2014 Hyundai Santa Fe Sport 2.4l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Trump wants a trade deal, but South Korea doesn't want US cars

SEOUL - US auto imports from the likes of General Motors and Ford must become more chic, affordable or fuel-efficient to reap the rewards of President Donald Trump's attempts to renegotiate a trade deal with key ally South Korea, officials and industry experts in Seoul say. Meeting South Korean President Moon Jae-in last week in Washington, Trump said the United States would do more to address trade imbalances with South Korea and create "a fair shake" to sell more cars there, the world's 11th largest auto market. "What we really want to say to the United States is: Make good cars, make cars that Korean consumers like." While imports from automakers including Ford, Chrysler and GM more than doubled last year largely thanks to free trade deal which took effect in 2012, sales account for just 1 percent of a market dominated by more affordable models from local giants Hyundai and affiliate Kia. Imports make up just 15 percent of the overall Korean auto market, and are mainly more luxurious models from German automakers BMW and Daimler AG's Mercedes-Benz, which also benefit from a trade deal with the European Union. "Addressing non-tariff barriers would not fundamentally raise the competitiveness of US cars," a senior Korean government official told Reuters, declining to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject. "What we really want to say to the United States is: Make good cars, make cars that Korean consumers like." TASTE BARRIER In Korea, US imports are seen as lagging German brands in brand image, sophistication and fuel economy, industry experts say. US imports do have a competitive advantage in electric cars: Tesla Motors' electric vehicles are seen as both environmentally friendly and trendy, while GM has launched a long-range Bolt EV. US Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross had cited a quota in the current trade deal as an obstacle to boosting imports. The quota allows US automakers to bring in each year 25,000 vehicles that meet US, not necessarily Korean, safety standards. Should GM, for example, decide to bring in more than its quota of one model - the Impala sedans - it would cost up to $75 million to modify the cars to meet Korean safety standards, the company told its local labor union. Asked about non-tariff barriers, a spokesman at GM's Korean unit said removing them could expand the range of models the company can bring in from the United States. No US company, however, has yet to make full use of the quota, industry data shows.

Hyundai And Kia Penalized $350 Million For Overstated MPG Claims

Nearly two years after Hyundai and Kia announced they exaggerated fuel economy numbers for several of their most popular models, the two Korean automakers have paid a heavy penalty for the transgressions. The Department of Justice and Environmental Protection Agency announced a settlement Monday that will cost the two car companies approximately $350 million. The financial sum includes a $100 million fine, the largest ever levied under the Clean Air Act, and about $200 million in forfeited greenhouse-gas emissions credits. At a time when car buyers rank fuel economy as a top concern when they head to dealerships and the federal government has mandated increased efficiency, Attorney General Eric Holder said the settlement should serve as a warning to automakers not to fudge their numbers. "This will send a strong message that cheating is not profitable," he said. The settlement ends a federal lawsuit filed against the automakers in U.S. District Court, but it's important to note that it doesn't end a class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of consumers. A preliminary settlement in that case, based in Los Angeles, was approved last month, but final approval isn't expected until July 2015. Officials with the EPA said the $100 million figure roughly equals the economic benefits the two companies received from exaggerating the mileage claims on the window stickers of new cars. Fuel-efficient boasts helped Hyundai and Kia establish a strong foothold in the U.S. marketplace. Advertisements for the Hyundai Elantra stated the vehicle achieved 40 miles per gallon in highway driving, and helped the car win the prestigious North American Car Of The Year honors at the Detroit Auto Show for its 2012 model. In July 2011, the advocacy group Consumer Watchdog began receiving complaints from consumers that the Elantra and other Hyundai models fell short of their stated mileage claims in real-world driving. The group wrote to the EPA and Hyundai, asking both to investigate. Government officials said Kia had overstated the mileage on its popular Kia Soul crossover by 6 miles per gallon, and more than a dozen overall models were affected. On Monday, EPA administrator Gina McCarthy said the violations were "egregious." Based on the exaggerations, the EPA calculated that Hyundai and Kia had underreported the greenhouse gas emissions of their fleets by about 4.75 metric tons over the estimated lifetime of the vehicles. That figure aided in the $200 million credit forfeiture.

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.