2009 Hyundai Genesis 4.6 Review

[Hemiman]

Far better at what? The interiors were inferior, the build quality was inferior, the luxury ammenities were inferior. The only thing "superior" was the drivetrain configuration, and even that will be debatable once you can fit an MKS with a 320+ HP motor and AWD early next year.

 

 

Interiors? As I said before, maybe. But I'm not too critical of interior style, (GM truck interiors suck though).

 

Build quality? My LS was rock solid & Wixom had the best build quality in NA, (when working under a car, I've never been more impressed with a platform than the LS. And I've prepped BMW's and Audi's for SC TransAm).

 

Ammenities, couldn't ask for more than my LS had.

 

Drivetrain config? I don't agree with you here. But I'm a student of the BMW design school as opposed to Audi.

[suv_guy_19]

Its flexible, if you don't piss your money away on the D3. Look at the G35 Coupe, sedan, 350Z, FX35/45/50....all the same chassis.

 

 

I didn't realize those cars were on D2C. Very nice cars, but the fact that they share a platform tells nothing of how flexible D2C is.

[NickF1011]

Do you think a 4300lb, AWD (FWD biased) MKS will have the dynamic perfection of a 3800lb Lincoln LS with a 50/50 weight distribution?

 

There's no debate about it!

 

Even if the MKS was RWD, it probably wouldn't have anywhere near the dynamic composure of the LS. It's a far larger vehicle.

 

With Lincoln's current lineup, I do see a nice slot between the MKZ and the MKS where I think a sedan like the LS could definitely work, I just don't see how it's going to happen anytime soon given the platform dilemma.

 

Again, product neglect. Compare its sales to the Sable, or any other Lincoln-Mercury sedan. All they had to do was restyle it like the 2002 Continental Concept and it'd be flying off the lots.

 

And as I said, had they found a way to keep the LS updated, it probably would have done very well and would be a very fine sport sedan today.

 

By who? Corporate pressure from Jaguar? Lexus doesn't have these problems, and that's one reason why they do so well.

 

Its flexible, if you don't piss your money away on the D3. Look at the G35 Coupe, sedan, 350Z, FX35/45/50....all the same chassis.

 

And that's probably what the 2012 RWD platform will do.

 

DEW98 was deemed too expensive by everyone. It has been compared to GM's Sigma chassis in that regard. GM has axed several programs that were going to be Sigma-based and they are even now having difficulty keeping prices under control for the lower-cost Zeta platform. DEW98, by most accounts, was made far more complex than it needed to be, and therefore more expensive than it needed to be.

 

D2C is very INflexible, per statements by Ford. Just because Nissan managed to build several vehicles on one platform doesn't mean that every platform is that flexible. D2C was a bastard child platform from the start. Ford knew it and went forward with it anyway. Not one of their better decisions. While the Mustang itself is doing well, it could have gone a much longer way toward aiding other vehicles and brands.

 

That goes back to the Falcon's Orion platform. I'm hoping they go forward with it and integrate it into a global product portfolio. We're completely in agreement here. I want to see Lincoln use it. I want to see Ford use it. It's just not going to happen overnight and definitely wasn't going to happen when the recent Lincoln models were introduced.

[NickF1011]

Interiors? As I said before, maybe. But I'm not too critical of interior style, (GM truck interiors suck though).

 

Build quality? My LS was rock solid & Wixom had the best build quality in NA, (when working under a car, I've never been more impressed with a platform than the LS. And I've prepped BMW's and Audi's for SC TransAm).

 

Ammenities, couldn't ask for more than my LS had.

 

Drivetrain config? I don't agree with you here. But I'm a student of the BMW design school as opposed to Audi.

 

Assembly quality is one thing. I wouldn't knock Wixom's workers. I know they were amongst the best. The actual design of the things being assembled is another. I've heard more complaining about things going wrong in the LS than any other Lincoln ever.

 

And while the ammenities for the LS might have been good when it was introduced, they just don't stack up today.

[Michael Reynolds]

Everything you said makes it more of a Lincoln than the MK-cars we currently have offered. The MKS looks like a chinese knock off Maserati from the back, Jaguar XF on the side and Pontiac Grand Prix in the front. And it has mediocre FWD handling (not good RWD handling) and a boring V6.

 

Yes I have driven the MKS, and its D3 stablemates. The MKS drives better than the Taurus/Sable, but its similar to the Five Hundred/Montego. The Hyundai drives like a $65,000 Mercedes E-class. More to the point, the MKS is a poor man's Acura RL.

 

Nope.

 

Have you ever owned a Hot Rod Lincoln? I guess the RWD, extra 100hp and amazingly well tuned Sachs suspension only screams superiority to me.

 

Why is mediocre so over used these days? Don't people know how to use just plain old 'average'? Anyhow, I know we aren't going to sit back and complain that the MKS is a knock-off of anything, when you have a vehicle (the Genesis) that looks like a mix of styling from Lexus and BMW. Nice try though.

 

Comparing the Genesis to an E Class doesn't further your argument either. Last I checked the E Class doesn't really set the world on fire when it comes to overall driving dynamics either

 

Nope I haven't, because Lincoln hasn't produced anything resembling anything of the sort in a VERY long time.

[SajeevMehta]

Why is mediocre so over used these days? Don't people know how to use just plain old 'average'? Anyhow, I know we aren't going to sit back and complain that the MKS is a knock-off of anything, when you have a vehicle (the Genesis) that looks like a mix of styling from Lexus and BMW. Nice try though.

 

I expect better styling from a Lincoln, bland and derivative is Hyundai's bag. That's my point.

 

Comparing the Genesis to an E Class doesn't further your argument either. Last I checked the E Class doesn't really set the world on fire when it comes to overall driving dynamics either

 

What's your point? The E-class has an amazing blend of ride comfort and handling poise. And the Genesis is aimed squarely at that type of dynamic. The MKS is big and clumsy, and if I could drive it back to back with the Genesis, I might even find its ride to be inferior to the Korean.

Edited August 28, 2008 by SajeevMehta

[NickF1011]

I expect better styling from a Lincoln, bland and derivative is Hyundai's bag. That's my point.

 

Well, I think Lincoln agrees but just doesn't have much choice. It's not like their concept vehicles haven't been bold.

 

Again, it would seem they are limited by funding more than anything. They are forced to share more with basic Fords which means they can only do so much to differentiate themselves. That said, I think the MKS does a pretty decent job. That car definitely doesn't "blend in" to traffic when you see it on the highway. The MKZ does a little more so, but that should change some with the upcoming refresh.

[SajeevMehta]

D2C is very INflexible, per statements by Ford. Just because Nissan managed to build several vehicles on one platform doesn't mean that every platform is that flexible. D2C was a bastard child platform from the start. Ford knew it and went forward with it anyway.

 

Keep in mind this is the same Ford told us that the Euro focus was too expensive to sell here, than told us that retooling the old one costs just as much as bringing the Euro one here. We're never gonna know the truth.

 

I have a D2C Mustang, and I'm not buying their argument. The Chicago D3 factory was upgraded to build multiple platforms in one place, and the D2C could have been engineered instead of the D3. If anything its primitive suspension makes it easier and more cost effective than the D3.

[SajeevMehta]

I didn't realize those cars were on D2C. Very nice cars, but the fact that they share a platform tells nothing of how flexible D2C is.

 

Unless you know why the D2C or the Nissan MR platforms are so radically different that they cannot be compared, I don't know why you're mentioning this. Do you really think cars are that complicated?

 

Any platform can be tweaked to accept different body configurations, the B pillar of the D2C Mustang is far easier to replicate in a sedan than the old frameless glass SN-95 Fox version...and they made sedans and wagons on the Fox.

 

Its not a question of if, its a question of why choose the D3 over the D2C.

[NickF1011]

Keep in mind this is the same Ford told us that the Euro focus was too expensive to sell here, than told us that retooling the old one costs just as much as bringing the Euro one here. We're never gonna know the truth.

 

I have a D2C Mustang, and I'm not buying their argument. The Chicago D3 factory was upgraded to build multiple platforms in one place, and the D2C could have been engineered instead of the D3. If anything its primitive suspension makes it easier and more cost effective than the D3.

 

So you would suggest that Lincoln sell a vehicle with suspension as primitive as the Mustang's? Yeah, that would go over real well.

 

Perhaps D2C is more flexible than they let on. They did build the MKR and Interceptor concepts from the chassis after all, although engineers claimed it wasn't suitable for a production version. That solution still leaves orphaned platforms in the global platform structure in the form of Orion, which is even lower volume than the Mustang itself. The only real solution in a time of such tight budgets is one ultra-flexible global platform.

 

As for the D3, there's only one main reason in my opinion that it hasn't done well -- they've all been over-the-top-ugly or just plain bland. The only exception to that in my opinion? The MKS. And lo and behold, the MKS has actually launched relatively quickly out of the gate. (Jury is still out on the Flex. I don't find it ugly, but it's definitely polarizing to put it mildly.)

 

Its not a question of if, its a question of why choose the D3 over the D2C.

 

In the end? Probably because it was cheaper. Plus it was anticipated that volumes for a large FWD would be far larger than for a large RWD. Probably a bit of a gamble on Ford's part. No way of knowing which would have done better. A large RWD Taurus would have done just as horribly if it was styled like the Five Hundred and '08 Taurus.

Edited August 28, 2008 by NickF1011

[suv_guy_19]

Unless you know why the D2C or the Nissan MR platforms are so radically different that they cannot be compared,

 

So why are you comparing them?

[SajeevMehta]

So why are you comparing them?

 

Have you been reading this thread?

 

I was responding to Nick's "They're doing all they really can right now unless Ford's GRWD becomes a reality" comment by saying they COULD have done better if they didn't buy into the D3. And gave the Infiniti as a reason why it could have happened.

 

They had three other options, love 'em or leave 'em.

Edited August 28, 2008 by SajeevMehta

[Michael Reynolds]

What's your point? The E-class has an amazing blend of ride comfort and handling poise. And the Genesis is aimed squarely at that type of dynamic. The MKS is big and clumsy, and if I could drive it back to back with the Genesis, I might even find its ride to be inferior to the Korean.

 

What's my point. The E Class, right along with the CLK, are some of the most flaccid vehicles I have driven in that price range. Steering feel never showed up for work and the handling is just as bad. I wouldn't even compare the Genesis to those dated float mobiles. That's my point.

 

And since you work for an automotive publication why don't you all test a V-6 Genesis and V-6 MKS (comparo). Wouldn't that be the best non-bias approach to the matter.

Edited August 28, 2008 by Michael Reynolds

[SajeevMehta]

So you would suggest that Lincoln sell a vehicle with suspension as primitive as the Mustang's? Yeah, that would go over real well.

 

Its a little worse than reskinning a Fusion, but the market for another Pony car is there. And if they put IRS in the old Cobra at minimal costs, why not?

In the end? Probably because it was cheaper. Plus it was anticipated that volumes for a large FWD would be far larger than for a large RWD. Probably a bit of a gamble on Ford's part. No way of knowing which would have done better.

 

There's no way, given Ford's awful branding efforts. If Ford knew that cars like the Panther would still sell even with ZERO help, if they knew the 2005 Mustang and Chrysler 300 would do so well for being so American...maybe things would be different.

 

Problem is Ford didn't know what makes a Ford. Maybe they still don't, because all I hear is more large import-wannabes in the future. And all of this goes back to the arguement on the Flex thread.

[SajeevMehta]

What's my point. The E Class, right along with the CLK, are some of the most flaccid vehicles I have driven in that price range. Steering feel never showed up for work and the handling is just as bad. I wouldn't even compare the Genesis to those dated float mobiles. That's my point.

 

And since you work for an automotive publication why don't you all test a V-6 Genesis and V-6 MKS (comparo). Wouldn't that be the best non-bias approach to the matter.

 

The E-class's handling is respectable, you're not gonna convince me otherwise. The Genesis handles nearly as well as an E550, and if it gets a 10th of the sales of the E-class its probably a smashing success.

 

I don't work for a car publication, I have a real job that pays the bills. Speaking of, I better get back to it before I get fired.

Edited August 28, 2008 by SajeevMehta

[Michael Reynolds]

The E-class's handling is respectable, you're not gonna convince me otherwise. The Genesis handles similarly, and if it gets a 10th of the sales of the E-class its probably a smashing success.

 

As a cruiser sure. I'd take a Genesis any day of the week over an E Class.

[NickF1011]

There's no way, given Ford's awful branding efforts. If Ford knew that cars like the Panther would still sell even with ZERO help, if they knew the 2005 Mustang and Chrysler 300 would do so well for being so American...maybe things would be different.

 

Again, you really need to look at some sales figures from 2008 if you think the Panthers are still selling. And well, check Chrysler's sales of those Chargers and 300's lately as well and maybe Chrysler would have thought differently also.

[SajeevMehta]

Again, you really need to look at some sales figures from 2008 if you think the Panthers are still selling. And well, check Chrysler's sales of those Chargers and 300's lately as well and maybe Chrysler would have thought differently also.

 

Chrysler couldn't make a long term success if its life depended on it. (wait, that's really true). Their style from the RWD chassis' hard points stole the show...until people realized its just a Chrysler. The point is that the RWD platform is part of the American brand. Its what separates Detroit from its now entrenched competition.

 

I think the Panthers sell well relative to their R&D expenses, marketing efforts and all that stuff that was bestowed on the D3. They put nothing in, but make thousands on every unit sold. Its absolutely brainless profit, and you know it. If you don't, ask the guy who started this thread, he's done the math on how rich Ford gets from every Panther sold.

Edited August 28, 2008 by SajeevMehta

[akirby]

What, are you assuming I haven't spent considerable seat time in both cars?

 

I'll say it again...the Fusion has better materials. PERIOD!

 

6 year LS owner, 3 year Fusion owner. With the exception of the wood steering wheel in the LS I agree 100%.

[Deanh]

Its a little worse than reskinning a Fusion, but the market for another Pony car is there. And if they put IRS in the old Cobra at minimal costs, why not?

 

 

There's no way, given Ford's awful branding efforts. If Ford knew that cars like the Panther would still sell even with ZERO help, if they knew the 2005 Mustang and Chrysler 300 would do so well for being so American...maybe things would be different.

 

Problem is Ford didn't know what makes a Ford. Maybe they still don't, because all I hear is more large import-wannabes in the future. And all of this goes back to the arguement on the Flex thread.

so sick and tired of constant Panther BULL$hit, along with the fact that any mention is usually followed by the grey screen of death are you yet another person in denial of the fact the reason it STILL sells is TOTAL DEPENDENCE BY MUNICIPALITIES, THEIR FAMILIARTY WITH THE PLATFORMS STRENGTH AND WEAKNESS"S AND STOCKPILED AFTERMARKET ACCESORIES....THAT IS IT DAMMIT....you sir seem to have more common sense than a pseudo police officer and a gatling gun wannabee.....

[Deanh]

Chrysler couldn't make a long term success if its life depended on it. (wait, that's really true). Their style from the RWD chassis' hard points stole the show...until people realized its just a Chrysler. The point is that the RWD platform is part of the American brand. Its what separates Detroit from its now entrenched competition.

 

I think the Panthers sell well relative to their R&D expenses, marketing efforts and all that stuff that was bestowed on the D3. They put nothing in, but make thousands on every unit sold. Its absolutely brainless profit, and you know it. If you don't, ask the guy who started this thread, he's done the math on how rich Ford gets from every Panther sold.

again...panther sales = captive audience.

[NickF1011]

Chrysler couldn't make a long term success if its life depended on it. (wait, that's really true). Their style from the RWD chassis' hard points stole the show...until people realized its just a Chrysler. The point is that the RWD platform is part of the American brand. Its what separates Detroit from its now entrenched competition.

 

Maybe. Maybe not. Do people avoid the Pontiac G8 in droves also because they know it's a GM? What do you think people's reaction would be to a RWD Ford? They don't exactly have a stellar reputation either....

 

I think the Panthers sell well relative to their R&D expenses, marketing efforts and all that stuff that was bestowed on the D3. They put nothing in, but make thousands on every unit sold. Its absolutely brainless profit, and you know it. If you don't, ask the guy who started this thread, he's done the math on how rich Ford gets from every Panther sold.

 

I think any math done on Panthers profits at this point has long since become outdated. With every passing day they are coming closer and closer to break-even. Fewer shifts, fewer sales, smaller retail share. None of those bode well for profits, even if the vehicle hasn't changed much in years.

[Deanh]

Maybe. Maybe not. Do people avoid the Pontiac G8 in droves also because they know it's a GM? What do you think people's reaction would be to a RWD Ford? They don't exactly have a stellar reputation either....

 

 

 

I think any math done on Panthers profits at this point has long since become outdated. With every passing day they are coming closer and closer to break-even. Fewer shifts, fewer sales, smaller retail share. None of those bode well for profits, even if the vehicle hasn't changed much in years.

G8...therein lies a quandry...LOVE the specs and aside from ho hum "holdback" conservative styling,. basically everything about the car rocks...but I am guessing its lacluster sales point to a more pressing issue....could the release of a "great" v8 RWD car have been at a worse time?.....

[P71_CrownVic]

The VW Phaeton got tremendous reviews but we know how that turned out. Without a doubt in my mind, the Genesis will suffer the same fate.

 

Why the Genesis and not the Lincoln Taurus?

 

The Genesis is a MUCH better car...with [proper power and proper drive wheels. Seems to me it has a better chance of being a hit than a rebadged Taurus with Acura headlights and Kia tail lights, wrong wheel drive and a V6.

[NickF1011]

Why the Genesis and not the Lincoln Taurus?

 

The Genesis is a MUCH better car...with [proper power and proper drive wheels. Seems to me it has a better chance of being a hit than a rebadged Taurus with Acura headlights and Kia tail lights, wrong wheel drive and a V6.

 

It's simply a matter of reaching too far beyond your traditional customer base. VW did it with the Phaeton. Hyundai is probably doing it with the Genesis. It really has little to do with the car not being good.

 

The Lincoln MKS (would you stop calling it the Taurus already, or please refer to ALL platform-mates from all brands going forward by their cheapest derivitive) is smack in the middle of the price range buyers expect from Lincoln.

 

Oh, and all of your jabs against the MKS were already mentioned in here by others about 50 times. If you aren't going to bother reading through all of the messages, don't bother responding to them. You wanted to take a cheap jab at the MKS. Mission accomplished. Pat yourself on the back and move on. :rolleyes:

Edited August 28, 2008 by NickF1011