Blue Tan One Owner Finance Wheels Auto Power Cruise Control Mp3 Sirius Ipod Usb on 2040-cars

Auto blog

The 2017 Hyundai Ioniq fuel economy numbers are official, and impressive

Thanks to the EPA's handy fuel economy reference site, fueleconomy.gov, we now know exactly how the three versions of the 2017 Hyundai Ioniq did in fuel economy testing. The EPA tested all three versions: the hybrid Ioniq, the plug-in hybrid Ioniq Blue, and the self-explanatory Ioniq Electric. For reference, the 2017 Toyota Prius is no slouch, getting 50 mpg highway, 54 in the city, and 52 combined according to EPA testing. Now let's compare to the Ioniq, which in regular form gets 54 highway, 55 city, and 55 combined. It bests the traditional hybrid Prius most significantly on the highway. The plug-in Blue achieved 59 highway, 57 city, for a combined 58 mpg rating. As we mentioned in our earlier deep dive on the Ioniq range, the plug-in will also do 31 miles on electricity alone. As suspected, the range of the Ioniq Electric is going to be an issue for the company. The EPA confirmed the range to be 124 miles in total, returning an MPGe rating of 122 highway, 150 city, and 136 combined. We know that Hyundai is self-conscious of the range of the initial model, which looks unimpressive compared to the crop of 200-plus-mile range EVs coming to market soon, like the Bolt. Hyundai recently told Automotive News that a 200-mile range version will be coming quickly, by 2018, so the Electric won't be hobbled for too long. As long as we're comparing it to the Bolt, it should be noted that the MPGe numbers are better, even if the total range isn't. The Bolt is only good for 110 highway, 128 city, and 119 combined MPGe – to put it another way, the Ioniq Electric consumes 25 kWh per 100 miles, while the Bolt consumes 28. A small difference, to be sure, but worth noting. Don't forget that there's a fourth Ioniq out there, which we rode in recently, although it's notably mainly for its autonomous tech rather than its drivetrain. Related Video: Tip: Ramsy Shuffield Green Hyundai Fuel Efficiency Hatchback Electric Hybrid

Hyundai, Kia and Genesis EVs recalled for damaged charging control unit

Hyundai Motor America and Kia America are recalling a combined 147,100 U.S. vehicles over a damaged charging unit, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) said on Thursday. Hyundai will recall 98,878 vehicles, including certain 2022-2024 Ioniq 5 and Ioniq 6, Genesis GV60, Genesis GV70 Electrified and Genesis GV80 Electrified models, while Kia will recall 48,232 vehicles impacting certain EV6 models. The Integrated Charging Control Unit (ICCU) "may become damaged over time from transient high voltage and thermal cycling" and stop charging the 12-volt battery, which can result in a loss of drive power increasing the risk of a crash, the safety regulator said. Kia notes that there will be "audible warning chimes and one or more of the following: Illumination of "Check Electric Vehicle System" warning light, Master warning light, Charging system warning light, "Stop vehicle and check power supply" warning light, power down (turtle) warning light and/or reductions in motive power." Dealers will inspect and replace the ICCU and its fuse, as necessary. In addition, dealers will update the ICCU software. Material from Reuters was used in this report. Green Recalls Genesis Hyundai Kia Electric

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.