Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
#31
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
Mike Marlow wrote:
> "Darby OGill" <bark@woof.net> wrote in message
> news:QYchg.3696$PY6.2047@trnddc05...
>
>
>>...its not always just mpg, its the type of car you want to drive. I have
>>not driven the 4, but i sure do enjoy the 6. It may cost me 300 bucks a
>
> year
>
>>more (my rough math), but its worth it to me. People spend(waste!) money
>
> in
>
>>all sorts of ways. I'd treat myself to the 6, buts thats just me.
>>
>>
>
>
> I was going to post something similar to the OP's question. I am not a 4
> cyl person at all. I like the feeling of some power when I step on the gas
> and the 4 cylinders just don't deliver that. No matter whether it's off a
> stop light or out in the passing lane, I like to feel a decent motor under
> the hood without the thing winding itself out like a bumble bee in heat.
> And I like smooth too. Not many 4 cylinders deliver a smooth ride like a 6
> does. I don't think it's a waste of money at all. It's your money and your
> preference - a waste of money would be buying something other than you
> really want.
>
Did you drive a Sonata 4 cylinder? Mine has the performance that the
V-6s had just a few years ago. It isn't the number of cylinders, it is
the torque.
Matt
> "Darby OGill" <bark@woof.net> wrote in message
> news:QYchg.3696$PY6.2047@trnddc05...
>
>
>>...its not always just mpg, its the type of car you want to drive. I have
>>not driven the 4, but i sure do enjoy the 6. It may cost me 300 bucks a
>
> year
>
>>more (my rough math), but its worth it to me. People spend(waste!) money
>
> in
>
>>all sorts of ways. I'd treat myself to the 6, buts thats just me.
>>
>>
>
>
> I was going to post something similar to the OP's question. I am not a 4
> cyl person at all. I like the feeling of some power when I step on the gas
> and the 4 cylinders just don't deliver that. No matter whether it's off a
> stop light or out in the passing lane, I like to feel a decent motor under
> the hood without the thing winding itself out like a bumble bee in heat.
> And I like smooth too. Not many 4 cylinders deliver a smooth ride like a 6
> does. I don't think it's a waste of money at all. It's your money and your
> preference - a waste of money would be buying something other than you
> really want.
>
Did you drive a Sonata 4 cylinder? Mine has the performance that the
V-6s had just a few years ago. It isn't the number of cylinders, it is
the torque.
Matt
#32
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
Bob Adkins wrote:
> On 5 Jun 2006 22:46:30 -0700, vineeth.alex@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>>Hi I was thinking of buying a GLS V6 Sonata. I got a coupl of quotes of
>>around 17350 to 17494 for the variant with moonroof. I was wondering is
>>that a good price. Also is the V6 fuel consumption anywhere near the
>>EPA figures? 1 has to be careful the way gas prices are looking now.. I
>>mean if it's not worthy I could go for the 4 cylinder verssion & save a
>>few hundred..
>
>
>
> The 4 is not a whole lot better on price or gas. I got my basic GLS V6 for
> 18500 OTD, paying very high tax in my area. I've owned a moon roof, but
> never liked it. Just too much noise, dust, and exhaust fumes for me. The 17"
> wheels in the sport package are not to my taste. Too harsh and noisy over
> highway expansion joints.
I paid $16,300 for my 4 cylinder. I think $2,200 is significant. :-)
> I am averaging ~27mpg, mostly on 70% highway, 30% town, with A/C always
> running.
I'm getting 31 MPG of late commuting to work. This is also about 70%
highway and 30% city. I haven't taken a long trip yet, but I fully
expect that the EPA highway rating of 34 is within reach on the interstate.
Matt
> On 5 Jun 2006 22:46:30 -0700, vineeth.alex@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>>Hi I was thinking of buying a GLS V6 Sonata. I got a coupl of quotes of
>>around 17350 to 17494 for the variant with moonroof. I was wondering is
>>that a good price. Also is the V6 fuel consumption anywhere near the
>>EPA figures? 1 has to be careful the way gas prices are looking now.. I
>>mean if it's not worthy I could go for the 4 cylinder verssion & save a
>>few hundred..
>
>
>
> The 4 is not a whole lot better on price or gas. I got my basic GLS V6 for
> 18500 OTD, paying very high tax in my area. I've owned a moon roof, but
> never liked it. Just too much noise, dust, and exhaust fumes for me. The 17"
> wheels in the sport package are not to my taste. Too harsh and noisy over
> highway expansion joints.
I paid $16,300 for my 4 cylinder. I think $2,200 is significant. :-)
> I am averaging ~27mpg, mostly on 70% highway, 30% town, with A/C always
> running.
I'm getting 31 MPG of late commuting to work. This is also about 70%
highway and 30% city. I haven't taken a long trip yet, but I fully
expect that the EPA highway rating of 34 is within reach on the interstate.
Matt
#33
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
Bob Adkins wrote:
> On 5 Jun 2006 22:46:30 -0700, vineeth.alex@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>>Hi I was thinking of buying a GLS V6 Sonata. I got a coupl of quotes of
>>around 17350 to 17494 for the variant with moonroof. I was wondering is
>>that a good price. Also is the V6 fuel consumption anywhere near the
>>EPA figures? 1 has to be careful the way gas prices are looking now.. I
>>mean if it's not worthy I could go for the 4 cylinder verssion & save a
>>few hundred..
>
>
>
> The 4 is not a whole lot better on price or gas. I got my basic GLS V6 for
> 18500 OTD, paying very high tax in my area. I've owned a moon roof, but
> never liked it. Just too much noise, dust, and exhaust fumes for me. The 17"
> wheels in the sport package are not to my taste. Too harsh and noisy over
> highway expansion joints.
I paid $16,300 for my 4 cylinder. I think $2,200 is significant. :-)
> I am averaging ~27mpg, mostly on 70% highway, 30% town, with A/C always
> running.
I'm getting 31 MPG of late commuting to work. This is also about 70%
highway and 30% city. I haven't taken a long trip yet, but I fully
expect that the EPA highway rating of 34 is within reach on the interstate.
Matt
> On 5 Jun 2006 22:46:30 -0700, vineeth.alex@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>>Hi I was thinking of buying a GLS V6 Sonata. I got a coupl of quotes of
>>around 17350 to 17494 for the variant with moonroof. I was wondering is
>>that a good price. Also is the V6 fuel consumption anywhere near the
>>EPA figures? 1 has to be careful the way gas prices are looking now.. I
>>mean if it's not worthy I could go for the 4 cylinder verssion & save a
>>few hundred..
>
>
>
> The 4 is not a whole lot better on price or gas. I got my basic GLS V6 for
> 18500 OTD, paying very high tax in my area. I've owned a moon roof, but
> never liked it. Just too much noise, dust, and exhaust fumes for me. The 17"
> wheels in the sport package are not to my taste. Too harsh and noisy over
> highway expansion joints.
I paid $16,300 for my 4 cylinder. I think $2,200 is significant. :-)
> I am averaging ~27mpg, mostly on 70% highway, 30% town, with A/C always
> running.
I'm getting 31 MPG of late commuting to work. This is also about 70%
highway and 30% city. I haven't taken a long trip yet, but I fully
expect that the EPA highway rating of 34 is within reach on the interstate.
Matt
#34
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
Bob Adkins wrote:
> On 5 Jun 2006 22:46:30 -0700, vineeth.alex@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>>Hi I was thinking of buying a GLS V6 Sonata. I got a coupl of quotes of
>>around 17350 to 17494 for the variant with moonroof. I was wondering is
>>that a good price. Also is the V6 fuel consumption anywhere near the
>>EPA figures? 1 has to be careful the way gas prices are looking now.. I
>>mean if it's not worthy I could go for the 4 cylinder verssion & save a
>>few hundred..
>
>
>
> The 4 is not a whole lot better on price or gas. I got my basic GLS V6 for
> 18500 OTD, paying very high tax in my area. I've owned a moon roof, but
> never liked it. Just too much noise, dust, and exhaust fumes for me. The 17"
> wheels in the sport package are not to my taste. Too harsh and noisy over
> highway expansion joints.
I paid $16,300 for my 4 cylinder. I think $2,200 is significant. :-)
> I am averaging ~27mpg, mostly on 70% highway, 30% town, with A/C always
> running.
I'm getting 31 MPG of late commuting to work. This is also about 70%
highway and 30% city. I haven't taken a long trip yet, but I fully
expect that the EPA highway rating of 34 is within reach on the interstate.
Matt
> On 5 Jun 2006 22:46:30 -0700, vineeth.alex@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>>Hi I was thinking of buying a GLS V6 Sonata. I got a coupl of quotes of
>>around 17350 to 17494 for the variant with moonroof. I was wondering is
>>that a good price. Also is the V6 fuel consumption anywhere near the
>>EPA figures? 1 has to be careful the way gas prices are looking now.. I
>>mean if it's not worthy I could go for the 4 cylinder verssion & save a
>>few hundred..
>
>
>
> The 4 is not a whole lot better on price or gas. I got my basic GLS V6 for
> 18500 OTD, paying very high tax in my area. I've owned a moon roof, but
> never liked it. Just too much noise, dust, and exhaust fumes for me. The 17"
> wheels in the sport package are not to my taste. Too harsh and noisy over
> highway expansion joints.
I paid $16,300 for my 4 cylinder. I think $2,200 is significant. :-)
> I am averaging ~27mpg, mostly on 70% highway, 30% town, with A/C always
> running.
I'm getting 31 MPG of late commuting to work. This is also about 70%
highway and 30% city. I haven't taken a long trip yet, but I fully
expect that the EPA highway rating of 34 is within reach on the interstate.
Matt
#35
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
My v-6 LX is a great car...except, the ride is harsh with the 17 inch
wheels, I drove a GLS with 16 inch wheels and ride was much softer..BUT It
also had cloth seats which I think contributed to the nice ride. general
mileage depends on your driving habits, etc, expect 15-19 city and 24-31
highway. the more people, stuff in the car, the less the mileage.
probably on smoothe road one person and no luggage no headwind at 60 MPH
you could probably get 33MPG!! But who drives that way
wheels, I drove a GLS with 16 inch wheels and ride was much softer..BUT It
also had cloth seats which I think contributed to the nice ride. general
mileage depends on your driving habits, etc, expect 15-19 city and 24-31
highway. the more people, stuff in the car, the less the mileage.
probably on smoothe road one person and no luggage no headwind at 60 MPH
you could probably get 33MPG!! But who drives that way
#36
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
My v-6 LX is a great car...except, the ride is harsh with the 17 inch
wheels, I drove a GLS with 16 inch wheels and ride was much softer..BUT It
also had cloth seats which I think contributed to the nice ride. general
mileage depends on your driving habits, etc, expect 15-19 city and 24-31
highway. the more people, stuff in the car, the less the mileage.
probably on smoothe road one person and no luggage no headwind at 60 MPH
you could probably get 33MPG!! But who drives that way
wheels, I drove a GLS with 16 inch wheels and ride was much softer..BUT It
also had cloth seats which I think contributed to the nice ride. general
mileage depends on your driving habits, etc, expect 15-19 city and 24-31
highway. the more people, stuff in the car, the less the mileage.
probably on smoothe road one person and no luggage no headwind at 60 MPH
you could probably get 33MPG!! But who drives that way
#37
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
My v-6 LX is a great car...except, the ride is harsh with the 17 inch
wheels, I drove a GLS with 16 inch wheels and ride was much softer..BUT It
also had cloth seats which I think contributed to the nice ride. general
mileage depends on your driving habits, etc, expect 15-19 city and 24-31
highway. the more people, stuff in the car, the less the mileage.
probably on smoothe road one person and no luggage no headwind at 60 MPH
you could probably get 33MPG!! But who drives that way
wheels, I drove a GLS with 16 inch wheels and ride was much softer..BUT It
also had cloth seats which I think contributed to the nice ride. general
mileage depends on your driving habits, etc, expect 15-19 city and 24-31
highway. the more people, stuff in the car, the less the mileage.
probably on smoothe road one person and no luggage no headwind at 60 MPH
you could probably get 33MPG!! But who drives that way
#38
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
I have posted my mileage statistics for GLS V6 to this group a few weeks
ago.
Search using Google and you will find my numbers.
<vineeth.alex@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149572790.220304.114050@y43g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi I was thinking of buying a GLS V6 Sonata. I got a coupl of quotes of
> around 17350 to 17494 for the variant with moonroof. I was wondering is
> that a good price. Also is the V6 fuel consumption anywhere near the
> EPA figures? 1 has to be careful the way gas prices are looking now.. I
> mean if it's not worthy I could go for the 4 cylinder verssion & save a
> few hundred..
>
ago.
Search using Google and you will find my numbers.
<vineeth.alex@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149572790.220304.114050@y43g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi I was thinking of buying a GLS V6 Sonata. I got a coupl of quotes of
> around 17350 to 17494 for the variant with moonroof. I was wondering is
> that a good price. Also is the V6 fuel consumption anywhere near the
> EPA figures? 1 has to be careful the way gas prices are looking now.. I
> mean if it's not worthy I could go for the 4 cylinder verssion & save a
> few hundred..
>
#39
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
I have posted my mileage statistics for GLS V6 to this group a few weeks
ago.
Search using Google and you will find my numbers.
<vineeth.alex@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149572790.220304.114050@y43g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi I was thinking of buying a GLS V6 Sonata. I got a coupl of quotes of
> around 17350 to 17494 for the variant with moonroof. I was wondering is
> that a good price. Also is the V6 fuel consumption anywhere near the
> EPA figures? 1 has to be careful the way gas prices are looking now.. I
> mean if it's not worthy I could go for the 4 cylinder verssion & save a
> few hundred..
>
ago.
Search using Google and you will find my numbers.
<vineeth.alex@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149572790.220304.114050@y43g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi I was thinking of buying a GLS V6 Sonata. I got a coupl of quotes of
> around 17350 to 17494 for the variant with moonroof. I was wondering is
> that a good price. Also is the V6 fuel consumption anywhere near the
> EPA figures? 1 has to be careful the way gas prices are looking now.. I
> mean if it's not worthy I could go for the 4 cylinder verssion & save a
> few hundred..
>
#40
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
I have posted my mileage statistics for GLS V6 to this group a few weeks
ago.
Search using Google and you will find my numbers.
<vineeth.alex@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149572790.220304.114050@y43g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi I was thinking of buying a GLS V6 Sonata. I got a coupl of quotes of
> around 17350 to 17494 for the variant with moonroof. I was wondering is
> that a good price. Also is the V6 fuel consumption anywhere near the
> EPA figures? 1 has to be careful the way gas prices are looking now.. I
> mean if it's not worthy I could go for the 4 cylinder verssion & save a
> few hundred..
>
ago.
Search using Google and you will find my numbers.
<vineeth.alex@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149572790.220304.114050@y43g2000cwc.googlegr oups.com...
> Hi I was thinking of buying a GLS V6 Sonata. I got a coupl of quotes of
> around 17350 to 17494 for the variant with moonroof. I was wondering is
> that a good price. Also is the V6 fuel consumption anywhere near the
> EPA figures? 1 has to be careful the way gas prices are looking now.. I
> mean if it's not worthy I could go for the 4 cylinder verssion & save a
> few hundred..
>
#41
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
"Matt Whiting" <whiting@epix.net> wrote in message
news:M4mhg.9362$lb.841944@news1.epix.net...
>
> Did you drive a Sonata 4 cylinder? Mine has the performance that the
> V-6s had just a few years ago. It isn't the number of cylinders, it is
> the torque.
>
All things have to be equal though Matt. Your 4 has the performance of the
six of a few years ago because the 6 of a few years ago lacked torque. You
have to compare current models. All things being equal, it is the number of
cylinders. That said, it's good to see the performance of the 4 cylinders
improving. I drove a four before buying our six and I really hated
everything about it. It was rougher, and it dramatically lacked power.
--
-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net
#42
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
"Matt Whiting" <whiting@epix.net> wrote in message
news:M4mhg.9362$lb.841944@news1.epix.net...
>
> Did you drive a Sonata 4 cylinder? Mine has the performance that the
> V-6s had just a few years ago. It isn't the number of cylinders, it is
> the torque.
>
All things have to be equal though Matt. Your 4 has the performance of the
six of a few years ago because the 6 of a few years ago lacked torque. You
have to compare current models. All things being equal, it is the number of
cylinders. That said, it's good to see the performance of the 4 cylinders
improving. I drove a four before buying our six and I really hated
everything about it. It was rougher, and it dramatically lacked power.
--
-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net
#43
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
"Matt Whiting" <whiting@epix.net> wrote in message
news:M4mhg.9362$lb.841944@news1.epix.net...
>
> Did you drive a Sonata 4 cylinder? Mine has the performance that the
> V-6s had just a few years ago. It isn't the number of cylinders, it is
> the torque.
>
All things have to be equal though Matt. Your 4 has the performance of the
six of a few years ago because the 6 of a few years ago lacked torque. You
have to compare current models. All things being equal, it is the number of
cylinders. That said, it's good to see the performance of the 4 cylinders
improving. I drove a four before buying our six and I really hated
everything about it. It was rougher, and it dramatically lacked power.
--
-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net
#44
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
Mike Marlow wrote:
> "Matt Whiting" <whiting@epix.net> wrote in message
> news:M4mhg.9362$lb.841944@news1.epix.net...
>
>
>>Did you drive a Sonata 4 cylinder? Mine has the performance that the
>>V-6s had just a few years ago. It isn't the number of cylinders, it is
>>the torque.
>>
>
>
> All things have to be equal though Matt. Your 4 has the performance of the
> six of a few years ago because the 6 of a few years ago lacked torque. You
> have to compare current models. All things being equal, it is the number of
> cylinders. That said, it's good to see the performance of the 4 cylinders
> improving. I drove a four before buying our six and I really hated
> everything about it. It was rougher, and it dramatically lacked power.
I disagree. The number of cylinders doesn't mean squat. It is the
torque curve shape and magnitude that matters. A 4 can be made very
smooth and a V-6 can shake like a paint mixer.
I prefer fewer cylinders as it lowers maintenance costs all the way
around and lessens the chance of failure. Having more parts means
greater likelihood of failure, in general.
I'm personally quite amazed at the performance of the new
Chrysler/Hyundai/Mitsubishi (I think the 3rd partner is Mitsu anyway)
2.4L. It is smooth, quiet and performs very well in a car the size of
the Sonata, at least with the standard shift. I didn't drive an
automatic 4, so maybe that is different as automatics are almost always
poorer performers than standard shift vehicles. And they ALWAYS feel
more sluggish.
I drove three different V-6 automatic Sonatas and the 4 with standard
just felt more responsive to me in almost all circumstances, except
right off the line. It is hard to get a good launch with the touchy
throttle combined with a too light clutch with too narrow an engagement
band.
Matt
> "Matt Whiting" <whiting@epix.net> wrote in message
> news:M4mhg.9362$lb.841944@news1.epix.net...
>
>
>>Did you drive a Sonata 4 cylinder? Mine has the performance that the
>>V-6s had just a few years ago. It isn't the number of cylinders, it is
>>the torque.
>>
>
>
> All things have to be equal though Matt. Your 4 has the performance of the
> six of a few years ago because the 6 of a few years ago lacked torque. You
> have to compare current models. All things being equal, it is the number of
> cylinders. That said, it's good to see the performance of the 4 cylinders
> improving. I drove a four before buying our six and I really hated
> everything about it. It was rougher, and it dramatically lacked power.
I disagree. The number of cylinders doesn't mean squat. It is the
torque curve shape and magnitude that matters. A 4 can be made very
smooth and a V-6 can shake like a paint mixer.
I prefer fewer cylinders as it lowers maintenance costs all the way
around and lessens the chance of failure. Having more parts means
greater likelihood of failure, in general.
I'm personally quite amazed at the performance of the new
Chrysler/Hyundai/Mitsubishi (I think the 3rd partner is Mitsu anyway)
2.4L. It is smooth, quiet and performs very well in a car the size of
the Sonata, at least with the standard shift. I didn't drive an
automatic 4, so maybe that is different as automatics are almost always
poorer performers than standard shift vehicles. And they ALWAYS feel
more sluggish.
I drove three different V-6 automatic Sonatas and the 4 with standard
just felt more responsive to me in almost all circumstances, except
right off the line. It is hard to get a good launch with the touchy
throttle combined with a too light clutch with too narrow an engagement
band.
Matt
#45
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Sonata GLS V6 Pricing?
Mike Marlow wrote:
> "Matt Whiting" <whiting@epix.net> wrote in message
> news:M4mhg.9362$lb.841944@news1.epix.net...
>
>
>>Did you drive a Sonata 4 cylinder? Mine has the performance that the
>>V-6s had just a few years ago. It isn't the number of cylinders, it is
>>the torque.
>>
>
>
> All things have to be equal though Matt. Your 4 has the performance of the
> six of a few years ago because the 6 of a few years ago lacked torque. You
> have to compare current models. All things being equal, it is the number of
> cylinders. That said, it's good to see the performance of the 4 cylinders
> improving. I drove a four before buying our six and I really hated
> everything about it. It was rougher, and it dramatically lacked power.
I disagree. The number of cylinders doesn't mean squat. It is the
torque curve shape and magnitude that matters. A 4 can be made very
smooth and a V-6 can shake like a paint mixer.
I prefer fewer cylinders as it lowers maintenance costs all the way
around and lessens the chance of failure. Having more parts means
greater likelihood of failure, in general.
I'm personally quite amazed at the performance of the new
Chrysler/Hyundai/Mitsubishi (I think the 3rd partner is Mitsu anyway)
2.4L. It is smooth, quiet and performs very well in a car the size of
the Sonata, at least with the standard shift. I didn't drive an
automatic 4, so maybe that is different as automatics are almost always
poorer performers than standard shift vehicles. And they ALWAYS feel
more sluggish.
I drove three different V-6 automatic Sonatas and the 4 with standard
just felt more responsive to me in almost all circumstances, except
right off the line. It is hard to get a good launch with the touchy
throttle combined with a too light clutch with too narrow an engagement
band.
Matt
> "Matt Whiting" <whiting@epix.net> wrote in message
> news:M4mhg.9362$lb.841944@news1.epix.net...
>
>
>>Did you drive a Sonata 4 cylinder? Mine has the performance that the
>>V-6s had just a few years ago. It isn't the number of cylinders, it is
>>the torque.
>>
>
>
> All things have to be equal though Matt. Your 4 has the performance of the
> six of a few years ago because the 6 of a few years ago lacked torque. You
> have to compare current models. All things being equal, it is the number of
> cylinders. That said, it's good to see the performance of the 4 cylinders
> improving. I drove a four before buying our six and I really hated
> everything about it. It was rougher, and it dramatically lacked power.
I disagree. The number of cylinders doesn't mean squat. It is the
torque curve shape and magnitude that matters. A 4 can be made very
smooth and a V-6 can shake like a paint mixer.
I prefer fewer cylinders as it lowers maintenance costs all the way
around and lessens the chance of failure. Having more parts means
greater likelihood of failure, in general.
I'm personally quite amazed at the performance of the new
Chrysler/Hyundai/Mitsubishi (I think the 3rd partner is Mitsu anyway)
2.4L. It is smooth, quiet and performs very well in a car the size of
the Sonata, at least with the standard shift. I didn't drive an
automatic 4, so maybe that is different as automatics are almost always
poorer performers than standard shift vehicles. And they ALWAYS feel
more sluggish.
I drove three different V-6 automatic Sonatas and the 4 with standard
just felt more responsive to me in almost all circumstances, except
right off the line. It is hard to get a good launch with the touchy
throttle combined with a too light clutch with too narrow an engagement
band.
Matt