2006 Hyundai Sonata Gls Sedan 4-door 3.3l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hyundai Elantra's alleged unintended acceleration sends teen, police on a 113-mile ride

Back in December, one North Texas teenager received a quick lesson in car control at the hands of his 2011 Hyundai Elantra. Elez Lushaj called police, after he says his car accelerated to nearly 120 mph on Highway 183 unintentionally. Dispatchers urged the 16-year-old driver to try everything from turning the car off to standing on the brakes and putting the car in neutral, but Lushaj told them nothing was working. Flummoxed, police simply did their best to warn traffic away from the speeding compact with the hope that the car would eventually run out of fuel.
Before that could happen, Lushaj lost control on Interstate 30 after some 90 minutes as he attempted to avoid a semi truck. The Elantra rolled four times, leaving the driver conscious but with several broken bones. Police commended Lushaj for keeping the car on the road and away from population centers for as long as he did.
Hyundai, meanwhile, said that it hasn't heard anything on the case. Spokesperson Jim Trainor reported to WFAA that it was "extremely unlikely for simultaneous and spontaneous total system failures for the brakes, accelerator and transmission to occur at the same time" and notes that Hyundai would like to investigate, but this is the first they've heard of Lushaj's wild ride. You can watch a local news report on the incident below for more information.

Insider trading ahead of Hyundai-Kia MPG debacle suspected

Reuters is reporting that large-scale insider trading may be at the heart of some particularly fishy stock-selling behavior, just prior to the original announcement about the Hyundai-Kia fuel economy ratings debacle.
On November 1st, Hyundai-Kia shares traded roughly 2.2 million times (the single highest-volume day of the year), and the stock price fell by about four percent. For reference, a standard daily trading volume for the stock in 2012 saw about 600k shares trading hands. On November 2nd, the company made public the bad news about the dropping fuel economy ratings for many of its models. In other words: No one outside of the company (and only a smallish group inside the company, we'd imagine) should have known anything about the impending bad news as of the first day of November. After the announcement, the stock price tanked, as you'd expect, and trading volume was way down as well.
Experts seem fully aware that the whole thing reeks of leaked information and subsequent insider trading. If chicanery on this sort of scale seems wacky to you, you'd be inline with the experts who report to Reuters that the level of trading is absolutely suspicious.

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.