2003 Hyundai Accent Gl 4 Dr Auto Loaded 80k Miles Warranty $3500 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hyundai, Kia consider body-on-frame SUVs aimed at Tahoe and Expedition

Hyundai and Kia are open to expanding their presence in the SUV segment by each releasing a body-on-frame SUV. Both models will be marketed as alternatives to the Chevrolet Tahoe and the Ford Expedition. "From a brand perspective, obviously that is thinkable. Now, whether it makes sense, and in what region, and with what particular concept remains to be seen," said Lorenz Glaab, Hyundai's head of global product management, in an interview with Australia's CarSales. "Nothing can be excluded. There is some dynamism in that segment you just described, and we are very much aware of that. We monitor it closely," he added. Hyundai and Kia sell the Palisade and the Telluride, respectively. Both are rather large, reasonably spacious, and relatively powerful, but they can't compete against body-on-fame SUVs like the Tahoe, the Expedition, and the Toyota Land Cruiser, among others. They feature unibody construction, so they're not as capable off-road. While neither firm has suitable underpinnings to build an SUV on, CarSales believes both new models will ride on a modular frame being developed internally, in part to underpin a pickup about as big as the Ford Ranger. Kia officials requested a bigger, more rugged SUV earlier in 2020. Damien Meredith, the chief operating officer of the firm's Australian division, said he wants "one or two bigger SUVs." He also confirmed Kia will launch a Ranger-baiting pickup, which lends credibility to the claim that the platform will also be used to underpin an SUV. Powertrain specifications are still up in the air. Rear-wheel drive will presumably come standard, and four-wheel drive will be either offered at an extra cost, or made standard on some variants. CarSales speculates a two-speed transfer case could be available, and it added the 3.0-liter turbodiesel straight-six developed for the Genesis GV80 will be the base engine in some global markets. It's reasonable to assume a hybrid option will appear, too. If the report is accurate, both SUVs could land in 2023, meaning they might be labeled 2024 models in the United States. They'd also be sold in Australia, where motorists have a healthy appetite for off-roaders, in the Middle East, where the Land Cruiser and the Nissan Armada reign supreme, and in Russia. Interestingly, posh spin-off Genesis could receive its own version of the SUV, much like Lexus gets a specific variant of the Land Cruiser. Deja vu?

Hyundai Sonata PHEV may be a game (and mind) changer

If you really, really want to consume volts instead of fuel on your way to work, school or shopping, you currently have just three options: pure EV, hydrogen fuel cell, or plug-in hybrid EV. Much as we love them, we all know the disadvantages of BEVs: high prices due to high battery cost (even though subsidized by their makers), limited range and long recharges. Yes, I know: six-figure (giant-battery) Teslas can deliver a couple hundred miles and Supercharge to ~80 percent in 10 minutes. But few of us can afford one of those, Tesla's high-voltage chargers are hardly as plentiful as gas stations, and even 10 minutes is a meaningful chunk out of a busy day. Also, good luck finding a Tesla dealership to fix whatever goes wrong (other than downloadable software updates) when it inevitably does. There still aren't any. Even more expensive, still rare as honest politicians, and much more challenging to refuel are FCEVs. You can lease one from Honda or Hyundai, and maybe soon Toyota, provided you live in Southern California and have ample disposable income. But you'd best limit your driving to within 100 miles or so of the small (but growing) number of hydrogen fueling stations in that state if you don't want to complete your trip on the back of a flatbed. That leaves PHEVs as the only reasonably affordable, practical choice. Yes, you can operate a conventional parallel hybrid in EV mode...for a mile or so at creep-along speeds. But if your mission is getting to work, school or the mall (and maybe back) most days without burning any fuel – while basking in the security of having a range-extender in reserve when you need it – your choices are extended-range EVs. That means the Chevrolet Volt, Cadillac ELR or a BMW i3 with the optional range-extender engine, and plug-in parallel hybrids. Regular readers know that, except for their high prices, I'm partial to EREVs. They are series hybrids whose small, fuel-efficient engines don't even start (except in certain rare, extreme conditions) until their batteries are spent. That means you can drive 30-40 (Volt, ELR) or 70-80 miles (i3) without consuming a drop of fuel. And until now, I've been fairly skeptical of plug-in versions of conventional parallel hybrids. Why?

40+ cars that barely avoid the gas guzzler tax

The Gas Guzzler schedule, with mpg ratings and charges that haven't changed since 1991, lays out which fuel-swillers owe what to Uncle Sam.
I started thinking about the "Gas Guzzler Tax" - considerably less well known as The Energy Tax Act of 1978 - when I was driving Dodge's new Challenger SRT Hellcat last week. Unsurprisingly for a car that can burn 1.5 gallons of gas per minute at max tilt, theoretically able to empty a full tank of premium in about 13 minutes, the Hellcat will be subject to the Gas Guzzler Tax schedule when it goes on sale.