2011 Hyundai Sonata GLS: Track Tested

Shouldn't a 200 hp, 3200 lb. car be faster than this?

0-60 at 8.2s still beats out Chevy Malibu, Toyota Camry, Ford Fusion. Seems fast enough for a family car, don't you think?

I'd like to hear more about IL's frequent mention of its poorly tuned overdamped steering. How does that impact family vacation drives for example. I like to hear IL's opinions when this car is subjected to what its typical buyers would do.

Nothing really to see here... pretty much hits the numbers you'd expect for a 4-banger slushbox family sedan. 3200 lbs seems relatively light though.

In other words it is just as fast as a lot of "muscle" cars from the 60's. Now before everybody starts screaming at me take the time too look up some old tests from MT and C&D from back then. Unless it something like a Hemi Coronet or a GS 455 Stage One, most "hot" cars from back then ran 0-60 around 8-9 seconds on the horrible tires of the time and high15 to mid 16s in the 1/4 mile. It is a just as fast as any late 70's Vette if not faster. Cars have come a long way.

this car is not as fast as its power to weight ratio would have you believe. In fact, the Camry (which is also light) is just as fast with considerably less hp. Mt did a four cylinder comparo a few months back and I dont think the Sonata was much faster than the next 2 fastest vehicles.

This is enough speed for the average buyer but this car should have a notable performance advantage over the competition with 298hp. The skidpad performance is Avalon like.

Ah where are you getting 298hp? Its a 4cyl. family sedan, no one buys this thing for the visceral speed they produce!

Not too bad. However, every time I see one on the road I can't help but think how ugly I think it is. That broken line in the hood looks ugly. It is distinctive, but I think it is ugly.

For the record, the Sonata did 8.1 0-60 in MT's comparo. The Camry and Altima tied for 2nd at 8.4. Those cars also however brought up the rear for observed fuel economy, while the Sonata was 3rd best of 7. Though it's fair to note that MT doesn't have any formal fuel economy run that I've ever read about, so over such a short period as they usually test for drivers could well make a big difference.

The Sonata is not the game changer we originally thought it would be, but its biggest plus is that it is fully competitive.

"The Sonata is not the game changer we originally thought it would be, but its biggest plus is that it is fully competitive."

What is your definition of game changing?

"Ah where are you getting 298hp? "

198hp obviously. Its got the best power to weight ratio in the class but it barely faster than Altima or camry.

In C&D's comparo the Sonata got 24mpg which tied the accord and trailed the Legacy over 400miles.

When IL compared specs between the Regal and Sonata a while back much was made about how the Sonata's specs dominated. It is a faster car but the gap isnt as big as you would think. C&D timed the Sonata at 7.8 secs (MT got 8.1) and Regal at 8.7. We'll see how MT's stats compare when they formally test a Regal but considering it weighs 300lbs more its not much slower. I didnt realize the Accord was only 20lbs more than the Sonata. The base weight was much touted when the car was introduced but the higher trim level models weigh almost as much as the Accord and Camry.

You guys do realize that Edmunds/Inside Line has the most conservative (realistic?) 0-60 times out of the major auto review sites. FWIW, Road & Track tested an SE model and managed 0-60 in 7.5 seconds. 7.5-8.5 seconds is a completely reasonable time for this type of car, especially once you factor in the class-leading fuel economy.

Want something faster? Get the turbo.

So, it's a slow wallowy car for $24,000. No thanks.

I'm old enough to remember the BMW 2002, from the late '60s. It was considered back then to be the supreme small sports sedan, and it did a 0-60 in 12.8.

http://www.hemmings.com/hsx/stories/2006/11/01/hmn_feature26.html

Now we have people complaining about sub-9 second 0-60 times as being slow.

If it can't keep up with my pickup truck, it's slow.

Well, searching a bit found out that:

The lightest car in the comparison of 7 midsize family sedans of Motor Trend was the Altima 2.5SL -Roughly 100 pounds less!!-
Given all the hype I thought it was the Sonata, but it wasn`t.
At least the Sonata SE, which basically weights the same as a Camry LE.

But then, something that still rings true, it is (in that comparo) that the Sonata is the faster of all those cars.

Faster to 60, faster in the 1/4 mile and has the best trap speed.
And that trap speed, makes it the faster all the way to 100+
In fact, as you go into higher speeds, the sonata keeps pulling harder and harder, and making the gap even wider.

So, you may say, the difference with the faster cars to 60 or the 1/4mile is just 0.2 secs, but go past 60 and the differences start to be 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 secs depending of the car is competing against.

The Accord EX, with is much touted 190 hp engine, gets a dissapointing 0-60 of 8.9 secs.
But, it shows its "lost power" at higher speeds, easily beating cars like the malibu and the fusion, cars that almost tied him in the 0-60 time with 9 flat and 8.7 respectively.

OH the beauty of the trap speed!

Here is the link fellas:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_1005_best_selling_midsize_family_sedan_comparison/malibu_fusion_accord_sonata_specs.html

its not all that fast (as its power to weight ratio would suggest) because of a combination of several things, like the not so fast shifting tranny, the not so grippy tires and the fact that unlike small displacement turbos, this car, despite direct injection, still makes its hp and torque higher on the tach rather than lower. (granted it hits its peak lower than say a honda accord, but it still falls short of the sub 2krpm torque peaks engines from vw can do.)

i actually like the sonata a lot, and that time is perfectly fine for a car in this class. slow? who says they are supposed to be fast? considering how fast people drive the v-6 versions of these cars (which are probably predominately purchased for the extra panache and features higher engined models offer) there is no shame in getting this, even over the forthcoming turbo.

to add to things i DONT like about the car, the steering is positively awful. i thought my wifes insight was a tad disconnected, but the thing feels like an m3 next to the sonata i test drove. its low effort sure, but confidence inspiring? hardly.