2013 Hyundai Genesis R Spec 5.0 Premium Push Start Lexicon Loaded Cam Bluetooth on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hyundai admits 'error' in KDM Sonata fuel economy announcement

Stop us if you've heard this one before: Hyundai is going to have to reduce the officially announced miles-per-gallon number for its 2014 Sonata. While there's a lot of similarity between this new situation and events that transpired in 2012, there are some important differences. For one, the new mileage mistake, which Hyundai says was once again caused by an error at its test centers, is only applicable to cars in the Korean Domestic Market. Secondly, it's not so much mpg as kilometers per liter. "We are very sorry for causing confusion to reporters" - Hyundai According to Reuters, the numbers for the Korean Sonata were originally announced as 12.6 kilometers per liter (29.63 mpg), a six-percent increase over the previous model. The automaker has just announced that government verification showed an actual result of 12.1 kpl (28.46 mpg), which is only a two-percent increase. Since these numbers were done using the South Korean economy test, they are not equivalent to the US EPA numbers, the latter of which say the 2014 Sonata gets 36/40/38 miles per gallon. The correction came before the new Sonata went on sale in South Korea. In an official statement, Hyundai said, "We are very sorry for causing confusion to reporters." Hyundai Motor America's Jim Trainor, product public relations senior group manager, assured AutoblogGreen that the Korean error will have "no effect" on US ratings. In 2012, Hyundai and Kia faced a media and consumer firestorm after being caught up in exaggerated mileage claims for vehicles like its 2013 Accent, Veloster and Elantra. The sister companies agreed to compensate buyers to the tune of $395 million for what they said were "honest mistakes" and "human error" during in-house fuel economy tests. There is no word yet on whether similar customer satisfaction actions will follow this domestic market snafu.

Car buyers are paying big money for technology they don't use

J.D. Power released the results of its Tech Experience Index study that measures "how much owners like [in-car] technologies and how many problems they experience with them." Among the study's findings, automakers are loading vehicles with more software and digital experiences that owners claim they never learn how to use or decide they don't need. For example, owners report to J.D. Power that gesture controls, like those used by BMW (spinning a finger, for instance, can raise or lower the audio volume), don't improve the overall ownership experience. In fact, gesture controls received the lowest overall satisfaction score in the study for a second consecutive year. In another example, the study found that 61% of owners claim never having used "in-vehicle digital market technology," while 51% of respondents said they didn't need it. Driver/passenger communication technology was another sore point with users, with 52% saying they have never used the technology, and 40% of those saying they have no need for it. (10 Features owners say they want, and 7 they really don't). Conversely, some technologies are well received by owners. For American owners, rear-view cameras and so-called "ground view" cameras were among the top three desired technologies. We assume that "ground view" is a surround-view or 360-degree camera system. The one-pedal driving possible in a number of EV's with adjustable regen braking also scored very high marks and few claimed issues.  While it could be argued that owners who don't want to use a specific piece of technology should just avoid using it, the reality is that all of these unused features add cost to the final price of any vehicle. Considering that the average transaction price of a new vehicle hit a record $45,031 in September of 2021, controlling spiraling costs is a big deal. J.D. Power's survey results found that dealerships can play a big role in explaining new technology to buyers. Scores for some technologies like trailer assistance received higher scores from owners who received training from their dealers. Unfortunately, 71% of owners say they were taught how to use tech from outside sources whereas only 30% learned from a dealer. The results of this study are the product of responses from 110,827 owners of current model-year vehicles that J.D. Power surveyed after 90 days of ownership from February through July 2021.

What do J.D. Power's quality ratings really measure?

Check these recently released J.D. Power Initial Quality Study (IQS) results. Do they raise any questions in your mind? Premium sports-car maker Porsche sits in first place for the third straight year, so are Porsches really the best-built cars in the U.S. market? Korean brands Kia and Hyundai are second and fourth, so are Korean vehicles suddenly better than their US, European, and Japanese competitors? Are workaday Chevrolets (seventh place) better than premium Buicks (11th), and Buicks better than luxury Cadillacs (21st), even though all are assembled in General Motors plants with the same processes and many shared parts? Are Japanese Acuras (26th) worse than German Volkswagens (24th)? And is "quality" really what it used to be (and what most perceive it to be), a measure of build excellence? Or has it evolved into much more a measure of likeability and ease of use? To properly analyze these widely watched results, we must first understand what IQS actually studies, and what the numerical scores really mean. First, as its name indicates, it's all about "initial" quality, measured by problems reported by new-vehicle owners in their first 90 days of ownership. If something breaks or falls off four months in, it doesn't count here. Second, the scores are problems per 100 vehicles, or PP100. So Power's 2015 IQS industry average of 112 PP100 translates to just 1.12 reported problems per vehicle. Third, no attempt is made to differentiate BIG problems from minor ones. Thus a transmission or engine failure counts the same as a squeaky glove box door, tricky phone pairing, inconsistent voice recognition, or anything else that annoys the owner. Traditionally, a high-quality vehicle is one that is well-bolted together. It doesn't leak, squeak, rattle, shed parts, show gaps between panels, or break down and leave you stranded. By this standard, there are very few poor-quality new vehicles in today's U.S. market. But what "quality" should not mean, is subjective likeability: ease of operation of the radio, climate controls, or seat adjusters, phone pairing, music downloading, sizes of touch pads on an infotainment screen, quickness of system response, or accuracy of voice-recognition. These are ergonomic "human factors" issues, not "quality" problems. Yet these kinds of pleasability issues are now dominating today's JDP "quality" ratings.