Genesis G70 Reviews

[canucklehead604]

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

^ there seems to be a few posts about the 2.0T acceleration. did i miss an instrumented test? i've been waiting for quite some time, and disappointed that no CAD testers have done so.

i did see some mention of mid-7 second runs from 0-60. frankly this seems off and i don't buy it. i mentioned in another post, but i had an '04 G35 6MT sedan years ago, and its tests showed ~5.8s 0-60. it had 260hp/260tq, RWD, 6MT, and weighed almost exactly what the G70 does which has 255/260, with the torque available much lower than in the G35. gearing is somewhat similar between the two as well.

one of my main concerns with the G70 (i only want a 6MT) is the power from the 2.0T. i'm used to Infiniti's VQ engines, which are not torque monsters but do have strong pull after 3500rpm. while i don't run 0-60 on a daily basis, that test is a measure of usable around-town power. based on the spec sheet, the G70 2.0T should be in the high 5's or very low 6's at worst. but c'mon, mid 7's? that may be a deal breaker.

as for comparison to the 2.0T Accord, being FWD and transverse mounted with a weigh bias heavily to the front makes it an indirect comparison. the Accord is very good, but the architecture puts it in a different performance category IMO. the G70 has a far superior layout for spirited driving.

 

[KDX]

Although I haven't checked, I'm sure there will be (if not already) performance tuners working on the 2.0L engine.

 

[devellis]

As always, you'll have to wait for instrumented tests to get the definitive word on what the 2.0 can do. Some review(s) I read stated that Genesis has engineered a rev drop into the engine as the clutch reaches its contact point. The reviewer mentioned the dip in power to the reps and they said it was purposeful to make for smoother clutch engagement. The reviewer noted that it made the car slower off the line. Not sure which review that was, unfortunately. But if it's accurate (and it seemed to be), it might explain the poor 0-60 runs. But I wouldn't take them too seriously until we get more data to chew on.

 

[Bamm1]

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 setting 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.

That is also the first I have heard of that feature as well. Maybe one of the youtube reviewers that attended the event will go through all the available drive modes so we can see if that pops up.

Anyone read the C&D article?:
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.

The "Equipped to Compete" US press release mentions a Front passenger seat walk-in device. I am thinking those controls (which are present on the KDM models) are what that is referring to.

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.

AWD Stinger 2.0T
0-60: 6.1
5-60: 7.4

RWD Stinger 2.0T
0-60: 6.6

It looks like the launch makes a big difference. Romping the gas from a roll matches the numbers from this US debut reviews.


One final note. It looks like, based on the reviews coming in and the 4 press releases (it is not mentioned in any of them) that the US model will not have Auto Stop/Start. The button to the left of the drive mode selector is still a "blank" in all of the test models from the New Hampshire event.

 

[MrLatte]

That is also the first I have heard of that feature as well. Maybe one of the youtube reviewers that attended the event will go through all the available drive modes so we can see if that pops up.

From the Motor1.com First Drive:
2019 Genesis G70 First Drive: A Satisfying Stepping Stone

"But if you really want to unleash its wild side, turn off all the electronic safety aids. Genesis execs actually encouraged it. With no nannies, the all-wheel-drive model sends up to 90-percent of its power to the rear wheels, compared to the 40/60 split that comes standard. Biermann jokingly called it a "drift mode,” but the G70 is more eager to controllably slide all four wheels than burn rubber in an all-out rear drift. "

 

[Slides]

Good. Hate auto stop/start

 

[R.K.]

^ there seems to be a few posts about the 2.0T acceleration. did i miss an instrumented test? i've been waiting for quite some time, and disappointed that no CAD testers have done so.

i did see some mention of mid-7 second runs from 0-60. frankly this seems off and i don't buy it. i mentioned in another post, but i had an '04 G35 6MT sedan years ago, and its tests showed ~5.8s 0-60. it had 260hp/260tq, RWD, 6MT, and weighed almost exactly what the G70 does which has 255/260, with the torque available much lower than in the G35. gearing is somewhat similar between the two as well.

one of my main concerns with the G70 (i only want a 6MT) is the power from the 2.0T. i'm used to Infiniti's VQ engines, which are not torque monsters but do have strong pull after 3500rpm. while i don't run 0-60 on a daily basis, that test is a measure of usable around-town power. based on the spec sheet, the G70 2.0T should be in the high 5's or very low 6's at worst. but c'mon, mid 7's? that may be a deal breaker.

as for comparison to the 2.0T Accord, being FWD and transverse mounted with a weigh bias heavily to the front makes it an indirect comparison. the Accord is very good, but the architecture puts it in a different performance category IMO. the G70 has a far superior layout for spirited driving.

The Alex on Autos video review clocked a 7.4 second 0-60 time for the 2.0T. That's awful.

 

[Bamm1]

From the Motor1.com First Drive:
2019 Genesis G70 First Drive: A Satisfying Stepping Stone

"But if you really want to unleash its wild side, turn off all the electronic safety aids. Genesis execs actually encouraged it. With no nannies, the all-wheel-drive model sends up to 90-percent of its power to the rear wheels, compared to the 40/60 split that comes standard. Biermann jokingly called it a "drift mode,” but the G70 is more eager to controllably slide all four wheels than burn rubber in an all-out rear drift. "

So Car and Driver is thoroughly confused......

They turned this: Biermann jokingly called it a "drift mode”

Into this: "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. "

 

[Edmguy]

One final note. It looks like, based on the reviews coming in and the 4 press releases (it is not mentioned in any of them) that the US model will not have Auto Stop/Start. The button to the left of the drive mode selector is still a "blank" in all of the test models from the New Hampshire event.

In Canada we don't have the auto start/stop on the 3.3T anyway. Which was a great surprise as I hated it in the Stinger.

So Car and Driver is thoroughly confused......

They turned this: Biermann jokingly called it a "drift mode”

Into this: "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. "

That is pretty bad on C&D's part if they actually did that. I would expect something like that from some wannabe youtuber, but not a major publication like that.

 

[canucklehead604]

The Alex on Autos video review clocked a 7.4 second 0-60 time for the 2.0T. That's awful.

^ i agree, that is awful. so awful in fact that i wonder if there is not more to the story. it was not an instrumented test. just an informal app or timer i believe. how many passengers or equipment on board? tire pressure? elevation? temperature? fuel grade? the car mags standardize testing protocol to produce more consistent results. like i said before, i may not wring out my car like the car mag testers do, but they do provide a more authoritative approach for objective results.

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[Tonester]

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.


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.

Nice overview of the reviews! One more to add to your list... Some reviewers called the 3.3T "tail happy" and not much understeer, while one other reviewer said there was some modest understeer. Most of what I saw was that "tail happy" with predictable throttle control won out and this car is very "planted" in the corners and confidence inspiring. I like it!

 

[g70manual]

This is even more informal but I timed both 0-60 runs on the redline review and got over 7 seconds each time.

 

[dougjp]

I find it jaw dropping that Alex got 0-60 in 4.6 seconds without launch control. He just mashed the gas on any old pavement and got 4.6? Then he got a poor number with the 2.0. So for me, as a possible 3.3 buyer, this is better information that any instrumentation test or C&D using tricks of the trade to get a few tenths. The 3.3 is d@mn fast.

 

[Tonester]

In the AoA review, his tester had the entry level double ten-spoke wheels, but he called it the "top spec" car. I assume he meant "3.3T" engine when he said top spec because the actual top spec 3.3T Sport model has the black 5-spoke wheels. Anyway, assuming his tester is a 3.3T, it must be either the Advanced or Elite with those standard looking double spoke wheels. I'm hoping one of the 3.3T trims has the polished 10-spoke (non double). The only trim left is the Prestige trim that could have that wheel. Anyone know?

 

[KusaKusa]

I'll probably still go for the 2.0T. Right now I have a 2012 V6 Accord coupe with 271 HP, and it's way more than enough for me as a casual driver and I never make full use of it. I hope the 2.0T is equivalent or close to it, especially since it's turbo in comparison.

 

[R.K.]

^ i agree, that is awful. so awful in fact that i wonder if there is not more to the story. it was not an instrumented test. just an informal app or timer i believe. how many passengers or equipment on board? tire pressure? elevation? temperature? fuel grade? the car mags standardize testing protocol to produce more consistent results. like i said before, i may not wring out my car like the car mag testers do, but they do provide a more authoritative approach for objective results.

Perhaps, but he got a 4.5s on the 3.3T. Presumably using the same kind of conditions.

 

[steelers84]

My absolute biggest fear is the lack of an auto start/stop button means it's on by default.

 

[KDX]

My absolute biggest fear is the lack of an auto start/stop button means it's on by default.

No auto start/stop on the 3.3 Sport.

 

[MrLatte]

What exactly is this “auto start/stop” feature? Is this different than the Adaptive Cruise Control with stop and go?

 

[R.K.]

What exactly is this “auto start/stop” feature? Is this different than the Adaptive Cruise Control with stop and go?

It turns the engine off when you come to a complete stop (for example, at a red light). As soon as you release the brake it starts the engine again.