[Dazzler]

Gee Alan .. you are the sharpest Geriatric I have ever seen.. your idea on how to time the acceleration was 

[AlanHo]

So, it's just an illusion then that car appears sluggish? 

I used to suffer from illusions of grandeur - it seems that this has been supplanted by illusions of sluggishness. For sure during the acceleration tests the car felt very lively.

I have now come to the conclusion that the car feels less lively because it is better sprung with a more compliant and foregiving ride, it feels more spacious, it feels more solid and refined (even my wife commented that it feels heavier and more like my old Audi A4), the controls and gear change are lighter and it is a lot quieter - hence there are less sensory signals that you are moving fast. For sure I am often surprised when I look at the speedo to find I am travelling much faster than I thought.

So I will take back what I said about it being sluggish - and continue to enjoy a fine car that ticks nearly all my boxes. (just the crappy instant fuel display and crappy front parking sensors knock it back from a perfect score)

[d3matt]

I can also confirm that there is no indication showing you when to change down...

I wonder why they have not done this.  This and the silly MPG display and useless bluetooth streaming, makes me wonder what Hyundai is at.

[d3matt]

One other thing (really sounds like I'm complaining now!) that isn't perfect is the steering wheel cowl isn't fitted together properly.


I've tried to squeeze it together, but it wont move.  Not very good quality control.  Now I've noticed this, you see this every time I get in!

[d3matt]

A couple of interesting points on the new i30.....

The wipers - one is tiny!


The door indicators are nice in the way that anyone in beside you can see the indicators.

[d3matt]

More indicator photos..

[d3matt]

And now for some pics....

[d3matt]

And a couple more...

[AlanHo]

Matt

Great photos

Take your car to the dealers and show them this so they know what it should be like (but without the dust)

[d3matt]

Thanks for that photo Alan.  I'll get the dealer to fix it when it goes in for its first service.

One more photo....old vs new....

[Dazzler]

Excellent photos Matt..Thanks. Alan has looked after us very well with updates and photos of the new i30. But nice to get one in a different colour (looks stirling in white) 

We haven't had the new model released in Oz yet  (still a month or two away)

[Doggie 1]

Thanks for the pics Matt, as Dazz said, we can only dream about them down under.

[bumpkin]

There is defintely an issue with the Czech QC compared to the Korean QC in my opinion, this is one of the reasons why I feel the ix20 is not "screwed together" quite as well as the i30 was, nothing serious just occasional minor gripes that you pick up on as time goes by, I had a door on mine that was sitting slightly higher than the waistline, I discovered some rattling going on in the headlining around the sunroof and found that it was easily fixed by actually attaching the headlining to the car and some of the trim looks like it has been forced into place, almost as if the body of the car is bigger than the parts they made to put into it.

Nothing I have found has been important enough to be a deal breaker in the first instance, but if you are new to the brand and then discover these type of things over the time of ownership it may well be enough to put you off maintaining a loyalty.

My Korean built i30 had an exceptionally built interior, not really something I can say about the ix20 nor one I have heard being shouted from the rooftops by masses of Czech built i30's unfortunately.

The ix20 also has the tiny passenger side wiper, whilst it kinda works, failure to clean the big arc left on the screen at that side is an annoyance for me.  I have often said to SWMBO that it would have been better to have Civic style wipers on it, but I see Honda have also gone down this route with the new Civic 

[accim]

This is a very interesting thread with many good comments and reviews.

I would just like to comment about the acceleration. Maybe it's just the feeling. Maybe it "pulls" a bit different comparing it to the "old" one and is now more "sophisticated" -> for example, like if you are driving 1.6 petrol and 1.6 CRDi. You would always say the CRDi goes better, but when you look at the time (acceleration) you see that they are about the same or the petrol goes even better, but in CRDi you feel the kick.

But mostly, I would advise to wait to reach at least 5,000 km. At around 1,500-2,000 I felt a change (improvement) in my i30, but it seems to me that it "came to life" at around 5,000. I think the best way to test it, is to record the acceleration in certain gears. I did that before tuning my previous i30. After doing that, u will ask one of the members (or few of them) to do the same with their i30's and we'll compare it. Needless to say we all must accelerate in same gear and on "flat" surface.

As for the 128hp engine.. I think the expectations of many are/will be too high in this case. Why? From what I've heard (I don't know if it's true, I got that info. from the salesman, the 128hp wasn't available here anyways), it accelerates about the same as the 115hp engine in old i30's (even in old i30's there was a 128hp option and both - the torque and the acceleration 0-100 was the same). There is supposed to be some minor difference in higher revs (128hp has more power there) and most important - the 128hp had higher top speed (although you can reach that top speed with 115hp too). So it seems to me, that they did some work on higher revs. What I'm trying to say is, that many will be disappointed to see, that even though they have more hp (+12 or +13hp), it goes about the same as their old 115hp model and most will come to conclusion that the 2012 i30 goes worse then the old one. But I think, they would come to the same conclusion if they bought the "old" i30 with 128hp model. I'm also pretty sure that even if you go for the 110hp model, you wont feel much difference.

But I admit..you would expect the new model to be better in all areas and it mostly is. But one of the main (at least for me) areas where it didn't improve, are the performances of the car. It does handle better, it looks more comfortable, etc.., but they didn't improve the acceleration and that is one of the reasons I decided not to wait for the 2012 (not to mention much higher price over here). But nevertheless it's still a great car.

As for Ceed vs i30. From my experiences, people who like(d) the Ceed, don't prefer the i30 and the other way around 

[Dazzler]

Nice summary there accim and found your comments interesting too Brian  (i have suspected that for some time) 

[Ibsgaard]

Want that Land Rover 
Congrats with your i30

Any chance of some photos please?

I'll take some tomorrow, but
here's one...

[d3matt]

My i30 is now 1 week old and already 800 miles on the clock.
It is growing on me now.  The car is nice to drive and oozes quality, but is a little noisy at motorway speeds.  Not from wind noise though, just excessive tyre noise.  A different set of tyres will probably help a lot, but I'll have to wait another 30,000 miles or so until I can do that.  Still it's quieter at motorway speeds than the Ceed, which in turn is quieter than the Focus.
The voice control for the phone is brilliant and extremely accurate.  Much better than the last one I had in a LR3 in 2006.  The auto wipers are also very good, particularly when motorway driving with the fine spray from other vehicles. 
One thing that is really impressing me is the economy.  My commute to work is 66 miles each way (near Didcot to Warwick) and if I keep below 70mph, I get over 70mpg on a trip.  When coming down the M40 and A34 the other evening, averaged 74mpg over 1 hour of driving and then it only dropped the average down to 69mpg when I got did the B-road driving.  For an engine that hasn't loosened up yet, it is very impressive.  But I was driving slow and was one of the slowest cars on the M40 on that trip, as most of the time I was doing 65mpg. 
I got 565 miles from the first tank of diesel, which means I averaged about 63mpg overall.  I think this new i30 will work about 15mpg better than the Ceed.
I drove in the dark last night for the first time.  Wow, the dash lights up nicely and the car looks a mass of small blue lights, particularly on the steering wheel.  One thing they haven't got right though is the brightness of the stereo and heating screens.  They are just too bright, even with the dash illumination turned down to the lowest setting.  One minor thing too is that the stereo screen is slightly brighter than the heater screen.  There is a button to turn off the stereo screen, but I'd rather have it dimly lit rather than disabled completely.
The cornering lights worked very well too.  They also worked earlier/more frequently than the last time I had these on a car (the Land Rover Discovery) and were probably more effective too.
I'm also finding the seat very comfortable too.
But I'm still finding it a little dull to drive compared to the Ceed.  It is quieter and a more solid/refined feel, but it doesn't have the low down pull and acceleration that the Ceed had.  This will probably improve when the engine loosens up a bit.  The i30 does perform ok if you open up the revs a bit but it seems to take longer to pick up and be ready to give that maximum power.  I over-took a car on windy A-road and it did pick up enough pace to feel safe, but doing the same in the Ceed gives you a little reminder that its quite spritely for a 1.6 and sometimes puts a little smile on your face.
But so far, I'm impressed.  There are some little niggles which shouldn't be there, as the previous generation Ceed  (and probably i30 too) did better, but overall compared to the current Golf, Focus, Astra, Megane etc, I think the i30 is certainly the best car, pound for pound.  That might change when the new Ceed comes out in a month or two - not for looks, but for interior design and standard kit.

[AlanHo]

Matt

A great report on a great car. I agree with all your points except road noise. Mine is fine but perhaps the result of me changing the tyres. I also share your impression about the car not being as lively - but will see in an earlier post that I have achieved the brochure 0 to 62 acceleration times. I have little doubt that Hyundai have tuned the throttle response to encourage economic driving and you have to be quite aggressive to sqeeze the performance out of the car using much higher revs than we were used on our previous cars.

When you say you got 565 miles from the first tank - did you use a whole tank or only part of one?. The tank hold 53 litres but you can get 57 litres in when slowly brimming it. You calculate you got 63 mpg which means you used 9 gallons (41 litres) which is well short of a tank.

It was strange that you should post a glowing report about economy on a day when I posted a gloomy report about a problem today with mine. Hence I am keenly interested in how you have calculated your economy figures. It would be even more interesting to learn that they are the result of brim to brim calculations.

[d3matt]

My 63mpg calculations aren't exact.  Just a 41 ltr fill up and then filling the tank again when there was about the same left - i.e. when the light came on.  I'm keeping a record of the amount of fuel I put in and as I'll be doing about 3,000 miles a month, I'll soon have an accurate figure.  And of course, I'm doing a lot of motorway driving, which is going to give me slightly above average mpg.

[d3matt]

I gave the car a quick wash this afternoon and took some more photos (outside this time)...

[Ibsgaard]

Beautiful car, can't wait till I get mine

[Dazzler]

Looks great  Like I said to Allan in another thread, looking forward to the Aussie release in the next few weeks 

[Doggie 1]

Me too.
June 1st release date here.
That's only 17 more sleeps 

[AlanHo]

My 63mpg calculations aren't exact.  Just a 41 ltr fill up and then filling the tank again when there was about the same left - i.e. when the light came on.  I'm keeping a record of the amount of fuel I put in and as I'll be doing about 3,000 miles a month, I'll soon have an accurate figure.  And of course, I'm doing a lot of motorway driving, which is going to give me slightly above average mpg.

I have carried out 2 further tests of my car's economy driving the same route that I took doing the previous test recorded in post#66 https://www.i30ownersclub.com/forum/index.php?topic=14198.60

I drove the route yesterday afternoon when it was warm and sunny, little wind and an air temperature of 14*C. The overall length of  the route measured 41.1 miles (66 km) on the odometer and the time taken was 59 minutes. The route comprises 13.9 miles of urban 30 mph roads (34%), the remainder (66%)being motorway. I cruised at 60 to 62 mph on the motorway mainly in 6th gear and at the speed limit in the urban sections - stopping several times at traffic lights.
The car averaged 64.9 mpg (4.35 l/100km) and the overall average speed was 41.6 mph (67 km/hr).

I did exactly the same route at the same speeds in the early hours of this morning. It was dawn, the roads were slightly wet in patches but it wasn't raining and the air temperature was 4*C.
The route length on the odometer was 41.4 miles (66.7 km), overall time 61 minutes, economy 60.1 mpg (4.70 l/100 km) and overall average speed 40.7 mph (65.5 km/hr)

I was a little surprised at the difference in route lengths measured by the odometer because I followed exactly the same route. Would wet versus dry roads be a factor?

I have to assume that the difference in economy between each test is due to air temperature. A difference of 10*C produced a difference of 4.8 mpg (8%).

This may explain why some of our Aussie friends are able to get such high economy compared with most of us in the UK. The average temperature difference between our countries must be at least 15*C

[Dazzler]

Hi Alan I have found my hybrid a little less economical when the roads are wet. I have been wondering if the wet roads cause more rolling resistance (it would not surprise me)

My car doesn't seem to coast as freely when the roads are wet. The Hybrid has low rolling resistance tyres and almost no engine braking so it tends to try and runaway sometimes, but less so when it is wet.

[AlanHo]

Hi Alan I have found my hybrid a little less economical when the roads are wet. I have been wondering if the wet roads cause more rolling resistance (it would not surprise me)

My car doesn't seem to coast as freely when the roads are wet. The Hybrid has low rolling resistance tyres and almost no engine braking so it tends to try and runaway sometimes, but less so when it is wet.

I have edited my text - the roads were only slightly wet - more damp than wet. Not enough to cause any spray and generally dry in the left lane where the overnight lorries had done their thing. I take your point though - but still think that temperature is a factor.

One thing for sure - my previous i30 never ever got close to these figures - the best I ever got was 54 mpg (5.23 l/100km) and the overall average for the 13000 miles I owned it was 49.01 mpg (5.76 l/100 km). Matt has inferred that his KIA Ceed was roughly the same as my old i30 when he says his new car is 15 mpg better.

[d3matt]

I was a little surprised at the difference in route lengths measured by the odometer because I followed exactly the same route. Would wet versus dry roads be a factor?

You must have wheel spinned a few times on the first run! 

I drove mine much harder on my commute home (can't say how much - officially 70mpg!) and I still got 50mpg, whereas in the Ceed on the same trip I would have got about 40mpg.  The economy of the new engine (in DriveLine models) is pretty impressive.  But then nothing better than what other manufacturers are doing.  BMW and VW models have been as economic on fuel for many years.

[Asterix]

I have to assume that the difference in economy between each test is due to air temperature. A difference of 10*C produced a difference of 4.8 mpg (8%).

This may explain why some of our Aussie friends are able to get such high economy compared with most of us in the UK. The average temperature difference between our countries must be at least 15*C

Hi Alan

Colder air should be better than warm air, if I remember correct from the school days of my mechanic apprentice time. If warm air should be better, why would they fit the intercooler on all diesels..

But the much nicer temps in OZ gives the benefit of not having those cold starts that we vikings face every winter.

[d3matt]

Interesting about damp/wet roads.  I've been doing my 66 mile commute twice a day and in the evening drive back I reset the MPG trip every time.  Tonight I averaged 9mpg less over the same journey than previous trips when driving at the same speed for the whole journey - the only difference.... about 4degC cooler and the roads were wet - not wet enough to cause spray and no puddles, but had rained hard about an hour before and much of the day.  It makes sense that a wet/damp road increased mpg, but the difference is about 14% less.
All very rough calculations of course, as there are other factors at play.

My car has now done over 1,065 miles and its only 11 days old!

[AlanHo]

Colder air should be better than warm air, if I remember correct from the school days of my mechanic apprentice time. If warm air should be better, why would they fit the intercooler on all diesels..

But the much nicer temps in OZ gives the benefit of not having those cold starts that we vikings face every winter.

I was under the impression that a few of our members have mentioned that their diesels are less economic in the winter.  I know my previous i30 was.