Finally *drove* the Genesis Coupe

It wouldn't be the first time a company "detuned" the base I4 turbo so it didn't out-perform the more expensive V6 option... (1.8T vs. 2.8 VR6 anyone? )

The GenC does look liek a great car... not what I'm looking for, but nice nonetheless.

Kind of like how the FD RX-7 and the original SA RX-7 are still kinda the same car. The dash widths and other random things are still identical, and with enough wrenching you can throw a complete FD suspension/drivetrain into an SA, but they aren't really the same anymore.

So loosely connected first cousins?

and no room for the 8 that is in the sedan

^ cORRECT. Strut towers are too tight for the Tau V8. Such a shame too... they are rumored to have a roots supercharger on top of it in the Korean market Equus Sedan. That would be the swap to do. 500hp supercharged 4.6L DOHC V8 in the Coupe....

That would be bad ass, though would probably handle like a pig.

So why not supercharge the RS3800 V6 already in it and have 400HP and good handling?

well considering the na v6 is going to have a high compression ratio to begin with boosting it is going to be troublesome, now the 4 on the other hand will be more easily tuned for a lot cheaper. bet you insurance is lower on the 4 too.

Insurance is higher on the Turbo4, I already checked. Dorifto tax will do that. Also, the V6 is only 10.4:1, easily made boostable.

And what part of the Turbo4 needs more parts at a higher price make it "easier to mod for less"?

Gutted, these things are gonna be scary.

Best thing hyundai has done yet, but for the money, I'll take my Mustang. It fits your cliff notes to a T, parts are cheaper than the Hyundai, and they're readily available. Rear wheel drive has been alive and well in the US for a long time.

I was just assuming, yeah I know, that being an NA motor the compression ratio would be higher, but I'm still betting that the 4 can be made to be a better performer all around. With my WRX I was knocking on 300hp with an 85 dollar DP and a 60 dollar cable.

But got, the GC is ugly.

The sedan isn't. What the hell, Hyundai?

ReverendDexter wrote: Gutted, these things are gonna be scary.

Stop that. I'm trying NOT to test drive one so i will never wonder how much faster it will be 600lbs lighter.

Ok the 4 is 9.4:1 going to be a lot easier to tune for boost. That 10.4:1 is still relativily high for an automotive engine. Let's call it agree to disagree. Then once we've each got one, we'll race To you this is going to be mostly a DD, to me it'll be a autocross/weekend driver. Then again my pipe dream of getting a fiesta and a GC coupe is probably just that, a pipe dream.

The Mustang is ugly, has a solid rear axle, has a horrible engine (and I own a 4,6 SOHC!!), and did I mention it's UGLY????

If I did a Mustang I'd rather pick up a low mileage 03/04 Mach 1 or S/C Cobra.

Osterkraut wrote: But got, the GC is ugly. The sedan isn't. What the hell, Hyundai?

Different strokes. Most here like the new Mustang, I think it's ugly as all get-out. I happen to really like the GC styling. Especially the huge rear flare lines. That's why cars look different, we all have different tastes.

I can't believe no one has mentioned the new Camaro yet. The 300hp V6 is cheaper than the V6 Genesis Coupe, and the 426hp V8 is in another league entirely.

nderwater wrote: I can't believe no one has mentioned the new Camaro yet. The 300hp V6 is cheaper than the V6 Genesis Coupe, and the 426hp V8 is in another league entirely.

Maybe that's because this is about the Genesis Coupe.... and not the Camaro. there's already 2 other threads pertaiing to the + a - of the camaro vs GC. The short story is the GC spanks the V6 camaro.

nderwater wrote: I can't believe no one has mentioned the new Camaro yet. The 300hp V6 is cheaper than the V6 Genesis Coupe, and the 426hp V8 is in another league entirely.

Yep! It's like comparing an aircraft carrier to a catamaran.

nderwater wrote: I can't believe no one has mentioned the new Camaro yet. The 300hp V6 is cheaper than the V6 Genesis Coupe, and the 426hp V8 is in another league entirely.

I drove the V6 Camaro about 2-3 weeks ago and posted about it. It's slower in every category, handles worse, weighs more, and is about a fifth again larger than the GC. The interior ergonomics would break a gymnasts back and the funky wheel blocks the gauges. In short, it's a total pile. I don't care how nice it looks (which to me is not much), it drives like a truck and has the visibility of a submarine periscope.

It's always easier and cheaper to get more power out of a factory FI car than a NA one.

docwyte wrote: It's always easier and cheaper to get more power out of a factory FI car than a NA one.

Oh really? Explain how come it's easier and cheaper to make power with a 5.0 Mustang than a Turbo SVO? Similar size engines yes (see Ford Cobra 03/04 vs GT/Mach 1/Bullitt) but when the NA motor is larger with a power advantage to start, no way.

nderwater wrote: I can't believe no one has mentioned the new Camaro yet. The 300hp V6 is cheaper than the V6 Genesis Coupe, and the 426hp V8 is in another league entirely.

Apples to oranges. 8" longer, 2" wider, 1.3" longer wheel base, and a minimum of 331 Lbs heavier (lightest Camaro, heaviest GC)

Honestly, different target audience.

P71 wrote:

Osterkraut wrote: But got, the GC is ugly. The sedan isn't. What the hell, Hyundai?

Different strokes. Most here like the new Mustang, I think it's ugly as all get-out. I happen to really like the GC styling. Especially the huge rear flare lines. That's why cars look different, we all have different tastes.

Agreed. I like the looks of the Mustang much better than the Genesis Coupe. The GC is nice, but the styling is boring imo....kind of like the Altima Coupe. Styling isn't everything though......I would like to get my hands on one for a drive. The last Hyundai I have was an 88 Excel. It had a power sunroof and a big analog clock where a tach should be.....I always thought that was odd.

P71 wrote: I don't care how nice it looks (which to me is not much), it drives like a truck and has the visibility of a submarine periscope.

No matter what your writing about that line is stupid funny.