do not time it correctly and end up holding launch control for too long the computer will either disengage it or you will possibly overheat and/or damage the transmission. Even brake torquing an automatic can be troublesome in those situations.

¼ mile times are a different animal as you CAN use launch control at a track.

I tend to look at 5-60 times, 30-50, 50-70, etc. if I am trying to assess if my car will be “quick”. If I am at a stop light and just mash the throttle what times do I get? Almost all of the magazine times involve some kind of “optimized” launch that uses every available aid (like TC fully off, launch control, etc.). It can get downright strange sometimes. For example, the Subaru Forester XT produces the best times when you brake torque in manual mode. Perform the 1-2 shift manually well before redline and then put the shifter back into drive to allow it to shift itself for the rest of the acceleration run. The average person who owns an XT doesn’t know they need to do that for the best times. They just mash the throttle.

PS Every time I discuss this kind of topic I can’t help but think of that kid from Home Improvement in F & S: Tokyo Drift talking about how fast his Viper goes 0-60………

Very good comment and the car that comes to mind here is the mercedes cla45 this car has a 4.2 0 to 60 but other tests have shown the 5 to 65mph is 5.2 or higher so yes everything you say is 100 percent spot on launch control is nice but it totally makes it pointless to judge a car using a spec sheet which does make it more difficult to compare cars unless you test drive them all of course

 

[Bamm1]

Very good comment and the car that comes to mind here is the mercedes cla45 this car has a 4.2 0 to 60 but other tests have shown the 5 to 65mph is 5.2 or higher so yes everything you say is 100 percent spot on launch control is nice but it totally makes it pointless to judge a car using a spec sheet which does make it more difficult to compare cars unless you test drive them all of course

The '17 CLA45 AMG goes 0-60 in 3.8s but goes 5-60 in 5.3s. That is pretty dramatic difference.

But there is hope for the 3.3T G70. Here is quote from a test of the RWD Stinger GT:

Perhaps the most striking facet of the engine’s power delivery is evident in the Stinger’s 5.0-second 5-to-60-mph time—quicker than every machine in our last comparison test of mid-size premium sports sedans. Acceleration is strong with this one.

If you compare that number to the smaller compact luxury sedan class it matches the 5-60 time for the 109 lb lighter Q50 RS400 and is a tenth faster than the 104 lb lighter C43 AMG. With the G70 likely coming in at a lighter weight than the Stinger GT, who knows, it could break into the 4's for its 5-60 time.

 

[Buckdes]

The '17 CLA45 AMG goes 0-60 in 3.8s but goes 5-60 in 5.3s. That is pretty dramatic difference.

But there is hope for the 3.3T G70. Here is quote from a test of the RWD Stinger GT:

Perhaps the most striking facet of the engine’s power delivery is evident in the Stinger’s 5.0-second 5-to-60-mph time—quicker than every machine in our last comparison test of mid-size premium sports sedans. Acceleration is strong with this one.

If you compare that number to the smaller compact luxury sedan class it matches the 5-60 time for the 109 lb lighter Q50 RS400 and is a tenth faster than the 104 lb lighter C43 AMG. With the G70 likely coming in at a lighter weight than the Stinger GT, who knows, it could break into the 4's for its 5-60 time.

Thats some very exciting tidbits as the acceleration is one of my important buying factors

 

[volnedan]

Everyone here is making valid points of why the acceleration times is/isn't important to them. For me, it's all about the power delivery and what it takes to get there. Most of these absurd 0-60 times use launch control and require a full redline each time. I don't need to utilize the engine 100% everytime I pull away from a stoplight or merge onto the freeway. But if the 60% I use is good enough, then I will be happy with whichever engine works best for me.

In my previous Genesis (2016), I felt that in this class of vehicle, the V8 was overkill and didn't compliment the car. I wouldn't use the power, and the V6 was plenty for how I planned to drive it. However, I still wanted a faster, sportier car with better handling. I was looking into a 2013 S4, but ended up with a 2013 335 xDrive. I stuck with the 335 because I wanted AWD with the manual transmission, but after a few months of ownership, I think I would have been happy with a regular A4 manual due to how well the 4 cylinder in the vehicle drove. I had a 2010 A5 manual few years back, and the stock engine had enough torque to feel fast off the line for me. If anything, I could have done an APR tune for $600 to make up for any lack of acceleration.

Which brings me to the G70; if the manual transmission is available in the US at launch, I can see myself trading in the 335 for the G70 depending on how strong the engine is in real world driving. All the reviews I've read on the Stinger 4cyl consistently get under 6 sec for 0-60, which is plenty fast for me.

But here's the caveat, I'm 37 and married with 3 kids. In my 20s, you couldn't pay me to get a 4cyl or a car that didn't go 0-60 in under 6 sec, let alone a sedan. My driving style has changed, and I'd rather have a slower G70 4cylinder manual transmission than a larger but faster Charger Scat Pack or G80 3.3t Sport.

I'm really excited for this car to come out, and even though I just got the 335, if the price is right I have no qualms to trade it in.

 

[devellis]

I think the comments regarding launch control are important and raise an issue I hadn't realized. I've never had a car with launch control and so, in every car I've ever had, the 0-60 time was necessarily longer than the 5-60 time (in the sense that it took additional time to get from 0 to 5 MPH). I suspect that the actual methodology of how these tests are done would make a difference, too. If you edge the speed ever-so-gently up to 5 MPH and then floored it, that would yield a different 5-60 time than if you gunned the car from 0 and just started the timer at 5 MPH. Not sure which method is used but I assume it's the latter. That's still very different from using launch control to lock up torque converters with high revs before take-off.

But you guys are right. If the 0-60 times are an artifact of what launch control brings to those numbers, then it really isn't as relevant as the 5-60 times (or 0-60 times without launch control, which may not be what we're seeing reported). Now, I still suspect that there is a pretty hefty correlation between the 0-60 time even with launch control and the 5-60 time, but the latter would certainly be more important as you consider how the car would drive on a day-to-day basis. I hadn't really considered the launch control impact at all, and it's obviously important. Thanks for educating me on this issue.