Insideline: Hyundai Veloster Turbo vs Scion FR-S

[klch]

Originally Posted by whtchocla7e

The Veloster gets 38 "hyundai" miles per gallon or HMPG on highway.
1 HMPG ~= 0.8 MPG

exactly, they always use all kinds of tricks to practically cheat in the EPA mpg test

[Tbxgz]

Originally Posted by GNS

It's not so much that the RWD dogma wins but more to do with how poorly sorted the Veloster's chassis is. You can't simply slap a turbo into a regular econobox and call it a day. Hyundai still has a long way to go before it can be taken seriously in the performance category.

The WRX says hi.

[Opposed]

And so many people give the FR-S/BRZ crap for its hp numbers and performance...

[SUB-FT86]

Originally Posted by GNS

It's not so much that the RWD dogma wins but more to do with how poorly sorted the Veloster's chassis is. You can't simply slap a turbo into a regular econobox and call it a day. Hyundai still has a long way to go before it can be taken seriously in the performance category.

I honestly think it was Hyundai's intention to make the car like this. Its just like the Sonata Turbo where you just get more power and some interior upgrades. If they released a R-Spec version of the Turbo Veloster and it is complete shit then you can justify how you feel about Hyundai.

[Sigh-on-Rice]

Originally Posted by whtchocla7e

The Veloster gets 38 "hyundai" miles per gallon or HMPG on highway.
1 HMPG ~= 0.8 MPG

lol
It's funny, but it's true.
It's at very least 1 MHPG ~= 0.9 MPG.

[subatoy]

wait the FR-s did 6.6 secs 0-60????
I thought it was in the 7 sec range. I guess the lack of torque makes it
feel slower than it is.

[Allch Chcar]

Originally Posted by subatoy

wait the FR-s did 6.6 secs 0-60????
I thought it was in the 7 sec range. I guess the lack of torque makes it
feel slower than it is.

With the manual transmission, 6's. Does it matter?

[Kel O Tron]

I actually really like Hyundai for what they are doing. They wanted to make the successor to the 240SX since Nissan didn't have the balls to do it, and filled the void when Toyota was still exclusively making beige and boring cars.

The Veloster Turbo is a great car, considering the car is supposed to compete with a Scion tC, I think it fares quite well.

[86'd]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

I honestly think it was Hyundai's intention to make the car like this. Its just like the Sonata Turbo where you just get more power and some interior upgrades. If they released a R-Spec version of the Turbo Veloster and it is complete shit then you can justify how you feel about Hyundai.

The FR-S's whole definition; it's ethos, is that of a "driver's car."

It would say a lot if Toyota/Subaru created this chassis and failed instead of reciving all of this positive attention.

Hyundai on the other hand (like you've stated) set out to make a quirky, quick, sporty car and I think they've done a good job.

In the end it's kinda like saying USA Basketball is going to beat Tunisia. You know it's going to happen, you just don't know by how much.

[TRD_86]

Originally Posted by subatoy

wait the FR-s did 6.6 secs 0-60????
I thought it was in the 7 sec range. I guess the lack of torque makes it
feel slower than it is.

2013 Hyundai Veloster Turbo: 6.8s
2013 FRS: 5.9s per zeroto60times.com to be exact if you care
Oh well it just depend how you launch for the money !

[GNS]

Originally Posted by Tbxgz

The WRX says hi.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. If you mean the base WRX 5MT and you're not impressed with it because of what I said about 'not slapping a turbo in an econobox and calling it a day', then you and I are in agreement.

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

I honestly think it was Hyundai's intention to make the car like this. Its just like the Sonata Turbo where you just get more power and some interior upgrades. If they released a R-Spec version of the Turbo Veloster and it is complete shit then you can justify how you feel about Hyundai.

You have a point. It would make sense if this was what Hyundai had intended to make - something with good power for its size, geared towards fuel economy and grocery getting/DD.

[subatoy]

Originally Posted by Allch Chcar

With the manual transmission, 6's. Does it matter?

If it didn't matter you wouldn't know it and magazines wouldn't test it.

[n2oinferno]

I remember the Think Tank discussion I participated in when they asked what they should do for the "sport version" of the car. I remember telling them three things. Offer the matte paint, because it'd be unique, and give the car IRS and LSD. I was immediately shot down with "no IRS ever" and nobody brought up LSD, except for a few "FWD don't need LSD!" types.

They already have their econo-Veloster. They should've set the sport bar higher with the turbo instead of gearing for MPG. I do wonder if they were worried about cannibalizing Genesis Coupe sales if a lower powered, but lighter weight car performed as well or better than the 2.0T. Sort out the suspension and put some more aggressive gear ratios in there, and I bet you'd have a fun, quick little hatch. I doubt we'll see an R-Spec version though.

[Allch Chcar]

Originally Posted by subatoy

If it didn't matter you wouldn't know it and magazines wouldn't test it.

Then why don't you know the 0-60 times?