2013 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 3.8 Track Coupe 2-door 3.8l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hyundai launches crate engine program with 2.0L four and 3.8L V6

With all the commotion about the aftermarket going on at the SEMA Show in Las Vegas, Hyundai's timing for this announcement is just perfect - the South Korean brand will launch its first crate engine program.
Starting with the 2.0-liter, turbocharged four-cylinder and the 3.8-liter V6 from the Genesis Coupe, the program should push Hyundai even further in to the performance realm. Two versions of the 2.0-liter will be available at first - a $4,500 version, that's ready for its owner to bolt on a turbo of their choosing, or a $6,000 version, which includes the turbo and all its plumbing. Hyundai claims the cheaper version was designed with the aftermarket specifically in mind, as it allows tuners to easily fit larger turbos while spending less coin for parts that will just be tossed. The 3.8-liter V6 will cost $9,000.
"As more Genesis Coupes have entered the pre-owned enthusiast market since its 2009 launch, we've witnessed strong interest in leveraging the low cost potential of this rear-drive platform and its powertrains for the tuner market and motorsports. Now, with our new crate engine program, Hyundai is making it more affordable for these same enthusiasts to modify their Genesis Coupe, or perhaps inject some high-value horsepower into other platforms," said Hyundai's North American president and CEO, John Krafcik.

Are we closer to a production version of the Genesis X Convertible?

Searching the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) database for the alphanumeric "GT90" returns 21 results. All but four results are dead. Three of those four trademark requests come from Hyundai, one of them filed this month. As CarBuzz noted, on April 4, Hyundai asked to reserve the character logo for "GT90 Genesis" for two categories: Automobiles and sports cars. As usual, a trademark application doesn't mean we'll see the trademark used anywhere. The Korean automaker's been toying with this idea for years, though. In 2017, it requested to reserve the name "Genesis GT90," in 2020 it applied to protect the same GT90 Genesis logo in several categories that did not include sports cars. The suspicion is that the GT name will could be for a grand tourer based on one of the Speedium concepts revealed in the last few years. The GT90 Genesis filing comes about two months after Hyundai supposedly told U.S. dealers the Genesis X Convertible concept will enter production. Descriptions from the chairman of Genesis' national dealer advisory council laid out a flagship product to launch the brand into another uncharted reach, attempting to take Genesis in the same direction the Celestiq is attempting to take Cadillac. Peter Lanzavecchia told Automotive News about the possible production car, "I don't know if it's going to be over $200,000 or $300,000, but I guarantee we're going see a lot of Bentley Continental convertible trade-ins on that when it comes to our showrooms." Other luxury news and rumor in the background at Genesis have the head of product planning telling Autocar, "We do talk about developing ‘effortlessÂ’ [electric] powertrains — enough power to be enjoyable in all circumstances, and which satisfies the luxury experience," and a report that there's work on a One of One personalization division. Both tidbits would fit with the arrival of a top-shelf electric GT. And if one, why not more? CarBuzz found more applications for GT60, GT70, and GT80 filed in Cuba. Genesis has said it won't abandon the sedan segment, and it wants more coupes and convertibles. Many automakers have said EVs open up the business cases for those two-doors and droptops that have become even more niche in the past decade. For Genesis, a three-pronged approach of G sedans, GV crossovers, and GT coupes and convertibles could be the result.   Related video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

U.S. appeals court preserves $210M Hyundai-Kia fuel economy class settlement

A U.S. appeals court restored a $210 million nationwide class-action settlement for hundreds of thousands of owners of Hyundai Motor Co and Kia Motors Corp vehicles whose fuel economy estimates were inflated. By an 8-3 vote on Thursday, in a case closely watched by class-action lawyers, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Pasadena, California, said vehicle owners had enough in common to let them settle as a group. It also rejected arguments by owners opposed to the settlement that the claims process was too burdensome, and that lawyers for the class had colluded with the automakers to extract a "sweetheart deal" that undervalued their claims. The case began after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency found flaws in Hyundai's and Kia's testing procedures, prompting the automakers to lower fuel efficiency estimates for about 900,000 vehicles from the 2011, 2012 and 2013 model years. Lawyers for objecting drivers had no immediate comment. Hyundai said it was grateful for the decision. Kia and its lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The decision by Circuit Judge Jacqueline Nguyen upheld a settlement approved in June 2015 by U.S. District Judge George Wu in Los Angeles. Wu "made careful findings, which the objectors here largely do not challenge, and which more than support the judgment," Nguyen wrote. The decision reversed a divided three-judge 9th Circuit panel's January 2018 rejection of the settlement and decertification of the class action. That panel said Wu failed to assess whether differences in state laws prevented certification of a nationwide class. It also said used car owners should have been excluded because it was unclear whether they had relied on the South Korean automakers' fuel economy claims. Lawyers had said it would become much harder to obtain nationwide settlements if the panel ruling stood. Nguyen had dissented from the panel ruling. Circuit Judge Sandra Ikuta, who wrote it, dissented on Thursday. Ikuta accused the majority of failing to determine what law should apply to the nationwide class or how the settlement, and thus attorneys' fees, should be valued. "The majority's failure to correct these errors may be beneficial for the class action bar, but it detracts from compliance with Supreme Court precedent," Ikuta wrote. The 9th Circuit covers nine western U.S. states, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands.