Author Topic: CD Article: 2007 Hyundai Santa Fe GL AWD (Read 10288 times)

jww · « **Reply #20 on:** January 18, 2007, 09:25:12 am »

I did some serious tire-kicking of a GL SF at my dealer yesterday while getting my Sonata it's 30K service (BTW - still only on normal service interval - only warranty issue was a replaced outside temperature gauge which was a well-documented problem that the dealer worked out before I could bark about it).

Boy was I impressed with the sheer size of the thing. On the outside, it didn't seem any larger to me than it's predecessor (it was parked beside a 2006 model in the dealership - good for immediate comparisons). Inside it was nothing short of gargantuous - especially the cargo hold. The fit and finish is what I have learned to now expect from Hyundai - as good as anyone else. I like some of the small 'niceties' as well, like two sunglass holders in the roof liner. With a year of excellent history on my 06 Sonata, I can imagine how well this vehicle will stand up as well.

Nice job Hyundai!

Giant Dwarf · « **Reply #21 on:** January 18, 2007, 03:21:36 pm »

Quote from: Snowman on January 05, 2007, 09:05:13 pm

A big two thumbs up. Drove one for a few days as a rental and would rank it right up there in quality, ride, and performance with any Japanese brand.

...and coming from a former Toyota Highlander, Hyundai should take that as very high praise indeed.

Accordingly · « **Reply #22 on:** January 19, 2007, 10:29:13 am »

Indeed...I much preferred the SF over the Highlander after back-to-back comparisons. The Highlander is quite dated (they still had a cassette player!) and the dash was of the last century (imoimoimoimoimo

)

dave 2 · « **Reply #23 on:** January 19, 2007, 04:49:10 pm »

3rd row option on Highlander is very uncomfortable. 3rd row on SF is "bearable" but my kids(6 - 9) were very comfortable on my test drive.

rex4rex · « **Reply #24 on:** February 22, 2007, 07:41:46 pm »

The new Santa Fe is indeed an impressive vehicle. However, it's interesting to me that in comparisions made to the new Toyota Rav 4 , no one ever mentions what I see to be the biggest shortcoming of the Rav 4 and that is rear end comprising the spare, the tailgate and the rear bumper. A former colleague of mine was rear-ended in a previous generation Rav 4 with the same rear end setup. Needless to say the the damage to his vehicle was huge, and the repair extremely costly. Why? there is no bumper, for all intents and purposes, hence the spare takes the hit driving it into the rear tailgate and demolishing the entire rear end. Add to this the ridiculousness of a large tailgate hinged on the right (not so bad in Japan - it opens to the curb in Tokyo), and requiring items to be loaded on the traffic side rather than from the convenience and safety of the curb. At least Honda had the sense to jettison this design in the new CRV, and along with the Santa Fe, and now almost all other SUV's, has the spare onboard and the tailgate hinged at the roofline where it belongs.

dave 2 · « **Reply #25 on:** February 22, 2007, 07:50:01 pm »

I test drove the RAV4 right after the Santa Fe and wife HATED the RAV4 just because of hinged tailgate(same as our CRV). But overall she just preferred the Santa Fe to the RAV.

CptCanuck · « **Reply #26 on:** February 22, 2007, 11:13:10 pm »

As soon we found out about the swing gate versus the Santa Fe's lift gate we immediately put the nix on the RAV4. It would impossible to put something in the RAV4 that just sticks out an inch or so without having the whole tailgate open a foot or more. The Santa Fe hatch is much more practical.

dave 2 · « **Reply #27 on:** February 23, 2007, 09:48:30 am »

Anyone out there worried about safety in that 3r row? I mean if you get rearended, wouldn't there be danger of intrusion?

Passengers would be seated very close to hatch window.

Leviathan · « **Reply #28 on:** February 23, 2007, 12:52:00 pm »

Quote from: dave 2 on February 23, 2007, 09:48:30 am

Passengers would be seated very close to hatch window.

Same can be said about side impacts no?

CptCanuck · « **Reply #29 on:** February 23, 2007, 02:14:07 pm »

It seems that the car industry concentrates more on Front and Side impacts, for which the 07 Santa Fe received 5-Stars on both, but there doesn't appear to be same emphasis on rear impacts either by the manufacturers or the testing bodies. The NHTSA doesn't test for rear crash impact. The IIHS tests for it, but they don't have a rating for the 07 Santa Fe yet.

Guy · « **Reply #30 on:** February 23, 2007, 02:29:25 pm »

I would be extremely concerned in the case of a rear end impact for the 3rd row passengers. That's the reason I am not considering the 7 passenger while I still consider a 5 passenger GLS. If you open the rear hatch, the top outside corners of the 3rd row is actually outside the vehicle, not confidence inspiring at all.

No such concern on my current 7 passenger XC90.

dave 2 · « **Reply #31 on:** February 23, 2007, 02:36:14 pm »

Quote

If you open the rear hatch, the top outside corners of the 3rd row is actually outside the vehicle, not confidence inspiring at all.

That's precisely what I had noticed and kind of freaks me out. All vehicles usually have a crumple zone...

I'm kinda back to considering Odyssey or Sienna...

PJungnitsch · « **Reply #32 on:** February 23, 2007, 03:22:02 pm »

Excellent ad for the Santa Fe (just yanked though, considered to 'show illegal activity'):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GfdyIZcRH4

The story on its creation:

http://www.duncans.tv/2007/hyundai-restless

CptCanuck · « **Reply #33 on:** February 23, 2007, 03:52:26 pm »

Quote from: Guy on February 23, 2007, 02:29:25 pm

I would be extremely concerned in the case of a rear end impact for the 3rd row passengers. That's the reason I am not considering the 7 passenger while I still consider a 5 passenger GLS.

I think that any of the cars in this class that offer 7-seating is pretty useless unless they are to be used only very occasionaly. If you really need 7 passenger seating on a regular basis you're better off looking at the Hyundai Veracruz, Mazda CX-9, Saturn Outlook or Honda Pilot. For a 5-seater the Santa Fe is great, besides with the Santa Fe 7-Seater you lose the under floor storage compartment (which is huge).

dave 2 · « **Reply #34 on:** February 24, 2007, 10:07:52 am »

Think I'll have to discuss with wife how often we would "need" 3r row. Probably 95% of time only need 2 rows(2kids). On the odd occasion, and mostly during the summer, when a 3rd little friend comes over(but even then, they can probably all sit in the 2nd row).

decisions, decisions...

airbalancer · « **Reply #35 on:** February 24, 2007, 11:39:53 am »

Quote from: dave 2 on February 24, 2007, 10:07:52 am

Think I'll have to discuss with wife how often we would "need" 3r row. Probably 95% of time only need 2 rows(2kids). On the odd occasion, and mostly during the summer, when a 3rd little friend comes over(but even then, they can probably all sit in the 2nd row).

decisions, decisions...

2 kids you need 4 rows as u need a row between them to keep the peace

dave 2 · « **Reply #36 on:** February 24, 2007, 11:56:20 am »

You are sooooooooo right....

Karen RB53 · « **Reply #37 on:** March 08, 2008, 12:43:04 am »

Quote from: jww on January 07, 2007, 02:04:18 pm

Quote from: dave 2 on January 06, 2007, 01:14:33 pm
... I mentioned in another forum topic, the salesguy didn't want to give me the residual value after a 4 yr lease. I found this funny as other mfrs have them on their websites. He was pushing financing and a "new" 60/84 option that I didn't quite understand (finance a reduced amount for 5 yrs and option of financing rest over 2yrs, looks like a form of Future Value???).
...
This is Hyundai's new program based on an old theme that the banks have been on about for at least 15 years or more. Think Royal Bank Buy-Back, and you have the Furture Value purchase program from Hyundai, Kia, Honda and a few others. It works similar to a lease, but the car is in your name, not a leaseholder's name. You pay your taxes up front like a purchase. Your payments are based on a fixed value for the vehicle less its future value, which you pay interest only on. We are actually considering this scheme right now as we are looking at 2nd vehicles. Could work well from a cash-flow perspective, and you don't have to worry about wear and tear. But it does mean you are making a longer commitment to the vehicle to get your money's worth.

Also - I found it interesting that from the research we have done, it is cheaper to insure a car that is purchased and financed than one that is leased. Not by much, but there is a premium to some degree when you lease. At least that's what we have learned this past couple of weeks as we have been shopping.

I didn't really understand this 60/84 deal either. What happens after 60 months?

jww · « **Reply #38 on:** March 11, 2008, 04:52:00 pm »

Quote from: Karen RB53 on March 08, 2008, 12:43:04 am

I didn't really understand this 60/84 deal either. What happens after 60 months?

You have a balance and like a lease, you can refinance, but walking away isn't as easy - you would have to sell it yourself.

In simple terms, you are paying interest only on a portion of the vehicle's value - a residual value determined by factors similar to lease math.

Angry Chicken · « **Reply #39 on:** March 20, 2008, 06:53:54 am »

I did a mini-review of my Santa Fe (and my Mazda3) fitted with Nokian Hakkapeliitta winter tires. With AWD and careful driving the Santa Fe was practically unstoppable when driving in that wild weather we had here in Eastern Canada two weekends ago.

Here's the link: http://www.canadiandriver.com/forum/index.php/topic,56705.0.html

/Eric