New Tucson turbocharged 1.6-litre in SG 4Q of 2016

[Sdf4786k]

How deep is your pocket? A 200bhp elantra could bring the price up to a sub 140k region.

 

Like that I go for WRX liao..

 

tucson at 132 K and elantra a cheaper car hit 140K ?

 

U right, the scooby is a irrational price car if I reading what you are saying. The WRX Sti is price like a Golf R...

Edited September 22, 2016 by Sdf4786k

[Pocus]

tucson at 132 K and elantra a cheaper car hit 140K ?

 

U right, the scooby is a irrational price car if I reading what you are saying. The WRX Sti is price like a Golf R...

I'm talking about the entry level CVT WRX which is around 140k to 150k region, excluding discount. Check it out, its not as expensive upfront is you think.

 

I'm basing the elantra based on the assumption that being turbocharged, its omv is higher than the bread and butter version.

 

I might be over exaggerating but the turbo tucson is already in the 130k to 140k region. In fact I haven't seen a turbo car in SG less than 130k give and take 5k for COE changes, tucson, veloster, koupe k3, DS3 etc.

 

I know what I say may not be music to your ears but expect the the turbo elantra to hover around that price range, esp one that produces 201bhp (tuned down 180bhp version we are getting btw, that's if komoco decides to bring in to compete with their own veloster turbo)

 

Ps: the STi is still cheaper than the GTI, haven't hit golf R range yet.

Edited September 22, 2016 by Pocus

[KoreanLover]

I'm talking about the entry level CVT WRX which is around 140k to 150k region, excluding discount. Check it out, its not as expensive upfront is you think.

 

I'm basing the elantra based on the assumption that being turbocharged, its omv is higher than the bread and butter version.

 

I might be over exaggerating but the turbo tucson is already in the 130k to 140k region. In fact I haven't seen a turbo car in SG less than 130k give and take 5k for COE changes, tucson, veloster, koupe k3, DS3 etc.

 

I know what I say may not be music to your ears but expect the the turbo elantra to hover around that price range, esp one that produces 201bhp (tuned down 180bhp version we are getting btw, that's if komoco decides to bring in to compete with their own veloster turbo)

 

Ps: the STi is still cheaper than the GTI, haven't hit golf R range yet.

Check out the Chevrolet Cruze 1.4 turbo .. $109,999

 

Opel Meriva $114,888

 

But price sensitivity for this market segment is high and it will be pretty unsellable if it crosses the $120k to $130k range..

[teomingern]

Check out the Chevrolet Cruze 1.4 turbo .. $109,999

 

Opel Meriva $114,888

 

But price sensitivity for this market segment is high and it will be pretty unsellable if it crosses the $120k to $130k range..

This is not marketed as a 1.6 L bro... it's marketed in the 2.0 L category... the COE is also in CAT B... so crossing the $130K mark is a given... look at the engine power...

[Mkl22]

Check out the Chevrolet Cruze 1.4 turbo .. $109,999

 

Opel Meriva $114,888

 

But price sensitivity for this market segment is high and it will be pretty unsellable if it crosses the $120k to $130k range..

I think what he meant was turbo cars with real HP. Not small cc with turbo to mimic the bigger cc variants and save fuel.

[Sdf4786k]

I think what he meant was turbo cars with real HP. Not small cc with turbo to mimic the bigger cc variants and save fuel.

yeah, I figure that the cheapest turbo would be the Nissan Note

 

Else I would have long compared the Nissan QQ to the Tucson..

 

WRX with CVT is like wearing a sports gear for the marathon run but with slippers 

[KoreanLover]

This is not marketed as a 1.6 L bro... it's marketed in the 2.0 L category... the COE is also in CAT B... so crossing the $130K mark is a given... look at the engine power...

 

I believe if Komoco were to finally to bring in the Elantra Turbo, they will bring in a stripped down version so as to price it more competitively..

 

Rightfully, it should not sell higher than the Tucson turbo or even the Civic 1.5 turbo

[teomingern]

I believe if Komoco were to finally to bring in the Elantra Turbo, they will bring in a stripped down version so as to price it more competitively..

 

Rightfully, it should not sell higher than the Tucson turbo or even the Civic 1.5 turbo

That is a tricky one for Komoco... cos the base 1.4 L turbo produces just a tad less power than our 130 bhp cap for Cat A cars 128)... but unless Komoco sees that as the base engine, and then it will become the de factory new standard in these Cat A cars... it will still be considered a premium model. But first of all, the OMV must be below $20K otherwise it's no go... at present the OMV is higher than $20K... that what I gathered so far...

[Shouyi]

That is a tricky one for Komoco... cos the base 1.4 L turbo produces just a tad less power than our 130 bhp cap for Cat A cars 128)... but unless Komoco sees that as the base engine, and then it will become the de factory new standard in these Cat A cars... it will still be considered a premium model. But first of all, the OMV must be below $20K otherwise it's no go... at present the OMV is higher than $20K... that what I gathered so far...

 

Hi,

 

Out of curiosity, how do you know that the Elantra 1.4T's OMV will be above $20K if it is to be offered in Singapore ?

[teomingern]

Hi,

 

Out of curiosity, how do you know that the Elantra 1.4T's OMV will be above $20K if it is to be offered in Singapore ?

Cos when I bought my Sonata, I was asking about both the 1.4 L and 1.6 L turbo engines. I asked my SE why they didn't bring in the 1.6 L turbo for the Sonata. He mentioned the OMV was too high and the tax structure was such that the selling price would higher than the Japanese 2.0 L and comparable to the 2.5 L versions which would place their 1.6 L both at a price and perception disadvantage. And he went on to also talk about the 1.4 L turbo for the Elantra... he said he hoped they could bring it in as it would be a game changer... maybe once these turbo engines reach mass adoption as they are more or less the base engines in other much larger markets the cost of manufacture may drop enough for Komoco to bring these in. See if the Japs beat them to the punch... our very peculiar tax structure creates these kinds of situations where better engines are passed over for older less efficient engines due to taxation and pricing issues...

 

Basically that's the estimate and the reason why it's not brought in yet... the OMV. And if you ask any SE, no one will commit to Komoco bringing in the turbo engines... the Tucson is a test case... if it sells very poorly then I think can forget turbo engines from Hyundai for a while... actually it's priced pretty high, definitely not the right price... but they chose the Tucson cos SUVs are the hottest cars to sell now... and they don't have a small SUV like a Vezel or Qashqai to sell with the 1.4 L turbo to test the market... they won't test on their cash cow the Elantra... that's their bread and butter car... their best seller by miles...

Edited September 26, 2016 by teomingern

[Ozkaki]

test drove the car. it is much better than the 2.0. but comes with 2 air bags only.... to make the price attractive. what a waste

[Lycanthrope]

probably add abit more , buy Ford Kuga  , re-saleability aside

[Little_prince]

To be fair, not all CVT are created equal and car manufacturers are toughen CVT for their more sporty oriented cars.

 

I dunno the CVT of Jazz or Fit cos I don't drive one often, but if you:

 

Eg. Drive a Mitshubishi Colt/Colt Plus 1.5 CVT versus drive a Colt Version R CVT, you will feel the difference. The CVT of the Colt R has no significant rubberband effect, but I won't say totally no effect. But it's more inherent in the normal Colts. The Colt R's CVT are chain driven to handle higher torque so that could be different. But if you WOT both mans, still get that boring max rev pull.

 

If you drove the 2016 Forester XT, totally different. The rubberband effect is non-existence and you feel the torque pull quite obvious. Forester's CVT are chain driven too.

 

The new Swift Sport CVT is also like the Forester, no rubberband effect and decent torque pull. Not sure if it's chain or rubber driven. But I do admit the Manual Swift Sport is much perky.

 

Now still got cars use foot parking brake meh? That was the trend of last decade models..

Now it's probably electronic parking brake. one button only.

 

why not. 

 

still got models with hand brake even lor. 

 

hahahahaha

[Columbian78]

why not.

 

still got models with hand brake even lor.

 

hahahahaha

I believe many drivers prefer the handbrake lever. The worst for me and a dealbreaker is foot parking brake. I really treasure the handbrake in my current car and i know the next time i buy a new car it is likely not going to be there anymore.

 

Just to add, i dont do handbrake turns or drifting stuffs. Just normal daily driving and i love to pull my handbrake lever with the tiak tiak tiak noise.

Edited October 4, 2016 by Columbian78

[Pocus]

why not.

 

still got models with hand brake even lor.

 

hahahahaha

Handbrake is a tested, proven and beloved design, esp for car enthusiasts.

 

Footbrake on the other hand is a crude design invented to save space, before electronic parking brakes were introduced.

 

That's why its mostly found in people movers like vans, wagons and mpv.. Not exactly inspiring...

Edited October 4, 2016 by Pocus

[HalleySim]

test drove the car. it is much better than the 2.0. but comes with 2 air bags only.... to make the price attractive. what a waste

Serious? Only 2?! The SE didn't even tell me when I asked what is the difference.

 

Did you SE told you about the price? Any other difference other den the handbrake is lever, no aircon glove compartment and 2 airbag?

[Akula]

I am perfectly fine with a hand brake.

[teomingern]

I'm growing to love my foot brake in my Sonata though...