@Leaaky: I'm guessing it was a Time-Speed-Distance rally, not a performance rally. They're not supposed to be dangerous, but take unfamiliar back roads and add a freak snowstorm, and the might quickly become so. I imagine the organizers are pretty gutted about having so many cars damaged and destroyed.
@CABEZAGRANDE: Yes, the CRX did weigh in at just over a ton... but the Veloster weighs only a few hundred more, which is a modern-day miracle in a car that has two more seats and current safety equipment. If anything I'm more worried about the longer wheelbase than the added weight -- that's where the CRX got a lot of its agility from.
And power is good, but I'll still take a good handler over raw power any day. I've seen 115whp Civics outrun RX-8s, WRXs, and E30 M3s on the autocross course.
And power is good, but I'll still take a good handler over raw power any day. I've seen 115whp Civics outrun RX-8s, WRXs, and E30 M3s on the autocross course.
@CABEZAGRANDE: If the suspension delivers, it doesn't need any more power. The base-model Mini Cooper gets away with far less, and the old CRX didn't need that much either. A lot of the naysayers don't seem to realize how much fun a momentum car can be.
@punksmurph: The benchmark here is not the tC, really, but the much-loved original Honda CRX (and by vague, black-sheep-half-uncle relation, the new CR-Z). On paper at least it looks really good. The final year of the CRX Si clocked in just shy of 2200 pounds -- for Hyundai to come within 400 pounds of that mark in a modern hatch with an extra row of seating is practically miraculous.
The Hyundai's power-to-weight ratio is slightly better than the CRX's, benefits from an extra gear ratio, and in cars of this type you're never really look for straight-line speed so much as the agility to maintain the speed you have in the corners. That's where the real question is -- the last CRX had an incredibly good SLA-front/multilink-rear setup on a very short wheelbase, which made for a lively, nimble little hatchback. With the Hyundai appearing to be much larger, and sporting a fairly generic MacStrut front and torsion-beam rear (akin to the CR-Z -- and to be fair, the first-gen CRX, and most of the other cars in this segment, sporty or otherwise), the Veloster runs the risk of being a much more sedate drive. That's where any comparison with the tC falls flat too, because we know from experience that the tC has all the feel and character of a dead fish.
With the Veloster then, we can see on paper what's a much more promising car for enthusiasts than the disappointing CR-Z, but Hyundai won't truly be vindicated until people actually get a chance to drive the car and see if Hyundai's suspension team pushed all the right buttons.
The Hyundai's power-to-weight ratio is slightly better than the CRX's, benefits from an extra gear ratio, and in cars of this type you're never really look for straight-line speed so much as the agility to maintain the speed you have in the corners. That's where the real question is -- the last CRX had an incredibly good SLA-front/multilink-rear setup on a very short wheelbase, which made for a lively, nimble little hatchback. With the Hyundai appearing to be much larger, and sporting a fairly generic MacStrut front and torsion-beam rear (akin to the CR-Z -- and to be fair, the first-gen CRX, and most of the other cars in this segment, sporty or otherwise), the Veloster runs the risk of being a much more sedate drive. That's where any comparison with the tC falls flat too, because we know from experience that the tC has all the feel and character of a dead fish.
With the Veloster then, we can see on paper what's a much more promising car for enthusiasts than the disappointing CR-Z, but Hyundai won't truly be vindicated until people actually get a chance to drive the car and see if Hyundai's suspension team pushed all the right buttons.
How on earth has nobody posted this yet?
@mrwoolery: Of course that plate is on a heavily-modified Miata. What else *could* it be on?
I've seen this in person, and it's an amazing beast to behold. Very little can truly compare to the austere beauty of a machine designed for the sole purpose of speed. If the Italian Futurists hadn't all gotten deadified during the first and second world wars, they'd have thrown down their brushes in futility after seeing the Valkyrie -- how do you compete with that!?
@Industreyal: I hope you don't often ask your clients "Do you think you can do better?" In my experience, they don't generally react well.
Chris Bangle may well be the most knowledgeable man alive about automotive design, but that doesn't necessarily make him a great automotive designer. Ultimately a designer has to be judged on the merits of his or her work, and on that level Bangle doesn't rate so well. The ideas may have been new wonderful and different, but ultimately they fell short in execution, and the critical response bears this out.
As a trailblazer and idea man, Bangle deserves praise. I think he'd make a fantastic dean of design at a university somewhere. But as BMW's design chief, I was quite glad to see him go.
Chris Bangle may well be the most knowledgeable man alive about automotive design, but that doesn't necessarily make him a great automotive designer. Ultimately a designer has to be judged on the merits of his or her work, and on that level Bangle doesn't rate so well. The ideas may have been new wonderful and different, but ultimately they fell short in execution, and the critical response bears this out.
As a trailblazer and idea man, Bangle deserves praise. I think he'd make a fantastic dean of design at a university somewhere. But as BMW's design chief, I was quite glad to see him go.
@tonyola: Says what? All I can see are the clown-shoe wheels. Is there a car in here somewhere?
@Phantom_Photon: Sitting next to a 1990-ish Civic hatch, the Fit looks hugenormous. Which it is, in comparison.
And you'd better fit into a Fit, because at 6'3" I have headroom and legroom to spare in that twenty-year-old Civic.
And you'd better fit into a Fit, because at 6'3" I have headroom and legroom to spare in that twenty-year-old Civic.
You can keep your gleaming alloy aircars. I want my red barchetta!
@Mnstrtq: Looking at my CRX, I don't think I'd even be able to fit a catch pan under there without putting the car up on jackstands, so moving around the oil filter wouldn't save me much trouble...
@OMGItsWeasel: That's more an issue of longitudinal space than side-to-side clearance, is it not? I believe you can keep the accessories when swapping a K20 into an EK chassis, at least.
@Thrashy: Dammit.
@Mnstrtq: Here's how you do it:
1: Buy one of these.
2: Stick it on you ratchet.
3: Stick your ratchet on the oil filter.
4: Turn counterclockwise.
5: Profit!
1: Buy one of these.
2: Stick it on you ratchet.
3: Stick your ratchet on the oil filter.
4: Turn counterclockwise.
5: Profit!
@Dirt Pirate: If they can stick the suspension bits of the red one underneath the body of the yellow one, wedge a current Honda motor under the hood, and bring the whole shebang to just-barely-passes-NHTSA-rules safety spec while keeping the weight below one ton, I will buy five of them.
@OMGItsWeasel: I really can't fathom why they ditched their very good SLA front/multilink rear arrangement after a decade of use. The development costs were long since paid for, the aftermarket has demonstrated that the newer K engine fits between the uprights of the old suspension with ease, and nothing else in the segment ever came close. Spending the money to develop a new and for some reason worse suspension makes no sense whatsoever.
@DonnaDixonLine and @Elhigh: I believe the early Vostok designs were developed from ICBMs, but the current Soyuz rockets are purpose-built.
@dmckoltrane- my JK doesn't hydrolock: To a point, more engines are better, provided you don't *need* all of them to make orbit. Being able to lose an engine or two on the way without having to abort gives you an additional margin of safety.
Falcon 9 uses nine engines on its first stage, and the proposed Falcon 9 Heavy has twenty-seven.
Falcon 9 uses nine engines on its first stage, and the proposed Falcon 9 Heavy has twenty-seven.
@endless: You kidding? Can you imagine how a gore-splattered security checkpoint would go over in the media?
