2003 Hyundai Elantra Gls Sedan 4-door 2.0l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Watch Indian cars fail Global NCAP crash tests miserably

It's taken for granted that cars currently for sale in Western countries pass crash tests, and often merit four- or five-star safety ratings in NCAP or NHTSA tests. This is why these scores attained by Indian market cars are so galling: seven vehicles currently sold in India got zero stars in any category – a horrifying clean sweep. It is understandable that cars sold in a developing market are cheap and equipment levels are low, but acceptable crash safety is something that should be considered essential in all markets. The cars tested in the Global New Car Assessment Programme were Hyundai's Eon, Maruti Suzuki's Eeco and Celerio models, Mahindra's Scorpio SUV and several Renault Kwid models. All of the cars were manufactured in India for the Indian market, and the Mahindra Scorpio was the sole larger car. It was first introduced in 2002, with updates made in 2006 and 2014. Mahindra has long planned to export its vehicles to the United States, with the likeliest version a pickup variant of the Scorpio. Renault's Kwid crossover was tested in three versions. Initially, the Kwid was tested with and without airbags, and on both accounts it scored zero stars in adult occupant protection and two stars in child occupant protection. Renault strengthened the bodyshell and the crash tests showed the updated Kwid's structure did not collapse; still, it was rated unstable and that it couldn't withstand further stress. On closer inspection, the structural reinforcements were found to be done only on the driver's side of the passenger cell. Renault has confirmed more safety updates are on their way. "We welcome Renault's efforts to correct this and we look forward to testing another improved version with airbags. Renault has a strong record of achievement in safety in Europe and it should offer the same commitment to its customers in India", says Global NCAP's David Ward. "Global NCAP strongly believes that no manufacturer anywhere in the world should be developing new models that are so clearly sub-standard. Car makers must ensure that their new models pass the United Nations' minimum crash test regulations, and support use of an airbag." The airbag-equipped Kwid was the only model of the seven cars tested that was fitted with one. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. This is how the Mahindra Scorpio performed. This content is hosted by a third party.

Hyundai Genesis Coupe to get bigger, lux up?

With the all-new, 2015 Hyundai Genesis Sedan hitting the road, it puts the current Genesis Coupe in a rather weird spot. The sporty model is starting to get a bit long in the tooth, and for 2015, it's dropped its four-cylinder engine in the US. Hyundai isn't letting the car whither on the vine, though. Behind closed doors, the Korean automaker is rumored to be working on a new coupe to transform the vehicle from something of a pony car in the current guise into a luxury grand tourer with avante garde styling.
The next-generation Genesis Coupe would reportedly borrow its design inspiration from the Hyundai HND-9 Sports Coupe Concept from the 2013 Seoul Motor Show, according to Australian site Go Auto. The key to the new model is growing it larger to be able to seat four adults and giving it more grown-up styling at the same time. Go Auto claims that the coupe could finally get a V8 engine option and possibly a V6 and turbocharged four-cylinder in at least some markets, too. It's slated for a possible 2016 unveiling.
Even during the HND-9's unveiling, Hyundai admitted that the concept projected of the design direction for future models. Its styling was certainly a big shift from the current Genesis Coupe with more hard creases, a wide, mesh grille and butterfly doors. The show car also packed a 3.3-liter turbocharged, direct-injected engine with 364 horsepower and an eight-speed automatic transmission driving the rear wheels.

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.