Genesis Working On a Luxurious Two-Door GT

[Submariner]

Good reply.

[2o6]

Good reply.

What you're doing isn't even actual criticism - it's brand snobbery. It's really shitty criticism.

[Submariner]

What you're doing isn't even actual criticism - it's brand snobbery. It's really shitty criticism.

No, it's fucking not.  It's the actual, tangible feel of the inside of the car, which is what matters in luxury cars.

And for what it's worth, the similarly priced, similarly revered Lincoln managed to best the G90 in the interior department in nearly every way.  It's not "snobbery", it's the lack of competence in designing a nice interior environment. 

[shp4man]

No, seriously​.

[giant_mtb]

LOL, so Submariner, are you really a trust fund baby?  To the big buck degree these dudes say?
If so, welcome to the Trump train! Wish I was you. 

Is it possible for you to have a conversation with someone without bringing up the POTUS?  You must be a real treat in real life.

[Soup DeVille]

No, it's fucking not.  It's the actual, tangible feel of the inside of the car, which is what matters in luxury cars.

And for what it's worth, the similarly priced, similarly revered Lincoln managed to best the G90 in the interior department in nearly every way.  It's not "snobbery", it's the lack of competence in designing a nice interior environment. 

This I agree with, although I really doubt the G90 is so bad as to be compared to a fiberglass banquet hall fountain.

[shp4man]

Is it possible for you to have a conversation with someone without bringing up the POTUS?  You must be a real treat in real life.

Na, I'm coo!. Are you? So how are you with Trump? One stop light?   

[12,000 RPM]

Which is fine, but it feels like hack luxury - like some Mediterranean-themed banquet hall with a plug-in fountain in the lobby and a "continental buffet" for breakfast.  "Look at that big screen!  We need one of those!  And look at the seats in that A8!  lift em' straight out and stick them in here!"  There is an enormous difference between something that looks nice and something that feels it, and that is where the G90 falls woefully short.  I can only imagine how the chassis and driving dynamics line up relative to Lexus, Jaguar and the Germans if the most overt part of the car is a 2nd rate affair.

Again, for someone who will never be able to afford and probably never drive a 100K German full sizer, the G90 is fine. You are deep into the realm of diminishing returns. If the G90 builds on what I experienced in the 1st gen Genesis, it's fine. It doesn't have to be perfect.

Plus it sounds like you don't want to like or legitimize the G90, and thus will ding it on every subjective metric possible. A Hyundai can't be a luxury car, it just can't!!!

[Submariner]

Again, for someone who will never be able to afford and probably never drive a 100K German full sizer, the G90 is fine. You are deep into the realm of diminishing returns. If the G90 builds on what I experienced in the 1st gen Genesis, it's fine. It doesn't have to be perfect.

Plus it sounds like you don't want to like or legitimize the G90, and thus will ding it on every subjective metric possible. A Hyundai can't be a luxury car, it just can't!!!

I have had similar contempt for Lincoln, yet I had no problem recognizing that it was a more thoughtfully executed car than the G90.

Even if some of the fit and finish is a bit dodgy, and some of the controls feel a bit cheap, and some of the styling cues were a bit off, it's a good attempt, and more importantly doesn't look or feel like a lazy, thoughtless rehash of the S/7/A8. 

[Submariner]

This I agree with, although I really doubt the G90 is so bad as to be compared to a fiberglass banquet hall fountain.

No, it's not that bad.  It's not even terrible, just forgettable, with a touch of the cheap (the wood, to the touch and eyes, is an embarrassing oversight, for example).

Another way of looking at it is this: go into an early 90's "luxury apartment" with a granite surround on the fireplace.  "Aha!"  You say.  "That's lovely!"  Except that upon closer inspection it's a bit cracked and with a knock, you find it that it's little more than a thin sheet of 2nd rate stone bonded to some particle board.

Again, fine for what it is, but my initial comment was in reply to Sporty asserting that it's a much more luxurious car than a similarly priced German automobile; only if you count gizmos and big screens as luxury.

[12,000 RPM]

Again, fine for what it is, but my initial comment was in reply to Sporty asserting that it's a much more luxurious car than a similarly priced German automobile; only if you count gizmos and big screens as luxury.

What $70K German car is more luxurious than the G90?

[Submariner]

What $70K German car is more luxurious than the G90?

Literally every one I sat in at the auto show: E, A6, 5, GS (LS), XJ (it starts at $74k but close enough).

[Soup DeVille]

No, it's not that bad.  It's not even terrible, just forgettable, with a touch of the cheap (the wood, to the touch and eyes, is an embarrassing oversight, for example).

Another way of looking at it is this: go into an early 90's "luxury apartment" with a granite surround on the fireplace.  "Aha!"  You say.  "That's lovely!"  Except that upon closer inspection it's a bit cracked and with a knock, you find it that it's little more than a thin sheet of 2nd rate stone bonded to some particle board.

Again, fine for what it is, but my initial comment was in reply to Sporty asserting that it's a much more luxurious car than a similarly priced German automobile; only if you count gizmos and big screens as luxury.

I used to drive limos, so I know exactly what you're saying about "faux luxury." Those things were rife with it. By spec sheets they look great, but all the materials are lacking.

[ifcar]

I'm picking up a G90 press car on Friday, so I'll be interested in seeing how terrible it actually is. My assumption is not actually terrible, and I wasn't blown away by the Continental I sat in.

Besides, if it's being compared to an A6 at the same price, the G90 stomps it for interior volume. And for plenty of buyers, a bigger car has significant appeal.

[Submariner]

I used to drive limos, so I know exactly what you're saying about "faux luxury." Those things were rife with it. By spec sheets they look great, but all the materials are lacking.

I don't know why I didn't use that example in the first place.

[Submariner]

I'm picking up a G90 press car on Friday, so I'll be interested in seeing how terrible it actually is. My assumption is not actually terrible, and I wasn't blown away by the Continental I sat in.

Besides, if it's being compared to an A6 at the same price, the G90 stomps it for interior volume. And for plenty of buyers, a bigger car has significant appeal.

The Continental didn't have some leveling effect on me, but it did the job fairly well - yes, better than the G90.

And those seats...they might be the nicest I've ever sat in - even better than the comfort seats in the 750i, with a far better massage feature.  Too bad the mix of door mounted controls and touch options on the screen was such a confusing, poorly thought out affair.  You end up needing the wonderful support they offer to knock your blood pressure down a notch or two on account of how frustrating it is to operate the bolster and massage functions. 

[Tave]

Literally every one I sat in at the auto show: E, A6, 5, GS (LS), XJ (it starts at $74k but close enough).

Kinda like how you vastly prefer the Macbook's zirconium-alloy body and Intel processor to the Surface's magnesium-alloy body and Intel processor?

In all seriousness though, Lexus was leagues behind on materials foooooooreeeeever. Sure, their panel gaps were excellent and the materials used were sturdy, but only recently have they started pushing design and touch points. People still bought them because they offered better value over ze Germans.

[Submariner]

Kinda like how you vastly prefer the Macbook's zirconium-alloy body and Intel processor to the Surface's magnesium-alloy body and Intel processor?

In all serious though, Lexus was leagues behind on materials foooooooreeeeever. Sure, their panel gaps were excellent and the materials used were sturdy, but only recently have they started pushing design and touch points. People still bought them because they offered better value over ze Germans.

Your computer analogy would be a bit better if both cars employed the same engine and chassis and differed on the tiny bits. 

For what it's worth, build quality is objective, but the MBP's little design touches and the unibody chassis absolutely put it a notch or two above the Surface.  It's almost objectively better built; even the zombies on /r/gadgets seem to bow the knee on that point, even though they are vehemently anti-Apple...but that's besides the point.

My argument was never "this car isn't going to sell".  My initial comment simply touched upon the cut-rate "luxury" offered.  It could sell a million units a year for all I know.  That being said, the luxury car market is rather different than it was back in 1990.  Mercedes isn't as (relatively) overpriced as it once was, Audi has made massive inroads, BMW is pushing a strong (though for most of us, dull) lineup, Jaguars aren't breaking down every 70 miles, Lexus is a hugely respected (and relatively cost-conscious) brand, and even Cadillac and Lincoln are beginning to push out non-excrementitious vehicles, at prices similar to the G90 and G80.  More choices + better products make it hard for a generic and dreary, if perfectly nice, car to do well.

I could be very wrong though.

[93JC]

Which is fine, but it feels like hack luxury - like some Mediterranean-themed banquet hall with a plug-in fountain in the lobby and a "continental buffet" for breakfast.  "Look at that big screen!  We need one of those!  And look at the seats in that A8!  lift em' straight out and stick them in here!"  There is an enormous difference between something that looks nice and something that feels it, and that is where the G90 falls woefully short.  I can only imagine how the chassis and driving dynamics line up relative to Lexus, Jaguar and the Germans if the most overt part of the car is a 2nd rate affair. 

Wow, this is some of the WASPiest stuff I've ever read.

[Tave]

Your computer analogy would be a bit better if both cars employed the same engine and chassis and differed on the tiny bits. 

For what it's worth, build quality is objective, but the MBP's little design touches and the unibody chassis absolutely put it a notch or two above the Surface.  It's almost objectively better built; even the zombies on /r/gadgets seem to bow the knee on that point, even though they are vehemently anti-Apple...but that's besides the point.

If I'm not mistaken, the Surface is unibody too. The regular 3 being fanless with no ductwork and SSD to boot! Regardless, no offense intended.

My argument was never "this car isn't going to sell".  My initial comment simply touched upon the cut-rate "luxury" offered.  It could sell a million units a year for all I know.  That being said, the luxury car market is rather different than it was back in 1990.  Mercedes isn't as (relatively) overpriced as it once was, Audi has made massive inroads, BMW is pushing a strong (though for most of us, dull) lineup, Jaguars aren't breaking down every 70 miles, Lexus is a hugely respected (and relatively cost-conscious) brand, and even Cadillac and Lincoln are beginning to push out non-excrementitious vehicles, at prices similar to the G90 and G80.  More choices + better products make it hard for a generic and dreary, if perfectly nice, car to do well.

I could be very wrong though.

No that's a good assessment, the market is really tight right now. Hyundai might not have what it takes, remains to be seen. Those guys in Seoul are determined though; they're still slapping 10yr/100,000 mile powertrain warranties on the Genesis. How many other automakers in the class give you that? I don't disagree with a lot of what you say, but then I remember me and all my friends in the 90s joking about how they'd never even be accepted as a mainstream option. We thought the 10yr warranty was a hail-Mary to save the US market that would bankrupt the company in a year.  It's hard not to feel a sense of deja-vu here.

[12,000 RPM]

I agree and have said Genesis is not having anywhere near a 1989 LS400 moment. The market is definitely way more competitive. Plus they seem completely tone deaf to the luxury crossover thing.

But there is still a ton of value in what they are doing. Just as luxury is more than interior room, horsepower and gizmos, it's also more than a brand, or panel gaps, or even "intangible details" or w/e. A G90 might not be an S-Class fighter but I'd argue it's closer to an S-Class than the Continental in many important ways. Truthfully though I always thought the G80/Genesis was Hyundai's luxury sweet spot.... $70K for the G90 is honestly a stretch but slightly more than half that for the G80 is a smoking deal compared to a 320i with heated seats and roll up windows.

[AltinD]

I used to drive limos, so I know exactly what you're saying about "faux luxury." Those things were rife with it. By spec sheets they look great, but all the materials are lacking.

You don't have to drive one, enough just seating on one for a few seconds

[Submariner]

Wow, this is some of the WASPiest stuff I've ever read.

Well, you have me on only one quarter of the acronym. 

[Vinsanity]

Plus they seem completely tone deaf to the luxury crossover thing.

To be fair, they did debut a luxury crossover concept at the NY Auto Show, I believe. I agree that they should've followed up with that instead of the G90, but I guess they wanted to "make a splash" or something?

[12,000 RPM]

Well they were already making the G90.... the G80 and G90 are not new cars.

But every year they don't have crossovers out.... they're missing out on billions of dollars in revenue. And now with the market headed for a slowdown, they're gonna be jumping into a situation of diminished expectations. Genesis sedans have been out for 8 years, they should have had Genesis crossovers out for at least 7.

[Rich]

+1