2014 Hyundai Santa Fe Sport 2.0l Turbo on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hyundai Santa Fe shows its face on mountain roads

The last time we saw the new Hyundai Santa Fe crossover, it was pretty well covered, and it happened to be hustling around the Nurburgring with at least one racing seat. This time, one of our spy photographers caught it being tested on public roads. It also has a nearly uncovered front end, save for the black and white vinyl wrap. It appears the racing seats are gone, too. Aside from the seats, we can see very clearly that the Santa Fe will wear a version of the new corporate grille introduced on the new Sonata. In contrast to the Sonata, the outer corners are higher and sharper, and the base of the grille appears to narrow much more dramatically. It's also undeniable now that the Santa Fe will have a headlight setup just like that of its tiny Kona cousin, in which the lower lamps are actually the primary lights, and the scowling upper lamps are just accents. Unlike the Kona, the extra slit above the main grille is absent. The rest of the crossover is still well-covered, so there aren't any other revelations. We still expect to see this new Santa Fe to make its debut sometime next year, possibly in the spring or fall, as a 2019 model. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2019 Hyundai Santa Fe spy shots View 13 Photos Image Credit: CarPix Spy Photos Hyundai Crossover Economy Cars hyundai santa fe

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.

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.