Open Letter to Genesis GV70 Design Team: 2.5T Performance Version

[EricB72]

Open Letter to Genesis GV70 Design Team

Request: 2023 Performance/Handling Version of the GV70 2.5T.

Features:

1. One Traditional Custom Exterior Color like English Racing Green or Basic Black or Racing Silver?
2. Control costs: Build off of the Standard 2.5t package
3. Basic black interior
4. Eliminate the sunroof (weight, cost savings)
5. Add LSD if possible
6. Perhaps a slightly hotter ignition system and tuning for more performance
7. Increased Braking Capability (3.5t brakes?)
8. Strengthen engine/intercooler cooling capability
9. 3.5T Venting
10. Lower suspension/ground clearance (example: from 7.3” to 6.5
11. Softer compound tire
12. Frame Bracing as appropriate
13. Protect Catalytic converters from theft*

*Include a hardened steel brace or plate bolted across the catalytic converters to not only brace frame but also protect catalytic converters from theft?

 

[PMCErnie]

This sounds more like a letter to Santa Claus, but good luck.

 

[csu87]

if anything, theyd do this with the 3.5. Would make no sense to make a performance gv70 and use the lesser engine.

 

[EricB72]

Santa...please?

 

[EricB72]

if anything, theyd do this with the 3.5. Would make no sense to make a performance gv70 and use the lesser engine.

It's my understanding S. Korea they have a 2.4t version and it significantly outperforms the 3.5t on the curves per posting of a S. Korean reviewer...the 3.5t is 200lbs heavier over the front wheels with too much understeer...the 2.5t runs circles around it... you understood understeer you would understand the handling superiority of the 2.5t..

 

[jetrep]

How many of these do you think they'd sell? The market for something like this is minuscule.

 

[BuzzinHornets]

It's my understanding S. Korea they have a 2.4t version and it significantly outperforms the 3.5t on the curves per posting of a S. Korean reviewer...the 3.5t is 200lbs heavier over the front wheels with too much understeer...the 2.5t runs circles around it... you understood understeer you would understand the handling superiority of the 2.5t..

Speculative bench racing at best. Sounds like the GV70 just isn't the right vehicle for you.

 

[EdP]

Open Letter to Genesis GV70 Design Team

Request: 2023 Performance/Handling Version of the GV70 2.5T.

Features:

1. One Traditional Custom Exterior Color like English Racing Green or Basic Black or Racing Silver?
2. Control costs: Build off of the Standard 2.5t package
3. Basic black interior
4. Eliminate the sunroof (weight, cost savings)
5. Add LSD if possible
6. Perhaps a slightly hotter ignition system and tuning for more performance
7. Increased Braking Capability (3.5t brakes?)
8. Strengthen engine/intercooler cooling capability
9. 3.5T Venting
10. Lower suspension/ground clearance (example: from 7.3” to 6.5
11. Softer compound tire
12. Frame Bracing as appropriate
13. Protect Catalytic converters from theft*

*Include a hardened steel brace or plate bolted across the catalytic converters to not only brace frame but also protect catalytic converters from theft?

How much extra are you willing to pay for all of that? With a tune for performance they may cut the drivetrain warranty. Are you ok with that?

 

[EricB72]

Disagree RE: market...there is BMW, Audi, Porsche, Volvo all of which have similar sized luxury SUVs which out-perform the Genesis GV70 in handling...the GV70 certainly has styling and Luxury/comfort to compete with the others...but the 3.5t unfortunately has neither the acceleration nor handling to compete with the above mentioned and suffers from excessive understeer due to the heavy V6 vs the competition... the 2.5t w/ RWD bias and an LSD has the potential to perform competitively in terms of handling for those us who would prefer not to plow around turns in the cumbersome dippy GV70 w/ heavy 3.5t and currently problematic eLSD.

 

[BuzzinHornets]

Disagree RE: market...there is BMW, Audi, Porsche, Volvo all of which have similar sized luxury SUVs which out-perform the Genesis GV70 in handling...the GV70 certainly has styling and Luxury/comfort to compete with the others...but the 3.5t unfortunately has neither the acceleration nor handling to compete with the above mentioned and suffers from excessive understeer due to the heavy V6 vs the competition... the 2.5t w/ RWD bias and an LSD has the potential to perform competitively in terms of handling for those us who would prefer not to plow around turns in the cumbersome dippy GV70 w/ heavy 3.5t and currently problematic eLSD.

How much time do you have behind the wheel of all those vehicles or was one Korean Youtuber enough to convince you that the 3.5 suffers excessive understeer? Why are you even interested in a crossover if handling is your main concern?

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[jetrep]

It's not exactly easy to compete with those manufacturers when it comes to handling though I'd like to see the data that clearly demonstrates that the Audi and Volvo truly have superior handling in a meaningful way.

Bottom line is there aren't that many people looking for maximum handling performance in an expensive SUV. Essentially nobody is taking their GV70 to the track. Those that are that fussy about handling will accept that an SUV is not for them or will spare no expense and get one of the M offerings from BMW.

You're not alone in wanting great handling. I certainly want good handling but I also want the V6 as the engine is significantly smoother than the big four cylinder. Of course it adds weight to the front end but I don't care...it's a heavy vehicle with the four cylinder too.

 

[EricB72]

How much extra are you willing to pay for all of that? With a tune for performance they may cut the drivetrain warranty. Are you ok with that?

Very good point..glad you raised it...retuning is simple and all done by chips...expect zero additional cost or warranty issues...you have an underlying assumption that current tuning optimizes reliability which is actually incorrect...as an engineer writing a letter to engineers who are fully aware that tuning can be done to open up (extend) the power band at the expense of low end torque which would actually be easier on the powertrain (lesson the load per stroke)...something Honda does extremely well with their 2.0t 4 cyl and 3.0t 6 cyl engines...and Lexus/toyota did over the years with the 3.5 engine to increase both HP and efficiency at the expense of a slight reduction in low rpm torque...current large turbo 4 cylinder powertrains which optimizes torque at low rpm's actually stresses both engine and transmission components more by comparison...it's called "lugging"...the power band (engine and transmission) can be tuned to operate better at higher rpms to reduce "lugging" around town. It's "lugging" that puts wear and tear on the drivetrain...why are engines set this way in the US?...it's because older, US new car buyers accustomed to plowing around town in heavier vehicles tend to prefer using the lower power band which actually stress components more by comparison...it's a carryover from the big old v8s and big block v6s that us market was accustomed to driving...would not be surprised if the Korean market engines and transmissions are tuned slightly differently than the US market since it's all done by chips and silly easy to do...and zero extra cost.

 

[BuzzinHornets]

retuning is simple and all done by chips...expect zero additional cost or warranty issues..

What about the Engineer's time and all the testing that is needed for emissions regulations, safety, longevity, drivability, fuel economy etc? Is all that free?

 

[EricB72]

Made the point earlier that this is has probably already done for the Korean market...but you raise a valid point regarding certification in the US which I had not originally considered.

 

[csu87]

It's my understanding S. Korea they have a 2.4t version and it significantly outperforms the 3.5t on the curves per posting of a S. Korean reviewer...the 3.5t is 200lbs heavier over the front wheels with too much understeer...the 2.5t runs circles around it... you understood understeer you would understand the handling superiority of the 2.5t..

I understand understeer and understand performance. if they wanted a more balanced 3.5 for a performance model, they could do it pretty easily. There would be no benefit to going to the 2.5t. you can mitigate the understeer with better suspension components. which if they are making a performance model, they would.

Disagree RE: market...there is BMW, Audi, Porsche, Volvo all of which have similar sized luxury SUVs which out-perform the Genesis GV70 in handling...the GV70 certainly has styling and Luxury/comfort to compete with the others...but the 3.5t unfortunately has neither the acceleration nor handling to compete with the above mentioned and suffers from excessive understeer due to the heavy V6 vs the competition... the 2.5t w/ RWD bias and an LSD has the potential to perform competitively in terms of handling for those us who would prefer not to plow around turns in the cumbersome dippy GV70 w/ heavy 3.5t and currently problematic eLSD.

BMW/Audi/Porsche all sell significantly more cars so they can have a true performance line. when youre only selling a few cars, much harder to dedicate a performance line. The market just isnt there for the GV70, or really any of the genesis models.

and fwiw, BMW and audi dont put their smaller engines in their M and S lines. they put their bigger, high performance engines in them and upgrade the suspensions.

Very good point..glad you raised it...retuning is simple and all done by chips...expect zero additional cost or warranty issues...you have an underlying assumption that current tuning optimizes reliability which is actually incorrect...as an engineer writing a letter to engineers who are fully aware that tuning can be done to open up (extend) the power band at the expense of low end torque which would actually be easier on the powertrain (lesson the load per stroke)...something Honda does extremely well with their 2.0t 4 cyl and 3.0t 6 cyl engines...and Lexus/toyota did over the years with the 3.5 engine to increase both HP and efficiency at the expense of a slight reduction in low rpm torque...current large turbo 4 cylinder powertrains which optimizes torque at low rpm's actually stresses both engine and transmission components more by comparison...it's called "lugging"...the power band (engine and transmission) can be tuned to operate better at higher rpms to reduce "lugging" around town. It's "lugging" that puts wear and tear on the drivetrain...why are engines set this way in the US?...it's because older, US new car buyers accustomed to plowing around town in heavier vehicles tend to prefer using the lower power band which actually stress components more by comparison...it's a carryover from the big old v8s and big block v6s that us market was accustomed to driving...would not be surprised if the Korean market engines and transmissions are tuned slightly differently than the US market since it's all done by chips and silly easy to do...and zero extra cost.

yes, retuning is simple. no, simply retuning the 2.5t is not a simple proposition. manufacturers tune their cars to maximize performance while hitting EPA guidelines, reliability targets, and cost efficiency targets. There is quite a bit of work and money that goes in to the factory tune. its not a zero cost effort to tune the 2.5t for higher output.

yes you can get big power numbers out of small turbo'd engines. but that comes at the cost of reliability and cost efficiency. Not to mention, raising the output of the 2.5 to numbers closer to the 3.5 would cut in to their 3.5 market, which they would be dumb to do.

 

[EricB72]

Not everyone equates higher performance with more power whether it is more horsepower and or more torque...tuning for performance does not necessarily mean more "power" as explained previously...it's widening the "power band" that matters to those who prefer smoother "performance"....regarding reliability...engines are typically optimized for a "driving style" while also hitting particular efficiency and epa numbers.

Hopefully we can agree that optimizing an engine for low end torque may be right for some drivers while optimizing the width of the power band at the expense of low end torque and or peak hp may be right for others.

 

[Jhon]

Open Letter to Genesis GV70 Design Team

Request: 2023 Performance/Handling Version of the GV70 2.5T.

Features:

1. One Traditional Custom Exterior Color like English Racing Green or Basic Black or Racing Silver?
2. Control costs: Build off of the Standard 2.5t package
3. Basic black interior
4. Eliminate the sunroof (weight, cost savings)
5. Add LSD if possible
6. Perhaps a slightly hotter ignition system and tuning for more performance
7. Increased Braking Capability (3.5t brakes?)
8. Strengthen engine/intercooler cooling capability
9. 3.5T Venting
10. Lower suspension/ground clearance (example: from 7.3” to 6.5
11. Softer compound tire
12. Frame Bracing as appropriate
13. Protect Catalytic converters from theft*

*Include a hardened steel brace or plate bolted across the catalytic converters to not only brace frame but also protect catalytic converters from theft?

Number 5 sounds like a trip.

 

[EricB72]

Yes #5 would be nice...independent reviews comparing the GV70 2.5t to similar priced BMW X3 2.0, Audi Q5 2.5, and Volvo XC60 all rate the GV70 2.5t as the worst handling of the group with roughest engine and transmission...and issues going to a stop and starting up again...I made constructive requests to improve "performance" of the 2.5t to address this...GV70 has many many packages and upgrades all targeted to luxury upgrades (apprrox +11K in options packages) and none address the GV70 weaknesses. Imagine the basic GV70 with 5K I upgrades targeted to smooth the engine and transmission and including an LSD...this instead of levels and levels of options addressing things like side shades, heated steering wheel, parking assist that one individual called the "sweet spot"...the base model is nice and AWD based off of RWD is great, as is GV70 styling... but rather than piling on 12K in additional luxury packages, how about some performance base upgrades as a package, Genesis? BTW: I rejected deposit on a GV70 2.5t which sticker for 51K+ which none of the over 10K in options addressing GV 2.5k weaknesses and the dealership wanted 1.6K in extra dealer fees/options on top of 52K sticker...making the car close to 58K out the door with taxes, licence and registration etc... a pretty face goes just so far. After the initial infatuation with styling and luxury appointments wears off, is a car that drives, handles rough and jerky stopping and starting (relative to the competition) really worth it?

 

[Abuschauffeur]

Quite so, I need a high performance “Spots Utility Van” to outrun the cops in a 50km/h zone to the supermarket.

 

[Londoner01]

Yes #5 would be nice...independent reviews comparing the GV70 2.5t to similar priced BMW X3 2.0, Audi Q5 2.5, and Volvo XC60 all rate the GV70 2.5t as the worst handling of the group with roughest engine and transmission...and issues going to a stop and starting up again...I made constructive requests to improve "performance" of the 2.5t to address this...GV70 has many many packages and upgrades all targeted to luxury upgrades (apprrox +11K in options packages) and none address the GV70 weaknesses. Imagine the basic GV70 with 5K I upgrades targeted to smooth the engine and transmission and including an LSD...this instead of levels and levels of options addressing things like side shades, heated steering wheel, parking assist that one individual called the "sweet spot"...the base model is nice and AWD based off of RWD is great, as is GV70 styling... but rather than piling on 12K in additional luxury packages, how about some performance base upgrades as a package, Genesis? BTW: I rejected deposit on a GV70 2.5t which sticker for 51K+ which none of the over 10K in options addressing GV 2.5k weaknesses and the dealership wanted 1.6K in extra dealer fees/options on top of 52K sticker...making the car close to 58K out the door with taxes, licence and registration etc... a pretty face goes just so far. After the initial infatuation with styling and luxury appointments wears off, is a car that drives, handles rough and jerky stopping and starting (relative to the competition) really worth it?

After going through all your comments, it just seems you want a GV70, but you don't want to pay the asking price. I am sure if dealers were discounting these vehicles for maybe $3-5,000, you would be completely happy. But the problems is dealers are adding $3-5,000 to the GV70's.
All GV70 and 80's are hard to get and a waiting list. If you can't afford or will not pay the price, don't blame the GV70.