2000 Hyundai Sonata Gls Sedan 4-door 2.5l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hyundai preparing to enter US commercial vehicle market

The commercial van segment has been surprisingly hot in the US over the past few years with new or updated entries from Ford, Nissan, Mercedes-Benz and Ram. Now, it looks like we can add one more to that lineup because Hyundai plans to enter the market here, too. The decision is part of the brand's newly announced push into the commercial vehicle segment worldwide, according to Reuters. Hyundai intends to invest 2 trillion South Korean won ($1.8 billion) into the venture through 2020, and the Korean automaker expects the segment to grow by 30 percent annually worldwide over the next five years. Around 1.6 trillion won ($1.5 billion) of that goes towards development of new models and engines for the division. Another $363 million is for expansion of the company's Jeon-ju plant to build 100,000 units there each year. According to Reuters, there's no set timeline on the US introduction of these models yet. Hyundai already sells commercial vehicles in Korea and China but holds just 2.1 percent of the global market in the segment. Autoblog reached out to Hyundai Motor America to learn more, but company spokesperson Jim Trainor said via email, "It is too early to provide any more details concerning the sale of commercial vehicles in the US market." The company is already setting it sights on the European commercial segment with the HG350 (pictured above). It's offered as either a cargo van or flatbed and is meant to compete against market stalwarts like the Ford Transit and Mercedes Sprinter. Rather than this vehicle, the US might get one of Hyundai's newly developed models, though. The automaker previously suggested to Autoblog that it wasn't "seriously considering" the HG350 for this market, at least at that time. Hyundai Motor Plans to increase Jeon-ju Commercial Vehicle Plant capacity to 100,000 units • Hyundai Motor to invest KRW 2 trillion on commercial vehicle development and production until 2020 • New Pilot Center, Global Training Center expected in Jeon-ju plant • 1,000 new jobs to be created following the increased capacity February 16, 2015 – Hyundai Motor announced today that it will invest KRW 2 trillion over the next six years to enhance its global commercial vehicle competitiveness. KRW 1.6 trillion will be invested on developing new models and engines to strengthen global commercial vehicle competitiveness.

Hyundai Veloster Re:Flex edition hits showrooms with $21,650* MSRP

It's been several months since Hyundai first revealed the Veloster Re:Flex at the Chicago Auto Show. The special-edition of the quirky Korean hatchback features an array of chrome accents and exclusive available Ice Pearl paint along with LED lighting, red or black leather interior, and of course special badging all around, available exclusively with the 1.6-liter naturally aspirated four-cylinder engine and six-speed dual-clutch gearbox.
Limited to just 3,000 units, Hyundai has now released pricing for the Veloster Re:Flex edition at $21,650, plus the standard $810 destination charge, for a delivered total of $22,460. That makes it $3,850 more expensive than the base Veloster (at $17,800 list or $18,610 delivered), but add to that the $1,250 for the DCT and you're already looking at $19,860 delivered. Add on the $1,800 Style Package (all of whose equipment is included in the Re:Flex save the panoramic roof) and you're looking at a delivered price of $21,660, so in the end the actual premium Hyundai's getting for the Re:Flex edition is $800 (plus whatever the missing sunroof is worth to you, because you can't option that separate of the aforementioned Style Package anyway). Details in the press release below.

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.