2011 Buick Regal vs. 2011 Hyundai Sonata: We Compare the Specs

They really arent comparable. The Regal is likely to have a based price that is $8k more than the Hyundai. They may compare in dimensions and powerplant but that's about it.

Regal is an Insignia and European cars tend to be heavier than Asian cars. Its true across the board. Name one non sports car from Europe that is a class leader in low weight. The weight of the Regal is in line with cars like the Passat, A4, 5 series, C class, etc- all of those cars are heavier than the Sonata while offering less space inside.

Just going by the specs, the Sonata has it all over the Regal. Whether that turns out to be the case in real-world driving, we'll have to wait and see.

I assumed the Sonata would be more likely to compete with the Malibu then a Buick vehicle. Has the the Sonata has been upscaled that much? I'm not saying the Buick is a luxury vehicle, but its likely to be a step above the Camry/Accord/Fusion etc of the world.

I'll be interested to see the Sonata in person. When pictured side by side with he Regal, it almost looks overstyled. Then again, the Regal is fairly conservative. Also, that front angle photo of the Sonata has a lot of glare.

The similar dimensions of the Taurus and Accord also suggests that some North American cars are also much heavier than their Asian counterparts.

If someone drives these two cars the Sonata will be more lively. If a buyer doesn't care about that--than its no problem. I personally like the advantages of lower weight.

But it seems to go both ways. Some European leaders vs Asian:

2008 BMW 328i manual: 3,340 lbs
2008 Lexus IS250 non-AWD manual: 3,455 lbs
Audi A4 2.0T: 3,428 lbs
Nissan Maxima auto: 3,579 lbs

The Maxima has a V6 and large wheels so its not like its extra weight isnt explained. The A4 with the V6 and AWD was considerably heavier. In general, Asian cars tend to be the lightest. Compare the weight of the full sized Avalon to cars like the 5 series, C class or A4- all of which have FAR less room inside. Most Toyota vehicles are lighter than average. Hyundais and Kias used to be heavy but now they are moving in the opposite direction.

The Sonata will offer more features for less money- that's what Hyundai ALWAYS does. Its pointless to compare the value offered by the Sonata to the Regal- the Regal will definitely cost more. The Sonata is aimed at the heart of the family car market, not the Regal. Buick doesn't need to worry since the Regal isn't going to be a volume car. Honda, Nissan, Toyota, Chevy, etc. may need to worry. I just checked out the Hyundai site and that interior LOOKS far better than almost anything out there. Design wise I would say only the Malibu is anywhere near as attractive inside. It blows away Accord, 2010 Fusion and Camry.

I have never liked the look of the new Sonata, it seems very Camry Solara in pictures. I have to say though that I ate my words when I saw it at the LA auto show. It's not the best looking car but it is much tidier in person, and yes, attractive. It's very impressive. I would not be surprised at all if it turns out to be a better car than the Regal. The specks seem to point (lightly) in that direction already.

Just going by the specs, the Sonata has it all over the Regal. Whether that turns out to be the case in real-world driving, we'll have to wait and see.

+100

And has it all over in value/price as well.

^ I can't believe I wrote "specks". :\

For those who like the cleaner (shall we say more "Germanic") look of the Regal/Insignia, Kia will will be coming out w/ the Peter Schreyer designed 2011 Optima which looks to have great lines.

In terms of comparison, the Sonata really should be compared w/ the Malibu (when the next-gen arrives), but thus far, the Sonata looks good w/ regard to fuel economy and interior room.

It'll be interesting to see how the spec-for-spec pricing turns out, but I'd expect the Hyundai to be cheaper when options are added. Numbers wise, they stack up pretty well, but none of the numbers listed really give a sense of handling/sportiness.

Also, I don't really see any issue with comparing cars with similar specs and different prices. Hyundai showed that it could take on the G37 with the Genesis Coupe and the Lexus LS with the Genesis Sedan. Why not see if they can take on the Regal (or TSX) with the Sonata as well?

Wow the Sonata's huge, 103.8 cu ft, that's bigger than the so called large sedan Taurus.
And the gas mileage of compact cars!

If those stats hold up to be true, the Sonata's amazing, and good looking too.

"It'll be interesting to see how the spec-for-spec pricing turns out, but I'd expect the Hyundai to be cheaper when options are added. "

Its going to be cheaper. Its supposed to start under $20k and considering its a Hyundai it will likely be loaded at less than $30k. The Regal CXL will probably start at $27k or so and easily hit $33k or more with nav and all options. Hyundai always leads when it comes to value, nothing new there.

"Wow the Sonata's huge, 103.8 cu ft, that's bigger than the so called large sedan Taurus.
And the gas mileage of compact cars!"

I dont know where all the space is coming from because the rear seat dimensions are modest. The rear legroom is actually less than most midsize competitors and certainly less than the Taurus.

As for styling I will take the Buick any day. The Sonata still trails the Malibu, 6 and Fusion in styling to my eyes. Its very generic and Toyota like. The wheels are terrible as well.

I'm really scared that all these DI engines will soon come back to haunt (carbon buildup) certain manufacturers who produce them. That's the last thing any manufacturer wants or needs especially one that's trying to prove themselves (GM and Hyundai) to potential consumers.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/6866031.html

"The DI invention concerns an internal combustion engine, especially an Otto engine, with a fuel injector.

Gasoline engines with direct injection of the fuel into the combustion chamber, i.e., not into the intake port, suffer especially from the problem of the formation of carbon deposits on components. Carbon deposits form especially in the neck region of intake valves. A more exact analysis of how these carbon deposits form leads to the following result: Oil and fuel constituents first form a sticky coating on the components. These constituents are chiefly long-chain and branched-chain hydrocarbons, i.e., the low-volatility components of oil and fuel. Aromatic compounds adhere especially well. This sticky base coating serves as a base for the deposition of soot particles. This results in a porous surface, in which oil and fuel particles in turn become embedded. This process is a circular process, by which the coating thickness of the carbon deposits continuously increases. Especially in the area of the intake valves, the deposits originate from blowby gases and from internal and external exhaust gas recirculation, and in this process, the blowby gases and the recirculated exhaust gas come into direct contact with the intake valve.

Especially in the area of the neck of the intake valves, excessive carbon deposits have extremely negative effects for the following reasons: In the case of Otto direct injectors, the successful ignition of the stratified charge depends to a great extent on correct development of the internal cylinder flow, which ensures reliable transport of the injected fuel to the spark plug to guarantee reliable ignition at the spark plug. However, a coating of carbon deposits in the neck region of the intake valve may interfere so strongly with the tumble flow that ignition failures may occur there as a result. Under certain circumstances, however, ignition failures can lead to irreversible damage of a catalytic converter installed in the exhaust gas tract for purifying the exhaust gas. Furthermore, the coating of carbon deposits in the neck region of the intake valve causes flow resistance, which can lead to significant performance losses due to insufficient cylinder filling, especially in the upper load and speed range of the internal combustion engine. In addition, the carbon deposits in the neck region of the intake valve may prevent correct valve closing, which leads to compression losses and thus sporadic ignition failures. This in turn could irreversibly damage the catalytic converter. There is the potential for small particles to break away from the coating of carbon deposits in the neck region of the intake valve and get into the catalytic converter. These hot particles may then cause secondary reactions and corresponding local damage of the catalytic converter. For example, a hole may be burned in the structure of the catalytic converter.

Globular deposits are found especially on the valve stem downstream from a partition plate in the intake port. Due to the dripping of high-boiling hydrocarbons from the partition plate towards the valve neck or valve stem, globular carbon deposits eventually form there by the sequence of events explained above. These deposits on the valve stem can result in flow deficits due to undesired swirling and turbulent flow around the globular carbon deposits. This may persistently interfere with the formation of stable tumble flow from cycle to cycle.

A possible solution would be to keep these sources of deposits away, for example, from the intake valve, by completely eliminating exhaust gas recirculation and the introduction of blowby gases into the intake port. However, with the combustion behavior of modern reciprocating internal combustion engines, at least external exhaust gas recirculation and the introduction of blowby gases into the intake port are absolutely necessary for reasons of emission control and fuel consumption, so that this approach is not possible. "

This is the exact reason why Honda's K20 based DI engine (available in the 2003 Honda Stream) was short lived as they didn't want the compromises that went with implementing DI technology as it didn't meet their standards of long term durability or reliability. That K20 DOHC DI engine was replaced by an R20 (larger version of the engine found in the current Civic (R18)) which is a SOHC configuration, has no DI yet produce nearly identical power, torque and fuel efficiency. Honda is still however researching and testing DI and ways to solve the carbon buildup issue.

so your point is no one should offer DI because Honda doesn't want to? Do you have proof that the issues you keep bringing up haven't been addressed?

Hondacura4,

Check the minimal deposits on this test engine, which included 300 hours at wide open.

http://jalopnik.com/5409697/hyundais-theta-ii-24+liter-direct+injection-four+cylinder-first-look

Honda can't combine great power with great fuel economy in a midsize car. Check out the Accord. It has 21 less hp and 23 lb. ft. less torque and manages 4 less mpg on the highway than the new Sonata.

"So your point is no one should offer DI because Honda doesn't want to?"

@1487, where did...........how did you get that from my post? I never stated that other manufacturers shouldn't offer DI engines because Honda doesn't currently because of proven carbon issues. My point is that there is a rather large hurdle to overcome before a higher level of reliability surfaces, Honda (and others) recognized this and are trying to completely solve the issue.

The WHOLE issue with the valve buildup is the fact that the intake tract is dry. As such, the oil deposits crystalize and form deposits in and around the valve, because there is nothing to keep them wet and allow them to be washed back into the combustion chamber. Surely a large portion of the blow by is recycled but it is enough of a problem for concern.

Direct injection has been around a long time in diesels. And injector and pump failures are an issue - far more so than in gasoline engines. The funny thing is that the problems with injectors and high pressure pumps for both diesel (Chevy Duramax/ Ford PowerStroke) and DI gasoline (BMW/Mazda) engines is that the problems have surfaced more in recent times. I beleive this is because of the ever increasing pressures required to hit both emissions and output targets for manufacturers. Bosch is behind most of the work in this area, and they are a very competent company, so the problems are not just the result of poor engineering or severe cost cutting.

"Do you have proof that the issues you keep bringing up haven't been addressed?"

@1487, do you have proof this issue HAS been completely resolved? I never stated Hyundai didn't try to address the issue or didn't pursue a lower level of buildup but you nor anyone else here have presented information that Hyundai completely solved the issue. If carbon buildup isn't an issue with DI engines why the hell would Toyota.... err Lexus pursue a parallel injection strategy on their DI V6? Port injection doesn't make more power, nor is it more fuel efficient and having a second set of injectors ain't cheap. All manufacturers that use DI use pretty much the same or similar DI design, Hyundai is no different in that regard.

"Honda can't combine great power with great fuel economy in a midsize car. Check out the Accord. It has 21 less hp and 23 lb. ft. less torque and manages 4 less mpg on the highway than the new Sonata."

@Arumage,

1) I'm glad everyone here...well a lot of people here... can fully review a car by simply using paper specs alone. The Sonata looks great on paper but the proof is in the pudding. I'm certainly not suggesting Hyundai can't or won't pull it off but since the car hasn't been tested in the real world how do we know what it can achieve? (For the record I actually like my sisters 2009 Hyundai Sonata Limted I4/5AT (although it's a bit soft for me) so don't label me a "Honda fan boy" or a "Hyundai basher").

2) DI alone didn't get those EPA estimates for the Hyundai as it isn't some wonder technology.

3) Even with the (much needed) revisions, the EPA ratings haven't shown to be 100% accurate of course to varying degrees depending on make and/or model of car and the right foot.

4) Many here have the mentality that DI is the end all be all technology, and yet, with the combination of DI and a 6AT, Hyundai can only manage to squeak by with a 13% FE gain, over a much older engine (Honda K series is 7-8 years of age), using a 5AT, in a larger and heavier car (the Accord). The weight should be good for a couple tenths of a % and we know from experience that in EPA numbers a properly calibrated 6AT is good for nearly 10% all by itself. So what does that leave us in regards to DI? Something between 1-5%? That works out to an extra 1MPG roughly. Even at $3-4 a gallon, you will NEVER save what you cost in additional maintenance, assuming Hyundai hasn't solved any of the problems others are having.

5) The 2011 Sonata's REAL WORLD ADVANTAGES vs the Accord EX-L (190hp).

(a) Weight - (comparing like models) the Sonata is about 50 lbs lighter than a competing Accord. While this is a nice improvement, it isn't ground breaking or anything. Given that the Sonata is 5" shorter, it isn't hard to imagine saving a pound or two across a few different areas and getting the weight where it is.

(b) Power - The Sonata engine is almost identically sized to the K24 in the Accord. But, it does employ continuously variable cam timing on BOTH intake and exhaust cams. Exhaust cam timing is worth about 3-4% more output and small improvement in emissions and fuel consumption. Since everyone is moving in this direction, I fully expect that Honda will have to do so on their next gen high feature 4cyl engine. Until they do, they're going to give up a little to those OEMs that do use it. The Sonata also employs a variable runner intake manifold (increased torque) along with higher compression allowed by premium fuel or direct injection. The additional point of compression is typically worth 2-3% more output as well. The Accord's K24 doesn't have continuously variable cam timing on BOTH cams (intake only) and it doesn't use a variable runner intake manifold yet makes the same power as the PZEV Hyundai DI 2.4.

Speaking of PZEV, if you look at the PZEV ratings for the Sonata (important because ALL Accord 4cyls are PZEV), the power output drops to 190hp and an unknown torque (I'm betting about 180 lbs-ft). This is identical power to the better of the two Accord engines and about 10% better torque. This torque increase is completely consistent with the additional technologies employed on the Sonata engine (higher compression, dual VVT and variable intake manifold), but there is no power advantage over the Accord engine (probably because Honda still makes the best cylinder heads in the business). Also keep in mind that the Accord engine is a very basic K24. Something like the engine in the TSX is much more representative of what the K24 can do and is better than the Hyundai engine in power output while being closer in torque AGAIN without DI or variable intake runners.

(c) Gearing - the Sonata is geared about 5% taller than the Accord in the manual version and about 11% taller in the automatic. This easily accounts for a significant portion of any EPA mileage improvement. In the real world, I think we'll find that the Sonata fits into the same x +/- 1 mpg category that all the other bread and butter sedans are in. Look at any comparison test and regardless of ratings, they're all right in that category. Some people may be swayed by the EPA numbers in the commercials, but real world economy differences will be down almost entirely to throttle control.

6) With all those technologies in place, DI doesn't seem to be offering much when you take into consideration the proven contributions of the other technologies involved (dual VVT, variable manifold, transmission rations/gear #'s, etc.) .

7) Hyundai (and many other brands) is going into production with known compromises. If you're concerned with looking at the history of gasoline direct injection, you might want to read up on Mitsubishi's history with it, as they have been a pioneer in the area. Their cars are also known for carbon deposits in the intakes. And strangely enough they don't use the technology on many of their models, despite have a decade of production experience.

8) In the end, its still a tradeoff, and you're talking about, even at maximum theoretical potential, small output gains. 3-4% for NA engines and 7-8% for boosted engines (although you rarely see that, the gains for boosted engines seem to be focused more on off boost drivability and response). I still think that given the current costs and rapidly evolving long term issues, DI for naturally aspirated engines is at best a break even sort of advancement for the end consumer, but government regulations might push more OEMs in that direction to meet the rather unrealistic emissions and economy targets/standards imposed on them.

"Check the minimal deposits on this test engine, which included 300 hours at wide open."

@Arumage, the fact is there is still carbon buildup, minimal or not and given the state of the economy I think a lot of people will be keeping their cars much longer vs purchasing a new vehicle every 50-60K like past years. That means more miles and potentially an even higher level of buildup.

hondacura4;

I'm beginning to think that my MS3 will be the last DI car I buy. When I'm convinced that the valve deposit problems are resolved I'll reconsider. That's one of the reasons I'm looking at older ///M cars...

Road, smart choice. Just for the record, I'm not against the technology as it certainly has its advantages (especially in boosted applications) BUT I think it really needs to be further refined to ensure a much higher level of reliability and durability.

The Sonata isn't overstyled, the Regal isn't styled enough, especially for being more upscale.

The Regal is boring. I said it.

The Sonata is actually downright ugly.

Kinda disappointed that hondacura4 has managed to derail another pretty interesting thread with a personally-motivated rant about direct injection.

Interesting for UK readers to see this comparison since the i40 (as the Sonata will be known over here) will be competing with the Insignia (as the Buick is known) when it is released. To me the Sonata wins hands down, so far. But one thing the Insignia has on the i40 here is the jump -the Insignia was first to market by about a year. Here Hyundai is perceived as a 'me too' brand, so being first would be sweet - although since Hyundai is releasing about a jillion new models here this year I guess I can't complain!

"The Sonata isn't overstyled, the Regal isn't styled enough, especially for being more upscale.

The Regal is boring. I said it."

I don't agree and most find the Insignia to be attractive. If you like Toyota styling the Sonata is for you. I'm generally not a fan of Toyota styling. the Sonata looks like what you would expect from an Asian automaker trying to make waves in the styling department. I prefer styling done by Americans and Germans. The Regal looks European because it is European- very understated but very premium looking. The Sonata does not LOOK expensive to me. That said, I'd buy it over an Accord any day of the week.

@Hondacura4:

Honda apologist through and through, eh? Any engine abused like that is going to have some deposits. No engine abused like that is going to be perfect. That's a whole lifetime's worth of abuse applied in a matter of a month or so. Here's a good article from regarding carbon deposits on a a Honda/Acura non-DI engine. If you run long enough at full throttle, you get carbon deposits.

http://accuratecars.com/blog/2009/08/13/egr-cleaning-improves-honda-and-acura-miles-per-gallon-mpg/

hondaacura:

I mentioned this before. How to you explain why automakers would be willing to back DI engines from 48k-100k miles with powertrain warranties if the reliability concerns are credible? As I said before Ford's powertrain warranty is good for 60k miles and GM's is good for 100k miles. Would they take such a risk on unproven, unreliable engine technology? I believe Lexus' powertrain warranty is 60k or 70k miles.

"Road, smart choice. Just for the record, I'm not against the technology as it certainly has its advantages (especially in boosted applications) BUT I think it really needs to be further refined to ensure a much higher level of reliability and durability."

Exactly.

"I mentioned this before. How to you explain why automakers would be willing to back DI engines from 48k-100k miles with powertrain warranties if the reliability concerns are credible?"

@ 1487, I can't answer for those companies 1487. However, I presented the facts with links and other material. With that said, it's not if it's going to happen it's when. VW/Audi, Mitsu, BMW, and Mazda to a less extent are getting a taste of this as we speak. Also, GM/Ford have seen a high injector failure rate with their diesels (Duramax/PowerStroke) and it's not an inexpensive repair.

The Regal isn't bad looking. The wheel choice in this pictures is much better.

I'd choose to drive the Sonata though. In black.

http://www.yflove.net/data/file/9/751135704_7e6abcba_yf2.jpg

"Kinda disappointed that hondacura4 has managed to derail another pretty interesting thread with a personally-motivated rant about direct injection."

@ Trash, since when did stating factual and valuable information become a bad thing? Reality must be a hard thing for you to grasp. As I said before, I'm not against the technology as it certainly has its advantages (especially in boosted applications) BUT I think it really needs to be further refined to ensure a much higher level of reliability and durability.

"Honda apologist through and through, eh? Any engine abused like that is going to have some deposits. No engine abused like that is going to be perfect. That's a whole lifetime's worth of abuse applied in a matter of a month or so. Here's a good article from regarding carbon deposits on a a Honda/Acura non-DI engine. If you run long enough at full throttle, you get carbon deposits."

@ Arumage, I'm in no way apologizing for Honda or any other company. My points are valid as I was merely pointing out that the "advantages" many see here aren't all that substantial simply because of direct injection or superior engineering. My comparison of the Honda/Hyundai 190hp PZEV 2.4s was to show that even though both are similar in power Hyundai had to use many more "technologies" to get there and the result was more torque output (due to dual CVVT, DI, variable intake runners, and higher compression. Of course Hyundai's better EPA ratings are due to the 6AT (11% taller vs Accord's 5AT), lower weight and DI. Yes, DI contributes but I don't think it's as substantial as everyone thinks or claims.

In terms of carbon deposits on non DI engines they are in no way comparable to engines with DI as DI engines accrue the deposits at a much faster rate and can suffer from injector and/or high pressure pump failure. That's already happening.

PLEASE VIEW THESE!

Low mileage Audi DI engine:

http://media.photobucket.com/image/carbon%20deposits%20on%20direct%20injection%20engine/pippyrips/DSCN3443.jpg

Carbon buildup thread about Audi/VW 2.0T:

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a140/pippyrips/DSCN3443.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php%3Fubb%3Dshowflat%26Number%3D1636675&usg=__ECFuopCauaygAo4J788ji5upaF8=&h=480&w=640&sz=44&hl=en&start=1&itbs=1&tbnid=c3Ml7Vmm0MLe-M:&tbnh=103&tbnw=137&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dcarbon%2Bdeposits%2Bon%2Bdirect%2Binjection%2Bengine%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den

From the link above, look at the deposits on the Jetta GLI 2.0T engine with 100K. If that isn't a serious issue I don't know what is.

Video: Brad Satow of Siegel Distributing performs a BG Fuel and Air Induction System Cleaning on an Audi 2.0FSI engine in a 2008 Audi A4.

http://www.vimeo.com/3989681

When I put ITB's on my 1995 Integra GSR powered Civic (we pulled the head) which has seen a substantial amount of WOT my valves weren't anywhere near as dirty or gunky as I could still see a substantial amount of shiny metal. Keep in mind at the time my engine had a bit more than 190,000 miles! Now it has about 262,000 and If I pulled the head today my valves wouldn't be much dirtier than before.

Congrats on listing on DI engine with problems!

Damm it, Like they Said they Compared the Specs, and its obvious that the Sonata is the Superior car!!!! Hyundai is an "aspirational/ value near luxury brand now", stop selling these guys short. Everything these guys have is superior to a comparable Chrysler, and guess what:

Biggest Trade ins for a Genesis=300C
Biggest trade Ins for a Sonata=Sebring
Biggest trade Ins for an Accent/Elantra=Pt Criuser.

Hyundai is number #1 US fuel economy according to the new EPA statistics released last week. Hyundai is #1 in Quality in Mass market Brands (Buick is a Mass market Brand too, in my eyes).

WE ARE SUPERIOR, WE HAVE THE SUPERIOR VALUE PROPOSITION, WE HAVE THE SUPERIOR RELIABILITY, WE HAVE THE SUPERIOR FUEL EOCNOMY, We Deserve More Awards, More Press, More Accolades.

Thanks Edmunds for seeing the Value Proposition of this company to the SAABs, Chryslers, Buicks, and Volvos of the world.

Hey, the GDI is really good! If you are worried about carbon deposits, just add half E85 and half gasoline and the thing will never have them, and run better,

BTW Sonata hands down the better car if you base it on "reliability history"

Does anyone else see the similarity between the new Buick Regal and the Suzuki Kizashi?

Horsepower isn't everything as Torque and when it peaks has a lot to do with how a car feels on the drive. I am intrested in the performance in everyday driving. My previous 05 awd Ford 500 had a v6 and only 205hp with a CVT transmission and quite a bit heavier than the 2011 Sonata. The new sonata while being down in torque has almost the same (in SE form) hp and is quite a bit lighter. I've had a number of sports cars including two Corvettes (one a big block 68 ) and several pontiacs including an ASC McClaren Turbo coupe and a GTP. Saying this only because my sporting nature wants a midsize car to be a performance car in some regard able to accelerate into traffic able to hold a comfortable quiet ride at speed, be able to hold my three grandkids in safety and be fuel efficient. So I am anxious to see and drive this vehicle.

The Sonata will have a 2.0 turbo with 274 horsepower @ 6000 and 269 lb-ft @ 1800 rpm as well as 34 mpg. At the moment the Regal will have a 220 hp 258 lb-ft 2.0 turbo with 29 mpg hwy along with an unofficial 255 hp and 295 lb-ft 2.0 turbo and the possibility of AWD. At this point I think Hyundai has the upper edge.

Good grief.

HondaAcura4

stated simple facts. I didn't get that he was bashing. If YOU feel comfortable buying a car with an engine that has NOT been proven to be AS reliable as others such as Honda or Toyota (hence the reason why they were #1 & #2 consistently for the last several years in consumer reports and such.) over the last several years, then by all means go for it.

Cars are a huge investment, for most of us anyway. I appreciate the ability to make an educated decision to get the most for my HARD EARNED dollars.

Maybe the reason they are not so worried about their warranties is they have seen what happens to car companies who get upside down with car prices/quality, they get GOVERNMENT BAIL OUTS.

2011 Hyundai Sonata is a luxury sedan with high quality fabrics and very good fit and finish. Combined with excellent features and good fuel economy, this is surely one car that I would love to own some day !

http://www.exploreauto.net/hyundai-sonata-reviews-a-retake.html

I have a 2011 Sonata SE its Black with the 18" rims and it looks awesome after its wash and is so smooth on the highway not mention it hauls ass. I have no problems with it right now besides I only keep my cars 3 years and look for a new model there after. I hate old cars anyway. Oh and by the way its true the regal looks like an older couple would drive it. Buicks are old people cars. I'm not young myself but I'd rather be in my sonata sure feels good in it. Very comfortable with electric seats, leather and the push button ignition. I'm happy besides I probably wont have it long enough to see the deposits on my intake valves.