[wobblefry]

Thinking of changing my i30 for a hyundai veloster wot ur opinions guys

I like the turbo model

[neptune]

Depending if you can live with a two door and getting out to let passengers in the back ......that is not nice when the weather is bad....apart from that, the turbo is nice....

[Dazzler]

Depending if you can live with a two door and getting out to let passengers in the back ......that is not nice when the weather is bad....apart from that, the turbo is nice....

In normal parking situations (unless you park on the RHS of the road in a  one way street, the third "hidden" door solves that issue, John! 

The standard veloster is a bit gutless as per my video review ..

Hyundai Veloster Review.mp4 - YouTube

But I reckon the Turbo model would be pretty good all round package.

Rear head room is poor though , so if you regularly transport fully grown teenagers or adults then you have to be really careful opening and closing the hatch.

Oh, and you sit very low so I couldn't live with one now (osteoarthritis in my hips!) 

[beerman]

I like the turbo model

But the 7,500 service intervals suck.....

[Dazzler]

I like the turbo model

But the 7,500 service intervals suck.....

Gee I didn't know that!  Seems odd! 

[beerman]

Must be because of the turbo, but still....

[Dazzler]

Well picked up Beerman (not that i didn't believe you but it is fairly well hidden on their site!)

Convenient longer service intervals

Hyundai vehicles are designed, built and engineered to maximise performance and minimise maintenance, so you spend more time on the road and less in the workshop. For most of our passenger vehicles, the scheduled service interval is 12 months or 15,000 kilometres – whichever comes first. (For the high performance Veloster SR Turbo, the service interval is 6 months or 7,500 kilometres.)

[Lakes]

Go for it but get the Turbo as looks like good low end Torque, they look good bit of fun putting passengers in the rear, but you don't want to be runing a free taxi service anyway. have some fun i think would ho;d there value too

[FatBoy]

The SR Turbo is $31K drive away at the moment in Hobart, a saving of over $6k!!  Personally I would get the SR Turbo!!

[Lakes]

The SR Turbo is $31K drive away at the moment in Hobart, a saving of over $6k!!  Personally I would get the SR Turbo!!

What is the drive away price?

[Dazzler]

The SR Turbo is $31K drive away at the moment in Hobart, a saving of over $6k!!  Personally I would get the SR Turbo!!

What is the drive away price?

  

Umm $31K normally about $37...

Shortened servicing intervals would probably be a deal breaker for me.

Kia do the same thing with Proceed GT and Koup..

Kia Scheduled Servicing - Kia Motors Australia

[FatBoy]

The Hyundai web site lists the Veloster SR Turbo "from $29,990 drive away".  So that includes stamp duty, registration, compulsory third party insurance and dealer delivery.  I had calculated one with pearl paint and a starter kit.

Hyundai Veloster SR Turbo Price in Tasmania - Hyundai Motor Company Australia

Same offer in NSW too!!

[Dazzler]

That is very cheap! But, if you did around 30K per year like I am doing at the moment you would have 4 services a year to pay for!

I prefer the Grill on the SR to the standard Veloster and the round exhausts too.. I like the Kia Proceed-GT probably more looks wise but the Veloster's extra door makes it more practical.

[FatBoy]

That is very cheap! But, if you did around 30K per year like I am doing at the moment you would have 4 services a year to pay for!

The 7,500km service is $159, the 15,000km service is $259.  It continues on from that.  So not that expensive, Dazz.  You are looking at two tanks of fuel for each of the extra services that you now have.

[beerman]

That is very cheap! But, if you did around 30K per year like I am doing at the moment you would have 4 services a year to pay for!

I prefer the Grill on the SR to the standard Veloster and the round exhausts too.. I like the Kia Proceed-GT probably more looks wise but the Veloster's extra door makes it more practical.

The Kia has an extra 2 years of warranty though, important on high performance stuff....

[Dazzler]

Very true Beerman..

Jamie, that is still approaching $1000 a year for someone doing 30,000 kms.. On the + side the Veloster is pretty economical fuel wise (even the Turbo apparently)

[FatBoy]

Very true Beerman..

Jamie, that is still approaching $1000 a year for someone doing 30,000 kms.. On the + side the Veloster is pretty economical fuel wise (even the Turbo apparently)

But only an EXTRA $318 from what you would be paying for the normal 15,000km servicing (which you have to anyway).  Considering it is a $6,000 saving, you would be able to drive for an extra 20 years before you were behind!!

How much was the Calais?  A bit more than $30K I think.  I see that the capped servicing for that is $185 for 15,000 and 30,000.  So really, you would be paying an extra $466 per year in servicing.  Which you could recoup in fuel savings over the year. 

[Dazzler]

Very true Beerman..

Jamie, that is still approaching $1000 a year for someone doing 30,000 kms.. On the + side the Veloster is pretty economical fuel wise (even the Turbo apparently)

But only an EXTRA $318 from what you would be paying for the normal 15,000km servicing (which you have to anyway).  Considering it is a $6,000 saving, you would be able to drive for an extra 20 years before you were behind!!

How much was the Calais?  A bit more than $30K I think.  I see that the capped servicing for that is $185 for 15,000 and 30,000.  So really, you would be paying an extra $466 per year in servicing.  Which you could recoup in fuel savings over the year.

I've got 3 years free servicing ...  But I do see the validity of your argument. 

I don't mind forking out good money for the right car, but try to keep my overheads down once the deal is done! 

[beerman]

Very true Beerman..

Jamie, that is still approaching $1000 a year for someone doing 30,000 kms.. On the + side the Veloster is pretty economical fuel wise (even the Turbo apparently)

But only an EXTRA $318 from what you would be paying for the normal 15,000km servicing (which you have to anyway).  Considering it is a $6,000 saving, you would be able to drive for an extra 20 years before you were behind!!

How much was the Calais?  A bit more than $30K I think.  I see that the capped servicing for that is $185 for 15,000 and 30,000.  So really, you would be paying an extra $466 per year in servicing.  Which you could recoup in fuel savings over the year.

I've got 3 years free servicing ...  But I do see the validity of your argument. 

I don't mind forking out good money for the right car, but try to keep my overheads down once the deal is done! 

Like everything the real savings are made in the buying....It amazes me that people will quibble over the cost of servicing, yet not screw the sales person down for every cent they can.....

Number 1 cost of vehicle ownership is depreciation

[Johnno]

They're removing the Veloster from the UK market, mind you the performance is nothing to write home about it's a bit lack luster compared to other Turbo's it's competing against. Overpriced underpowered

[Dazzler]

They're removing the Veloster from the UK market, mind you the performance is nothing to write home about it's a bit lack luster compared to other Turbo's it's competing against. Overpriced underpowered

It isn't overpriced in Australia and has been a reasonable success (although the fact they are discounting them probably means the Turbo has sold slower than they would have hoped)

[rustynutz]

Like everything the real savings are made in the buying....It amazes me that people will quibble over the cost of servicing, yet not screw the sales person down for every cent they can.....

I was reading the car guide from last Friday's Herald Sun newspaper while waiting for my fish & chips the other night and, according to an article in it, there is very little money to be made on a new car which is why car yards won't drop the prices much these days.
If I remember correctly, on an un-named model small car selling at $23,000 odd, the yard is making perhaps $300. If the car has metallic paint, they then make $400 odd...
Their bread & butter is in accessories and servicing...

[Johnno]

I've only ever seen one on the road, sat in one in the showroom whilst waiting to collect mine and a quite liked it, but me personally I wouldn't buy one when I can buy another car just over 5K cheaper and faster, i think HY have missed the boat concerning the UK turbo market. The USA gets 204bhp and we end up with 184bhp. Now if they would of stuck a 2.OL lump in it and gave it 250bhp it might of stood a chance with the likes of Ford, Vauxhall, Citroen, Renualt  and knock the price down by a couple of grand

[Just Rick]

If you go for a Veloster,get the turbo,the non turbo one is crap,if your taller than five eight,don't get the one with the panoramic sun roof,you'll be constantly hitting your head,if you intent to carry passengers in the back,make sure they have no legs(if they're just a torso and arms and a head they'll be fine in the back) the Turbo goes like a cut cat but the economy is garbage,the friend of mine who had one sold it after 18 months and got a I35,although she said the Volester was a lot of fun,it was fairly expensive to run,Insure and wasn't all that practical for more than 2 people

[bumpkin]

Doesn't it kind of depend on WHAT you want from the vehicle?

If you want the looks and are not worried about the performance then why worry about the turbo version?

If you want performance then perhaps the Veloster is out of the equation before you start?

If you need practicality then perhaps waiting for the i30 with the turbo engine is an option?  (For me the Cee'd GT is lovely!)

I prefer the Pro Ceed looks wise to the Veloster and in the UK our GT badged Kia's are giving 201BHP (still regarded as "lacking" compared to the rivals as far as power is concerned but they look great!)

I think that Kia are on the right lines with the announced but yet to be released GT Line range, all the looks but in a standard car, so normal service intervals and economy. 

Reminds me of a conversation I had with the top brass of Mitsubishi years ago (I was an invited guest at the Wales Rally GB).  They were asking me why I had had a series of Imprezas and not considered Mitsubishi instead, my reply was that in order to get a good looking Lancer like car I had to buy a Carisma and that you could not get a "Sport" version, whereas the Impreza I was driving around in at the time LOOKED like the WRC car and could only be told apart from the performance version by the missing bonnet scoop and Eurotunnel exhaust looks wise.  They didn't get it.

[Johnno]

Doesn't it kind of depend on WHAT you want from the vehicle?

If you want the looks and are not worried about the performance then why worry about the turbo version?

If you want performance then perhaps the Veloster is out of the equation before you start?

If you need practicality then perhaps waiting for the i30 with the turbo engine is an option?  (For me the Cee'd GT is lovely!)

I prefer the Pro Ceed looks wise to the Veloster and in the UK our GT badged Kia's are giving 201BHP (still regarded as "lacking" compared to the rivals as far as power is concerned but they look great!)

I think that Kia are on the right lines with the announced but yet to be released GT Line range, all the looks but in a standard car, so normal service intervals and economy. 

Reminds me of a conversation I had with the top brass of Mitsubishi years ago (I was an invited guest at the Wales Rally GB).  They were asking me why I had had a series of Imprezas and not considered Mitsubishi instead, my reply was that in order to get a good looking Lancer like car I had to buy a Carisma and that you could not get a "Sport" version, whereas the Impreza I was driving around in at the time LOOKED like the WRC car and could only be told apart from the performance version by the missing bonnet scoop and Eurotunnel exhaust looks wise.  They didn't get it.

You've hit the nail on the head

Reminds me of a conversation I had with the top brass of Mitsubishi years ago (I was an invited guest at the Wales Rally GB).  They were asking me why I had had a series of Imprezas and not considered Mitsubishi instead, my reply was that in order to get a good looking Lancer like car I had to buy a Carisma and that you could not get a "Sport" version, whereas the Impreza I was driving around in at the time LOOKED like the WRC car and could only be told apart from the performance version by the missing bonnet scoop and Eurotunnel exhaust looks wise.  They didn't get it.

Wouldn't the spoiler kit and front grill also be a difference? as well as wheels - badges - brakes - completely different interior and the major difference would be the sound and performance

That reminds me of the lebo guy living just up the road from me, he's converting his Lancer into an EVO look a like, bloody thing sounds like a fishing trawler pulling out of the harbour

If I get a chance to speak to him one day I might ask him what he did to stuff it up

[bumpkin]

The UK Sport Impreza had the same grille and boot spoiler as the '95 WRX including the big round fog lamps, so looks wise was very similar, can't argue with the performance bit, but that was not the point, Subaru offered a close to the look normal car, Mitsubishi offered a family saloon (and had the audacity to call it Carisma (it had none))

Edit:  My Sport was very similar to this http://newcarsimage.com/images/2016-subaru-impreza-wrx-hatchback.jpg

[Paolo5]

I had a test-drive of the turbo Veloster and the Kia Proceed GT. I found the Kia to corner and handle quite a bit better than the Veloster.

They both GO!!!!


I was impressed with both...

Then I got into my diesel and appreciated it all the more.