What's your G70 engine/transmission?

[danygenesis]

Just a simple question to have an idea what's the engine of choice of the G70 forum members.

 

[ninjastar687]

Just a simple question to have an idea what's the engine of choice of the G70 forum members.

Great idea! I actually mentioned this on a post yesterday.

 

[GenesisYEG]

Right now a 2.0T 6MT RWD but I primarily drive a 3.3T Sport AWD so I voted 3.3T as it is my preferred G70 engine.

 

[Edmguy]

Results are similar to what I would have expected.

The 2.0T is noticeably slower than same sized engine in Audi, MB, or BMW. Yet the 3.3T is right with 3.0T's in those cars. And the premium you pay for the 3.3T over the 2.0T in the G70 is less than what you pay to move up with the Germans so it really makes it a no brainer imo (assuming you care about the power and the ~$5K isn't too much trouble for you).

 

[canucklehead604]

Results are similar to what I would have expected.

The 2.0T is noticeably slower than same sized engine in Audi, MB, or BMW...

^ yes, but why? specs match up closely with the competition. so where's the bust? that's what folks have been trying to figure out. OT to this thread, but there's gotta be an explanation somewhere...

 

[Edmguy]

Same thing Germans vs Japanese competitors. I personally think the Germans understate numbers and clearly that isn't the case with Japanese/Korean companies.

 

[canucklehead604]

^ perhaps, but then why is the G70 2.0T testing showing much slower times than Stinger 2.0T? same everything, just less weight for the G70. makes no sense. Stinger at 0-60 in 6.2s should equate to G70 times of ~6.0s, not ~7.0s.

 

[danygenesis]

^ perhaps, but then why is the G70 2.0T testing showing much slower times than Stinger 2.0T? same everything, just less weight for the G70. makes no sense. Stinger at 0-60 in 6.2s should equate to G70 times of ~6.0s, not ~7.0s.

I'm with you 100% here. There is no explanation unless the G70 engine/tranny are programed different than the Stinger.

 

[Toddasaurus]

^ perhaps, but then why is the G70 2.0T testing showing much slower times than Stinger 2.0T? same everything, just less weight for the G70. makes no sense. Stinger at 0-60 in 6.2s should equate to G70 times of ~6.0s, not ~7.0s.

0-60 for the 2.0 8spd G70 RWD Sport trim is 6.2 seconds, according to Motorweek.

I'm not sure what the difference between the weight of the 2.0 8spd G70 Sport RWD vs base model 2.0 Stinger RWD. It might actually be very similar, as the sport trim adds a bunch of things whereas the base Stinger is super basic. That said, I'm not too surprised that they are about the same in terms of 0-60 performance.

 

[danygenesis]

After 10 days Poll shows what we were expecting. 3.3T picks doubles 2.0T (counting MT), but this is in the forum where we usually find more enthusiastic and knowledgeable people about the car. The only real way to know is if Genesis should release their selling numbers someday.

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[NLJ]

0-60 for the 2.0 8spd G70 RWD Sport trim is 6.2 seconds, according to Motorweek.

I'm not sure what the difference between the weight of the 2.0 8spd G70 Sport RWD vs base model 2.0 Stinger RWD. It might actually be very similar, as the sport trim adds a bunch of things whereas the base Stinger is super basic. That said, I'm not too surprised that they are about the same in terms of 0-60 performance.

Did they actually show proof that it was 6.2secs?
I've tried multiple times on my AWD and the best I can do stock is 6.9secs.
Different story with JB4 though.

 

[Toddasaurus]

Did they actually show proof that it was 6.2secs?
I've tried multiple times on my AWD and the best I can do stock is 6.9secs.
Different story with JB4 though.

Just showed a drive-by on their strip, not anything reputable though. Looks like they were losing some traction on each start (RWD). Even so, RWD *should* be quicker than AWD when it comes to stock vs stock using LC....but .7 seconds? I dunno...

 

[NLJ]

Just showed a drive-by on their strip, not anything reputable though. Looks like they were losing some traction on each start (RWD). Even so, RWD *should* be quicker than AWD when it comes to stock vs stock using LC....but .7 seconds? I dunno...

If you're losing traction, then AWD will be the same or faster even if it is heavier since it is only 1-200lbs.

 

[canucklehead604]

^ yeah, my guess is the clips they showed laying down rubber were not the runs used for test data. looks better for the camera but certainly slower than an ideal launch.

i just read the C&D review of the 2019 330i x-drive. while they are still not big fans of the steering feel and a few other aspects (and they actually mention the G70 favorably in this regard), test data showed 0-60 in 5.2s and the 1/4 in 13.9. all this with 255hp and at 3709lbs. so even with the MW times of 6.2s we are a full second behind a very comparable vehicle.

something still doesn't smell right...

 

[Toddasaurus]

If you're losing traction, then AWD will be the same or faster even if it is heavier since it is only 1-200lbs.

I agree with your logic, but evidently that's not the case. Stock for stock, the RWD models are getting faster 0-60 times than their AWD counterparts.

 

[NLJ]

^ yeah, my guess is the clips they showed laying down rubber were not the runs used for test data. looks better for the camera but certainly slower than an ideal launch.

i just read the C&D review of the 2019 330i x-drive. while they are still not big fans of the steering feel and a few other aspects (and they actually mention the G70 favorably in this regard), test data showed 0-60 in 5.2s and the 1/4 in 13.9. all this with 255hp and at 3709lbs. so even with the MW times of 6.2s we are a full second behind a very comparable vehicle.

something still doesn't smell right...

I know that there are reports of low - mid 14s for the 2.0t with the JB4.
I don't have a Dragy but I was getting ~6.3secs with Map2 without fuel wires.
Now I have them installed and plugs re-gapped so I will have to check again.
Btw plugs on the i4 are super easy. 10 mins total!
Stock is 0.034 and I regapped to 0.024!

I agree with your logic, but evidently that's not the case. Stock for stock, the RWD models are getting faster 0-60 times than their AWD counterparts.

Yeah ideally but we still don't have anyone willing to show us documented times. Which is a stupid.

 

[Toddasaurus]

Yeah ideally but we still don't have anyone willing to show us documented times. Which is a stupid.

Agreed 100%

 

[NLJ]

Agreed 100%

Btw I can spin out my wheels even with AWD as well. Bit if you let go quickly during LC, there is barely any spin!
I bet the BMW is pushing ~340hp at the crank and a crapload of torque!

 

[DefinitelyMaybe]

Haven’t bought one yet. Was going to go 2.0T AT, but leaning towards 3.3T now.

 

[Samy]

I drive a Siberian blue 2.0T Manual Transmission