2012 Hyundai Elantra Touring 4 Dr Hatchback Gls, One Owner, Low Miles, Save $$ on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2013 Hyundai Veloster Turbo: April 2013

Learning To Love Understand You
I will admit, I haven't had the nicest things to say about our long-term 2013 Hyundai Veloster Turbo since its arrival in our fleet earlier this year. I can't exactly say that I've bonded with our turbocharged Hyundai, despite the fact that I've driven it quite a bit since its arrival in the Autoblog Garage. Several of my friends will no doubt recall me saying things like, "I love everything about this car - except driving it," which is a shame, since the driving aspect is what's supposed to make this car so special. I'm a big fan of the base Veloster, and this one has the extra power bump that the naturally aspirated could really benefit from. So what gives?
Recently, I took a trip to the south of France, where I drove the brand-new Ford Fiesta ST along the lovely roads of the Alps. I adored that car - it's everything a hot hatch should be, and it's priced right, too. But when I came home and picked up the Veloster Turbo at the airport, I found myself disappointed. The Ford I drove in Europe was similar to the Hyundai in terms of size, function, equipment and price, but it was far better to drive. To be fair, that car wasn't even out to benchmark when the Veloster Turbo debuted, but my already sour feelings only got worse at that moment.

2014 Hyundai Tucson gets DI engines, styling tweaks, priced from $21,450*

Despite being overhauled for the 2010 model year, not much attention has been paid to the Hyundai Tucson crossover in recent times. But when its overseas twin, the ix35, received modest updates at this year's Geneva Motor Show, we knew it'd only be a matter of time before the US-spec model was blessed with similar tweaks. So, without further ado, meet the ever-so-slightly enhanced 2014 Tucson.
The most significant mid-cycle change is found under the Tucson's hood, where two new direct-injected four-cylinder powerplants are found. On the base end, there's a brand new 2.0-liter "Nu" inline-four, good for 164 horsepower and 151 pound-feet of torque. These numbers represent a loss of one measly horsepower, but five more foot-pounds of torque. Nothing significant here, and fuel economy is only slightly better - 23/29 miles per gallon city/highway versus the 22/29 rating of the 2013 model. Uplevel Tucson models use a revamped 2.4-liter engine, also featuring direct injection, which produces 182 hp and 177 lb-ft of torque - gains of six hp and nine lb-ft, respectively. That said, fuel economy for the front-wheel-drive, automatic transmission model has actually suffered some - 2013's rating of 21/30/25 mpg (city/highway/combined) has fallen slightly to 21/28/24. Both front- and all-wheel drive are available on all trim levels.
As far as visual enhancements go, the 2014 Tucson now uses projector-beam halogen headlamps up front and LED taillamps out back, and redesigned 17- and 18-inch alloy wheels are fitted, depending on trim level. Inside, two new cabin colors are available - beige and brown - the navigation system has been enhanced with a choice of two touchscreen interfaces, and there are now two-stage reclining rear seats.

IIHS: Drivers safer than passengers in frontal crash test

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety introduced a small overlap frontal crash test in 2012 that replicates what happens when the front corner of a car impacts another object. In the test, vehicles travel at a speed of 40 mph toward a five-foot-tall barrier with 25 percent of the total width of the car striking the barrier on the driver side. One would assume that vehicles with good small overlap front ratings would protect the driver and the passenger equally. But a recent study from the IIHS proves that passengers aren't as protected as drivers. The IIHS conducted the test on seven small SUVs with good driver-side small overlap ratings and only one of the vehicles, the 2016 Hyundai Tucson, performed well enough to be given a good rating. The other SUVs performance ranged from poor to acceptable. After reviewing the results of the test, the IIHS is deliberating whether it should institute a passenger-side rating as part of its Top Safety Pick criteria. "This is an important aspect of occupant protection that needs more attention," states Becky Mueller, lead author of the study and an IIHS senior research engineer. "More than 1,600 right-front passengers died in frontal crashes in 2014." Since the small overlap front test was introduced, 13 automakers have made structural changes to 97 vehicles with roughly three-quarters earning a good rating after the adjustments. The IIHS' test for frontal ratings is completed with a dummy in the driver's seat and with a barrier overlapping the driver's side. Which makes sense, as passengers aren't always riding in a vehicle. "It's not surprising that automakers would focus their initial efforts to improve small overlap protection on the side of the vehicle that we conduct the tests on," states David Zuby, IIHS executive vice president and chief research officer. "In fact, we encouraged them to do that in the short term if it mean they could quickly make driver-side improvements to more vehicles. As time goes by, though, we would hope they ensure similar levels of protection on both sides." As the IIHS' test revealed, there's a massive difference in safety between the two front seats. Increase passenger safety, according to Mueller, would require automakers to strengthen the occupant compartment by using a different type of material or by making it thicker.