2008 Hyundai Elantra Se Sedan 4-door 2.0l on 2040-cars
Sault Sainte Marie, Michigan, United States
Engine:2.0L 1975CC l4 GAS DOHC Naturally Aspirated
For Sale By:Private Seller
Body Type:Sedan
Fuel Type:GAS
Make: Hyundai
Options: CD Player
Model: Elantra
Safety Features: Anti-Lock Brakes, Driver Airbag, Passenger Airbag
Trim: SE Sedan 4-Door
Power Options: Air Conditioning, Cruise Control, Power Locks, Power Windows, Power Seats
Drive Type: FWD
Number of Doors: 4
Number of Cylinders: 4
Mileage: 71,056
Exterior Color: Black
Hyundai Elantra for Sale
- 1 owner! usb! aux input! ipod ready! xm radio! loaded! save big $$$ from new!!
- Cd cloth 4 cyclinder financing one owner steel wheels upgraded radio
- 2012 hyundai elantra touring gls 10 year 100,000 mile warranty msrp $20,000(US $11,800.00)
- 2013 no reserve auction only 2800 miles, save 1000`s! must go!
- 2005 hyundai elantra gt leather loaded super clean 85,000 miles warranty finance
- 2007 hyundai elantra gls sedan 4-door 2.0l
Auto Services in Michigan
Winners Auto & Cycle ★★★★★
Westborn Auto Service ★★★★★
Weber Transmission Company ★★★★★
Vaneck Auto Body ★★★★★
US Wheel Exchange ★★★★★
U Name IT Auto ★★★★★
Auto blog
What do J.D. Power's quality ratings really measure?
Wed, Jun 24 2015Check these recently released J.D. Power Initial Quality Study (IQS) results. Do they raise any questions in your mind? Premium sports-car maker Porsche sits in first place for the third straight year, so are Porsches really the best-built cars in the U.S. market? Korean brands Kia and Hyundai are second and fourth, so are Korean vehicles suddenly better than their US, European, and Japanese competitors? Are workaday Chevrolets (seventh place) better than premium Buicks (11th), and Buicks better than luxury Cadillacs (21st), even though all are assembled in General Motors plants with the same processes and many shared parts? Are Japanese Acuras (26th) worse than German Volkswagens (24th)? And is "quality" really what it used to be (and what most perceive it to be), a measure of build excellence? Or has it evolved into much more a measure of likeability and ease of use? To properly analyze these widely watched results, we must first understand what IQS actually studies, and what the numerical scores really mean. First, as its name indicates, it's all about "initial" quality, measured by problems reported by new-vehicle owners in their first 90 days of ownership. If something breaks or falls off four months in, it doesn't count here. Second, the scores are problems per 100 vehicles, or PP100. So Power's 2015 IQS industry average of 112 PP100 translates to just 1.12 reported problems per vehicle. Third, no attempt is made to differentiate BIG problems from minor ones. Thus a transmission or engine failure counts the same as a squeaky glove box door, tricky phone pairing, inconsistent voice recognition, or anything else that annoys the owner. Traditionally, a high-quality vehicle is one that is well-bolted together. It doesn't leak, squeak, rattle, shed parts, show gaps between panels, or break down and leave you stranded. By this standard, there are very few poor-quality new vehicles in today's U.S. market. But what "quality" should not mean, is subjective likeability: ease of operation of the radio, climate controls, or seat adjusters, phone pairing, music downloading, sizes of touch pads on an infotainment screen, quickness of system response, or accuracy of voice-recognition. These are ergonomic "human factors" issues, not "quality" problems. Yet these kinds of pleasability issues are now dominating today's JDP "quality" ratings.
Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota
Wed, Feb 25 2015It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study
Hyundai files patent for smartphone feature disabler in proximity to steering wheel
Wed, Apr 15 2015Combatting driver distraction continues to be a hot topic in automotive safety, especially when it comes to young motorists. While simply not using a smartphone behind the wheel would fix much of the problem, automakers are trying to work out complicated ways to make people safer. For example, GM is experimenting with head and eye tracking to make sure folks are paying attention to the road. Now, Hyundai might have come up with a technology that offers a very simple fix: disable the phones. The Korean automaker explains the idea in explicit detail in a recently published patent. The tech specifically "limits or disables the use of some of mobile device features which could cause distraction to the user," according to the abstract. Depending on variables like the vehicle's speed, the system determines what smartphone functions are safe to use, including texting or voice calls. Based on a plethora of permutations in the document, these restrictions could only be for the area around the driver's seat or for the whole vehicle. The key to the patent is placing antennas around the vehicle and monitoring for cellular signals. When the system detects them, it can begin selectively deciding what features to allow on the device. The tech isn't a simple on/off switch either, and can possibly detect the time of day or importance of the caller to let messages though. The major downside to all of this is the phone would need to run a specific program or firmware for all of this to work. With such a recently published patent, it might be years before the tech arrives in Hyundai vehicles, if at all. Still, this is an interesting solution. Of course, it would be far simpler if people just put down their phones. You can read the full description of the automaker's concept, here. News Source: Free Patens Online via US Patent and Trademark Office Auto News Hyundai Technology Emerging Technologies Smartphone distracted driving patent cell phone driver distraction