2012 Hyundai Genesis 5.0 R-spec 30k Low Miles Nav Rearcam Sunroof One 1 Owner on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Peter Schreyer designs the future of Hyundai, Kia, and Genesis

Peter Schreyer now leads the design teams at Hyundai, Kia, and the new Genesis brand. He has the difficult task of differentiating the three brands aesthetically, even if they share mechanical components. A new profile about the designer by Bloomberg shows just how much he means to the Korean brands, and it's well worth a read. According to Bloomberg, Schreyer has distinctive ideas for the Korean brands' design. A Kia should look sporty and appeal to young buyers. In contrast, a Hyundai would be for someone who prefers a minimalist design. So far, Genesis is blending those traits for its Athletic Elegance design language. Schreyer went to Kia from Volkswagen Group in 2006, and his mission was to revolutionize the Korean's brand's boring look. He succeeded with sharper, more modern designs for vehicles like the Optima and Sorento that arrived after he took over. He did such a good job there that Hyundai-Kia Motor Group appointed him as its first non-Korean president at the end of 2012. He also now oversees former Lamborghini designer Luc Donckerwolke at the Genesis luxury brand. Bloomberg speaks with industry analysts and other designers to get a better idea of Schreyer's meaning to the company. The piece presents him as an easygoing person who knows exactly how each vehicle should look. If you want to get a better Schreyer and his work at Hyundai, Kia, and Genesis, the story is worth checking out. Related Video:

Hyundai, Porsche top J.D. Power APEAL study

Just as they did in the Initial Quality Study, Porsche and Hyundai have taken the premium and non-premium crown, respectively, for the 2014 J.D. Power APEAL study. This is the tenth consecutive year for that Porsche has been rated the best premium make in the APEAL study, which attempts to figure out how pleased owners are with their purchases. For 2014, it asked 86,000 owners of MY2014 cars to rate their vehicles in 77 different categories 90 days after their initial purchase. The resulting figures were plugged in deliver the APEAL score, which is rated on a 1,000-point scale.
The industry average sits at 794 points for 2014, although that's a one-percent decline over last year's rating. In this year's study, premium brands averaged 840 out of 1,000, while non-premium makes average 785. For their part, Porsche netted an impressive 882 points, while Hyundai earned an 804. Interestingly, only four non-premium brands (Hyundai, Ram, Volkswagen and Mini) finished above the industry average for 2014.
It's also interesting to see the clear delineation between premium and non-premium brands, with an eight-point gap between the non-premium champ, Hyundai, and the lowest-rated premium brand, Volvo.

What do J.D. Power's quality ratings really measure?

Check 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.