Road Noise?

[Mark_888]

I just took a look at the sight you suggested and see what you are speaking of but the noise comfort rating on the Michelin Energy Saver A/S is 9.1 and ride comfort rating is 8.9. If you compare those Michelin tires from that sight with the Energy Saver A/S the A/S has a slight edge.

The survey for that tire is out of whack with ratings of other Michelin Energy Saving tires, and are based on a small sample size of only 428,955 mile, whereas most of the other tires much larger number of miles (which means many more people have reviewed them).

One interesting thing to note is that according to the survey (maybe some people on this forum have posted their results with the Equus or Genesis, both being quiet cars, that have skewed the results) the Michelin Energy Saver A/S rates better in ride comfort (9.1 to 8.7) and noise comfort (8.9 to 8.6) than the Goodyear Assurance ComforTred . However, if you read this review of these tires conducted by TireRack internally, you will see that Goodyear Assurance beat the Michelin Energy Saver A/S in both ride comfort and noise comfort.

"As its name promises, the Goodyear Assurance ComforTred provided the most comfortable ride of the group. This tire did a good job controlling jounce and jiggle as the Prius chassis encountered patched concrete expansion joints. The Bridgestone Ecopia EP100 followed, also doing a good job minimizing how much of the road's bumps made their way to the driver. Right behind was the Michelin Energy Saver A/S, which also displayed good ride characteristics, allowing just slightly more of the road's texture to find its way into the cabin."

For overall noise comfort, the ComforTred again led the group with the least amount of tread noise relative to the other tires in the evaluation. Following close behind were the Ecopia EP100, Energy Saver A/S and HydroEdge with Green X."
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/testDisplay.jsp?ttid=121

This reinforces my statement above about the difference in sample size, and it is possible that some members of this forum may have posted their own opinions that have skewed the TireTrack results.

Michelin says the Energy Saver is rated as 9/10 for comfort and other Michelin tires such as the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S are rated 10/10.
http://www.michelinman.com/tire-selector/name/energy-saver-a-s-tires
http://www.michelinman.com/tire-selector/name/pilot-sport-a-s-plus-tires

I certainly don't want to suggest that the Michelin Energy Saver A/S tires are poor when it comes to road noise or comfort, but there are Michelin tires that score better in these categories according to both TireTrack tests (not customer surveys) and Michelin's own statements. On smooth asphalt roads, I doubt anyone would hear/feel the difference, but some people drive a lot on concrete roads that can make a lot of weird noises with certain tires.

For maximum quietness where fuel efficiency is not paramount, I would get something other than the Michelin Energy Saver A/S tires, which were probably chosen by Hyundai to squeeze the best EPA rating out of the vehicle (since EPA numbers are not given in fractions, even a slight difference can boost EPA ratings by a whole digit).

 

[MHT]

The survey for that tire is out of whack with ratings of other Michelin Energy Saving tires, and are based on a small sample size of only 428,955 mile, whereas most of the other tires much larger number of miles (which means many more people have reviewed them).

One interesting thing to note is that according to the survey (maybe some people on this forum have posted their results with the Equus or Genesis, both being quiet cars, that have skewed the results) the Michelin Energy Saver A/S rates better in ride comfort (9.1 to 8.7) and noise comfort (8.9 to 8.6) than the Goodyear Assurance ComforTred . However, if you read this review of these tires conducted by TireRack internally, you will see that Goodyear Assurance beat the Michelin Energy Saver A/S in both ride comfort and noise comfort.


This reinforces my statement above about the difference in sample size, and it is possible that some members of this forum may have posted their own opinions that have skewed the TireTrack results.

Michelin says the Energy Saver is rated as 9/10 for comfort and other Michelin tires such as the Michelin Pilot Sport A/S are rated 10/10.
http://www.michelinman.com/tire-selector/name/energy-saver-a-s-tires
http://www.michelinman.com/tire-selector/name/pilot-sport-a-s-plus-tires

I certainly don't want to suggest that the Michelin Energy Saver A/S tires are poor when it comes to road noise or comfort, but there are Michelin tires that score better in these categories according to both TireTrack tests (not customer surveys) and Michelin's own statements. On smooth asphalt roads, I doubt anyone would hear/feel the difference, but some people drive a lot on concrete roads that can make a lot of weird noises with certain tires.

For maximum quietness where fuel efficiency is not paramount, I would get something other than the Michelin Energy Saver A/S tires, which were probably chosen by Hyundai to squeeze the best EPA rating out of the vehicle (since EPA numbers are not given in fractions, even a slight difference can boost EPA ratings by a whole digit).

I think you are the type of person who thinks that you are right all the time and always have to have the last word. You research just enough to try and validate your point but that is far as it goes. Your opinion about the tire rack reviews being skewed by forum members is unfounded and makes no sense at all. First of all I could care less about the GoodYear Assurance as unless someone wants to change from the recommended OEM tire size the tire is not made in a 235-50-18. Michelin only recommends two tires for the Genesis with 235-50-18 tires and they are the Energy Saver A/S and Pilot MXM4 both which have a 9/10 comfort rating. The Pilot Sport A/S has a 10/10 comfort rating which is not that big of a difference from 9/10.

 

[Mark_888]

I think you are the type of person who think that you are right all the time and always have to have the last word. You research just enough to try and validate your point but that is far as it goes. Your opinion about the tire rack reviews being skewed by forum members is unfounded and makes no sense at all. First of all I could care less about the GoodYear Assurance as unless someone wants to change from the recommended OEM tire size the tire is not made in a 235-50-18. Michelin only recommends two tires for the Genesis with 235-50-18 tires and they are the Energy Saver A/S and Pilot MXM4 both which have a 9/10 comfort rating. The Pilot Sport A/S has a 10/10 comfort rating which is not that big of a difference from 9/10. The Pilot Sport A/S is not a recommended tire for the Genesis by Michelin because it is a directional tire and the OEM tires on the Genesis are non directional. You can put a directional tire on the Genesis but any good tire dealer will stamp a disclaimer on your purchase receipt letting you know that the tire is different than the OEM tires. Personally I like the Tire Rack internal reviews but I tend to put more stock in the people who ride on the tires every day in all types of conditions.
Between the Dunlop's, Continental Extreme DWS, Michelin Pilot Sport A/S, Michelin Pilot MXM4 all of which I have driven on I find the Energy Saver A/S to be the best both in ride comfort and noise comfort. As with any tire you may get a little more tire noise going over some road surfaces but I find it not to be a problem as the tire is basically quiet. Some of your non energy saver tires may start out quiet but over time will become noisier . I still say opinions are ok but people need to try out the tires for themselves as everyone has different taste. If you prefer a non energy saver tire good for you but I do not think that you should try and sway people to follow your lead with misinformation.

You are entitled to your own opinion, but I was just pointing out that the review conducted by Tire Track (as opposed to the reader survey) differs in conclusion from yours, as do the ratings by Michelin themselves on their website. Certainly, all of the high-end Michelin tires are quite comfortable.

Regarding skewing of of the Tire Track customer survey by members of this or other forums, my point was that when driving a car that is inherently quiet, it is harder to be objective about the tires, especially when the surveys for a particular tire has a small sample size (low number of reported miles). In other words, in the surveys, there are many different cars being driven, but in the Tire Rack review they drive the same car when they test a group of tires.

 

[MHT]

You are entitled to your own opinion, but I was just pointing out that the review conducted by Tire Track (as opposed to the reader survey) differs in conclusion from yours, as do the ratings by Michelin themselves on their website. Certainly, all of the high-end Michelin tires are quite comfortable.

Regarding skewing of of the Tire Track customer survey by members of this or other forums, my point was that when driving a car that is inherently quiet, it is harder to be objective about the tires, especially when the surveys for a particular tire has a small sample size (low number of reported miles). In other words, in the surveys, there are many different cars being driven, but in the Tire Rack review they drive the same car when they test a group of tires.

The ratings on the Michelin Tires I listed came from the Michelin web sight. Michelin does not give a rating for noise comfort.
The car that Tire Rack used for their test was a Toyota Prius. You failed to mention that they tested 7 tires and not 2. Of the tires listed the Michelin
Energy Saver A/S came in 3rd for comfort and noise. As it looks like the Michelin Energy Saver beat out several non energy saver tires I do not see how the Tire Rack internal review differs from my opinion that an Energy Saver tire is not noisier than all non energy saver tires as you suggested. The fact that only one car is used for the test (Toyota Prius) makes me think that it would be harder to be objective about the Tire Rack internal review.
I am not going to waste any more time on this discussion as I think that both suspensions and tires have been discussed more than enough for people to make an intelligent decision as to what they need to do.

 

[Mark_888]

The ratings on the Michelin Tires I listed came from the Michelin web sight. Michelin does not give a rating for noise comfort.
The car that Tire Rack used for their test was a Toyota Prius. You failed to mention that they tested 7 tires and not 2. Of the tires listed the Michelin
Energy Saver A/S came in 3rd for comfort and noise. As it looks like the Michelin Energy Saver beat out several non energy saver tires I do not see how the Tire Rack internal review differs from my opinion that an Energy Saver tire is not noisier than all non energy saver tires as you suggested. The fact that only one car is used for the test (Toyota Prius) makes me think that it would be harder to be objective about the Tire Rack internal review.
I am not going to waste any more time on this discussion as I think that both suspensions and tires have been discussed more than enough for people to make an intelligent decision as to what they need to do.

My point was that the Tire Rack customer surveys rated the Michelin Energy Saver A/S as lower noise than the Goodyear Assurance ComforTred, but in the test conducted by Tire Rack internally (they tested 7 tires on the same car and using the same exact tests) they rated the Goodyear Assurance ComforTred as lower noise. So my point is that the customer survey ratings are suspect as which tire has the lowest noise, but I am not saying that the Michelin Energy Saver A/S scored poorly in that category, since it did very well, but just opposite rankings than the customer surveys.

I then mentioned some possible reasons why the customer surveys may be inaccurate, such as:

1. Individual reviewers in the customer surveys have seldom used more than one or a few of the tires in the same Tire Track category. As you noted, the Tire Rack internal test I mentioned included 7 different tires.
2. The customer survey reviews are based on different cars (one customer reviewer may have used the tires on one car, but another customer reviewer may have rated a tire may using a different car, making like-to-like comparison difficult). Since different tires come installed as OEM on different cars, this can make the overall survey results skewed towards the suspension characteristics of a particular car.
3. Some tire reviews may be based on a much smaller sample (fewer number of customer driven miles in the case of Tire Rack reviews) than other tires in the surveys, such as is the case with the Michelin Energy Saver A/S. That makes the issues noted in items 1 and 2 more problematic.

But you are absolutely correct that the Michelin Energy Saver A/S is a very good and quiet tire, although maybe not the quietest that Michelin has to offer.

 

[MHT]

My point was that the Tire Rack customer surveys rated the Michelin Energy Saver A/S as lower noise than the Goodyear Assurance ComforTred, but in the test conducted by Tire Rack internally (they tested 7 tires on the same car and using the same exact tests) they rated the Goodyear Assurance ComforTred as lower noise. So my point is that the customer survey ratings are suspect as which tire has the lowest noise, but I am not saying that the Michelin Energy Saver A/S scored poorly in that category, since it did very well, but just opposite rankings than the customer surveys.

I then mentioned some possible reasons why the customer surveys may be inaccurate, such as:

1. Individual reviewers in the customer surveys have seldom used more than one or a few of the tires in the same Tire Track category. As you noted, the Tire Rack internal test I mentioned included 7 different tires.
2. The customer survey reviews are based on different cars (one customer reviewer may have used the tires on one car, but another customer reviewer may have rated a tire may using a different car, making like-to-like comparison difficult). Since different tires come installed as OEM on different cars, this can make the overall survey results skewed towards the suspension characteristics of a particular car.
3. Some tire reviews may be based on a much smaller sample (fewer number of customer driven miles in the case of Tire Rack reviews) than other tires in the surveys, such as is the case with the Michelin Energy Saver A/S. That makes the issues noted in items 1 and 2 more problematic.

But you are absolutely correct that the Michelin Energy Saver A/S is a very good and quiet tire, although maybe not the quietest that Michelin has to offer.

This is your original reply # 4 that prompted my reply #14 :
The noise is probably related somewhat to the tires. If you want to reduce road noise, don't get Energy Saver tires. Look for tires that are rated as very quiet on TireTrack.com customer survey reviews. Energy Saver type of tires are typically used by manufacturers who are trying to squeeze every last MPG out the EPA ratings.

Now what is it going to be, you said on the "Tire Rack.com customer survey, now you seem to have an issue with the very survey that you first recommended and as it is more convenient to prove your point you now decide that the Tire Rack internal review is better.
You said"if you want to reduce road noise,don't get Energy Saver tires. Look for tires that are rated as very quiet on TireTrack.com customer survey reviews". My point was and is that there are non energy saver tires that are noisier than Energy Saver tires and to tell someone not to get an Energy Saver tire based on what you were saying just did not seem right to me.

 

[BacktoHyundaibychoice]

Over/Under on who gets the last word in this thread?

 

[JPW]

Over/Under on who gets the last word in this thread?

This is just my opinion, but the difference in tires is sort of a moot point for me because I'm evaluating different vehicles from the manufacturer (stock), not different tires. If the manufacturer chose their tires poorly then that should be a mark against them.

For kicks I bought a sound pressure level meter at Radio Shack, took my BMW 2006 750LI on I-45 at 70 mph and noted the reading. It stayed pretty much right at 67db. I have no idea whether that is good or bad. What I'll probably do in a few weeks is do the same test, down the same stretch of road, during approximately the same time, and see how the 2011 Equus and 2012 Genesis compare. I also have a friend with a Lexus LS and I'll get his numbers as well.

 

[Mark_888]

This is just my opinion, but the difference in tires is sort of a moot point for me because I'm evaluating different vehicles from the manufacturer (stock), not different tires. If the manufacturer chose their tires poorly then that should be a mark against them.

For kicks I bought a sound pressure level meter at Radio Shack, took my BMW 2006 750LI on I-45 at 70 mph and noted the reading. It stayed pretty much right at 67db. I have no idea whether that is good or bad. What I'll probably do in a few weeks is do the same test, down the same stretch of road, during approximately the same time, and see how the 2011 Equus and 2012 Genesis compare. I also have a friend with a Lexus LS and I'll get his numbers as well.

Here is how Consumer Reports measures noise level in their car reviews. You can compare relative numbers that are reported by Consumer Reports for various cars, but obviously should not compare db readings by Consumer Reports with those you get.
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...noise.htm?loginMethod=auto&copyrightYear=2011

 

[JPW]

Here is how Consumer Reports measures noise level in their car reviews. You can compare relative numbers that are reported by Consumer Reports for various cars, but obviously should not compare db readings by Consumer Reports with those you get.
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...noise.htm?loginMethod=auto&copyrightYear=2011

Any chance you can tell me where you see the db readings? I just signed up for Consumer Reports online to see these figures, but I can't see that they reflect them anywhere.

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[Mark_888]

Any chance you can tell me where you see the db readings? I just signed up for Consumer Reports online to see these figures, but I can't see that they reflect them anywhere.

I remember seeing the db readings in the paper magazines in past years, but not sure if they still do them (not sure if the link I provided is recent). Up until last year I subscribed to the online version of Consumers Reports, but found that their website is terrible, and does not include all the information in the paper magazines, but not sure if that is the issue in this case. Maybe someone has some Consumer Reports paper magazines lying around, or check your local library.

 

[Mark_888]

Looks like Edmonds Inside Line publishes sound levels in their "Full Test" reports.

Here is the 2012 Hyundai Genesis 5.0 R with sound levels:

• Sound level @ idle (dB) 38.7
• @ Full throttle (dB) 72.7
• @ 70 mph cruise (dB) 64.1

http://www.insideline.com/hyundai/g...i-genesis-5-0-r-spec-full-test-and-video.html


Here is 2011 Equus:

• Sound level @ idle (dB) 39.5
• @ Full throttle (dB) 72.4
• @ 70 mph cruise (dB) 61.4

http://www.insideline.com/hyundai/equus/2011/2011-hyundai-equus-full-test-and-video.html


Here is 2009 Genesis V6 Sedan:

• Sound level @ idle (dB) 39.6
• @ Full throttle (dB) 70.8
• @ 70 mph cruise (dB) 63.5

http://www.insideline.com/hyundai/genesis/2009/full-test-2009-hyundai-genesis-v6.html

 

[JPW]

That is great! Thanks for passing it on! I've known of Edmunds and Inside Line, but never really spent any time on their site. For this discussion it gives me exactly what I am looking for, that is, a good baseline to compare interior noise.

What I find especially interesting is that they indeed have a full test for both the 2006 BMW 750i and Equus. As you already mentioned the Equus reflected a 70 mph cruise reading of 61.4 db. They state the 2006 BMW 750i has reading of 64 db, seems to be aligned closer to the Genesis.

What will be interesting is to see whether my own test reflect similar results. As I mentioned just doing some early tests in my BMW reflected 67 db at 70 mph, BUT it feels less noisy to me than the Equus. I could very well be wrong and having some objective data behind it will be interesting.

I just spent a little time perusing through many of the full tests on that site and some of the interior noise figures are surprising. The Equus certainly reflected a figure that was exceptionally good because most are higher. What took me back a little was the 2011 Chrysler 300. It reflects almost the same figure was the Equus with 61.5 db? They even mention how quite the vehicle is in the article and state the only vehicle that is quieter is the $285,000 Bentley Mulsanne.

 

[JPW]

I was curious on my way home from work so I decided to stop by the Chrysler dealership and test drive the Chrysler 300. Yes, I even brought with me the SPL meter to see how it might compare. Again, based on Edmunds Inside Line they claim the Chrysler 300 is one of the quietest cars on the road.

The car actually somewhat impressed me in some areas. The handling was surprisingly good and may be the most stable car I've driven in some time. There was not even a hint of nervousness with the car. It really felt like it had the glide that you see in the long wheelbase versions of some other cars.

Unfortunately, that is pretty much were the positive elements ended. The seats were ridiculously uncomfortable and no matter how I adjusted them I couldn't get it right. The interior in my mind was just a complete disaster. I don't know why most American car companies can't get this right but the every part of the vehicle I actually had to come in contact with either felt cheap or uninviting.

But I don't want this to turn in to a full comparision test so let me just mention the SPL meter readings. I drove two Chrysler 300's and they both gave me readings right around 68db at 70 mph. Again, my BMW 750LI offered readings of 67db right around the same stretch of road. Based on what Edmund's Inside Line stats reflected this shouldn't be the case. They claim the Chrysler reflected readings much more quiet than the 750LI.

I'm certainly not disputing how they measured it. I'm sure what they have is accurate. I just wonder what is causing this anomaly. I'm not an engineer so this may be way off, but here is my suspicion (right or wrong).

I have to believe Inside Line is running these tests on a test track. There probably isn't any traffic and the pavement may be very smooth. The environment I'm testing in is more "real-world" and includes traffic from all directions and on a less than perfect road. This puts a greater stress on the vehicle in regards to vibration. So some cars like the Chrysler 300 may do a good job of absorbing certain vibrations up to a certain level and perhaps these were the conditions found on the test track. However, once a threshold is met their ability to dampen the sound may fall off quickly when compared to other vehicles. Again, just a theory I have that might explain why I'm seeing a difference here, but who knows.

 

[BacktoHyundaibychoice]

I was curious on my way home from work so I decided to stop by the Chrysler dealership and test drive the Chrysler 300. Yes, I even brought with me the SPL meter to see how it might compare. Again, based on Edmunds Inside Line they claim the Chrysler 300 is one of the quietest cars on the road.

The car actually somewhat impressed me in some areas. The handling was surprisingly good and may be the most stable car I've driven in some time. There was not even a hint of nervousness with the car. It really felt like it had the glide that you see in the long wheelbase versions of some other cars.

Unfortunately, that is pretty much were the positive elements ended. The seats were ridiculously uncomfortable and no matter how I adjusted them I couldn't get it right. The interior in my mind was just a complete disaster. I don't know why most American car companies can't get this right but the every part of the vehicle I actually had to come in contact with either felt cheap or uninviting.

But I don't want this to turn in to a full comparision test so let me just mention the SPL meter readings. I drove two Chrysler 300's and they both gave me readings right around 68db at 70 mph. Again, my BMW 750LI offered readings of 67db right around the same stretch of road. Based on what Edmund's Inside Line stats reflected this shouldn't be the case. They claim the Chrysler reflected readings much more quiet than the 750LI.

I'm certainly not disputing how they measured it. I'm sure what they have is accurate. I just wonder what is causing this anomaly. I'm not an engineer so this may be way off, but here is my suspicion (right or wrong).

I have to believe Inside Line is running these tests on a test track. There probably isn't any traffic and the pavement may be very smooth. The environment I'm testing in is more "real-world" and includes traffic from all directions and on a less than perfect road. This puts a greater stress on the vehicle in regards to vibration. So some cars like the Chrysler 300 may do a good job of absorbing certain vibrations up to a certain level and perhaps these were the conditions found on the test track. However, once a threshold is met their ability to dampen the sound may fall off quickly when compared to other vehicles. Again, just a theory I have that might explain why I'm seeing a difference here, but who knows.

If you can tell the diffierence between 67 and 70 decibels while driving at 70 MPH, you must never have listened to rock music in your youth.

 

[JPW]

If you can tell the diffierence between 67 and 70 decibels while driving at 70 MPH, you must never have listened to rock music in your youth.

LOL! I did (reflecting on my skateboarding days in the early 80's with a walkman cranking Aldo Nova and Van Halen) and this is why I'm having to rely on the SPL meter

All joking aside, it is a good point though. Should we really care about the difference of just a few decibels? I don't really know, but what I do know was that in my next car I swore it not be a fatiguing vehicle. Personally, I think Mercedes-Benz does a great job of this. I bought a beautiful MB E500 that I drove for about half a year. It was extremely quiet and relaxed on the interstate, but I absolutely hated the transmission and the suspension. I couldn't live with it. That led me to make an extremely difficult decision between the Hyundai Genesis V8 and the BMW 750LI about 3 years ago. I went with the BMW for a few different reasons, but one being the fact that it had the same unfatiguing quality as the MB. I haven't lived with a Hyundai so I can't really say whether it is a fatiguing vehicle or not, but I suspect the Equus is their best shot at it. So it would be nice to find a way to quantitatively differentiate between what makes an unfatiguing vehicle and what doesn't, but my guess is I won't be able to find it. I just know it when I see/feel it.

 

[Ennesco2011]

I have an 2011 Equus. When I first bought the car I noticed that the sound system did not sound right. I waited until the 6500 mile service to fix it. The dealer replaced the entire driver information system. When I got the car back from the dealer I tried to put an address into the GPS. I could not find the state Alabama in the menu. So I took the car back to the dealer and they also discovered there was no state of Alabama in my GPS. The information was sent to Hyundai tech support. After a four day wait for a return call it was discovered that no one knows why it is missing and nobody knows how to fix it. They said if they replace the driver information system (3rd one in the car) it will have to bench tested it before it ships. They said that they were truly stumped.

Now this is how Equus Customer Service handles a problem.

I just got off the phone with Equus customer service for the fifth time and their answer is there is nothing they can do right now. They said that have to "do more research the problem before a plan of action can be put in place."
It takes a week just to get a return phone call from Tech Support. I wonder how much time it takes to "do more research?" a day? a week? a year? They will not say. They just said wait.

To me it's not really about the GPS. Its the way they are handling this issue. It's like since this is a problem that customer service didn't train on what to say. They just get dumbfounded and tell me to wait. In one conversation I was told that they are showing their commitment because they have "already put one $7,000.00 system in the car" Well it doesn't work.

Realize the fact the a critical part of the car with a major problem got all the way from design to production through quality control all then to the customer without this problem ever being noticed.
What else could be the same way? How do I know the traction control doesn't have a problem. or any other electronics? What is next?

The car is less than 90 days old.

Is this the return of the original Hyundai? It seems like it to me.

 

[BacktoHyundaibychoice]

Ennesco:
Since you're telling the story in multiple threads,, I'll post my reply again:


If the dealer's techs, presumably in accord with Hyundai techs, are working on the solution to a problem they've never seen, what was the purpose of the call to Hyundai/Equus Customer Service? Their response is what I'd expect:an apology and "hell if i know". You understand that the CS folks get their info from the techs, right? As for quality control, there have been over 1500 Horses sold. This is the first time anyone has posted that Alabama isnt covered by the map/guidance. Not to mention almost 5 years of the Genesis with the same system. That's actually a pretty good record for this particular problem. Not saying there haven't been other but you get the point.
As for what else could be wrong, specifically traction control, it's a huge leap from "missing Alabama" to "is my car unsafe"?
Keep us informed, thanks.

 

[NOLa]

Ennesco,

you might be better served by posting your own thread rather than posting on other threads that have nothing to do with your subject.

In the "Genesis" section, you might post your issue in the "electrical section" since the tech package and lexicon system are the same in the two vehicles.

Hope that helps.

NOLa

 

[tfmsEQ]

Well, comparing it to the 4.6 Genesis i came out of, the Horse is MUCH quieter. I get some wind noise around 80 mph or so, but not much from the road.
Certainly not enough to be a deal buster.
But maybe i'm playing my DVD-A's to loudly to notice?!?

OT:
Anybody get the survey with letter from Mr. K? Just completed it.

Wind Noise: I've had high-pitched wind noise coming from the driver's window @70+mph when I slightly open the driver's window. It gets EXTREMELY loud if the window is opened more. This DOES NOT happen with any other windows (whether or not the shades are up). When I brought it to the dealer, they test drove it and couldn't find it. I brought it to another dealer, and when they test drove it, they covered the outside driver's side mirror. The noise was gone. They ordered me a new replacement mirror and now it's quiet.
PS: Prior to changing the mirror, the first dealer replaced the whether stripping around the door. It didn't help.