Genesis G70 Reviews

[Beefer]

https://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta...-minute-2019-genesis-g70-outperforms-its.html

 

[larrymg1]

Well!

 

[Cowtown]

Not necessarily a "review" but expanded coverage on Car & Driver. The 2019 Genesis G70 Is Priced from $35,895

 

[canucklehead604]

here's another RWD 6MT Sport review - it's a bit of a puff-cake review but certainly praises the 6MT actuation:

https://www.wheels.ca/car-reviews/review-2019-genesis-g70-sport-rwd/

 

[Cowtown]

Finalist for North American Car of the Year 2019 and the Motor Trend 2019 trophy, must be something to these positive reviews...

Genesis G70: 2019 Motor Trend Car of the Year Finalist - Motor Trend

 

[steintm12]

Finalist for North American Car of the Year 2019 and the Motor Trend 2019 trophy, must be something to these positive reviews...

Genesis G70: 2019 Motor Trend Car of the Year Finalist - Motor Trend

Yikes. Those acceleration numbers are surprisingly slow for the 2.0T, both automatic (7.4s 0-60, 15.7s@91.7mph 1/4mi) and manual transmissions (7.2s 0-60, 15.7s@91.0mph 1/4mi). Very disappointing. Motor Trend and Car & Driver both got significantly better numbers out of the 2.0T Stinger, which doesn't make sense. At least the G70 improved on the Stinger's braking, lateral acceleration, and figure eight tests.

2018 Kia Stinger 2.0T RWD First Test - Motor Trend
2018 Kia Stinger 2.0T RWD Test | Car and Driver

 

[NLJ]

Finalist for North American Car of the Year 2019 and the Motor Trend 2019 trophy, must be something to these positive reviews...

Genesis G70: 2019 Motor Trend Car of the Year Finalist - Motor Trend

I have to agree that the seats feels narrower than comparative sized cars.

 

[NLJ]

Yikes. Those acceleration numbers are surprisingly slow for the 2.0T, both automatic (7.4s 0-60, 15.7s@91.7mph 1/4mi) and manual transmissions (7.2s 0-60, 15.7s@91.0mph 1/4mi). Very disappointing. Motor Trend and Car & Driver both got significantly better numbers out of the 2.0T Stinger, which doesn't make sense. At least the G70 improved on the Stinger's braking, lateral acceleration, and figure eight tests.

2018 Kia Stinger 2.0T RWD First Test - Motor Trend
2018 Kia Stinger 2.0T RWD Test | Car and Driver

Not a 1/4 driver, but I have to say my 2.0T feels a whole lot faster than my TL SH-AWD AT which did 0-100kmh in 6.4 seconds.

 

[Cowtown]

Yikes. Those acceleration numbers are surprisingly slow for the 2.0T, both automatic (7.4s 0-60, 15.7s@91.7mph 1/4mi) and manual transmissions (7.2s 0-60, 15.7s@91.0mph 1/4mi). Very disappointing. Motor Trend and Car & Driver both got significantly better numbers out of the 2.0T Stinger, which doesn't make sense. At least the G70 improved on the Stinger's braking, lateral acceleration, and figure eight tests.

2018 Kia Stinger 2.0T RWD First Test - Motor Trend
2018 Kia Stinger 2.0T RWD Test | Car and Driver

Yeah I'm not going to lie, what I was seeing out of the Genesis numbers when I could find any was not great. I kept trying to convince myself that it had to be closer to the Stinger, if not better, so it definitely played into my decision to just get the motor everyone raved over. Given the relatively small gap fuel efficiency wise I figured it was fine. When I drove the 2.0T it scooted along fine even with 4 people but I just felt that if it couldn't come within a second of my GTI then it was probably not going to have the scoot that my wife and I like around town.

I have decided at least one of the next cars will be electric once I update the house to accommodate so this is a bit of a last hurrah for the old guard as it were. ;-)

 

[Cowtown]

I have to agree that the seats feels narrower than comparative sized cars.

From my two drives I think the cabin at the shoulder area does come in a bit tighter than say the c300 which had a less aggressive "bow" to that line. It wasn't too small but it was "tighter". I think the way the middle seat in the back and the drivetrain hump comes off with the narrower toe room leads to the tighter back seat comments. Thankfully for me after a lot of assessment I figured it'd be fine. My son is a ways off of 5'10", my wife is 5' 9" and the other person who rides with us more often is only 5'7" so back seat will be fine for most of the time I plan to have the car, barring my son shooting up 7" in 2 years (could happen). ;-)

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[steintm12]

Not a 1/4 driver, but I have to say my 2.0T feels a whole lot faster than my TL SH-AWD AT which did 0-100kmh in 6.4 seconds.

That's good to hear, NLJ. I'll hold my judgement until more tests come in and I'm able to give it a proper test drive myself.

Yeah I'm not going to lie, what I was seeing out of the Genesis numbers when I could find any was not great. I kept trying to convince myself that it had to be closer to the Stinger, if not better, so it definitely played into my decision to just get the motor everyone raved over. Given the relatively small gap fuel efficiency wise I figured it was fine. When I drove the 2.0T it scooted along fine even with 4 people but I just felt that if it couldn't come within a second of my GTI then it was probably not going to have the scoot that my wife and I like around town.

I am primarily interested in the 6-speed manual, so that would limit me to the 2.0. However, the 3.3 is certainly tempting. Not ruling it out.

 

[Cowtown]

That's good to hear, NLJ. I'll hold my judgement until more tests come in and I'm able to give it a proper test drive myself.


I am primarily interested in the 6-speed manual, so that would limit me to the 2.0. However, the 3.3 is certainly tempting. Not ruling it out.

I think with the manual you can mitigate it a bit more. It'd be interesting though to see the G70 2.0T auto on a dyno and live instrumented test to see what's up because the numbers I've seen it listed as slower than a 2.0T Santa Fe AWD. So talk about making no sense....

I also went the 3.3 route as I've been debating about moving my 96 Cobra along that I've been slowly refurbishing. It only seems like 500 kms a year during a busy year. So if I do decide to I'll at least have the 3.3 grunt to make up for it.

Back to the 2.0, it moved along fine and I think many will be rather pleased. Unfortunately I'm not that person and I know the numbers, it would drive me nuts but it's definitely worth a drive.

 

[NLJ]

I think with the manual you can mitigate it a bit more. It'd be interesting though to see the G70 2.0T auto on a dyno and live instrumented test to see what's up because the numbers I've seen it listed as slower than a 2.0T Santa Fe AWD. So talk about making no sense....

I also went the 3.3 route as I've been debating about moving my 96 Cobra along that I've been slowly refurbishing. It only seems like 500 kms a year during a busy year. So if I do decide to I'll at least have the 3.3 grunt to make up for it.

Back to the 2.0, it moved along fine and I think many will be rather pleased. Unfortunately I'm not that person and I know the numbers, it would drive me nuts but it's definitely worth a drive.

There is a Korean review comparing both with Dyno numbers out there.

 

[canucklehead604]

^^ ever since i started seeing these non-instrumented acceleration times being reported for the G70 i have been skeptical. if C&D test data (instrumented) for the 2.0T RWD Stinger at 0-60 in 6.0s, why would the lighter G70 possibly be over a second slower? makes no sense. same gearing, same engine, same everything, just less weight.

until we see several sources of instrumented testing to compare i will remain a skeptic of these absurdly slow times. the 2.0T times in particular, but many feel the 3.3T times are a bit conservative as well.

 

[NLJ]

^^ ever since i started seeing these non-instrumented acceleration times being reported for the G70 i have been skeptical. if C&D test data (instrumented) for the 2.0T RWD Stinger at 0-60 in 6.0s, why would the lighter G70 possibly be over a second slower? makes no sense. same gearing, same engine, same everything, just less weight.

until we see several sources of instrumented testing to compare i will remain a skeptic of these absurdly slow times. the 2.0T times in particular, but many feel the 3.3T times are a bit conservative as well.

I'm betting 5.6 for RWD and 5.8 for AWD.

 

[canucklehead604]

^ i did my own, non-scientific testing before i bought my G70. i had a friend drive my old G37S 6MT along side the 6MT G70 i was testing. we did a few pulls up to ~100km/h. each time i pulled ahead until we got closer to 100km/h, when the G37S would start to pull away. above 100km/h i wouldn't have been able to hang with the G37S. but it had 340hp with great top-end power so that made sense. the G37S was tested at ~5.1-5.2s 0-60. while we are no pro's, that at least gave me some perspective of where the G70 6MT was at because back in August there was literally no info on the 2.0T 6MT testing...still isn't really.

i agree that at least upper 5's is realistic, if not a bit better. seat of the pants, for whatever that's worth, supports this.

 

[NLJ]

^ i did my own, non-scientific testing before i bought my G70. i had a friend drive my old G37S 6MT along side the 6MT G70 i was testing. we did a few pulls up to ~100km/h. each time i pulled ahead until we got closer to 100km/h, when the G37S would start to pull away. above 100km/h i wouldn't have been able to hang with the G37S. but it had 340hp with great top-end power so that made sense. the G37S was tested at ~5.1-5.2s 0-60. while we are no pro's, that at least gave me some perspective of where the G70 6MT was at because back in August there was literally no info on the 2.0T 6MT testing...still isn't really.

i agree that at least upper 5's is realistic, if not a bit better. seat of the pants, for whatever that's worth, supports this.

I can firmly say I don't miss the 305hp 273 torque on my Acura. Doesn't feel like a downgrade in terms of power anyway for the way I drive. Maybe on the top end of the Rev range!

 

[KusaKusa]

Here's a 2.0T launch video.

It backs a lot of the 0-60 times journalists are finding. It looks like it needs 3rd gear to reach 60 mph, which I'm not sure if that's standard for 4 cylinders or not. I think from the video and what reviewers said, the first gear may be held back and the upper RPMs are weaker in power. In practical use, I don't think these don't matter as much so it shouldn't feel slow. But for launches and people who tend to rev the heck out of the engines, it would matter.

 

[KusaKusa]

Here's a really nice review that's detailed on the feel of driving the G70:

 

[canucklehead604]

^ thx Kusa! Hadn’t seen that one yet, nice to finally get a bit more coverage of the RWD 6MT - Canada spec no less!