2011 Hyundai Sonata Gls Sale Price Will End 7/20/14 Take Advantage Now! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hyundai Motor shares slide following U.S. probe of airbag failures

SEOUL — Shares in Hyundai Motor tumbled on Monday on a U.S. probe into why airbags failed to deploy in some of its Sonata sedans, with investors fretting about potential recall costs for the once popular cars. The probe, which follows crashes that reportedly killed four people and left six injured, will review the 2011 Sonata sedan as well as the 2012-2013 Forte made by affiliate Kia Motors, encompassing some 425,000 vehicles. It marks the second investigation by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration into the South Korean duo in less than one year, exacerbating headaches for Hyundai which reported in January its worst annual earnings in seven years. Hyundai has issued a recall for more than 150,000 U.S. Sonatas after incidents of non-deployment were linked to electrical overstress in the airbag control unit, but said it did not have a final fix. "What I am concerned about is that the recall will be expanded to other markets," said Ko Tae-bong, an analyst at Hi Investment & Securities. The Sonata and Forte sedans were responsible for driving sales for Hyundai and Kia in key markets in recent years, although they are no longer as popular as they once were. Ko estimated the U.S. recall could cost as much as $575 million if airbags were replaced in 425,000 vehicles under review and the automakers were found responsible for the problem. Hyundai Motor shares tumbled 4.8 percent while Kia Motors lost 3.7 percent. Parts supplier Hyundai Mobis fell 5.4 percent while the broader market was down 0.7 percent. Hyundai declined to comment on whether the recall would be expanded. Kia said it has not confirmed problems with the airbags but added it would "act promptly to conduct a safety recall, if it determines that a recall would be appropriate." The automakers told the South Korean regulator that the Sonata and Forte models sold in the domestic market were not affected, an official at South Korea's transport ministry told Reuters. The U.S. regulator said the airbag control units were built by ZF Friedrichshafen-TRW, a German auto supplier that acquired TRW Automotive in 2015, adding that it would determine if any other manufacturers used similar airbag control units and if they posed a safety risk. The NHTSA also said that electrical overstress appeared to be the root cause in the 2016 recall by Fiat Chrysler America of 1.4 million U.S. vehicles for airbag non-deployments in significant frontal crashes.

2020 Toyota Highlander vs other 3-row crossovers: There can only be one!

We've done quite a few spec comparison posts involving three-row family crossovers, and when included, the Toyota Highlander has always been the runt of the group. While the rest increasingly seemed to be benchmarking each other toward greater girth, the Highlander was the outlier.  That changes a bit for the 2020 Toyota Highlander, but only a bit. It's now larger and more competitive, specifically in regards to the amount of cargo space aft of the third-row seat. As you can see below, this aligns the Highlander most closely to its long-time competitor the 2020 Honda Pilot. However, let's see how it stacks up to others in the segment, which is heavily populated now, so for the sake of space, we've selected the newest entries: Kia Telluride, Hyundai Palisade, Subaru Ascent and Ford Explorer. The order in which they are presented is random.  Performance and fuel economy The 2020 Highlander is more than 200 pounds lighter than its predecessor, but has the same 295-horsepower V6 engine that was already one of the strongest in the segment. We'd say that would give it a leg up, but the Pilot and Explorer have proven to be sprinters, delivering 0-60 times in the low-6 range by some publications' stopwatches (or VBoxes, whatever). We don't expect the Highlander to beat them, but it may dip into the 6's. The heavy, less-powerful Subaru Ascent is most likely to take up the rear. It's fuel economy of 23 mpg combined also matches the Highlander and Explorer for segment-best. Remember, however, that the Explorer's turbocharged inline-four engine is likely more susceptible to differences in driving style (read: a heavy foot).  Of course, if you're really interested in fuel economy, the Highlander and Explorer are the only vehicles in the segment to offer hybrid versions. The Ford Explorer Hybrid puts a greater emphasis on performance, however, resulting in lower estimates of 25 mpg combined (AWD) and 28 mpg combined (FWD). By contrast, the new 2020 Toyota Highlander Hybrid is estimated to return 36 mpg combined.  Passenger and cargo space According to Highlander chief engineer Yoshikazu Saeki, he had a choice of two directions with the new Highlander. He could have indeed made it bigger, matching these very competitors, especially in terms of third-row and cargo space. Or, he could have maintained a smaller-than-average size. He obviously chose the latter. First, it was the size customers had come to expect. Would they be put off by something bigger?

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.