Hyundai Forums banner

Hyundai SFS 2014 tests, comparisons and concern

2K views 13 replies 7 participants last post by  mikelets456 
#1 ·
Hello All and glad I found this forum. Hopefully I'll never have to use it--LOL.

We recently purchased the 2.4 Hyundai Santa Fe sport 2014 completely loaded. We did exhaustive research on the CX-5, CR-V, RAV 4 and the Escape. We loved the CR-V, but it was NOISY on the road and had too many mixed reviews on the AWD system and reliability...if it had been quieter we probably would have bought the 2012 that was loaded.

Next was the RAV 4---for one, I am a Toyota guy but the RAV 4 felt like junk to me. I felt I was sitting above the steering wheel driving a toy. It too was loud and felt like a cheap car. Also, the interior was cheap feeling and was very expensive.

The CX-5, I liked quite a bit but was a bit noisy at highway speeds and the biggest problem, it was TOO SMALL.

Ford Escape, I really liked. It was quiet, big and decent pick up but in the end I really wanted a foreign car because all my Fords required some sort of suspension work by 70000 miles.

So we drove the Santa Fe sport and I was AMAZED how quiet this vehicle was...coming from a Highlander and Toyota Avalon, this was every bit as quiet. Also, the tech package and gadgets on this vehicle were amazing.

So we came to my only point of concern---the engine. However, I continued to lament on the fact that my '02 Explorer weighed 1500 lbs more and had a 200 HP V6 so surely a 190 HP Cyl on a 3600 LB vehicle should be fine? I understand the gas mileage which I've been getting 21-26 City/HWy. But I am concerned how many of you are saying this is under powered....how? What is the reasoning?

I looked at the Rav4 with 174 HP and only 100 lbs less in curb weight. The CR-V at 185 and about the same weight. When I step on the gas the inline 4 of the SFS seems quite sufficient. However, compared to my 270 HP Highlander engine, there's no comparison.

Also, what's the reliability on this engine? I can't find much on widespread problems other than reading some on this site.

Other than that concern we're happy with this great purchase.
 
See less See more
#3 ·
#4 ·
Well the moderator did not lock the thread.....yet

You are of course comparing a number of different vehicles with different engines . The 2.4 uses direct injection which does allow for smaller displacement with good power output. Somewhere I saw a HP/lbs-ft graph and the 2.4 has a nice relatively flat torque curve - up to a certain point and when you hit that point - at higher speeds or with a loaded vehicle you may notice the engine response not quite like it is at lower speeds or what it is in your Toyota or maybe even the Ford. But lower end and mid range power looks pretty robust.
Whether it's enough power for you really depends on what your needs/expectations are . Reliability - you have a 100k warranty.
If your model is AWD and loaded it may actually weight closer to 3900 lbs than 3600 lbs.
 
#6 ·
Well the moderator did not lock the thread.....yet
i wont, but i wanted to let people know that every week, we have a new member who starts a similar thread. its not needed
 
  • Like
Reactions: fishwoker
#5 ·
Thanks good information.... BTW, I'm not complaining (maybe I'm more concerned) and trying to understand why on this site people are saying the engine is undersized. Reading through, you could see how over time it could be a concern but your explanation helps.

The bottom line is this was for my wife, she loves it (that's all that matters--lol) and I want to make sure she's happy with it for a long time.
 
#7 ·
you should be all set - remember people that are unhappy or have problems usually post the most - I've been that way about mpgs, having bought the car prior to the EPA revision . I was kind of expressing that if you tow over 1500 lbs , drive mtn passes, or expect to pass semis at 75 mph in short passing lanes then the 2.4 might fall short, it will though downshift more and give you power. But for everyday driving most on here are quite happy with the 2.4 . I think Hyundai builds mostly well designed engines and vehicles for the money.
 
#8 ·
Admittedly, I have not had a 4 Cylinder since 1989 and all my cars since then (even my kid's cars) were all 6 Cyl, hence the "concern" and apprehension.

Quite honestly, I was surprised how quiet this 4 cylinder is especially at high speeds...yes, above 70 MPH in PA. That was another concern with the CR-V only being a 5 speed at those higher speeds and the tach over 3000 RPM where the SFS is at 2650.

But yes, overall I am quite pleased and your last post regarding towing, etc put my mind at ease because this is our "night out" car with the occasion trip to my son's college.
 
#10 ·
In 2015 the CR-V uses a CVT - this pushed fuel economy even higher to 26/33 epa rating. Most small SUVs lists I've seen have the CR-V, CX-5, SFS, and Forester topping the ratings - and yes I think it's C&D that found the engine in the CR-V noisy. The RAV4 never seems to get very good reviews but like the CR-V has high sales volume - probably for no other reason that it's Toyota.
 
#9 ·
Welcome to the forum 456, so now here's how I see it. Yes, the SF is truly a quiet ride compared to the noisy, over-reved, underpowered, tin door competition. And again in my opinion, compared to the competition, the 2.4 has adequate power. But compared to a 2T, the 2.4 is underpowered. You get a few more MPGs and save a few bucks...same room, but no zoom. If you can live with that (and many can) then I say "more power to you".
 
#11 ·
Be thankful that you did not chose the Rav 4. The rear seats are like a non supporting church pew. (Per my wife) The interior also is not as nice as the SFS and appears rather sparten. The actual on the road fuel economy is better than the SFS 2.0T and 2.4L but at a HP cost.

BTW, the actual MPG difference between the 2.0T and the 2.4L is actually quite small but the 2.0T has at least some get up and go when you need it! (I.E. at anything over 55 mph)
 
#12 ·
In short ; for a city-and suburbs cruiser a 2.4 is fine. For going heavy-loaded into the mountains and on narrow roads with a lot of trucks you might feel safer, in the end, with the turbo. Are you a sporty driver ; pick the turbo. Are you a relaxed driver and never even consider doing a 0-60 test yourself or never drive with a lead-foot ; then the 2.4 will suit you fine and save you quite a bit when purchasing and adding gas.
 
#14 ·
Quick question. I have a 2008 BASE Highlander and once a year I unplug the battery to reset or reboot the system----this resets shift points in the transmission and the vehicle seems to run better for quite some time. My question is with a fully loaded Hyundai SFS, is this advisable? Has anyone done this and seen fewer computer "glitches", betting shifting, etc?

Also, one more quick question. Is there a way to set my phone as the the default mode every time I get in the SFS? Meaning, I don't want to scroll through 3 FM, 2 AM and 3 XM modes/presets before getting to my phone's music, etc every time I get into the SFS.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top