Genesis G70 Reviews

[YEH]

New and Used Car Reviews, Car News and Prices | Car and Driver

Dynamic Mojo
Over mountain roads in New Hampshire on the way to and from the challenging 2.5-mile Club Motorsports circuit in Tamworth, the G70 proved itself a quiet and elegant means of taking in the sights among summer traffic but fully able to entertain when a nice stretch of hilly terrain opened up. What was more impressive was its behavior on the track, where we lapped hard on a variety of turns laid over the hills. We drove only V-6 cars there, in both rear- and all-wheel-drive configurations, and the only surprises they presented were the happy sort. All of these cars ran 19-inch Michelin Pilot Sport 4 summer tires, which are widely available throughout the range. Turn-in response is quick without being twitchy, the brake dive and acceleration squat we felt in the prototypes we drove last summer has been quelled to insignificance, and the transmission behaves admirably whether left to itself or manually shifted via paddles.

The steering calibration on the production models now has the firm on-center feel we found lacking in the prototype, and the wheel delivers proportional responses and a good sense of load building in turns. The electrically assisted steering features a rack-mounted motor, which in our experience gives better feel than when located on the steering column. Sadly, like most of its competitors, the G70 lacks any real through-the-wheel feedback about road texture or even bumps. That said, the 2.0-liter Sport model, which we “autocrossed” on the facility’s go-kart track and drove much more on the open road, has a crisper, sportier steering feel, aided by the reduction of weight over the front axle.

We had expressed early doubts about the interior, which on the prototypes leaned toward the dark and conservative ambience of a BMW or Audi. The production cars were slightly more daring, with contrast stitching in gray or red on black leather and a few color combinations including burgundy shades on the upper doors and on the dashboard cover. The overall impression was of high-quality materials deployed liberally in a driver-centric cockpit. The G70’s cabin is neither as jaw-droppingly gorgeous as we’ve found in recent Volvos nor as disappointingly bland as the Jaguar XE’s.

2019 Genesis G70 First Drive: A Satisfying Stepping Stone

2019 Genesis G70 First Drive Review | Less bark, more bite

 

[KusaKusa]

Alex on Autos: 2019 Genesis G70 Review - The Car Lexus Should Have Made

 

[Aquineas]

lol the brand hate in the Youtube video comments is amusing.

 

[Beefer]

lol the brand hate in the Youtube video comments is amusing.

I know...wow. Did a neighbor with a Lexus run over his kid?

 

[Aquineas]

I know...wow. Did a neighbor with a Lexus run over his kid?

I think it's really just a handful of naysayers, that you'll see (the same people) in any positive Genesis thread. It goes to show you that Genesis is shaking things up some- if they weren't, then no one would care. I remember when the DH sedan was introduced (as the 2015 Hyundai Genesis), the Yahoo "reviewer" completely trashed the Genesis- only to find out later that he was an employee of the advertising firm that handled Lexus.

Furthermore, I've found that many G80 or G90 Youtube videos start with Lexus advertising (though Infiniti is really the brand that should be the most worried).

Though in all fairness I have to admit I'm a Genesis enthusiast, so I have to respect the fact that there will be detractors.

And now for something completely different, I'll leave you all to check out one of my favorite renditions of Stand By Me (which I happen to be rocking right now in my headphones).

 

[devellis]

Alex on Autos: 2019 Genesis G70 Review - The Car Lexus Should Have Made

Very informative review. They got 0-60 in 4.6, which is encouraging. The factory claims often are an exaggeration but if they got 4.6 in their informal testing, then the claim of 4.5 under better conditions seems perfectly reasonable.

Overall, I found the review to be very encouraging. If the price is really around $50,000 for a full-spec 3.3 Sport, I'm very interested.

 

[tpman24]

I'm guessing the 2.0T Sport 6-speeds they were testing were pre-production models or something similar because the last press release says it's supposed to have the Nappa leather, not leatherette.

 

[larrymg1]

Everybody has something to say. There are so many reviews it would be difficult to post all the links separately. So, here is the Google search page with all the various review links posted.
2019 genesis g70 - Google Search
Cross-posted.

 

[Bamm1]

Very informative review. They got 0-60 in 4.6, which is encouraging. The factory claims often are an exaggeration but if they got 4.6 in their informal testing, then the claim of 4.5 under better conditions seems perfectly reasonable.

Overall, I found the review to be very encouraging. If the price is really around $50,000 for a full-spec 3.3 Sport, I'm very interested.

I find the factory estimates to almost always be an "under promise" as far as magazine tests go. They might be closer to what one sees in day to day driving. The BMW 340i xDrive, C43 AMG, etc. are all faster than their factory estimates.

One thing to note about AoA's number. He mentioned that he did not use launch control. I would suspect he might be able to hit the factory estimate (or beat it) had he used it.

 

[Aquineas]

I find the factory estimates to almost always be an "under promise" as far as magazine tests go. They might be closer to what one sees in day to day driving. The BMW 340i xDrive, C43 AMG, etc. are all faster than their factory estimates.

One thing to note about AoA's number. He mentioned that he did not use launch control. I would suspect he might be able to hit the factory estimate (or beat it) had he used it.

The Germans always under-promise and over-deliver on performance, and over-promise and under-deliver in terms of reliability. That's usually the opposite of what the Japanese do (on both counts). It would be nice if Genesis would get in the habit of delivering Japanese reliability and German performance.

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[Edmguy]

Anyone read the C&D article?:

G70 - Car and Driver review

I found this to be particularly interesting:

"All-wheel-drive 3.3Ts also have a “drift” setting that skews the torque split further rearward and incorporates yaw damping control and “countersteer detection logic” to lend subtle assistance to your exhibitions. "

Now I definitely haven't noticed that in any of my settings and haven't seen it mentioned anywhere else yet. Anyone know if this is legit? I am definitely jealous if this is a feature only available on US models, even if it is a feature I would never actually use.

I also noticed that in many of the pictures on the US test cars that the passenger seat has the buttons on the backrest to move the seat from either the rear or driver side. Nice feature but also odd difference between the Canadian and US market.

 

[devellis]

Okay, so I've read and watched all of the reviews that have been posted so far. I'm very encouraged and very interested.

Most of the reviewers like the car quite a bit and feel that it does very well overall against the competition.

But these are "driving impression" reviews. We'll have to wait a while for instrumented testing and more critical evaluations of the car. These types of reviews tend to be positive, but the G70 seems to be garnering more praise than some cars get at this stage.

One of my skill sets is in assessment and measurement and a tenet in that arena is that for assessments to be valid, they mus be reliable. If ratings disagree from observer to observer, then either the observers aren't making accurate assessments or their observations are based on something other than what they're actually observing. Examples of the latter would most obviously include personal preferences and biases. That's why it's essential to collect information over many observers, so that the idiosyncratic quirks cancel each other out when you view the data in aggregate.

With that idea in mind, I found the following contradictions or inconsistencies in the reviews available so far. I've tried to give my sense of which point of view was the most common when that was possible.

1. Top price is $50K vs top price is mid 50’s. Only 1 reviewer reported that Genesis said it was mid50's and maybe he meant close to $50,500, not close to $55,000. Let's hope the one guy is wrong and the others are right. At $55,000 the picture would change drastically, and not in a god way for Genesis.

2. Automatic transmission shifts really quickly vs transmission sometimes lags. Could be a matter of what the reviewer is accustomed to.

3. Paddle shifters are the way to go vs leaving it to shift on its own is the way to go. Probably just personal preference.

4. 6-speed tranny is kind of vague vs feels solid and precise. Again probably what the reviewer is accustomed to and is serving as a comparison standard. But it suggests that the 6-speed is neither the best nor the worst out there.

5. Should have opened Genesis brand with a CUV vs starting with a sedan was a sensible move. Many feel that starting with a sedan is a big mistake in a market that's moving away from that configuration toward SUVs and CUVs. But at least one reviewer felt that a luxury brand has to establish its bona fides first with sedans and that Genesis is holding true to its market of origin (Korea) where sedans are still preferred. Obviously personal points of view.

6. As much as 90% of power to rear wheels on AWD vs as much as 100%. Both reported as factual. One (I think the latter) must be wrong.

7. Ride is too stiff for daily driving vs ride is ideal for daily driving. Personal preference.

8. Four-cylinder is under-powered and struggles when trying to accelerate up hills vs it's all the power you really need. Personal opinion, perhaps also influenced by the order in which the cars were driven.

9. The back seat is too cramped vs it's okay. Nobody considered it anything close to spacious. Some felt it was really quite restrictive while one or two found it adequate for most situations.

10. Body rolls too much in the corners vs car stays suitable flat in corners. Some disagreement although most seem to think it does lean a fair bit when pushed hard through corners. None felt it was so bad as to be a significant flaw but most felt that it wasn't up to the standard of, say, a BMW 3-series in this respect.

11. Some reviewers called the 3.3T "tail happy" and not much understeer, while one other reviewer said there was some modest understeer. This one was recommended by Tonester. I think part of the difference reviewers were seeing here has to do with RWD being capable of tossing the tail end out and AWD being decidedly less so, as you'd expect. It will be interesting to see some lap times. Not sure which would actually be faster. I'm guessing AWD might be quicker (any loss of traction means forward propulsion has been curtailed; but that could be offset by positioning for a more optimal line if the tail slides out a bit) but a lot would depend on the driver.

Things that seemed to be pretty well agreed on (besides factual information from Genesis press releases) were:

1. The 3.3 is a strong engine. Pretty much everyone seemed to like it.

2. The interior is nice. Quibbles here and there but most found that it was comfortable, attractive, and that stuff was easy to figure out.

3. The balance between comfort and handling was about right. Some would push the balance a bit in one or the other direction but most seemed okay with it.

4. It's a car that competes very favorably against the competition. That is to say, just about every reviewer felt that it offers a whole lot and that, while specific competitors may beat it out in any given category, overall it puts a lot of features together in a reasonably-priced package.

5. The brand is largely unknown and it doesn't have the cachet of of the brands with which it's competing, especially those from Europe. Not everyone explicitly stated this but those who addressed the perception issue suggested that it was currently a disadvantage for Genesis relative to competitors.

So, my take is that these initial reviews are predominantly positive, with some areas of disagreement. Some of this may change as more reviews based on the initial promotional press event drift in and we may see more substantial changes one more formal testing is done. But things look pretty positive for now.

 

[Slides]

The 2.0T is off my list as a possible purchase. It's slower than an Accord 2.0T. Expected from a much heavier car but I'll take a 5.7 sec 0 to 60 over a 7.1ish sec 0 to 60 any day.

 

[50jae]

The 2.0T is off my list as a possible purchase. It's slower than an Accord 2.0T. Expected from a much heavier car but I'll take a 5.7 sec 0 to 60 over a 7.1ish sec 0 to 60 any day.

Yeah I don't see the point of the 2.0T manual over an accord sport manual 2.0T. I know it's a lot sportier with rwd and lsd, but most people get the 2.0T for better gas mileage/lower running cost and the performance seekers would mostly seek the 3.3T. The accord seems like the better value 2.0T car imo if you aren't planning to track/autocross.

I'm really impressed though that AoA thinks the G70 handles better than an A4 without sacrificing ride quality even without adaptive dampers

 

[Buckdes]

The 2.0T is off my list as a possible purchase. It's slower than an Accord 2.0T. Expected from a much heavier car but I'll take a 5.7 sec 0 to 60 over a 7.1ish sec 0 to 60 any day.

I am not sure why the 2.0T is so slow, i mean most pickups now can do a 7 second 0 to 60

 

[Beefer]

I am not sure why the 2.0T is so slow, i mean most pickups now can do a 7 second 0 to 60

I thought my 2013 A4 was slow at 6.4 seconds. It has 210 hp. Sheesh.

 

[KDX]

The 2.0T is off my list as a possible purchase. It's slower than an Accord 2.0T. Expected from a much heavier car but I'll take a 5.7 sec 0 to 60 over a 7.1ish sec 0 to 60 any day.

How fast is the 2.0 Stinger 0-60? The G70 should equal or best that speed as it is a little lighter in weight.

 

[Edmguy]

The 2.0T is off my list as a possible purchase. It's slower than an Accord 2.0T. Expected from a much heavier car but I'll take a 5.7 sec 0 to 60 over a 7.1ish sec 0 to 60 any day.

I don't think there will be that much of a difference between the Accord and the G70 with the 2.0T. We haven't seen official instrumented tests yet so I would hold off on a decision. Not to mention you should also drive it. Not to say the new Accord isn't a good value and performer, but they are still very different cars.

 

[devellis]

I was never really considering the 2.0 but, still, it's disappointing not to see it do better. If folks really want one, say for the manual transmission, they perhaps shouldn't count on its being around after this model year.

 

[Edmguy]

I was never really considering the 2.0 but, still, it's disappointing not to see it do better. If folks really want one, say for the manual transmission, they perhaps shouldn't count on its being around after this model year.

Shouldn't count on the transmission or the engine being around after this model year? Engine I doubt, unless it gets improved, and regarding transmission, there is this from the article I posted above from C&D:

"It had been indicated to us earlier that the manual would be a first-year-only offering, but Genesis brand chief Manfred Fitzgerald says that’s now not the case and that it will stay in the lineup as long as there’s sufficient demand for it. Something on the order of 5 percent of overall G70 sales is projected, and Fitzgerald says he “would hope 5 to 10 percent of 2.0-liter customers” will choose the stick. "