Brian Nystrom

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>>
>> Well, I'm closing in on 1,000 miles now and am on my third tank of
>> gas. My early impressions of the car are:
>>
>> Pros -
>>
>> Styling is great, but then this is very subjective.
>> Interior room is great for this size (exterior-wise) car.
>> Power is great for a 4 cylinder.
>> Braking is impressive and I like having disks on all four corners.
>> Quietness for a car of this price.
>> Controls are pretty good and easy to find, although I dislike the
>> dimmer switch that must be pushed forward and pulled back. I much
>> prefer the toggle style dimmers in my American cars.
>> Sound system is pretty good.
>> Assembly quality seems very good.
>> The car handles well and the Michelin tires perform great in snow.
>> The steering is a little too light with too little feedback, but not a
>> major problem.
>>
>> Cons -
>>
>> Heater doesn't distribute heat well to the footwells.
>> Windows fog up with more than two people in the car.
>> The seat belts are too close to the interior panel making it hard for
>> me to grab ahold of them to put them on. The receptacle is also too
>> close to the console leaving insufficient room for my hand to insert
>> the buckle.
>> The electronic throttle is too light (too little feedback) making it
>> hard to make a smooth start in 1st gear as the engine is also too
>> quiet to hear. In an automatic this wouldn't be an issue.
>> The storage bins are all the wrong size for common items. I use a
>> 4x6" spiral bound notebook to keep my vehicle log for fuel purchases
>> and maintenance. The cubby under the heater controls is about 5 7/8"
>> wide which means this notebook won't fit in it. It fits perfectly in
>> a similar cubby in my Chrysler minivan. Likewise, the top compartment
>> of the console looks like it was designed to hold a short stack of
>> CDs, but again it is about 1/8" too small for a standard CD case. And
>> the bottom compartment looks like it is the right size for a standard
>> square box of tissues, but again it is about 1/8" too small.
>> Fortunately, the tissue boxes give and I can jamb one in there.
>>
>> Neutral -
>>
>> Fuel economy - First tank was 27 MPG (60-70% highway probably) and
>> second tank was 29 MPG (maybe 70-80% highway), both in weather running
>> in the high 20s to low 30s. I'm hoping for at least 30 in my normal
>> mix of driving once the car is broke in and the weather gets a little
>> warmer. I drive 70-80% highway typically. I'd like to get closer to
>> the 34 highway rating, but I doubt that will happen as all of the road
>> tests I've seen of Hyundais show that they don't get as close to the
>> EPA ratings as to most other car makers (Toyota in particular does
>> well in this regard).
>>
>>
>> I'm be curious to hear others initial impressions of their Sonatas.
>>
>>
>> Matt
>
>
> One more small nit on the 4 cylinder is the dipstick. The tube is about
> 4" down in a hole in the engine decorative cover (I still can't figure
> out why anyone needs these on their engine fer cryin' out loud!).

I can only think of two reasons for them:

1) Showroom appeal. It looks nice.
2) It does keep the engine cleaner, which makes it more pleasant to work
on. At least the Hyundai covers are quick to remove and you could always
leave them off, if you want to.

If you think Hyundai engines are bad, take a look at a VW sometime. My
girlfriend's Passat's engine compartment has so many covers that it take
half an hour of disassembly to gain access to anything in it. It's the
most inconveniently designed car I've ever worked on. Fortunately for
me, it's pretty reliable and when she bought it (used), it came with a
transferrable extended warranty. She just has her friendly, local VW
mechanic work on it and the warranty covers everything significant. It
gets me off the hook. ;-)

Matt Whiting

Brian Nystrom wrote:
> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>> Brian Nystrom wrote:
>>
>>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>
>>>> The car handles well and the Michelin tires perform great in snow.
>
>
>>> I laugh every time I see a statement like this. Get some snow tires
>>> and you'll discover how pathetic "all season" tires truly are in the
>>> snow.
>
>
>> Like I do with your statement. People who don't know how to drive in
>> snow say this all the time. I've got 30 years of winter driving
>> experience, including five years driving tractor trailers on and off
>> road hauling logs.
>
>
> I guess we'll just have to disagree on this point. I'm in my 1st winter
> driving in New Hampshire and I know how to drive in snow. I've compared
> good snow tires (Nokian) to the stock Michellins and there is absolutely
> no comparison in traction. The Nokians are FAR better in snow and
> significantly better on ice.

Most tests I've seen show less than a 20% difference on packed snow and
often even less on ice. This is your 1st year driving in the winter and
you already claim to know how to drive in snow? :-)

Disagreeing is fine. To me it is simply a decision as to what to
optimize. Do you optimize for a handful of days in a typical winter
that have snow and ice or do you optimize for the 90% or more days that
have wet or dry pavement? I choose to optimize for the conditions I
encounter most often here in northern PA and upstate NY. Now, if I
lived in Telluride or Alaska, I'd probably make a different choice.


>> I drive my K1500 quite regularly in the snow as I plow my 1700' long
>> driveway with it. It has the heaviest lug M&S tires I could find.
>> Snow tires are better in snow, but the difference is relatively minor
>> in most conditions. In the conditions that prevail 95% of the time in
>> PA and NY (dry or wet pavement), all-season tires are better
>> performers than snow tires.
>
>
> Granted, the stock tires are better on wet/dry pavement, but that's not
> my concern in winter. Snow tires are better on snow and ice.

I've never disputed that snow tires are better on snow and ice. I
simply don't have to deal with snow or ice on the roads more than a few
days in a typical winter. So far this winter, I've driven to work on
two days where the road was snow covered and had yet to be plowed and
cindered and salted. The other 45 days (I count winter as starting with
the first snow which this year was just before Thanksgiving as I
recall), the roads have been wet at worst and mostly clear and dry.



>>>> The steering is a little too light with too little feedback, but not
>>>> a major problem.
>
>
>>> The Elantra is the same. The Elantra is my first car with power
>>> steering and I'd rather not have it at all. Manual rack and pinion is
>>> far more precise. If I could find a manual rack for it, I'd change it
>>> in a heartbeat!
>>
>>
>> Yes, I agree that in a small car, there is little need for power
>> steering unless you are physically handicapped. I'd prefer manual
>> myself.
>
>
> Unfortunately, I haven't found anyone that makes a manual rack for
> Hyundais. I've considered just disconnecting the p/s pump and draining
> the fluid, since the steering is rack and pinion and the stock steering
> ratio seems reasonable for use un-boosted, but I'm not sure how well
> that will work. I may try it next summer, as an experiment. It would be
> nice to get rid of the extra weight and drag of the p/s pump. I would
> think it would gain an extra mpg or two.

I don't know if that would work or not. Most power steering cars I've
driven steer really hard when the pump fails. I doubt you could measure
the savings in fuel. The power steering really only works hard while
steering at very low speeds, and I doubt it consumes even 1/4
horsepower. Remember, it is only doing the work you would be doing with
manual steering. And this isn't much work most of the time. And very
few humans can develop even 1/4 horsepower for any length of time, and
that is using your legs!


>>>> Heater doesn't distribute heat well to the footwells.
>
>
>>> Ditto for the Elantra.
>
>
>> I guess every brand has to have its achilles heel!
>
>
> In this case, one warm heel and one cold heel. ;-)

Actually, both of my feet stay fairly cold until about 30 minutes have
elapsed. My wife and I were driving for about 90 minutes this past
weekend visiting motorcycle dealers (I have to do something to keep my
spirits up in the winter!) and my feet did eventually get warm, but it
took at least 30 minutes and this was on a pretty warm day ... about 30F.


> Like you, I was initially disappointed with the gas mileage in my
> Elantra. However, it increased rapidly for the first few tankfulls and
> continued to increase gradually for ~10K miles. I switched the engine to
> synthetic oil at 3000 miles and the transmission to synthetic lube at
> 10K. That seems to increase fuel mileage, particularly in winter. If you
> decide to do the same, Redline MT-90 seems to be the synthetic gear lube
> of choice for the tranny. You must use a GL-3 lube and it's one of the
> few available.

I've used Mobil 1 for years and plan to switch over at the first oil
change. My truck has synthetic in the gearbox as Chevy calls for a
particular gear lube made by Castrol and I'm pretty sure it is
synthetic. I think it is called Syntorq or something like that.

I hadn't even checked the gear lube requirement for the Sonata as yet.
I thought GL-3 was a pretty old standard. Isn't GL-5 or -6 what is current?


Matt

Matt Whiting

Brian Nystrom wrote:
> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>> Brian Nystrom wrote:
>>
>>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>
>>>> The car handles well and the Michelin tires perform great in snow.
>
>
>>> I laugh every time I see a statement like this. Get some snow tires
>>> and you'll discover how pathetic "all season" tires truly are in the
>>> snow.
>
>
>> Like I do with your statement. People who don't know how to drive in
>> snow say this all the time. I've got 30 years of winter driving
>> experience, including five years driving tractor trailers on and off
>> road hauling logs.
>
>
> I guess we'll just have to disagree on this point. I'm in my 1st winter
> driving in New Hampshire and I know how to drive in snow. I've compared
> good snow tires (Nokian) to the stock Michellins and there is absolutely
> no comparison in traction. The Nokians are FAR better in snow and
> significantly better on ice.

Most tests I've seen show less than a 20% difference on packed snow and
often even less on ice. This is your 1st year driving in the winter and
you already claim to know how to drive in snow? :-)

Disagreeing is fine. To me it is simply a decision as to what to
optimize. Do you optimize for a handful of days in a typical winter
that have snow and ice or do you optimize for the 90% or more days that
have wet or dry pavement? I choose to optimize for the conditions I
encounter most often here in northern PA and upstate NY. Now, if I
lived in Telluride or Alaska, I'd probably make a different choice.


>> I drive my K1500 quite regularly in the snow as I plow my 1700' long
>> driveway with it. It has the heaviest lug M&S tires I could find.
>> Snow tires are better in snow, but the difference is relatively minor
>> in most conditions. In the conditions that prevail 95% of the time in
>> PA and NY (dry or wet pavement), all-season tires are better
>> performers than snow tires.
>
>
> Granted, the stock tires are better on wet/dry pavement, but that's not
> my concern in winter. Snow tires are better on snow and ice.

I've never disputed that snow tires are better on snow and ice. I
simply don't have to deal with snow or ice on the roads more than a few
days in a typical winter. So far this winter, I've driven to work on
two days where the road was snow covered and had yet to be plowed and
cindered and salted. The other 45 days (I count winter as starting with
the first snow which this year was just before Thanksgiving as I
recall), the roads have been wet at worst and mostly clear and dry.



>>>> The steering is a little too light with too little feedback, but not
>>>> a major problem.
>
>
>>> The Elantra is the same. The Elantra is my first car with power
>>> steering and I'd rather not have it at all. Manual rack and pinion is
>>> far more precise. If I could find a manual rack for it, I'd change it
>>> in a heartbeat!
>>
>>
>> Yes, I agree that in a small car, there is little need for power
>> steering unless you are physically handicapped. I'd prefer manual
>> myself.
>
>
> Unfortunately, I haven't found anyone that makes a manual rack for
> Hyundais. I've considered just disconnecting the p/s pump and draining
> the fluid, since the steering is rack and pinion and the stock steering
> ratio seems reasonable for use un-boosted, but I'm not sure how well
> that will work. I may try it next summer, as an experiment. It would be
> nice to get rid of the extra weight and drag of the p/s pump. I would
> think it would gain an extra mpg or two.

I don't know if that would work or not. Most power steering cars I've
driven steer really hard when the pump fails. I doubt you could measure
the savings in fuel. The power steering really only works hard while
steering at very low speeds, and I doubt it consumes even 1/4
horsepower. Remember, it is only doing the work you would be doing with
manual steering. And this isn't much work most of the time. And very
few humans can develop even 1/4 horsepower for any length of time, and
that is using your legs!


>>>> Heater doesn't distribute heat well to the footwells.
>
>
>>> Ditto for the Elantra.
>
>
>> I guess every brand has to have its achilles heel!
>
>
> In this case, one warm heel and one cold heel. ;-)

Actually, both of my feet stay fairly cold until about 30 minutes have
elapsed. My wife and I were driving for about 90 minutes this past
weekend visiting motorcycle dealers (I have to do something to keep my
spirits up in the winter!) and my feet did eventually get warm, but it
took at least 30 minutes and this was on a pretty warm day ... about 30F.


> Like you, I was initially disappointed with the gas mileage in my
> Elantra. However, it increased rapidly for the first few tankfulls and
> continued to increase gradually for ~10K miles. I switched the engine to
> synthetic oil at 3000 miles and the transmission to synthetic lube at
> 10K. That seems to increase fuel mileage, particularly in winter. If you
> decide to do the same, Redline MT-90 seems to be the synthetic gear lube
> of choice for the tranny. You must use a GL-3 lube and it's one of the
> few available.

I've used Mobil 1 for years and plan to switch over at the first oil
change. My truck has synthetic in the gearbox as Chevy calls for a
particular gear lube made by Castrol and I'm pretty sure it is
synthetic. I think it is called Syntorq or something like that.

I hadn't even checked the gear lube requirement for the Sonata as yet.
I thought GL-3 was a pretty old standard. Isn't GL-5 or -6 what is current?


Matt

Matt Whiting

Brian Nystrom wrote:

> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Well, I'm closing in on 1,000 miles now and am on my third tank of
>>> gas. My early impressions of the car are:
>>>
>>> Pros -
>>>
>>> Styling is great, but then this is very subjective.
>>> Interior room is great for this size (exterior-wise) car.
>>> Power is great for a 4 cylinder.
>>> Braking is impressive and I like having disks on all four corners.
>>> Quietness for a car of this price.
>>> Controls are pretty good and easy to find, although I dislike the
>>> dimmer switch that must be pushed forward and pulled back. I much
>>> prefer the toggle style dimmers in my American cars.
>>> Sound system is pretty good.
>>> Assembly quality seems very good.
>>> The car handles well and the Michelin tires perform great in snow.
>>> The steering is a little too light with too little feedback, but not
>>> a major problem.
>>>
>>> Cons -
>>>
>>> Heater doesn't distribute heat well to the footwells.
>>> Windows fog up with more than two people in the car.
>>> The seat belts are too close to the interior panel making it hard for
>>> me to grab ahold of them to put them on. The receptacle is also too
>>> close to the console leaving insufficient room for my hand to insert
>>> the buckle.
>>> The electronic throttle is too light (too little feedback) making it
>>> hard to make a smooth start in 1st gear as the engine is also too
>>> quiet to hear. In an automatic this wouldn't be an issue.
>>> The storage bins are all the wrong size for common items. I use a
>>> 4x6" spiral bound notebook to keep my vehicle log for fuel purchases
>>> and maintenance. The cubby under the heater controls is about 5 7/8"
>>> wide which means this notebook won't fit in it. It fits perfectly in
>>> a similar cubby in my Chrysler minivan. Likewise, the top
>>> compartment of the console looks like it was designed to hold a short
>>> stack of CDs, but again it is about 1/8" too small for a standard CD
>>> case. And the bottom compartment looks like it is the right size for
>>> a standard square box of tissues, but again it is about 1/8" too
>>> small. Fortunately, the tissue boxes give and I can jamb one in there.
>>>
>>> Neutral -
>>>
>>> Fuel economy - First tank was 27 MPG (60-70% highway probably) and
>>> second tank was 29 MPG (maybe 70-80% highway), both in weather
>>> running in the high 20s to low 30s. I'm hoping for at least 30 in my
>>> normal mix of driving once the car is broke in and the weather gets a
>>> little warmer. I drive 70-80% highway typically. I'd like to get
>>> closer to the 34 highway rating, but I doubt that will happen as all
>>> of the road tests I've seen of Hyundais show that they don't get as
>>> close to the EPA ratings as to most other car makers (Toyota in
>>> particular does well in this regard).
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm be curious to hear others initial impressions of their Sonatas.
>>>
>>>
>>> Matt
>>
>>
>>
>> One more small nit on the 4 cylinder is the dipstick. The tube is
>> about 4" down in a hole in the engine decorative cover (I still can't
>> figure out why anyone needs these on their engine fer cryin' out loud!).
>
>
> I can only think of two reasons for them:
>
> 1) Showroom appeal. It looks nice.
> 2) It does keep the engine cleaner, which makes it more pleasant to work
> on. At least the Hyundai covers are quick to remove and you could always
> leave them off, if you want to.
>
> If you think Hyundai engines are bad, take a look at a VW sometime. My
> girlfriend's Passat's engine compartment has so many covers that it take
> half an hour of disassembly to gain access to anything in it. It's the
> most inconveniently designed car I've ever worked on. Fortunately for
> me, it's pretty reliable and when she bought it (used), it came with a
> transferrable extended warranty. She just has her friendly, local VW
> mechanic work on it and the warranty covers everything significant. It
> gets me off the hook. ;-)

I've heard that VWs in generally are a pain to work on. The only VWs
I've owned were two Beetles, a 1971 and a 1975. Both were fairly easy
to work on, but didn't have some of the creature comforts such as
heating and defrosting. My Beetles were the only cars where I had to
scrap the inside of the windshield as I drove!


Matt

Matt Whiting

Brian Nystrom wrote:

> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Well, I'm closing in on 1,000 miles now and am on my third tank of
>>> gas. My early impressions of the car are:
>>>
>>> Pros -
>>>
>>> Styling is great, but then this is very subjective.
>>> Interior room is great for this size (exterior-wise) car.
>>> Power is great for a 4 cylinder.
>>> Braking is impressive and I like having disks on all four corners.
>>> Quietness for a car of this price.
>>> Controls are pretty good and easy to find, although I dislike the
>>> dimmer switch that must be pushed forward and pulled back. I much
>>> prefer the toggle style dimmers in my American cars.
>>> Sound system is pretty good.
>>> Assembly quality seems very good.
>>> The car handles well and the Michelin tires perform great in snow.
>>> The steering is a little too light with too little feedback, but not
>>> a major problem.
>>>
>>> Cons -
>>>
>>> Heater doesn't distribute heat well to the footwells.
>>> Windows fog up with more than two people in the car.
>>> The seat belts are too close to the interior panel making it hard for
>>> me to grab ahold of them to put them on. The receptacle is also too
>>> close to the console leaving insufficient room for my hand to insert
>>> the buckle.
>>> The electronic throttle is too light (too little feedback) making it
>>> hard to make a smooth start in 1st gear as the engine is also too
>>> quiet to hear. In an automatic this wouldn't be an issue.
>>> The storage bins are all the wrong size for common items. I use a
>>> 4x6" spiral bound notebook to keep my vehicle log for fuel purchases
>>> and maintenance. The cubby under the heater controls is about 5 7/8"
>>> wide which means this notebook won't fit in it. It fits perfectly in
>>> a similar cubby in my Chrysler minivan. Likewise, the top
>>> compartment of the console looks like it was designed to hold a short
>>> stack of CDs, but again it is about 1/8" too small for a standard CD
>>> case. And the bottom compartment looks like it is the right size for
>>> a standard square box of tissues, but again it is about 1/8" too
>>> small. Fortunately, the tissue boxes give and I can jamb one in there.
>>>
>>> Neutral -
>>>
>>> Fuel economy - First tank was 27 MPG (60-70% highway probably) and
>>> second tank was 29 MPG (maybe 70-80% highway), both in weather
>>> running in the high 20s to low 30s. I'm hoping for at least 30 in my
>>> normal mix of driving once the car is broke in and the weather gets a
>>> little warmer. I drive 70-80% highway typically. I'd like to get
>>> closer to the 34 highway rating, but I doubt that will happen as all
>>> of the road tests I've seen of Hyundais show that they don't get as
>>> close to the EPA ratings as to most other car makers (Toyota in
>>> particular does well in this regard).
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm be curious to hear others initial impressions of their Sonatas.
>>>
>>>
>>> Matt
>>
>>
>>
>> One more small nit on the 4 cylinder is the dipstick. The tube is
>> about 4" down in a hole in the engine decorative cover (I still can't
>> figure out why anyone needs these on their engine fer cryin' out loud!).
>
>
> I can only think of two reasons for them:
>
> 1) Showroom appeal. It looks nice.
> 2) It does keep the engine cleaner, which makes it more pleasant to work
> on. At least the Hyundai covers are quick to remove and you could always
> leave them off, if you want to.
>
> If you think Hyundai engines are bad, take a look at a VW sometime. My
> girlfriend's Passat's engine compartment has so many covers that it take
> half an hour of disassembly to gain access to anything in it. It's the
> most inconveniently designed car I've ever worked on. Fortunately for
> me, it's pretty reliable and when she bought it (used), it came with a
> transferrable extended warranty. She just has her friendly, local VW
> mechanic work on it and the warranty covers everything significant. It
> gets me off the hook. ;-)

I've heard that VWs in generally are a pain to work on. The only VWs
I've owned were two Beetles, a 1971 and a 1975. Both were fairly easy
to work on, but didn't have some of the creature comforts such as
heating and defrosting. My Beetles were the only cars where I had to
scrap the inside of the windshield as I drove!


Matt

Brian Nystrom

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Brian Nystrom wrote:
>
>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>> Brian Nystrom wrote:
>>>
>>>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> The car handles well and the Michelin tires perform great in snow.
>>
>>
>>
>>>> I laugh every time I see a statement like this. Get some snow tires
>>>> and you'll discover how pathetic "all season" tires truly are in the
>>>> snow.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Like I do with your statement. People who don't know how to drive in
>>> snow say this all the time. I've got 30 years of winter driving
>>> experience, including five years driving tractor trailers on and off
>>> road hauling logs.
>>
>>
>>
>> I guess we'll just have to disagree on this point. I'm in my 1st
>> winter driving in New Hampshire and I know how to drive in snow. I've
>> compared good snow tires (Nokian) to the stock Michellins and there is
>> absolutely no comparison in traction. The Nokians are FAR better in
>> snow and significantly better on ice.
>
>
> Most tests I've seen show less than a 20% difference on packed snow and
> often even less on ice. This is your 1st year driving in the winter and
> you already claim to know how to drive in snow? :-)

Oops! That was a typo; it's my 31st winter driving in NH. As written, it
would be a pretty bizarre claim.

> Disagreeing is fine. To me it is simply a decision as to what to
> optimize. Do you optimize for a handful of days in a typical winter
> that have snow and ice or do you optimize for the 90% or more days that
> have wet or dry pavement? I choose to optimize for the conditions I
> encounter most often here in northern PA and upstate NY. Now, if I
> lived in Telluride or Alaska, I'd probably make a different choice.
>
>
>>> I drive my K1500 quite regularly in the snow as I plow my 1700' long
>>> driveway with it. It has the heaviest lug M&S tires I could find.
>>> Snow tires are better in snow, but the difference is relatively minor
>>> in most conditions. In the conditions that prevail 95% of the time
>>> in PA and NY (dry or wet pavement), all-season tires are better
>>> performers than snow tires.
>>
>>
>>
>> Granted, the stock tires are better on wet/dry pavement, but that's
>> not my concern in winter. Snow tires are better on snow and ice.
>
>
> I've never disputed that snow tires are better on snow and ice. I
> simply don't have to deal with snow or ice on the roads more than a few
> days in a typical winter. So far this winter, I've driven to work on
> two days where the road was snow covered and had yet to be plowed and
> cindered and salted. The other 45 days (I count winter as starting with
> the first snow which this year was just before Thanksgiving as I
> recall), the roads have been wet at worst and mostly clear and dry.
>
>
>
>>>>> The steering is a little too light with too little feedback, but
>>>>> not a major problem.
>>
>>
>>
>>>> The Elantra is the same. The Elantra is my first car with power
>>>> steering and I'd rather not have it at all. Manual rack and pinion
>>>> is far more precise. If I could find a manual rack for it, I'd
>>>> change it in a heartbeat!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I agree that in a small car, there is little need for power
>>> steering unless you are physically handicapped. I'd prefer manual
>>> myself.
>>
>>
>>
>> Unfortunately, I haven't found anyone that makes a manual rack for
>> Hyundais. I've considered just disconnecting the p/s pump and draining
>> the fluid, since the steering is rack and pinion and the stock
>> steering ratio seems reasonable for use un-boosted, but I'm not sure
>> how well that will work. I may try it next summer, as an experiment.
>> It would be nice to get rid of the extra weight and drag of the p/s
>> pump. I would think it would gain an extra mpg or two.
>
>
> I don't know if that would work or not. Most power steering cars I've
> driven steer really hard when the pump fails. I doubt you could measure
> the savings in fuel. The power steering really only works hard while
> steering at very low speeds, and I doubt it consumes even 1/4
> horsepower. Remember, it is only doing the work you would be doing with
> manual steering. And this isn't much work most of the time. And very
> few humans can develop even 1/4 horsepower for any length of time, and
> that is using your legs!
>
>
>>>>> Heater doesn't distribute heat well to the footwells.
>>
>>
>>
>>>> Ditto for the Elantra.
>>
>>
>>
>>> I guess every brand has to have its achilles heel!
>>
>>
>>
>> In this case, one warm heel and one cold heel. ;-)
>
>
> Actually, both of my feet stay fairly cold until about 30 minutes have
> elapsed. My wife and I were driving for about 90 minutes this past
> weekend visiting motorcycle dealers (I have to do something to keep my
> spirits up in the winter!) and my feet did eventually get warm, but it
> took at least 30 minutes and this was on a pretty warm day ... about 30F.
>
>
>> Like you, I was initially disappointed with the gas mileage in my
>> Elantra. However, it increased rapidly for the first few tankfulls and
>> continued to increase gradually for ~10K miles. I switched the engine
>> to synthetic oil at 3000 miles and the transmission to synthetic lube
>> at 10K. That seems to increase fuel mileage, particularly in winter.
>> If you decide to do the same, Redline MT-90 seems to be the synthetic
>> gear lube of choice for the tranny. You must use a GL-3 lube and it's
>> one of the few available.
>
>
> I've used Mobil 1 for years and plan to switch over at the first oil
> change. My truck has synthetic in the gearbox as Chevy calls for a
> particular gear lube made by Castrol and I'm pretty sure it is
> synthetic. I think it is called Syntorq or something like that.
>
> I hadn't even checked the gear lube requirement for the Sonata as yet. I
> thought GL-3 was a pretty old standard. Isn't GL-5 or -6 what is current?

Damn, another typo! MT-90 is a GL-4 lube, not GL-3. It's not a question
of age of the standard, but of the material the that the synchronizers
are made of. Double check the requirements for the Sonata, but the
Elantra transmission requires a GL-4 oil. GL-5 or "universal" lubes will
not work acceptably, as they're too slippery for proper synchro
function. I've been using MT-90 for nearly 20K miles and it's been
great. I know several other Elantra owners that use it as well.

Brian Nystrom

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Brian Nystrom wrote:
>
>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>> Brian Nystrom wrote:
>>>
>>>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> The car handles well and the Michelin tires perform great in snow.
>>
>>
>>
>>>> I laugh every time I see a statement like this. Get some snow tires
>>>> and you'll discover how pathetic "all season" tires truly are in the
>>>> snow.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Like I do with your statement. People who don't know how to drive in
>>> snow say this all the time. I've got 30 years of winter driving
>>> experience, including five years driving tractor trailers on and off
>>> road hauling logs.
>>
>>
>>
>> I guess we'll just have to disagree on this point. I'm in my 1st
>> winter driving in New Hampshire and I know how to drive in snow. I've
>> compared good snow tires (Nokian) to the stock Michellins and there is
>> absolutely no comparison in traction. The Nokians are FAR better in
>> snow and significantly better on ice.
>
>
> Most tests I've seen show less than a 20% difference on packed snow and
> often even less on ice. This is your 1st year driving in the winter and
> you already claim to know how to drive in snow? :-)

Oops! That was a typo; it's my 31st winter driving in NH. As written, it
would be a pretty bizarre claim.

> Disagreeing is fine. To me it is simply a decision as to what to
> optimize. Do you optimize for a handful of days in a typical winter
> that have snow and ice or do you optimize for the 90% or more days that
> have wet or dry pavement? I choose to optimize for the conditions I
> encounter most often here in northern PA and upstate NY. Now, if I
> lived in Telluride or Alaska, I'd probably make a different choice.
>
>
>>> I drive my K1500 quite regularly in the snow as I plow my 1700' long
>>> driveway with it. It has the heaviest lug M&S tires I could find.
>>> Snow tires are better in snow, but the difference is relatively minor
>>> in most conditions. In the conditions that prevail 95% of the time
>>> in PA and NY (dry or wet pavement), all-season tires are better
>>> performers than snow tires.
>>
>>
>>
>> Granted, the stock tires are better on wet/dry pavement, but that's
>> not my concern in winter. Snow tires are better on snow and ice.
>
>
> I've never disputed that snow tires are better on snow and ice. I
> simply don't have to deal with snow or ice on the roads more than a few
> days in a typical winter. So far this winter, I've driven to work on
> two days where the road was snow covered and had yet to be plowed and
> cindered and salted. The other 45 days (I count winter as starting with
> the first snow which this year was just before Thanksgiving as I
> recall), the roads have been wet at worst and mostly clear and dry.
>
>
>
>>>>> The steering is a little too light with too little feedback, but
>>>>> not a major problem.
>>
>>
>>
>>>> The Elantra is the same. The Elantra is my first car with power
>>>> steering and I'd rather not have it at all. Manual rack and pinion
>>>> is far more precise. If I could find a manual rack for it, I'd
>>>> change it in a heartbeat!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, I agree that in a small car, there is little need for power
>>> steering unless you are physically handicapped. I'd prefer manual
>>> myself.
>>
>>
>>
>> Unfortunately, I haven't found anyone that makes a manual rack for
>> Hyundais. I've considered just disconnecting the p/s pump and draining
>> the fluid, since the steering is rack and pinion and the stock
>> steering ratio seems reasonable for use un-boosted, but I'm not sure
>> how well that will work. I may try it next summer, as an experiment.
>> It would be nice to get rid of the extra weight and drag of the p/s
>> pump. I would think it would gain an extra mpg or two.
>
>
> I don't know if that would work or not. Most power steering cars I've
> driven steer really hard when the pump fails. I doubt you could measure
> the savings in fuel. The power steering really only works hard while
> steering at very low speeds, and I doubt it consumes even 1/4
> horsepower. Remember, it is only doing the work you would be doing with
> manual steering. And this isn't much work most of the time. And very
> few humans can develop even 1/4 horsepower for any length of time, and
> that is using your legs!
>
>
>>>>> Heater doesn't distribute heat well to the footwells.
>>
>>
>>
>>>> Ditto for the Elantra.
>>
>>
>>
>>> I guess every brand has to have its achilles heel!
>>
>>
>>
>> In this case, one warm heel and one cold heel. ;-)
>
>
> Actually, both of my feet stay fairly cold until about 30 minutes have
> elapsed. My wife and I were driving for about 90 minutes this past
> weekend visiting motorcycle dealers (I have to do something to keep my
> spirits up in the winter!) and my feet did eventually get warm, but it
> took at least 30 minutes and this was on a pretty warm day ... about 30F.
>
>
>> Like you, I was initially disappointed with the gas mileage in my
>> Elantra. However, it increased rapidly for the first few tankfulls and
>> continued to increase gradually for ~10K miles. I switched the engine
>> to synthetic oil at 3000 miles and the transmission to synthetic lube
>> at 10K. That seems to increase fuel mileage, particularly in winter.
>> If you decide to do the same, Redline MT-90 seems to be the synthetic
>> gear lube of choice for the tranny. You must use a GL-3 lube and it's
>> one of the few available.
>
>
> I've used Mobil 1 for years and plan to switch over at the first oil
> change. My truck has synthetic in the gearbox as Chevy calls for a
> particular gear lube made by Castrol and I'm pretty sure it is
> synthetic. I think it is called Syntorq or something like that.
>
> I hadn't even checked the gear lube requirement for the Sonata as yet. I
> thought GL-3 was a pretty old standard. Isn't GL-5 or -6 what is current?

Damn, another typo! MT-90 is a GL-4 lube, not GL-3. It's not a question
of age of the standard, but of the material the that the synchronizers
are made of. Double check the requirements for the Sonata, but the
Elantra transmission requires a GL-4 oil. GL-5 or "universal" lubes will
not work acceptably, as they're too slippery for proper synchro
function. I've been using MT-90 for nearly 20K miles and it's been
great. I know several other Elantra owners that use it as well.

Brian Nystrom

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Brian Nystrom wrote:
>
>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, I'm closing in on 1,000 miles now and am on my third tank of
>>>> gas. My early impressions of the car are:
>>>>
>>>> Pros -
>>>>
>>>> Styling is great, but then this is very subjective.
>>>> Interior room is great for this size (exterior-wise) car.
>>>> Power is great for a 4 cylinder.
>>>> Braking is impressive and I like having disks on all four corners.
>>>> Quietness for a car of this price.
>>>> Controls are pretty good and easy to find, although I dislike the
>>>> dimmer switch that must be pushed forward and pulled back. I much
>>>> prefer the toggle style dimmers in my American cars.
>>>> Sound system is pretty good.
>>>> Assembly quality seems very good.
>>>> The car handles well and the Michelin tires perform great in snow.
>>>> The steering is a little too light with too little feedback, but not
>>>> a major problem.
>>>>
>>>> Cons -
>>>>
>>>> Heater doesn't distribute heat well to the footwells.
>>>> Windows fog up with more than two people in the car.
>>>> The seat belts are too close to the interior panel making it hard
>>>> for me to grab ahold of them to put them on. The receptacle is also
>>>> too close to the console leaving insufficient room for my hand to
>>>> insert the buckle.
>>>> The electronic throttle is too light (too little feedback) making it
>>>> hard to make a smooth start in 1st gear as the engine is also too
>>>> quiet to hear. In an automatic this wouldn't be an issue.
>>>> The storage bins are all the wrong size for common items. I use a
>>>> 4x6" spiral bound notebook to keep my vehicle log for fuel purchases
>>>> and maintenance. The cubby under the heater controls is about 5
>>>> 7/8" wide which means this notebook won't fit in it. It fits
>>>> perfectly in a similar cubby in my Chrysler minivan. Likewise, the
>>>> top compartment of the console looks like it was designed to hold a
>>>> short stack of CDs, but again it is about 1/8" too small for a
>>>> standard CD case. And the bottom compartment looks like it is the
>>>> right size for a standard square box of tissues, but again it is
>>>> about 1/8" too small. Fortunately, the tissue boxes give and I can
>>>> jamb one in there.
>>>>
>>>> Neutral -
>>>>
>>>> Fuel economy - First tank was 27 MPG (60-70% highway probably) and
>>>> second tank was 29 MPG (maybe 70-80% highway), both in weather
>>>> running in the high 20s to low 30s. I'm hoping for at least 30 in
>>>> my normal mix of driving once the car is broke in and the weather
>>>> gets a little warmer. I drive 70-80% highway typically. I'd like
>>>> to get closer to the 34 highway rating, but I doubt that will happen
>>>> as all of the road tests I've seen of Hyundais show that they don't
>>>> get as close to the EPA ratings as to most other car makers (Toyota
>>>> in particular does well in this regard).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm be curious to hear others initial impressions of their Sonatas.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Matt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> One more small nit on the 4 cylinder is the dipstick. The tube is
>>> about 4" down in a hole in the engine decorative cover (I still can't
>>> figure out why anyone needs these on their engine fer cryin' out loud!).
>>
>>
>>
>> I can only think of two reasons for them:
>>
>> 1) Showroom appeal. It looks nice.
>> 2) It does keep the engine cleaner, which makes it more pleasant to
>> work on. At least the Hyundai covers are quick to remove and you could
>> always leave them off, if you want to.
>>
>> If you think Hyundai engines are bad, take a look at a VW sometime. My
>> girlfriend's Passat's engine compartment has so many covers that it
>> take half an hour of disassembly to gain access to anything in it.
>> It's the most inconveniently designed car I've ever worked on.
>> Fortunately for me, it's pretty reliable and when she bought it
>> (used), it came with a transferrable extended warranty. She just has
>> her friendly, local VW mechanic work on it and the warranty covers
>> everything significant. It gets me off the hook. ;-)
>
>
> I've heard that VWs in generally are a pain to work on. The only VWs
> I've owned were two Beetles, a 1971 and a 1975. Both were fairly easy
> to work on, but didn't have some of the creature comforts such as
> heating and defrosting. My Beetles were the only cars where I had to
> scrap the inside of the windshield as I drove!

I never owned one, but my best friend did before I owned a car. During
the winter, he drove and I scraped the inside of the windshield. It was
a LOT of "fun" when we piled into the car after a day of X/C skiing or
ice climbing, with all that damp clothing and gear! ;-)

Brian Nystrom

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Brian Nystrom wrote:
>
>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, I'm closing in on 1,000 miles now and am on my third tank of
>>>> gas. My early impressions of the car are:
>>>>
>>>> Pros -
>>>>
>>>> Styling is great, but then this is very subjective.
>>>> Interior room is great for this size (exterior-wise) car.
>>>> Power is great for a 4 cylinder.
>>>> Braking is impressive and I like having disks on all four corners.
>>>> Quietness for a car of this price.
>>>> Controls are pretty good and easy to find, although I dislike the
>>>> dimmer switch that must be pushed forward and pulled back. I much
>>>> prefer the toggle style dimmers in my American cars.
>>>> Sound system is pretty good.
>>>> Assembly quality seems very good.
>>>> The car handles well and the Michelin tires perform great in snow.
>>>> The steering is a little too light with too little feedback, but not
>>>> a major problem.
>>>>
>>>> Cons -
>>>>
>>>> Heater doesn't distribute heat well to the footwells.
>>>> Windows fog up with more than two people in the car.
>>>> The seat belts are too close to the interior panel making it hard
>>>> for me to grab ahold of them to put them on. The receptacle is also
>>>> too close to the console leaving insufficient room for my hand to
>>>> insert the buckle.
>>>> The electronic throttle is too light (too little feedback) making it
>>>> hard to make a smooth start in 1st gear as the engine is also too
>>>> quiet to hear. In an automatic this wouldn't be an issue.
>>>> The storage bins are all the wrong size for common items. I use a
>>>> 4x6" spiral bound notebook to keep my vehicle log for fuel purchases
>>>> and maintenance. The cubby under the heater controls is about 5
>>>> 7/8" wide which means this notebook won't fit in it. It fits
>>>> perfectly in a similar cubby in my Chrysler minivan. Likewise, the
>>>> top compartment of the console looks like it was designed to hold a
>>>> short stack of CDs, but again it is about 1/8" too small for a
>>>> standard CD case. And the bottom compartment looks like it is the
>>>> right size for a standard square box of tissues, but again it is
>>>> about 1/8" too small. Fortunately, the tissue boxes give and I can
>>>> jamb one in there.
>>>>
>>>> Neutral -
>>>>
>>>> Fuel economy - First tank was 27 MPG (60-70% highway probably) and
>>>> second tank was 29 MPG (maybe 70-80% highway), both in weather
>>>> running in the high 20s to low 30s. I'm hoping for at least 30 in
>>>> my normal mix of driving once the car is broke in and the weather
>>>> gets a little warmer. I drive 70-80% highway typically. I'd like
>>>> to get closer to the 34 highway rating, but I doubt that will happen
>>>> as all of the road tests I've seen of Hyundais show that they don't
>>>> get as close to the EPA ratings as to most other car makers (Toyota
>>>> in particular does well in this regard).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm be curious to hear others initial impressions of their Sonatas.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Matt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> One more small nit on the 4 cylinder is the dipstick. The tube is
>>> about 4" down in a hole in the engine decorative cover (I still can't
>>> figure out why anyone needs these on their engine fer cryin' out loud!).
>>
>>
>>
>> I can only think of two reasons for them:
>>
>> 1) Showroom appeal. It looks nice.
>> 2) It does keep the engine cleaner, which makes it more pleasant to
>> work on. At least the Hyundai covers are quick to remove and you could
>> always leave them off, if you want to.
>>
>> If you think Hyundai engines are bad, take a look at a VW sometime. My
>> girlfriend's Passat's engine compartment has so many covers that it
>> take half an hour of disassembly to gain access to anything in it.
>> It's the most inconveniently designed car I've ever worked on.
>> Fortunately for me, it's pretty reliable and when she bought it
>> (used), it came with a transferrable extended warranty. She just has
>> her friendly, local VW mechanic work on it and the warranty covers
>> everything significant. It gets me off the hook. ;-)
>
>
> I've heard that VWs in generally are a pain to work on. The only VWs
> I've owned were two Beetles, a 1971 and a 1975. Both were fairly easy
> to work on, but didn't have some of the creature comforts such as
> heating and defrosting. My Beetles were the only cars where I had to
> scrap the inside of the windshield as I drove!

I never owned one, but my best friend did before I owned a car. During
the winter, he drove and I scraped the inside of the windshield. It was
a LOT of "fun" when we piled into the car after a day of X/C skiing or
ice climbing, with all that damp clothing and gear! ;-)

Mike Marlow

"Brian Nystrom" <brian.nystrom@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:LtOwf.591$GJ4.342@trndny08...

>
> Oops! That was a typo; it's my 31st winter driving in NH. As written, it
> would be a pretty bizarre claim.
>

Well then, you're almost as old as me. That gives you a couple of muligans
in these types of things.

--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

Mike Marlow

"Brian Nystrom" <brian.nystrom@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:LtOwf.591$GJ4.342@trndny08...

>
> Oops! That was a typo; it's my 31st winter driving in NH. As written, it
> would be a pretty bizarre claim.
>

Well then, you're almost as old as me. That gives you a couple of muligans
in these types of things.

--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net