Finally, hyundai is pushing the 3.3L turbo. share your comments!

[ferrethouse]

I'm always amazed at car site posters who think they know more than the engineers at the car companies. Not all decisions are made by the accountants and not all are made to satisfy governments.

The engineers at most other car companies have decided that turbos are the way to go. So your statement is misleading. There are plenty of engineers that picked turbos for cars in the same class as the Genesis. Suggesting that people here who support turbos are pretending that they know more than engineers simply because the Hyundai engineers picked a NA engine for the 2015 is silly.

In fact, I'm willing to bet that they stayed with the NA 5.0 for cost reasons (e.g. the accountants made the decision). And that they will adopt the turbo soon due to the input from the engineers.

BTW: I love my NA 5.0

 

[GenesisCaptain]

The big difference in handling between the V6 and the V8 is not the 225 #. The big difference is the electronically controlled suspension in the V8. I'm amazed so many here claim the handling in the V6 is "better". It's not.

The 2012 Genesis was offered with both the V6 and V8 in non-R-Spec configurations (same wheels and suspensions). The V8 was 225 lbs. heavier. Since the suspensions were the same, the handling differences were most likely due to the weight and balance differences.

Similarly, my last two cars were almost identical except for the engines. The bigger engine car weighed 290 lbs. more. The handling difference between the two were pretty much the same as the differences I noticed between the V6 and V8 1st generation Genesis.

he Hyundai V8 is not "too large" for the power it produces. 420 HP is very reasonable for this motor and Hyundai, for 2015, deliberately moved the HP number down to move the torque peak lower. It provides excellent, smooth power delivery and is very consistent with other 5.0L dohc V8s from around the world.

My context for my "too large" statement is the luxury performance sedan segment. In that segment, the NA V8 is bigger and heavier than its competitors that produce similar power. It is good for a normally aspirated V8, but luxury performance sedans are not using NA V8 engines. They are using smaller, lighter, more powerful forced induction engines.

For the record, my next car will be a big engine again. I miss it more than I thought I would. I will sacrifice the handling for the power.

 

[zielritter]

Some are actually made to create a salable product that works well for the consumer. Hyundai engineers have done an excellent job of making a car that works.

Bingo, profit for the shareholders is always priority number one in any publicly traded company (yes, I know Korea's economy is not totally privatized like ours).

The fact that different manufacturers have adopted different strategies to meet demand and outperform peers while working within a regulatory framework is what makes capitalism work. Choice between FI or large displacement NA will always be there if companies deem such vehicles a profitable venture.

 

[Sal Collaziano]

All I know is - the 3.3 twin turbo will be a tremendous addition to the Genesis Coupe as it's a lot more powerful (especially torque-wise) out of the showroom and can be EASILY modified to 450-500hp with a tune. It's going to turn the Genesis Coupe into a real enthusiast car.

 

[Monolith2001]

Although I said I was out of this discussion, this video from /Drive is so timely for this discussion. They talk about all the things we are talking about in this thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBvbhO0hKkc

 

[jimb100]

The engineers at most other car companies have decided that turbos are the way to go. So your statement is misleading. There are plenty of engineers that picked turbos for cars in the same class as the Genesis. Suggesting that people here who support turbos are pretending that they know more than engineers simply because the Hyundai engineers picked a NA engine for the 2015 is silly.

In fact, I'm willing to bet that they stayed with the NA 5.0 for cost reasons (e.g. the accountants made the decision). And that they will adopt the turbo soon due to the input from the engineers.

BTW: I love my NA 5.0

In Europe, smaller displacement is taxed less. Audi turbo their v8 to get more power from the smaller v8.

I'm just as willing to bet that Hyundai with the Genesis have little interest in the European market. Same as Lexus.

Also, their power train warranty would put an emphasis on reliability and durability. With low end torque and good hp, good for the consumer. Not an accounting compromise.

 

[EXBMWGUY]

All I want is to finish my popcorn and have a Tesla AWD and a pushrod V8 in my garage at the same time. Carry on.

 

[jimb100]

The engineers at most other car companies have decided that turbos are the way to go. So your statement is misleading. There are plenty of engineers that picked turbos for cars in the same class as the Genesis. Suggesting that people here who support turbos are pretending that they know more than engineers simply because the Hyundai engineers picked a NA engine for the 2015 is silly.

In fact, I'm willing to bet that they stayed with the NA 5.0 for cost reasons (e.g. the accountants made the decision). And that they will adopt the turbo soon due to the input from the engineers.

BTW: I love my NA 5.0

For large, flagship sedans like the S550, Audi A8, Lexus 460?

 

[CanukV6]

For large, flagship sedans like the S550, Audi A8, Lexus 460?

From 2015 M-B S550 ad:
The 4.6L Bi-turbo V8 in the S 550 4MATIC takes you from 0 -100 km/h in 4.8 seconds. Which is blisteringly fast.

From 2015 Audi A8 ad:
TFSI® – Sensational and supreme.
Audi TFSI® engines attain a particularly high compression ratio. The result: outstanding efficiency combined with optimum performance. Substituting turbocharging for cubic capacity has the effect of reducing engine size and weight considerably – while performance is as impressively dynamic as ever. For power delivery that will win you over from the word go.

Lexus LS460 stays with a NA V8 - for now.

 

[DRS]

I think my points are proven with his recent responses.

I am a racist, freak, ageist, liberal tyrant for disagreeing with his view on the world and calling him on it. Ironic that you accuse me of "University Professor" speech and then compare manufacturers to Stalin. A cornerstone of Stalinism was a paranoia of intellectuals.

Very apt quote from the moderator indeed.

Anyways, I'm all for innovation and the promotion of cleaner efficient turbo engines that make high power while preserving low end torque. In a free market system, the market supplies what the consumer demands and legislation (economically speaking) is supposed to control for externalities involved in free-market transactions.

If we're all being duped by advertising, the turbo lobby (I can't believe I gave this theory mention), and the EPA into buying FI powered vehicles, then bravo sirs - what a cover up you've pulled off on a global scale. Yet, even if this is the case, the digitally connected world we live in will expose the truth eventually.

By principle, a FI powered vehicle will be lighter and, generally speaking, reliable and fuel-efficient compared to a large displacement V8. You can throw things in like cylinder deactivation to help level the playing field, but the engineers at these manufacturers have put their lot in with FI when determining how to best meet global demand and make a profit for their shareholders.

Regardless, Gasoline prices will head back up when the Saudi's turn down the fire hose and China, hopefully for the sake of the global economy, pulls itself out of a full-out recession. Oil is exhaustible and I favor any legislation that encourages conservation of it and innovative alternatives.

Well.. There you have it. Your agenda and opinion exposed by your words. You "favor" control over others choices with legislation... And that includes moving towards smaller turbo motors? Oh, thought so.

You "opinion" about the capabilities of V8s verses wheezy green turbos, is your opinion. Let the market decide if you are correct. But no, you seek with your views and votes to end choice and force your opinion on others.

The manufacturers DO lean towards wheezy turbo motors which get less real world mileage than stated, because that is what .gov wants them to do. .gov skews and rigs the tests to force builders into this reality.

No matter what you say about my using the control freak expression suppression lexicon, you are about having power over others. Your words in your posts say as much. And using the force of .gov to have your opinion (and those like yours) be the mandatory rules of the day. Just the way it is. And that is what others with eyes to see and ears to hear will also see. I do appreciate the banter.

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[DRS]

Huh? Tesla accolades? I was commenting about the performance advantages of FI over NA. In my personal experience between the two, I would probably always choose FI, because it out-performs NA (in as equivalent as you can get between two cars with the different engine types). I have not been "taught" to love the performance advantages that FI brings to cars I enjoy driving. It is intrinsic in the vehicle experience.



The Hyundai is V8 is amazing... for an NA engine. Ditto the V6 that I have. However, neither is competitive in the current performance market. They are simply too large and too heavy for the power they deliver. And they deliver that power way to late in the RPM range. Hyundai will have to move to FI engines to compete with European car maker performance. Or, they will simply choose to hang back to compete with the heavier and slower Japanese luxury cars.



One of the reasons I chose my V6 over the V8 Genesis is that I liked the V6's lighter and more responsive handling feel. The V6 car is 225 lbs. lighter than the V8, and most of that weight is sitting on the front axle. Imagine how awesome the car would be if it weighed the same, but had the 5.0's V8 power and more low-end torque. The only way to get there is FI-- twin turbo V6. That is why I prefer FI over NA.



BMW and Honda (and probably others) were doing simulated engine sound enhancement long before FI took over. My NA V6 Honda Odyssey has fake engine sound piped in. I agree it is silly, but that is the current state of the market.

I have no qualm with your choices. Be glad you have choices to pick from your view of what is best. What if the .gov skewed for whatever reason testing that made turbos impossible to pass? Like full throttle emissions (they run richer typically for cooling effect), or mid throttle real world mileage? Or how about "towing mileage" standard? Those all could be used to end your preference on turbos. You would not like it of the Jack boot was kicking your way.

Be thankful you have choices. And choices you can argue about with others. Soon, we will lost most those choices. Being forced by the 54mpg average fleet (including trucks) standard. AND the Feds WILL get around to the turbo weakness in emissions when in boost, mileage weakness under less than light throttle settings, and they might just cook up "turbo fire hazard" regulations... Who knows what they will do to destroy your choices. What if they restrict like Japan and other location the V6 size you like today in your Genesis? They might force you to a 1.6L wheezy motor in your 4300lb Genny. You light and balanced V6, no longer a choice.

The heavy hand of .gov has hit my choices, the TAU V8. Next time they will chase after yours. And that is my point. They will decide the rules and force the manufacturers what motors to offer you. Just the way it is, unless it is stopped.

 

[DRS]

Just to differentiate, there's a difference between simulated (i.e. comes out of your speakers) engine sounds and "piping" in the induction noise like the coupe does.



I quite frankly like the idea of latter in a sportier car which is basically putting a non-electric megaphone on top of the engine and running the other end into the cabin. That way you still get the authentic intake snarl when you want it.



I think it was Top Gear where they mentioned a Peugeot that not only had speaker generated induction noise, but the ability to change that noise to mimick the sound profiles of an I6, boxer 4, V8, V12, etc.



That, most definitely, is one of the silliest things I've heard of in the car market.

^ +1

 

[DRS]

The V8 Tau isn't going anywhere. They're planning on boosting it for performance versions of their vehicles. Small boosted engines will allow for large boosted engines to stick around.

If you have defined info on this opinion, good news. Choice is good. Affordable choice is good. Not a boosted TAU (no longer offers in NA) only in a $115k+ "choice".

 

[DRS]

Hyundai engines aren't "amazing" at all. They are not even state of the art. They are good durable engines that make reasonable power.



Amazing is GM able to get 460 HP out of a small block pushrod engine that gets good gas mileage and will go 200K miles with minimal maintenance. And when it needs a rebuild, rering it and put in 16 new valves and run it another 200K miles.



The big difference in handling between the V6 and the V8 is not the 225 #. The big difference is the electronically controlled suspension in the V8. I'm amazed so many here claim the handling in the V6 is "better". It's not. The electronic dampers minimize roll, adjust better to road irregularities and provide better grip over bumps, especially bumps encountered when exiting corners under acceleration. The wheels and tires on the V8 are larger and the V8 has more electronics.



The Hyundai V8 is not "too large" for the power it produces. 420 HP is very reasonable for this motor and Hyundai, for 2015, deliberately moved the HP number down to move the torque peak lower. It provides excellent, smooth power delivery and is very consistent with other 5.0L dohc V8s from around the world.



Forced Induction is a very viable solution for smaller cars where packaging is a consideration, for performance cars where maximum power per size is desireable. For large cruisers, like the Genesis, the mid-sized normally aspirated V8 is a great choice, providing good power, reasonable gas mileage, good low end torque, reliability and durability.



I'm always amazed at car site posters who think they know more than the engineers at the car companies. Not all decisions are made by the accountants and not all are made to satisfy governments.



Some are actually made to create a salable product that works well for the consumer. Hyundai engineers have done an excellent job of making a car that works.

Good points. +1

 

[jimb100]

From 2015 M-B S550 ad:
The 4.6L Bi-turbo V8 in the S 550 4MATIC takes you from 0 -100 km/h in 4.8 seconds. Which is blisteringly fast.

From 2015 Audi A8 ad:
TFSI® – Sensational and supreme.
Audi TFSI® engines attain a particularly high compression ratio. The result: outstanding efficiency combined with optimum performance. Substituting turbocharging for cubic capacity has the effect of reducing engine size and weight considerably – while performance is as impressively dynamic as ever. For power delivery that will win you over from the word go.

Lexus LS460 stays with a NA V8 - for now.

I'm surprised that you, as a V6 guy, are touting the fact that these German mfg. use a 5.5 L and a turbo and the Audi uses, what, a 4.3 and a turbo.

Do you really think these motors, with turbos, weigh less than the Genesis V8?

The point is not that they added a turbo for extra performance, its that they didn't switch to a 6 and a turbo.

I thought you guys were all about justifying the use of a 6 cyl and a turbo in large cruisers. That's certainly what I thought you were trying to say.

 

[DRS]

Although I said I was out of this discussion, this video from /Drive is so timely for this discussion. They talk about all the things we are talking about in this thread.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBvbhO0hKkc

Good choice. The past the halfway, I like the comparison where the 427 (7.0) Corvette has the best pulling power, torque, acceleration, AND gas mileage.. Plus they talk about potential emissions problems with turbo in testing with real world driving.. They also speak about .gov heavy hand with displacement taxes that pushes Ferrari to dinky engines in Italy.. Point is, again? Choice is good. Keep .gov out of it. Let the market bring forth what people might want once they see the choice. Tesla is one good recent disruptive example of that... For those who can afford that choice at that price range.

 

[DRS]

All I want is to finish my popcorn and have a Tesla AWD and a pushrod V8 in my garage at the same time. Carry on.

Funny. Get that. Good.... CHOICES.

 

[DRS]

I thought you guys were all about justifying the use of a 6 cyl and a turbo in large cruisers. That's certainly what I thought you were trying to say.

^^ +1. Yep.

 

[DRS]

At least I am keeping this lively. Go to the Ethanol verse "E0" post... All kinds of engineering debate. They seem to also forget about choice and mandates. And how that is causing chaos. Kinda dry posts over there.

 

[zielritter]

Well.. There you have it. Your agenda and opinion exposed by your words. You "favor" control over others choices with legislation... And that includes moving towards smaller turbo motors? Oh, thought so.

You "opinion" about the capabilities of V8s verses wheezy green turbos, is your opinion. Let the market decide if you are correct. But no, you seek with your views and votes to end choice and force your opinion on others.

The manufacturers DO lean towards wheezy turbo motors which get less real world mileage than stated, because that is what .gov wants them to do. .gov skews and rigs the tests to force builders into this reality.

No matter what you say about my using the control freak expression suppression lexicon, you are about having power over others. Your words in your posts say as much. And using the force of .gov to have your opinion (and those like yours) be the mandatory rules of the day. Just the way it is. And that is what others with eyes to see and ears to hear will also see. I do appreciate the banter.

First, answer "Why?" to the bolded part above. You've continued to dance around answering this part of your argument aside from alluding to a theory that the turbo maker lobby is in par with the Illuminati when it comes to influencing government policy.

Your theory that the ".gov thugs" are conspiring to rid the world of V8 is in opinion too. An outlandish opinion with scant tangible evidence to support its claims. At least my opinions are based in economic theory.

See, this is where you insist on misrepresenting everything I say and what makes me lash out at you. Yes, I'm in favor of legislation that encourages, not coerces like you blabber on about, choices that correct for economic externalities.

Without such legislation there would be: 1) No local police; 2) Widespread monopolization in the private sector; 3) Excessive pollution along the jetstream - just to name a few. Your continuous characterization of me as a control freak wanting to subject others to tyranny only serves to weaken your position and makes you come off as juvenile.

V8's will continue to be around. Boosted V8's will thrive. Boosted V6's will thrive. Everyone wins when the market works to supply what is demanded. However, I refuse that a completely unchecked capitalistic system is in everyone's best interest.