Hi I was thinking of buying a GLS V6 Sonata. I got a coupl of quotes of
around 17350 to 17494 for the variant with moonroof. I was wondering is
that a good price. Also is the V6 fuel consumption anywhere near the
EPA figures? 1 has to be careful the way gas prices are looking now.. I
mean if it's not worthy I could go for the 4 cylinder verssion & save a
I have the same car, purchased in September, 2005. That is a fair price.
Take a look at Edmund's or Consumer Reports and you will see that the price
is just about at the bottom line for the dealer including rebates and other
incentives. The only chance for a bit of a rip off is that in your region,
there may be another incentive that I can't check because I don't know
where you are located.
As far as gas mileage goes, there is a lot of discrepency over that. I am
averaging just over 23 MPG with my GLS V6. Considering the EPA numbers are
20 city and 30 hwy, and I drive about 80% city or so, I think I am actually
beating the numbers (just barely). But some have reported mileage as low
as 15 MPG. And I have had tanks as low as 18 MPG myself in the Winter.
I can't speak with too much authority on the 4 cyl., but it does seem that
they typically get about 4 MPG more than the V6.
...its not always just mpg, its the type of car you want to drive. I have
not driven the 4, but i sure do enjoy the 6. It may cost me 300 bucks a year
more (my rough math), but its worth it to me. People spend(waste!) money in
all sorts of ways. I'd treat myself to the 6, buts thats just me.
I was going to post something similar to the OP's question. I am not a 4
cyl person at all. I like the feeling of some power when I step on the gas
and the 4 cylinders just don't deliver that. No matter whether it's off a
stop light or out in the passing lane, I like to feel a decent motor under
the hood without the thing winding itself out like a bumble bee in heat.
And I like smooth too. Not many 4 cylinders deliver a smooth ride like a 6
does. I don't think it's a waste of money at all. It's your money and your
preference - a waste of money would be buying something other than you
I'm not arguing any of that. I can't!! I bought the V6 after driving
both of them too. The OP asked for mileage numbers. I just provided
mine, and a few examples of what others are claiming to get with the
I would say you can expect to get between 15-24 MPG City and 24-32 MPG
Hwy depending on just how much you like to push the non-linear,
electronic throttle. A few weeks ago I managed to get 32.7 MPG on a
trip to VA from NJ. It was a 1:00 AM - 5:00 AM trip with the cruise
control on most of the time, windows closed, air off and so on. Almost
"prefect" conditions. My trip home was 28.5 MPG in the evening with
high humidity and the A/C on for a good portion of the trip.
I see the roughly similar numbers, but haven't hit 32 mpg (yet), and nothing
worse than 22. As you, when I close the roof with windows up and a/c off my
MPG improves significantly......problem is I'm a big guy and cherish the
wind all about me......2006 lx v6, 18500 miles....PS drive thru's kill you
mileage, teenage drivers don't help either. (duh!!)
All things have to be equal though Matt. Your 4 has the performance of the
six of a few years ago because the 6 of a few years ago lacked torque. You
have to compare current models. All things being equal, it is the number of
cylinders. That said, it's good to see the performance of the 4 cylinders
improving. I drove a four before buying our six and I really hated
everything about it. It was rougher, and it dramatically lacked power.
I disagree. The number of cylinders doesn't mean squat. It is the
torque curve shape and magnitude that matters. A 4 can be made very
smooth and a V-6 can shake like a paint mixer.
I prefer fewer cylinders as it lowers maintenance costs all the way
around and lessens the chance of failure. Having more parts means
greater likelihood of failure, in general.
I'm personally quite amazed at the performance of the new
Chrysler/Hyundai/Mitsubishi (I think the 3rd partner is Mitsu anyway)
2.4L. It is smooth, quiet and performs very well in a car the size of
the Sonata, at least with the standard shift. I didn't drive an
automatic 4, so maybe that is different as automatics are almost always
poorer performers than standard shift vehicles. And they ALWAYS feel
I drove three different V-6 automatic Sonatas and the 4 with standard
just felt more responsive to me in almost all circumstances, except
right off the line. It is hard to get a good launch with the touchy
throttle combined with a too light clutch with too narrow an engagement
Go look at the Hyundai performance chart Matt. The 6 clearly has a higher
torque and a higher horsepower rating. Cylinders do matter. There's a
limit to what you can get out of a given engine displacement. But read my
comment above again. That was not the point of my comment.
It isn't the number of cylinders, it is the engine displacement and
design. I can show you 4 cylinder engines with way more torque than a
Yes, no doubt the Sonata V-6 has a more HP and torque than the Sonata
I-4, but the difference in performance is pretty slight and actually
doesn't seem consistent with the difference in published power and
torque figures. Barely 1 second difference in the quarter mile time
(see link below). Given that the V-6 has 38% more torque and 45% more
horsepower, the quarter mile time is only 7% quicker. Part is due to
the extra weight of the V-6 engine and automatic transmission, and part
is due to the higher power loss in the automatic as compared to the
standard. I'm not sure what the rest is due to, but I have to wonder if
the V-6 stats haven't suffered from "marketing inflation" to more
closely compete with the V-6s from Toyota and Honda.
For me the deciding factors in favor of the 4 were fuel economy, better
handling of the 4 vs. the 6 due to having 200 or so fewer pounds up
front, and just a more responsive feel of the 4 vs. the 6. And my "seat
of the pants" assessment of the difference in acceleration jives very
closely with the numbers published here. The V-6 simply didn't feel
much faster than the 4, and the only place it did was during
acceleration above about 70 MPH. It actually felt more sluggish to me
in the 30-60 range which is where I do about 99.44% of my driving.
Matt - I had just said that it's displacement. These days you seem to be
quick to disagree without reading what posters are saying. If we're going
to argue then let's argue like a man - let's argue about which is *really*
better - red heads or brunettes.
I agree. I really enjoy shifting for myself, so I had to buy the 4.
I'd have loved to have Hyundai offer the V-6 along with a real standard
shift, not that pseudo standard that comes with the automatic.
The mileage you get depends alot on your driving habits. I've got the
V6 and averaged 29.3 on a trip of 1300 miles two weeks ago. This was a
combination of interstate and highway driving in mildly hilly country
(Southern Indiana and Kentucky). A lot of the time either the windows
and sunroof were open or the A/C was going.
On 5 Jun 2006 22:46:30 -0700, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
The 4 is not a whole lot better on price or gas. I got my basic GLS V6 for
18500 OTD, paying very high tax in my area. I've owned a moon roof, but
never liked it. Just too much noise, dust, and exhaust fumes for me. The 17"
wheels in the sport package are not to my taste. Too harsh and noisy over
highway expansion joints.
I am averaging ~27mpg, mostly on 70% highway, 30% town, with A/C always
An acquaintance got 36.5 by commuting to work for a week. He drove ~52mph,
using Shiftronic, and A/C turned off. It must have been a very boring week,
because he drove over 500 miles at that speed.
The V6 typically gets pretty poor mileage in heavy city traffic. Expect
under 20mpg with 70% city and 30% highway.
I paid $16,300 for my 4 cylinder. I think $2,200 is significant. :-)
I'm getting 31 MPG of late commuting to work. This is also about 70%
highway and 30% city. I haven't taken a long trip yet, but I fully
expect that the EPA highway rating of 34 is within reach on the interstate.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.