Pity the Europeans can,t see the follly of their ways .

[Sunny43.5]

It's interesting that Mr Biermann, the former head of BMW's M division and a 30 year BMW veteran has suddenly changed his perspective on technology now that his pay packet comes from a lower tech manufacturer.

As for "We have a solid Hyundai steel platform, tonnes of high-strength steel – okay, it’s a little bit heavier than the other cars", in other words, we can't get the weight down on this car so we'll pitch it's extra weight and low tech as a positive.

High tech maybe the high end manufacturers marketing hype, excess weight and low tech is Hyundai's marketing hype. It's all about creating a perception.

Cheers

George

I think also what he is alluding to with the bit about high strenth steel is definetly worth considering , I work in an industry where we are constantly having to work around the steel used in some of these cars . Back in around 2004 Toyota released an updated Camry I fitted an aftermarket sunroof to the car and as usual we remove the cross roof brace to allow the sunroof to be fitted . Now it was the first car we had encountered with a "Boron " steel cross brace , shortly after sucessfully fitting the roof we were contacted by our testing division in Germany . They had also done the same model and discovered a problem , Toyota had changed their testing regime in regards to side impact protection . Up until then most cars roof braces when tested would bend at around 10 to 15 thousand neuton metres , The Camry brace maxed the test rig out as they reached 30 thousand neuton metres of crush strength and the brace had only bowed up a small amount in the middle . When the pressure was released it went back to it's original shape !! , now I remembered when I removed the one I did it weighed a huge amount compared to most other cars roof braces . The point I am making here is lots of car makers use this steel in strategic places in the cars which makes them incredibly strong and heavy . Other car makers whilst getting the crash ratings they strive for will use technology rather than strength in body to get the result . Very recently the Mustang was only getting a 3 star rating and Ford had to fit alternative technology to get a better rating , this is probably why the Hyundai boss was alluding to the weight factor . He is doing his best to sell to the public that technology is not neccesary always the best thing in cars in regards to safety . PS the Camry I did was the first and last one we did as we were told not to remove the brace for possible saftety reasons . In the last nine months a new modified sunroof was released and it weighs around 8 kilograms heavier than the previous model and can you guess why ? yep a boron steel reinforcing cross brace has been built onto the sunroof housing . Technology could not fix that problem only extra weight .

[woofy]

The Kia Sorrento was similar when I got the Santa Fe but I preferred the SF at the time. Now the Sorrento is a different car altogether with a different chassis.

[brad]

Hyundai have expensive servicing and parts, when Kia charge far less for the exact same things.We got the previous shape Santa Fe and the new variant went up nearly 7k over the outgoing. Same engine/drivetrain, most of the mechanicals etc. Each new model they bump up the price a bit more locally, but in other countries they are way cheaper so its pretty obvious we are being done over here.

ex-wife just bought a Kia Cerato. Cross-shopped the equivalent hyundai (i30?) and there was $5k difference ($20500 for the Kia with auto and upgraded head unit). The Hyundai guy told her he couldn't match features, warranty or price and the kia was a good buy. She got the Kia for just over $19k with metalic paint thrown in. Amazing value.

[woofy]

Hyundai have expensive servicing and parts, when Kia charge far less for the exact same things.We got the previous shape Santa Fe and the new variant went up nearly 7k over the outgoing. Same engine/drivetrain, most of the mechanicals etc. Each new model they bump up the price a bit more locally, but in other countries they are way cheaper so its pretty obvious we are being done over here.

[Ozsko]

Call me thick but I don't follow that.

[gldgti]

I had a customer question why the battery we fitted to their Mazda was $500 with no generic equivalent available. No car is cheap to own any more, whatever the brand.

Thats an interesting one actually.

The day I brought my Touareg home I knew I would need to change the battery. So I pull it out and call the local battery specialist, who says "Thats an odd size battery, hardly anyone makes them and they are really expensive. We dont even supply them. BUT, we do supply a battery of exactly the same specifications, width, height and post configuration. Different part number, exact equivalent battery. $240.

You'll forgive me if I dont remember the actual part numbers :shrugs:

[Ozsko]

I had a customer question why the battery we fitted to their Mazda was $500 with no generic equivalent available. No car is cheap to own any more, whatever the brand.

[Transporter]

The Hyundai is not a cheap car anymore. Their cheapest models are competing with VW and all Japanese brands, their top of the range models cost well over $40,000 which in my books is a lot for a low tech car that until now is unreliable when it gets closer to these 10years of age, so I really don’t know what he’s about?

All that European new technology was right until now copied by Korean companies once it was perfected, so they should be greatfull for that.

[Ozsko]

Without starting WW 111 I think some are missing the point , many of the things we are seeing in cars today are not worth having or cannot be trusted or were badly conceived . If we want to enjoy driving cars we should avoid all this stuff as car makers are pushing us towards autonomous cars , now where is the fun in that , plus from an old guy I like to think the reason I got my license in the first place was that i was taught how to use my eyes and my brain and my common sense while driving . I was taught how to reverse park , now days too many people are buying a car with all this stuff just because it saves them from using their brain .

Point one...Not everyone enjoys driving cars, to some it is onerous but necessary and some of that tech makes that task easier and less onerous.

When I first got my license cars did not even have heaters and those that did the fan was optional so I appreciate all the modern tech that cars now have and all I can say is bring on the rest. My first driving course was live in 8 weeks full time and we had to reverse park a Landrover with a trailer on the back between two other vehicles among other stuff that was equally as hard. I went on to driving trucks full time and when the first autos became available on our fleet my dreams came true.

[gldgti]

I'm not sure you're going to get the affirmation of beliefs you are looking for here.

Despite the hyperbole you quoted, the reality is that the majority of manufacturers, regardless of what part of the world they originate from, make both basic and high end vehicles. In recent years VAG has done a pretty poor job of some of the aspects of their vehicles, some of those being quite serious. I would argue that they have done quite a good job at the high end of the market however. There are marques with justifiably bad reputations with regard to reliability in the luxury end of things (Land Rover!) but I don't think VAG is one of them.

You seem to believe that the market forces work back-to-front... manufacturers put various technologies in their vehicles not because they demand that consumers buy it, but because consumers demand they want it. The products are a reflection of the market. A new base model golf or polo has emergency city braking not because VAG think its a good idea, but because people who buy the cars think its a good idea.

All of this to say that if you don't want it... then don't buy it! Its as simple as that. If the manufacturer isn't making what you want, go elsewhere..... I'm sure Hyundai would love your custom.

There is no conspiracy to turn us all into mindless passengers in autonomous cars full of "useless" technology.

[woofy]

"I like to think the reason I got my license in the first place was that i was taught how to use my eyes and my brain and my common sense while driving"
This is the reason we have so much tech in cars to "assist" us while driving... because people are not using common sense anymore.
Ultimately we are heading towards autonomous cars as people will eventually no longer be trusted to drive.

Its not so much common sense as much as autonomous can detect things well before we can. Yes my car annoys me when it thinks I'm gonna rearend a car slowing down to go around a corner. But you know what, plenty of people get hit from behind. If that stops someone else hitting me who got distracted by kids in the back etc than so be it. Same with parking sensors, plenty of people bagged them, but if it means your car doesn't get hit in a car park as often, then it was worth it. We have more cars on the road than ever before, which means more chances for crap to happen, so anything to minimise that is worth it. And even people who were taught to use their eyes and brain and common sense like my grandfather, one day can no longer rely on them as well, and mysterious scrapes start appearing on their car. What you have now might one day fail you and the car might just be the difference between being around longer and not.

[blutopless2]

If car manufacturers are not offering anything "new and improved" then people will not spend money to keep upgrading.. we would still be driving beetles and kombis around... this is no difference to any other manufacturer... look at TV's and electronic devices... gaming consoles.. whitegoods... gee now my fridge can connect to the internet and order **** that I'm running out of...
so this is nothing new... but in the end people must want it otherwise it would not be offered...
You also need to factor in the safety aspect of newer cars... tech is improving to improve safety.
"I like to think the reason I got my license in the first place was that i was taught how to use my eyes and my brain and my common sense while driving"
This is the reason we have so much tech in cars to "assist" us while driving... because people are not using common sense anymore.
Ultimately we are heading towards autonomous cars as people will eventually no longer be trusted to drive.

[VW Convert]

It's interesting that Mr Biermann, the former head of BMW's M division and a 30 year BMW veteran has suddenly changed his perspective on technology now that his pay packet comes from a lower tech manufacturer.

As for "We have a solid Hyundai steel platform, tonnes of high-strength steel – okay, it’s a little bit heavier than the other cars", in other words, we can't get the weight down on this car so we'll pitch it's extra weight and low tech as a positive.

High tech maybe the high end manufacturers marketing hype, excess weight and low tech is Hyundai's marketing hype. It's all about creating a perception.

Cheers

George

[Sunny43.5]

[QUOTE You are sighting examples which are not within the luxury market being discussed in the article...[/QUOTE] So from your experience it seems if you buy luxury high priced cars then those issues are not applicable , just remeber those same manufactureres make other models that are probably bought more commonly by the wider population . It is well known that the luxury models are equipped with lots of tech stuff and it does filter down into the lower priced models over time , GPS was the norm in high end models now its common in much lesser ones . So the same ideaology the Koreans are highlighting does apply to lower models , I suppose its easy to forget that Golf owners were saddled with some disastorous examples of smart technology and those cars have luxury models within the range . I love this bit I borrowed from the comments in the article from a writer {Thanks MR Majestyk }


Quote " The level of stupid tech in Euro's make them nothing more than very expensive mobile living rooms. Pack in as much tech as you can for the sake of bragging rights and keep quiet about the rapier costs when it all fails. Interior, seats, brakes engine handling steering are what really matters. I only want the tech that improves the real driving experience, not crap like heated vanity mirrors, 47 speaker sound system, autonomous braking, blah blah. It's no wonder they are pushing autonomous driving, already they want you think as little as possible and let the car do as much as possible. "

[brad]

People forget how crap cars were. I can't believe how reliable and well built they are these days.

I was a qualified motor mechanic from 1979-1989.
Lets see...
oil changes every 3000km / 3months - at least you got to know your customers really well - I even dated a few
spark plugs every 10,000km (leaded fuel)
Points every 10,000km
Air and fuel filters (if fitted) every 20,000km
Mechanical EFI systems were a nightmare (esp Kugelfucher or whatever it was) but so were twin carbs and SU/Solex and webbers.
Not to mention all the other stuff (uni joints, ball joints, tie rod ends that needed greasing and still wore out before 100,000km.

A car was considered old and worn out at 160,000km.

And they were gutless!

My 4.2L VB Commodore was <90kw
My 5.9L Chrysler 2BBL was around120kw about the same as my current 1.8tsi Octavia. The Chrysler averaged 14mpg (20L/100km) if I took it easy. 6mpg (47L/100km) if I gave it some stick.

Plus all the safety stuff on modern cars like ABS and stability control.

I know there's some useless tech on modern cars but I'd hate to go back to an older car as a daily.