Good thing for you, that they didn't send the Pony to the US. Leaking rings at 12k miles!?

 

It's funny you say that, because I was looking at the Genesis BECAUSE I own one now; a 2004 Sonata, and I have had exactly ZERO issues with it. The handling is terrible, don't get me wrong, but for a daily driver, it's quite comfy. The genesis has the worst NVH levels I've experienced in a car in my (somewhat) short life.

 

That Genesis interior is BLAND. Seats look nice, everything else looks like a 99 Celica.

 

Correction the camaro WAS a pony car
it isn't anymore because of the shear size and weight.
IMO that has everything to do with the classification.
All my classifications are of the current gen cars not the old ones.
Just because a car shares the name of it's older brother doesn't make it the same animal.

 

Have you driven any of newer Hyundais?

A friend from work has Elantra, I hate to admit it, but it's more quiet and confortable than my Fusion. And I kinda like the interior better too, it's not better quality, but looks much better.
And fuel economy is impressive.

That doesn't mean that I would pick Genesis over Mustang, but if I ever decide to buy an import it will be Hyundai/Kia.

 

No. And I won't. Based simply on 20+ year old experiences. I know things change, but I just can't get past the 'Hyundai'.

 

Test drive Kia then, you'll like it.

 

A friend just bought the new '11 Sonata. What a car for the money. Im with Red Star. I had a Hyundai Scoop and a Kia Sportage and they sure have come along way since then.

 

nice article but one ???? why didn't they get a premium package mustang it still would of came in cheaper than the competition

 

I'm sure they just got what they could get. With only pre-production Mustangs out there still, the magazine's pickins are probably slim.

 

Seems like a good review to me and a reflection that it isn't only how fast a car goes, but how a car goes fast and the Genesis seemed to do more qualitative part best. The Stang had some of the best numbers, especially straight line and that carries the day for many on this forum right there, it seems the Genesis was the best driver overall. It's not like MT panned the Stang either, they were quite enthusiastic about it overall and how the 3.7 is a massive improvement over the 4.0 version on a number of fronts, now being a car worthy of an enthusiast's driveway rather than just a rental car lot.

I've never been a fan of this bulky, high-waisted, sitting in a bunker styling that really seems to have become the vogue for the past decade. To me, its all bad-boy wannabe pose but little purpose, actually compromising and detracting from the actual driving experience. A light, airy cabin with excellent sight lines well executed ergonomics can really make the actual driving experience, even if you stop watch says you might not have the fastest ride. The Camaro is clearly worst in this regard and suffered for it, while the Challenger is not too far behind in the rolling gun-bunker ratings. The Stang is much better, though still with a carrier deck's worth of hood to try to look over when aiming for apexes while the Genesis delivers a true wide screen hi-def presentation the road. While I won't argue for the aesthetics of these cars, I certainly would for the functionality of the designs in terms of actual driving enjoyment rather than just trying to look bad azz or something.

I would consider all four to be Pony Cars, especially in 6 cylinder guises, as they do, ostensibly, represent overall performance packages two door coupes. Muscle cars, at least originally, I tended to see as big, cloddish, mid-large two/four door sedans with big V8s that emphasized straight line acceleration over anything else. The Camaro and especially the Challenger do start to creep into the larger size/weight class of a traditional Muscle Car, but they aren't the simplistic, brutish one trick ponies of yore.

That the Genesis Coupe, particularly in V6 trim, is essentially a Korean pony car is interesting in itself and its credible performance here indicates that it is not a competitor to overlook or dismiss. I've always thought this car is but one 4.6 V8 away from really kicking in the barn door to making Hyundai a true player in the performance car market. Hyundai does seem to be getting ever more confident as indicated by its forays into exalted Lexus territory with its Genesis sedan. Perhaps that confidence might too be reflected in a Genesis Coupe 4.6 some day?

 

 

When thinking about sightlines and being connected to the road, my best experiences thus far were with the 90-91 Preludes. Even though the driver's seating position was _very_ low to the ground, the low sides and hood gave excellent visibility. I would love to see what a car maker could do with that chassis profile with today's structural and powertrain tech.

 

Interesting . . . last comparo I read between the Hyundai and Camaro V6, they picked the Camaro even though the Genesis had better numbers, mainly because the Hyundai ride was "harsh" . . . I forget which mag that was, but I doubt it has changed.

Maybe I should take another look at the Genesis; but I simply like the styling of the Mustang better, and the gas mileage ratings for the mustang are still quite a bit better . . . though I did notice that the actual mileage in the test was middle of the pack on the Mustang, despite the fact that the ratings are the highest.

edit:
After taking another look at the pics, the Genesis simply is not what I want . . .

 

Agreed, they choose a base V6 with PP and then go load up the Genesis but complain the Mustangs interior was cheap? Huh?!?!....

The Mustang won almost all catagories and it is cheaper due to the lack of premium package...I'm happy with the performance numbers but don't agree with the test due to the way it was stacked toward the Genesis..which by the way I think is an awesome car for the money.

Dave

 

Knowing that the V6 mustang is the "base model" Mustang while the Genesis coupe is the pinnacle of the Hyundai line puts this into perspective I think. Very impressive for the base "secretary" Mustang to be so close.

 

Well, MT itself picked the Camaro v6 over the hyundai, about a year ago IIRC. I don't recall the reasoning the camaro won, but they used the improved version of the V6 Camaro, and the Genesis hasn't improved since then.

 

I thought it was MT, I remember that article -- they picked the Camaro even though the Genesis had better numbers, because the Hyundai's ride was "harsh" . . . I doubt it has gotten any better since then . . . but I still wouldn't go so far as to say the review was "stacked", they explained pretty clearly why they chose the Genesis

 

Wasn't a base V6, it had the Performance Package.

And their putting the hyudai on top was a subjective choice, not by hard performance numbers, they just liked the feel/looks of it better.

What really rags me about this test as well as most of the other tests involving the new V6 car, almost all of them had the Performance Package and are touting how great the package is and how we would all be fools not to get the car with it.

All that would be great if the Performance Package was available right now, but no, Ford is making everyone wait till August to get the **** thing...

 

The data definitely doesn't quite support their conclusion, but then that's not unusual for MT...

Mustang had faster 0-60, and quarter mile, shorter stopping distance, more lateral g's, lower base price, better fuel economy, and better emissions.