First Drive: 2013 Hyundai Veloster Turbo

[omoderncultureo]

If there is a single complaint to be made about the Hyundai Veloster, it’s that it simply doesn’t have enough power. The solution, it seems, would be to strap a turbocharger to the small 4-cylinder and increase engine output by roughly 50 percent. With Hyundai having done just that in the all-new 2013 Veloster Turbo, it’s now apparent that that’s not all it needs.

Full Article

Yet another tight uphill hairpin looms as we storm up our favorite mountain road in a 2013 Hyundai Veloster Turbo with a full head of steam. Upon arrival we breathe off the throttle, turn in toward the apex and roll back on the gas without ever once thinking of dropping a gear in search of the grunt necessary to continue our uphill charge.

The same corner in last year's normally aspirated machine would have demanded that downshift, and after complying we'd still have cursed the grade and gravity for conspiring to hold the Veloster's well-sorted chassis by the tail as we attempted to claw back our lost momentum.

That was last year. The 2013 Hyundai Veloster Turbo has a ready answer in the form of 63 additional horses and 72 extra pound-feet of torque. The funky and unique three-door Hyundai hatchback known for having more chassis than motor now has equal shares of each.

Full Article

Restraint is a noble thing, and Hyundai sets an excellent example with the 2013 Veloster Turbo. The 201-hp version of this half-coupe, half-sedan, half-hatchback is everything it could be without becoming things it shouldn’t be, including expensive.

As we’ve previously reported, the Veloster is an odd little bulldog cadged together from platform pieces of the Accent and Elantra. The two-plus-one asymmetrical side doors are as novel as they are practical, but much about the Veloster’s blueprint is engineering code for “economy car.” There are struts in front and a twist-beam axle in back.

Full Article

[Golgo-13]

Meet the new Honda.

Welcome.

[someguy123]

Still waiting for the humpers here that was going to buy one.

[RobMarkToo]

looks pretty nice

[CP1]

Even the non-turbo has gotten solid reviews (tho there have been reviews which have been overly harsh and overly superlative), but while the VT gets a much needed bump in power, it seems that the VT is something that, while appealing to the general public, doesn't quite "hit it" when it comes to enthusiasts looking for a "hot hatch."

The Kia Koup SX seems to be the more exciting drive (than the Veloster or the Elantra coupe), even if it needs some fine-tuning (a new Koup will be due out sometime after the new Forte is launched next year, so Kia may very well take the next step w/ the Koup).

I guess Hyundai could inject a bit more excitement if they do an R-Spec trim, but we'll see.

Still can't stand that center stack.

[genjy]

VW GTI: 200 HP
Veloster Turbo: 201 HP

[JtotheG]

VW GTI: 200 HP
Veloster Turbo: 201 HP

There's a weight difference though as well.

[clutchrider]

Meet the new Honda.

Welcome.

This. Hyundai built a CRX, Honda built a two door hybrid.

VW GTI: 200 HP
Veloster Turbo: 201 HP

I personally wouldn't cross shop the two if I was in the market. I consider the Veloster to be in a lower class (not lower as in beneath or less than) than the GTI. It's smaller and almost for a sub-compact than compact.

Still looks like a fun little car.

[mikegilbert]

Hyundai's new grilles look horrible in real life.

[Wanganrunner]

I'm seriously considering a normal Veloster, I don't think I'd go for the turbo.

I drove one yesterday and was pleasantly surprised.

I'm not a fan of the center stack either, but the interior quality in general is very good and the tech package for ~$17.5k is outstanding. It's a little slow, but at 40mpg as a commuter with that much visual impact, it's pretty compelling.

My only worry is it looks sort of toy-like, and I need to drive people around for work and generally look professional, and while I love it, I don't want people thinking it's goofy. Normally (i.e. personally) I'd never care, but professionally I care a little.

[JDBVR6]

Ugly, said car is very ugly!

Hyundai's have great engine choices. It's too bad that they but them in such horribly styled cars. Based on styling alone I would opt to purchase from their sister company Kia if I wanted a durable daily driver.

[Lexi]

Its quirky and the more I see it the more I love it. Honda move over, this is doing it right for the right price. Who wants a hybrid CRX anyways ?

[clutchrider]

I've seen a few Veloster's around and they do stand out and get noticed. The front doesn't bother me too much and looks a lot better in person. Especially if you get the right color.

[Double-V]

If only they would fix the ugly, it would be a compelling package.

[Egz]

If only they would fix the ugly, it would be a compelling package.

This.

[InternetMeme]

Ugly, said car is very ugly!

Hyundai's have great engine choices. It's too bad that they but them in such horribly styled cars. Based on styling alone I would opt to purchase from their sister company Kia if I wanted a durable daily driver.

QFT.

The Veloster is one of the is one of the ugliest cars on the road.

[Bibs]

People bag on Mazda with the grin, but love this thing? I don't care for either, styling wise, but the VT is a disaster....it's a random mash of swoops and curves that looks like it's designed by kids.
It will look dated pretty quickly.
From what I read, it is a great car....I just need my cars to look good.

[jumbo11]

The original Veloster to me looks ok in pictures but pretty bad in person.
It's too high off the ground. The third door stands out like a sore thumb. The rear-end looks like a pregnant woman. For a small hatch, it's definately not small. The rear visibility..

I just can't convince myself to like the exterior styling.
$22.5k for the turbo is almost FR-S terrirtory.

[MoPho]

People bag on Mazda with the grin, but love this thing? I don't care for either, styling wise, but the VT is a disaster....it's a random mash of swoops and curves that looks like it's designed by kids.
It will look dated pretty quickly.
From what I read, it is a great car....I just need my cars to look good.

Looks are subjective, plenty of people like the looks of the Veloster and they are selling quite well ( and I see them all over the place where I live), so no one really cares if you or anyone else like the looks or not. I am sure many people think the cars that you "need to look good" in order to own are ugly, for example I find that Magnum of yours to be hideous and the front of the MX5 ain't great either

And the whole it will "look dated" thing is a bunch of crap. Just like any design, whether it be architecture, fashion, graphics, photography, etc., car design follows trends that go in and out of style and car companies don't want cars to stand the test of time, they want you to buy a new one

[2.0T_Convert]

The new CRX?

From Autoguide:

An impressive machine based on all the available statistics, the Veloster Turbo is undeniably fun but fails to deliver that wow factor.

In nearly all categories, Hyundai’s value approach has allowed it to rise to the top, but not here. After all, this is a segment where value is far from being a main priority and where ‘fun-to-drive’ comes standard.

Regardless, Hyundai will sell lots of Veloster Turbos by nature of the fact that it delivers the goods on paper while in reality isn’t too hard-edged and won’t scare off the average consumer. A hot hatch for all, enthusiasts need not apply.

I see C&D and IL follow the typical form by not offering any real negatives. I'll wait for the full tests and matches against other cars. Sounds like this car sells more on overall value than trying to steal the crown for performance.

[MoPho]

The new CRX?

From Autoguide:



I see C&D and IL follow the typical form by not offering any real negatives. I'll wait for the full tests and matches against other cars. Sounds like this car sells more on overall value than trying to steal the crown for performance.

It's not intended to steal the crown for performance

[JalopnikMatt]

Our review is up:

http://jalopnik.com/5921208/hyundai-...alopnik-review

[JtotheG]

The Hooniverse review:

http://hooniverse.com/2012/06/26/fir...eloster-turbo/

Complete with confusing intro paragraph!

[2.0T_Convert]

It's not intended to steal the crown for performance

John Krafcik from Hyundai states they benchmarked cars like the CRX and GTI.

If that is the case why then turn around and trade things like LSD and a better rear suspension for a lower price tag.

[JtotheG]

John Krafcik from Hyundai states they benchmarked cars like the CRX and GTI.

If that is the case why then turn around and trade things like LSD and a better rear suspension for a lower price tag.

The rear suspension is fine for the car. It was composed in the canyon roads, and it felt good on the auto-x course.

[MoPho]

John Krafcik from Hyundai states they benchmarked cars like the CRX and GTI.

If that is the case why then turn around and trade things like LSD and a better rear suspension for a lower price tag.

Neither of those cars hold the crown for performance either and both make compromises to meet their corporate objective, so what is your point?


And I have driven it, and it is very much in the vein of those cars

[caj1]

Looks are subjective, plenty of people like the looks of the Veloster and they are selling quite well ( and I see them all over the place where I live), so no one really cares if you or anyone else like the looks or not.

No one asked you to care, even though you clearly do enough to respond.

[Turbio!]

VW GTI: 200 HP
Veloster Turbo: 201 HP

It seems natural to compare them, but I think the Veloster is a better match for the 500 Abarth, Mini Cooper S, Sonic turbo, and so forth. The GTI is larger, more powerful (its true output is ~230hp), and more capable, but it's also significantly more expensive when comparably equipped.

Personally, I think the idea of a quick but compact and reasonably efficient commuter for $22k is pretty compelling. No, it's not a track star, but for someone who likes owning a smaller, more efficient commuter but hates the lack of balls that characterizes most such cars, it'd be a worthy option.

It reminds me, actually, of a Saab 900. Its stance, proportions, and overall package is something that late-'80s Saab would have done if it existed now.

[2.0T_Convert]

Neither of those cars hold the crown for performance either and both make compromises to meet their corporate objective, so what is your point?

And I have driven it, and it is very much in the vein of those cars

Hyundai talked the talk and then delieved mixed results.

I don't really care, I appreciate at least some of these reviews have the balls to give a balanced review unlike the bigger guys like IL who seem to do nothing but sing phrase for any new car.

I forgot... you are a reviewer for MT or someone else?

[adrew]

$23-25k is too much for a turbo Accent hatchback with a twist-beam rear end, in my opinion.

$25k will get you a Volvo C30 T5, Focus ST, Cooper S, GTI, MazdaSpeed 3, Miata, FR-S, etc. Hell, Hyundai's own Sonata 2.0T SE is $25.6k. Veloster Turbo should be $20-21k, tops.

[MoPho]

Hyundai talked the talk and then delieved mixed results.

I don't really care, I appreciate at least some of these reviews have the balls to give a balanced review unlike the bigger guys like IL who seem to do nothing but sing phrase for any new car.

I forgot... you are a reviewer for MT or someone else?

Suggesting that they benchmarked certain cars doesn't mean they had to beat them, only that they looked to those vehicles for part of their engineering criteria. I think you're reading too much into the statements

And there is no balls or no balls to give a balanced review, if you go into it expecting some fire breathing sports car of course you're going to be disappointed, but if you adjust your expectations to what the car is meant to be, like one should when reviewing a car, then their isn't much to complain about. The same could be said of the GTI, as the C/D article notes of the VT, it is a sporty car, not a sports car
All cars have to compromise in one way or another

.

[A.Wilder]

I hope the shifter feel is better than my wife's 07 elantra. The 07 is terrible.

[Bibs]

I am sure many people think the cars that you "need to look good" in order to own are ugly, for example I find that Magnum of yours to be hideous and the front of the MX5 ain't great either

Touche, I knew this comment was coming...

Maybe its an age thing...kids raised on transformers movies and video games look at this thing with envy. I think it looks like a bad cartoon drawing.
I see plenty of them around, though...oddly, it's mostly retired people. A sporty economical package makes sense for them, I guess.

[2.0T_Convert]

All cars have to compromise in one way or another

Agreed then.

I guess my fanboism kicked in at some users comments.

Best of luck to Hyundai then although I still consider it ugly

[Turbio!]

$23-25k is too much for a turbo Accent hatchback with a twist-beam rear end, in my opinion.

$25k will get you a Volvo C30 T5, Focus ST, Cooper S, GTI, MazdaSpeed 3, Miata, FR-S, etc. Hell, Hyundai's own Sonata 2.0T SE is $25.6k. Veloster Turbo should be $20-21k, tops.

First off, the Veloster starts at $22k. Everything else you mentioned starts at $25k or thereabouts. $3k is not insignificant, and it's not fair to compare an optioned-up example of the former to base versions of the latter, especially when none of those cars remain at $25k when equipped comparably to the Veloster.

Now, then, personally, subjectively, I think the Veloster makes a case for itself as an alternative to what you mentioned. The Miata and FR-S are not what I'd call comfortable commuter cars and they don't deliver 34-38mpg highway. The MS3, GTI, and C30 likewise struggle to top 32mpg highway. The Cooper S is more expensive, less powerful, and smaller. It's more practical and comfortable than a tiny 500 Abarth. And the Sonata is a large midsize sedan, and not terribly good to drive. None of those alternatives are bad, and the Veloster is not necessarily superior, but the Veloster represents a fairly unique mix of attributes - just as the rest of them do. I think there's a place in the market for an affordable, efficient commuter that makes no pretense of being a track star, but has enough balls that it doesn't run out of breath going uphill, and styling that's not totally soporific. If it's not for you, there's plenty of cars that are, but I think this will find plenty of buyers.