In an attempt to make up for the lack of reviews I am posting a second review today. The Hyundai Sonata, I split up the 2007 and 2008 from the 2009 because they're surprisingly different despite not looking very different.
Introduction: The Hyundai Sonata is Hyundai's mid-sized car. Originally introduced in 1985 to replace the disappointing Hyundai Stellar and ending Hyundai's rear wheel drive lineup. The Sonata is now in its 5th generation, the new 6th generation Sonata is ready to take over for the 2011 model year.
I wasn't really all that thrilled about the Sonata much like other Korean cars when I first started out. It was the 2009 models where I was surprised about how different Hyundai has become.
Performance: I haven't driven any of the V6 Hyundai Sonatas so my review will stick with the standard 2.4L 4-cylinder engine included in the base Sonata models. The 2009 has an updated version of the engine meaning it produces more power than the original 2007-2008 models. The original engine produced 162 hp and 164 lbs.ft of torque. The updated engine has 175 hp and 168 lb.ft of torque. The differences between the two is rather minimal although I will say the 2009 feels a slight bit smoother and less strained. The acceleration time is roughly 9.5-9.8 seconds from 0-100 km/h. Not a very quick car but its reasonably smooth and modest.
My Score(both): 6/10 - Not a very quick engine but reasonable for its power.
Handling: I've noticed some differences between the two version here. Starting with the earlier Sonata, when you take one of these cars into a corner the body roll and lack of steering feel is very apparent. The wheel isn't exactly light but it doesn't translate into an enjoyable experience. I found the earlier Sonata a rather boring vehicle to take into a corner. Now the 2009 Sonata is a much different experience. The steering is more sharper and a far more willing car to be pushed to its limits and giving a better sense of steering feel that the older Sonata wouldn't give. The roll is also less pronounced and dynamically a better experience overall. I can easily say the 2009 Sonata was my first taste of Hyundai turning its image into a better car company.
My Score(2007-2008): 5/10 - Very boring, quite a bit of body roll and not willing to play.
My Score(2009): 8/10 - Better steering than the previous version, less body roll and far more enjoyable to drive in comparison.
Interior: This is easily the biggest difference between the two versions. The earlier Sonata has a very plain interior design, there is very little styling input into the interior. The plastics look functional but overall not very nice and the stereo is very bad. While the old interior isn't a great place to sit inside it was well equipped and functional. The newer 2009s seemed to completely change and fix what was wrong with the previous interior. The plastics were of higher quality and were much nicer to feel and look at. The entire center console was changed to a higher level which really impressed me. The gauges had a nicer clean modern look with the white and blue touches while the older one was pretty dated. The stereo unit is a far nicer one although its still a troublesome item and likely the only thing in the car that needs repair early. The atmosphere of the newer interior really shows Hyundai's commitment to higher quality. The build quality on the Sonata is very well done either version. Most Sonatas in North America are built in Montgomery, Alabama.
My Score(2007, 2008): 5/10 - Very boring and unattractive, but built well
My Score(2009): 9/10 - One of the best economical interiors I've seen especially at this price range, its plastic but its very nice plastic. The stereo is the only small weak link.
Styling: This is always my problem with Korean cars in the past, they rarely put enough time and effort to style their cars. This 5th generation Sonata doesn't solve this problem but the coming 6th gen shows Hyundai has changed this. From much of its styling its clear the 5th generation Honda Accord was its major inspiration both rear and front are similar. The earlier Sonata does have a nicer grille than the 2009 and 2010s but neither really substantially differentiate themselves from the old Accord.
My Score(both): 2/10 - A nice copy job, but still a copy job and is not good styling by any means.
Value for money: The Hyundai Sonata relies solely on its low price range to take market share away from the bigger automakers. The Sonata does not disappoint here, both versions are very well equipped even in rather base specification. Hyundai's pricing is rather aggressive and trying to take away from Honda and Toyota. The deal looks a bit less impressive when one adds options for the Sonata but ideally the base Sonata will work for most buyers. The older Sonata was not all that refined and is less appealing especially with the updated 2009s which is better in almost every way. The newer Sonata is a very good deal for an inexpensive relatively large car.
My Score(2007, 2008): 7/10 - A pretty good deal but overshadowed by the 2009's improvements.
My Score(2009): 10/10 - Very well priced and far more refined than before, very hard to argue against recommending it.
Overall(2007, 2008): 25/50 - A so-so boring car with reasonable value
Overall(2009): 35/50 - A pretty good budget value mid sized sedan with one of the nicest interiors in a while, easily the most well updated car I've ever encountered.
This blog is about me reviewing what seems to be several modern cars. Cars which I have driven, not just merely test driven. I go over things like performance, handling, value for money, styling and the interior and give each one scores of how well they either suited my tastes or how much better/worse they are to their competition.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
2007-2009 Chrysler PT Cruiser
I apologize for the lack of updates, this January has been particularly tiring and has only recently slowed down. Finally another review and this time of a Chrysler product.
Introduction: The Chrysler PT Cruiser was developed from the early Plymouth Pronto concept. Originally slated to be a Plymouth model, but with the merger with Mercedes-Benz the Plymouth line of cars would discontinue. As a result the PT Cruiser was given a Chrysler badge and was first released in late 1999 as a model year 2000 vehicle. Most PT Crusiers were 5-door hatchbacks however for 2005 Chrysler developed a 2-door convertible version of the PT Cruiser. The convertible PT Cruisers stopped production in late 2007 and the final vehicles being sold as 2008 models. 2009 was supposed to mark the final year for the PT Cruiser, however Chrysler has changed plans with 2010 now being the supposed final year for the PT Cruiser.
When the PT Cruiser came out, I couldn't believe how terrible looking the car was. I couldn't believe anybody would buy such a car. That was some time ago and boy was that a wrong assumption, particularly during the early 2000s there were loads of the things. Presented with the opportunity to drive one, I wanted to see for myself whether it was as bad as I believed it to be.
Performance: The standard PT Cruiser gets by with a 2.4L 4-cylinder engine that produces 150 hp and 162 lbs.ft of torque. This engine was developed during the days of the Neon while the standard Neons didn't use this engine, the SRT-4 Neons used a turbocharged version. What surprises me most is why Chrysler decided to use the GEMA engine when that engine is less powerful than the engine the PT uses. Due to the PT Cruiser's weight its acceleration numbers are not so good with a manual its 8.9 seconds but the automatics are 10.8 seconds to get from 0-100 km/h. That said, the engine makes an interesting whining noise when you gun the throttle. Overall though its not a quick car if you settle for an automatic.
My Score: 4/10 - The engine is old and today quite slow, but it does make an interesting noise and if the engine was placed in a lighter car or coupled with a proper transmission its quite competent.
Handling: I mentioned the PT Cruiser is a bit heavy the base PT Cruiser weighs about 3100-3200 lbs. The rear suspension for the PT is a twist beam design, essentially a torsion bar much like the Corolla. Things don't look good so far, they're not helped by the PT's truly poor turning radius. To turn a PT sharply at low speeds sometimes requires a three point turn. However when I drove it at regular speeds it wasn't nearly as bad as it seemed. I did manage to tripod a PT Cruiser meaning it can actually take some aggressive cornering. Steering feel is actually quite appropriate, far better than today's Chryslers. One does have to be mindful of the height where if you really went too far pushing a PT you'll roll it.
My Score: 7/10 - A surprising handler despite the less than ideal components and body, but the turning radius is poor.
Interior: Inside a PT Cruiser its how one would expect an interior from Chrysler. The plastics are not of very high quality and the switchgear is not in an ideal place clustered in the center console. Unlike other Chrysler products though it does have a bright interior instead of the usual darkness. The plastics are also better quality than those used on newer Chryslers too, the newer cars are rough. Due to the unusual shape the rear hatch space is very good, far better than the Caliber's. Another bonus over new Chryslers is the rear visibility, the rear wiper can clear most of the big rear windscreen and the C-pillars are rather small unlike again newer Chryslers. The build quality is actually not too bad, however watch out for factory defects where sometimes an entire batch have the same problem. The PT Cruisers for most markets are assembled in Toluca, Mexico.
My Score: 7/10 - Very practical, excellent visibility but silly switch gear location and not very good plastics.
Styling: This car was a very controversial one, I myself hated the way the car looked. Yet there are people who loved the way the PT looked. This was easily the most polarizing car of 2000, one where people really loved it or hated it. These days in terms of ugliness there are much uglier cars now than the PT. I still don't like the unusual shape nor the way the front looked. That said I'm willing to say Chrysler took a risk and it paid off.
My Score: 5/10 - Very polarizing, for that reason it was interesting and will always be a subject of discussion.
Value for money: A very big reason for buying a PT Cruiser in the early days was down to the way the car looked. It was a great buy in the early days if you wanted the styling and the practicality. Today the car is approaching 10 years old as a design and it hasn't changed almost at all since the early 1999 cars. Normally this would devalue the car instantly, yet among all the Chrysler cars you can buy...I have to say the PT is still the better car. Its design was easily more common sense compared to a newer Chrysler product like a Dodge Journey where ergonomics was thrown out in favour of stupid design. One has to keep in mind you are buying a 10 year old vehicle though and most other manufacturers have a competing product now. A Nissan Cube, a Scion xB or GM's Chevrolet HHR all newer designs. A PT is a reasonable Chrysler buy, just not a reasonable unique hatch buy. I will say the PT has an unusual charm to it, I wanted to hate it but I came out believing different after driving it. I know its not a good car, but its become very difficult to hate it now. I've encountered some former PT owners who miss their PT and likely will buy the final ones.
My Score: 6/10 - The car is outdated but for a Chrysler product its better value than the car intended to replace it, the Caliber. The car has a lot of charm which is difficult to do as well.
Overall: 29/50 - The PT Cruiser is an aging vehicle, sadly its actually still one of Chrysler's better vehicles. What a shame to see a once innovative company make inferior cars.
Introduction: The Chrysler PT Cruiser was developed from the early Plymouth Pronto concept. Originally slated to be a Plymouth model, but with the merger with Mercedes-Benz the Plymouth line of cars would discontinue. As a result the PT Cruiser was given a Chrysler badge and was first released in late 1999 as a model year 2000 vehicle. Most PT Crusiers were 5-door hatchbacks however for 2005 Chrysler developed a 2-door convertible version of the PT Cruiser. The convertible PT Cruisers stopped production in late 2007 and the final vehicles being sold as 2008 models. 2009 was supposed to mark the final year for the PT Cruiser, however Chrysler has changed plans with 2010 now being the supposed final year for the PT Cruiser.
When the PT Cruiser came out, I couldn't believe how terrible looking the car was. I couldn't believe anybody would buy such a car. That was some time ago and boy was that a wrong assumption, particularly during the early 2000s there were loads of the things. Presented with the opportunity to drive one, I wanted to see for myself whether it was as bad as I believed it to be.
Performance: The standard PT Cruiser gets by with a 2.4L 4-cylinder engine that produces 150 hp and 162 lbs.ft of torque. This engine was developed during the days of the Neon while the standard Neons didn't use this engine, the SRT-4 Neons used a turbocharged version. What surprises me most is why Chrysler decided to use the GEMA engine when that engine is less powerful than the engine the PT uses. Due to the PT Cruiser's weight its acceleration numbers are not so good with a manual its 8.9 seconds but the automatics are 10.8 seconds to get from 0-100 km/h. That said, the engine makes an interesting whining noise when you gun the throttle. Overall though its not a quick car if you settle for an automatic.
My Score: 4/10 - The engine is old and today quite slow, but it does make an interesting noise and if the engine was placed in a lighter car or coupled with a proper transmission its quite competent.
Handling: I mentioned the PT Cruiser is a bit heavy the base PT Cruiser weighs about 3100-3200 lbs. The rear suspension for the PT is a twist beam design, essentially a torsion bar much like the Corolla. Things don't look good so far, they're not helped by the PT's truly poor turning radius. To turn a PT sharply at low speeds sometimes requires a three point turn. However when I drove it at regular speeds it wasn't nearly as bad as it seemed. I did manage to tripod a PT Cruiser meaning it can actually take some aggressive cornering. Steering feel is actually quite appropriate, far better than today's Chryslers. One does have to be mindful of the height where if you really went too far pushing a PT you'll roll it.
My Score: 7/10 - A surprising handler despite the less than ideal components and body, but the turning radius is poor.
Interior: Inside a PT Cruiser its how one would expect an interior from Chrysler. The plastics are not of very high quality and the switchgear is not in an ideal place clustered in the center console. Unlike other Chrysler products though it does have a bright interior instead of the usual darkness. The plastics are also better quality than those used on newer Chryslers too, the newer cars are rough. Due to the unusual shape the rear hatch space is very good, far better than the Caliber's. Another bonus over new Chryslers is the rear visibility, the rear wiper can clear most of the big rear windscreen and the C-pillars are rather small unlike again newer Chryslers. The build quality is actually not too bad, however watch out for factory defects where sometimes an entire batch have the same problem. The PT Cruisers for most markets are assembled in Toluca, Mexico.
My Score: 7/10 - Very practical, excellent visibility but silly switch gear location and not very good plastics.
Styling: This car was a very controversial one, I myself hated the way the car looked. Yet there are people who loved the way the PT looked. This was easily the most polarizing car of 2000, one where people really loved it or hated it. These days in terms of ugliness there are much uglier cars now than the PT. I still don't like the unusual shape nor the way the front looked. That said I'm willing to say Chrysler took a risk and it paid off.
My Score: 5/10 - Very polarizing, for that reason it was interesting and will always be a subject of discussion.
Value for money: A very big reason for buying a PT Cruiser in the early days was down to the way the car looked. It was a great buy in the early days if you wanted the styling and the practicality. Today the car is approaching 10 years old as a design and it hasn't changed almost at all since the early 1999 cars. Normally this would devalue the car instantly, yet among all the Chrysler cars you can buy...I have to say the PT is still the better car. Its design was easily more common sense compared to a newer Chrysler product like a Dodge Journey where ergonomics was thrown out in favour of stupid design. One has to keep in mind you are buying a 10 year old vehicle though and most other manufacturers have a competing product now. A Nissan Cube, a Scion xB or GM's Chevrolet HHR all newer designs. A PT is a reasonable Chrysler buy, just not a reasonable unique hatch buy. I will say the PT has an unusual charm to it, I wanted to hate it but I came out believing different after driving it. I know its not a good car, but its become very difficult to hate it now. I've encountered some former PT owners who miss their PT and likely will buy the final ones.
My Score: 6/10 - The car is outdated but for a Chrysler product its better value than the car intended to replace it, the Caliber. The car has a lot of charm which is difficult to do as well.
Overall: 29/50 - The PT Cruiser is an aging vehicle, sadly its actually still one of Chrysler's better vehicles. What a shame to see a once innovative company make inferior cars.