This is the perfect car if you want to look sporty AND be fuel efficient, at 24/35mpg. It's ultimate package leaves you with a fully loaded car (leather heated seats, navigation system, bluetooth, moonroof, backup monitor, xm radio, and voice activation system) for under $25K. Couldn't be happier with my Veloster Turbo. I didn't expect it to be a sports car. It is an economy car that happens to look like a sports car... a perfect fit for me. And let me tell you, this car turns heads!
Why are so many people concerned about the 0-60 time, or how fast it is. I mean it's not built to be a fucking race car, it's just an economy hatchback that's a little sporty. Stop all this, "My Honda can beat this piece if shit." Not everybody is a reckless driver wanting to street race everybody.
it's not a dragster people... it's a good all around sports car that's fully loaded and good MPG .... yes a focus st, or sti will be faster but not as loaded and no 10 yr 100k warranty either. . so the veloster is the better car in my opinion .
MIGHTY SCRUB He is not bashing the car he is bashing the old school review style. However, Motorweek has been a car review source for a very long time and I happen to like that the review style has remained nearly unchanged.
@@Reefer-Rampage69 completely not possible stock. I've walked stock Veloster Turbos with my e36 m3 STOCK. I am not stock anymore... You aren't breaking 7 seconds
@@goclunker Alright, I'm not a Hyundai fanboy at all, I'm just saying I've seen it done before. Like I said you need optimal conditions. Warm tires, sticky tires, good weather, clean track/road, and a damn good driver. You can get below 7 seconds. 7.8 is wayyy slower then even most people can get, these guys launched it horribly
EXACTLY! Coming from an '05 GTO that I bought new with heavy mods, doing the 1/4 in 12.2-12.4, I've been looking for a replacement with a better driveling, so I've been looking at used M3's, M5's, and even M6's. Luxury, power, and looks,but terrible gas mileage, and they don't come with half the stuff the Veloster Turbo comes with standard. Honestly, when I got my GTO, The speed was nice, but the things I was missing, was more important. I'm actually considering the Veloster Turbo over a BMW.
yes it did get 35 MPG highway on a few trips. And yes the Veloster has great features and like most Hyundias, is a great value, with all that content. All I was saying is that for the HP numbers/weight the performance is subpar. It's not what I think it should be.
The Veloster is a fine car for commuting. Handling has nothing to do with power nor going fast, unless you are drag racing. If you want to drag race, you would be better served with a Mazda Speed3.
do you know how loaded these cars are? thats why they cost a little more. a base model veloster is a hyundai accent maxed out in the options chart and has a better suspension system than the accent, so it handles better (crz rival). the veloster turbo comes standard with the style package upgrades, so the price to upgrade to the more powerful engine is actually more like a 2500 dollar upgrade than a 4500 dollar upgrade.
Errr yeah, between the Forte SX and the Velostar, this 1.6T with the autos were doing 6.6-6.8 second 0-60's and 15.0-15.2 quarter. I wonder if they took the time to work the launch to get away from the wheelhop (I think the SX is better in this respect). 7.8 sounds awful...
Small turbo cars with auto trans are usually quicker than their manual copies on a 0-60 test. With manual you lift for the upshift, so the turbo loses some of its boost which costs some time building it up again. The guy with the auto just matts the gas and leaves it there. My MS3 would probably do 0-60 low 5 seconds if it had a good auto trans. BTW, how did you time yours?
LOL!!!! I have the 2013 Turbo and I have hit 0-60 in 5.9, 6.1 and 5.7. first run was no trac control. second run was trac on with eco on and third run was trac and eco off. allready beat a mustang GT and a Cooper S but lost to a vette. knew I would lose to the vette but my ego was to high that day....LOL!!!! Damn piece of chevy. Anyways love this little 1.6 litter turbo that is a blast to drive and I am still getting 34.7 MPG
I don't get what the argument is, here... I took a ride in one of these, it's a nice ride. Comfortable, good looking, and great economy if you aren't booking it down country roads for thrills.
The 2013 Hyundai Veloster Turbo is America's best looking and speediest sports hatch of 2013. German designers and Korean engineers have engineered a car that delivers excellent power, superior driving dynamics and advanced technologies such as hill assist. Forza Hyundai Motors!
I have a 2011 Gen Coupe. The mileage is better than advertised and I have not had one complaint or warranty issue. I drive my cars into the ground so we shall see how long it lasts. So far 27k+ miles of spirited driving and nothing but rock solid reliability. It's almost paid off too. Keep your German junk...
I have a 2013 TURBO VELOSTER and at Spokane raceway I did 0-60 clocked at 5.7 seconds ( strip was really sticky). Granted it did take me a few runs to figure out how to drive with TC and ECO off. Plus I get 37.6 MPG while driving normal...but kick in the TURBO all the time and it drops to 34 sometimes 31 MPG depending on pedal placement (the floor) TURBO's are funny. I'm not saying it's the fastest car out there, but it is alot of fun to drive.
Try the R-Spec !! It's a $1000.00 less and much better deal. Faster steering lower gearing all the good stuff. Most people don't know that it is available.
Veloster has massive recalls right now for the sunroof cracking smashing while driving. Hyundai and kia have also been in the news for getting caught for lying about gas mileage figures
Sonic_1000 I'm taking mine to the track for the first time tomorrow. I've never raced at a strip.. so I'm interested to see what I can manage. I do know the track isn't the best.. a lot of people who race fwd cars at this track pick up as much as a half second at the track in Baytown. The track I'm running at... They won't let you run in the grooves where all the rubber is.. so it's like trying to launch the car on the street. Hoping I can get a low 15 out of it.
I know right?! I wonder if they left the Traction Control on. Depending on your skill with a manual most people are seeing anywhere from 6.5 to 7.1 for 0-60 mph.
***** Faster than a BRZ/FRS? Lets see: Toyobaru Twins: 6.4 sec, 14.9 sec @ 95.5 mph //(Motor Trend). Veloster Turbo 6M: 7.3, 15.5 sec @ 91 mph //(Car and Driver). Not to mention the Veloster is a Hyundai Elantra with a body kit.
Did you cobalt SS get 35mpg highway, have an 8" touch screen entertainment system, push button start, heated leather seats, XM radio, etc etc etc? Nope. It's about the total package, not just its straight line time.
Hyundai has really screwed something up with the engine in this car. The base 138hp hyundai accent and kia rio can get from 0-60 in the range of 7.9 to 8.1 seconds and even the 2015 honda fit is now able to get to 60mph in 8.0 seconds. road and track and top gear tested the veloster turbo and were unable to get under 7.7 0-60. With 200hp hyundai has either really over estimated the HP on this car or has the ecu tuned to pull back boost and timing in first and second to either extend the transmission life or help with traction. Heck a 2005 Volvo XC70 that weighs 4000lbs and only has a 208hp turbo engine does 0-60 in 7.6 seconds. Even if we went with the fiesta ST which has 197hp and weighs only 100lbs lighter does 0-60 in 6.7 and does the 1/4 mile in 1.2sec quicker
+justin sexton This car is rated 6.7 by car and driver, i personal have a 2016 and i get around 6.5 sec, but depends on where you are with sea level im in FL
I have the '13, the car has an awful ECU tuning, plus it does retards the timing and it does it to protect the engine. Also, horsepower is overstated. I would say it makes about no more than 190Hp at the engine and about 180Hp at the wheels. Hyundai likes to round UP numbers, even if they are far from it, lol! If you just imagine this car is really just 180Hp with a tiny turbo, the 1/4 mile and the 0-60 starts to make sense. As it turns out, this engine in '13 was still very experimental and the internal component had to be upgraded the following year (2014) after many owners had their engines flying apart around 40-60k on the odo. Many tuner garages decided to turn down '13 owners and refused to go beyond stage 0, because they started to take get blamed for blown engines, even though stock factory cars were blowing up by just driving at 35mph. Interestingly some people getting a tune managed to pass 100k, which is kinda sad and probably horrifying for average drivers expecting 150 and 200k out of these cars. Either the turbo and/or the engine is gonna go before that number, so keep $4-5k ready in the saving account for engine replacement if the car makes it past 140k. There is a reason you don't see many of these cars anymore.
7.8 seconds to 60? Oh come on... I would think that with 201 hp and 195 lb/ft of torque it should be AT LEAST as quick as an si. The Civic si has 201 hp and only 177 lb/ft and gets a 0-60 of 6.9 - 7.1 so this is... disappointing.
That is utterly ridiculous. The Genesis coupe is a faster in a straight line, but the handling is not even close. You could also get a V6 Mustang or Camaro for not much more money, but the fact is the BRZ and 86 stop better, handle better, can be easily driven at the limit, if you know what you are doing, and is a much more fun car. Plus, that 2.0T Hyundai engine is a dog. The 2013 version is better, but the turbo lags is terrible. You would be better served with a used STi over any of these.
Super Slow.. Aftermarket parts will make it faster, dont know if they forged the internals, probably not. Looks nice, but most n/a stock tuners will walk away from this car in a drag.
Not bad, but I seen some SUVs twice as big as that car quicker than this car. This car is one of those cute hatchbacks meant for college kids to deliver pizzas with!
It does not hit 0-60 in 7.8 seconds because i get that almost with my non turbo. im starting to hate car videos on youtube because of terrible reviews like this shitty video. the veloster beats and frs almost always with a good driver. AND gets waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy better fuel economy.
You don't buy a Hyundai for its MPG or reliablity or value. You buy a Hyundai cause you can't squeeze the extra $3-4k for a GTI or focus ST or even civic SI.
Comparing to the frs. No comparison. The frs whether its faster or slower id rather own. How can you respect someone who thinks this pile is badass lol
If you are here watching this video because you are considering a VT, do yourself a huge favor and walk away and do not look back. I owned this car for 2 years and it was the biggest joke. The MT was terrible, it was so slow and just spun tires in first, under 30 mpg from a 1.6T that isnt fast, and atrocious handling over bumps. The only thing this car did well was decent cargo space. I ended up trading it in because it was unreliable and the engine made so many scary noises that the dealer refused to help me with because I had an air intake. Yea...don't look back.
this is bs 100% they were paid to lie. . click on my channel ,my VT beats is vtecs,civics with type r engines.. I ran 5.4 to 60 mph and 14.6 1/4 mile with mild upgrades.. intake and resonator delete
+Amer Hodzic our cars love the track.. 6 and 8 cly cars always come up to me and say i know you will beat me from the start.. so they got whell hop then they cant drive
The Ford Focus ST is a great car that looks stupid. The Hyundai Veloster is a great looking car with no guts. I don't suppose it's possible that the two could get together?!
Cool little car but overpriced. This should top out at $20k fully loaded. The non turbo should be $15k max. Hyundai and kia have improved alot but they are not honda toyota or nissan. Their prices should be much lower. Yes they have good looking vehicles but that doesnt mean you can jack up the prices. But its a company and like any other company profit is job #1. But learn hyundai and kia. You have to win the hearts of american buyers. You are not going to do that with high prices. LOWER PRICES
This is the perfect car if you want to look sporty AND be fuel efficient, at 24/35mpg. It's ultimate package leaves you with a fully loaded car (leather heated seats, navigation system, bluetooth, moonroof, backup monitor, xm radio, and voice activation system) for under $25K. Couldn't be happier with my Veloster Turbo. I didn't expect it to be a sports car. It is an economy car that happens to look like a sports car... a perfect fit for me. And let me tell you, this car turns heads!
Why are so many people concerned about the 0-60 time, or how fast it is. I mean it's not built to be a fucking race car, it's just an economy hatchback that's a little sporty. Stop all this, "My Honda can beat this piece if shit." Not everybody is a reckless driver wanting to street race everybody.
it's not a dragster people... it's a good all around sports car that's fully loaded and good MPG .... yes a focus st, or sti will be faster but not as loaded and no 10 yr 100k warranty either. . so the veloster is the better car in my opinion .
Still not a sports car though. Just because you add a turbo doesn't mean it bumps the car into the dedicated sports car class.
1990s called they want this review back.
haha lol ikr
Vanneker at least it looks great. Chevrolet Impalas have turned to *bleep* after changes. Just check 1990s vs current.
MIGHTY SCRUB He is not bashing the car he is bashing the old school review style. However, Motorweek has been a car review source for a very long time and I happen to like that the review style has remained nearly unchanged.
Friend just bought one of these, its pretty sweet little car!
You guys need to be better with your 0-60's. My old Veloster Turbo hit 60 in 6.2 seconds stock. Avg time should be around 6.6
Fatal_Inertia no it didn't. A e36 m3 obliterates the Veloster turbo and its no rocket-ship. Why lie?
Fatal_Inertia every video I see is around 7 sec. these guys are a but slow or higher up in elevation
@@goclunker I've seen stock veloster turbos hit 60 in 6 seconds flat with a very good launch and stickier tires. It isnt impossible
@@Reefer-Rampage69 completely not possible stock. I've walked stock Veloster Turbos with my e36 m3 STOCK. I am not stock anymore...
You aren't breaking 7 seconds
@@goclunker Alright, I'm not a Hyundai fanboy at all, I'm just saying I've seen it done before. Like I said you need optimal conditions. Warm tires, sticky tires, good weather, clean track/road, and a damn good driver. You can get below 7 seconds. 7.8 is wayyy slower then even most people can get, these guys launched it horribly
EXACTLY! Coming from an '05 GTO that I bought new with heavy mods, doing the 1/4 in 12.2-12.4, I've been looking for a replacement with a better driveling, so I've been looking at used M3's, M5's, and even M6's. Luxury, power, and looks,but terrible gas mileage, and they don't come with half the stuff the Veloster Turbo comes with standard. Honestly, when I got my GTO, The speed was nice, but the things I was missing, was more important. I'm actually considering the Veloster Turbo over a BMW.
yes it did get 35 MPG highway on a few trips. And yes the Veloster has great features and like most Hyundias, is a great value, with all that content. All I was saying is that for the HP numbers/weight the performance is subpar. It's not what I think it should be.
this or 2013 fusion del ?
i love my black 2015 v turbo batman.
At 2:16 the car spits a cloud of black smoke out the tail type is that normal?
@ dan chang i got mine at 6.3 - 6.4 but i also put work into my vt
The Veloster is a fine car for commuting. Handling has nothing to do with power nor going fast, unless you are drag racing. If you want to drag race, you would be better served with a Mazda Speed3.
It's unburned fuel from the shift. It's relatively normal.
do you know how loaded these cars are? thats why they cost a little more. a base model veloster is a hyundai accent maxed out in the options chart and has a better suspension system than the accent, so it handles better (crz rival). the veloster turbo comes standard with the style package upgrades, so the price to upgrade to the more powerful engine is actually more like a 2500 dollar upgrade than a 4500 dollar upgrade.
I thought it'd be much quicker than that with the turbo added and that much power. Guess the tires don't traction well at all.
You drive a boat .. why would someone try to boast about owning an Accord?
Errr yeah, between the Forte SX and the Velostar, this 1.6T with the autos were doing 6.6-6.8 second 0-60's and 15.0-15.2 quarter. I wonder if they took the time to work the launch to get away from the wheelhop (I think the SX is better in this respect). 7.8 sounds awful...
ive timed my VT auto at 6.5 to 60 so idk why all these reviews are saying its slower when its not
Small turbo cars with auto trans are usually quicker than their manual copies on a 0-60 test. With manual you lift for the upshift, so the turbo loses some of its boost which costs some time building it up again. The guy with the auto just matts the gas and leaves it there. My MS3 would probably do 0-60 low 5 seconds if it had a good auto trans. BTW, how did you time yours?
VAspeed3 like as in what did I use to time it? my cell phone has a stop watch
Um that just means the driver sucks not the transmission or shifting abilities of the transmission.
Then auto is slow as shit lmao the manual won't even do 6.5 you must live on a giant hill and are doing your runs down it lmao
These times look pretty bad. I had an 06 2.4L Cobat SS 5 speed. It's about 0.5 sec quciker 0-60 and in the 1/4.
LOL!!!! I have the 2013 Turbo and I have hit 0-60 in 5.9, 6.1 and 5.7. first run was no trac control. second run was trac on with eco on and third run was trac and eco off. allready beat a mustang GT and a Cooper S but lost to a vette. knew I would lose to the vette but my ego was to high that day....LOL!!!! Damn piece of chevy. Anyways love this little 1.6 litter turbo that is a blast to drive and I am still getting 34.7 MPG
Yeah I drive my 2013 turbo on the daily and I can feel the 0-60 is much faster
Did the mustang start in third gear?
YAY!
Agreed
informative review, but damn it feels like im watching a daytime commercial on basic television. A jerry springer commercial break.
They haven't changed their approach since the 90s haha
Motorweek has been doing this since the 1980's when they were on PBS and their presentation hasn't changed one bit. Corny.
50 percent more power and torque but less than a second quicker?
I thought me and my car would have some issues with this thing if someone ever tried racing me in it. i see i have nothing to worry about :)
1:54 Sunday driver disease (drive it like you stole it grandpa)
if i choose the turbo over the standard model...will it cost me more on my car insurance?
Craig G Yes! But not by much, really. It's worth it, though.
I don't get what the argument is, here... I took a ride in one of these, it's a nice ride. Comfortable, good looking, and great economy if you aren't booking it down country roads for thrills.
how do you get a 16 second quarter mile with 201 hp and 190 tq? that car must weigh 4000lbs
Dusty Thibodaux right!! Lol someone cant shift
What year was the Mustang GT? The new 5.0 ones will destroy this. They do 0-60 in 4.3 seconds...
I like that they made a more powerful option but i would rather have the turbo engine in the more conventional looking Elantra sedan or GT
The 2013 Hyundai Veloster Turbo is America's best looking and speediest sports hatch of 2013. German designers and Korean engineers have engineered a car that delivers excellent power, superior driving dynamics and advanced technologies such as hill assist.
Forza Hyundai Motors!
I have a 2011 Gen Coupe. The mileage is better than advertised and I have not had one complaint or warranty issue. I drive my cars into the ground so we shall see how long it lasts. So far 27k+ miles of spirited driving and nothing but rock solid reliability. It's almost paid off too. Keep your German junk...
I have a 2013 TURBO VELOSTER and at Spokane raceway I did 0-60 clocked at 5.7 seconds ( strip was really sticky). Granted it did take me a few runs to figure out how to drive with TC and ECO off. Plus I get 37.6 MPG while driving normal...but kick in the TURBO all the time and it drops to 34 sometimes 31 MPG depending on pedal placement (the floor) TURBO's are funny. I'm not saying it's the fastest car out there, but it is alot of fun to drive.
I test drove this car, an automatic, it was really weak. My 2.2L s-10 pulled harder. I need to test drive a manual I guess.
Try the R-Spec !! It's a $1000.00 less and much better deal. Faster steering lower gearing all the good stuff. Most people don't know that it is available.
Uh because the R spec came in 2014
its a car full of autozone parts lol like the turbo seats
7.8?? Im guessing honda payed these guys to do the review
Love the looks of the car but 201 hp is still lacking.
7.8 seconds to 60 MPH? mpgomatic did it under 7 sec...
Veloster has massive recalls right now for the sunroof cracking smashing while driving. Hyundai and kia have also been in the news for getting caught for lying about gas mileage figures
i love this car but for the price I rather go the genesis :)
7.8 ? learn how to drive...
lol
Hey guys is that the old man, got to get my deli meat on my cruise ship, Shadow and Onasis reference.
7.8??? IGNITION tested the Veloster Turbo and did 6.9 sec 0-60.
My base with an Elantra 1.8 60mm throttle and spectre inline air box does 0-60 in 7.7 seconds.
i guess this might be good for a 1.6 i love my srt4 with the proper mods, she does just fine
2005 scion tc with 163hp is faster than 200hp Hyundai veloster.. How?
Because it was a bad test. My 2016 Veloster Turbo is just as fast as my 14 Civic Si. It's dead even.
Sonic_1000 I've got a Veloster Turbo and pulling a 16 sec 1/4 out of it would be depressing. my old SVT focus was faster than that. lol
I've seen them go mid to high 14's stock. Not all tests are the fastest.
Sonic_1000 I'm taking mine to the track for the first time tomorrow. I've never raced at a strip.. so I'm interested to see what I can manage. I do know the track isn't the best.. a lot of people who race fwd cars at this track pick up as much as a half second at the track in Baytown. The track I'm running at... They won't let you run in the grooves where all the rubber is.. so it's like trying to launch the car on the street. Hoping I can get a low 15 out of it.
Walter Nugent Yea. Low 15 is, likely, going to be good for a first time run. 14.70's are possible on a cooler day on a good track.
7.8 seconds? lol, someone can't drive a manual. i did it in 6 flat
I know right?! I wonder if they left the Traction Control on. Depending on your skill with a manual most people are seeing anywhere from 6.5 to 7.1 for 0-60 mph.
6 seconds flat? Bullshit
Spencer Angell downhill...
Ian Clancy up hill both ways in the snow like your grand pappy
Absolute bullshit. 6 seconds? In your wet korean dreams
but for little more you get a Monster Genesis coupe 2.0 T wich would rape any FRS/BRZ.
hmmmm... the 0-60 is 6.5 manual and 7.1 for auto. My NAV manual can do 0-60 in 8 seconds, and the DCT auto is like 9.1
It does not do a 6.5.. I've seen these lose to frs lol
yes it does. Just depends on the driver. And the VT is much faster than the FRS.
***** Faster than a BRZ/FRS? Lets see:
Toyobaru Twins:
6.4 sec, 14.9 sec @ 95.5 mph //(Motor Trend). Veloster Turbo 6M: 7.3, 15.5 sec @ 91 mph //(Car and Driver). Not to mention the Veloster is a Hyundai Elantra with a body kit.
Did you cobalt SS get 35mpg highway, have an 8" touch screen entertainment system, push button start, heated leather seats, XM radio, etc etc etc? Nope. It's about the total package, not just its straight line time.
Hyundai has really screwed something up with the engine in this car. The base 138hp hyundai accent and kia rio can get from 0-60 in the range of 7.9 to 8.1 seconds and even the 2015 honda fit is now able to get to 60mph in 8.0 seconds. road and track and top gear tested the veloster turbo and were unable to get under 7.7 0-60. With 200hp hyundai has either really over estimated the HP on this car or has the ecu tuned to pull back boost and timing in first and second to either extend the transmission life or help with traction. Heck a 2005 Volvo XC70 that weighs 4000lbs and only has a 208hp turbo engine does 0-60 in 7.6 seconds. Even if we went with the fiesta ST which has 197hp and weighs only 100lbs lighter does 0-60 in 6.7 and does the 1/4 mile in 1.2sec quicker
+justin sexton This car is rated 6.7 by car and driver, i personal have a 2016 and i get around 6.5 sec, but depends on where you are with sea level im in FL
I have the '13, the car has an awful ECU tuning, plus it does retards the timing and it does it to protect the engine. Also, horsepower is overstated. I would say it makes about no more than 190Hp at the engine and about 180Hp at the wheels. Hyundai likes to round UP numbers, even if they are far from it, lol! If you just imagine this car is really just 180Hp with a tiny turbo, the 1/4 mile and the 0-60 starts to make sense.
As it turns out, this engine in '13 was still very experimental and the internal component had to be upgraded the following year (2014) after many owners had their engines flying apart around 40-60k on the odo. Many tuner garages decided to turn down '13 owners and refused to go beyond stage 0, because they started to take get blamed for blown engines, even though stock factory cars were blowing up by just driving at 35mph. Interestingly some people getting a tune managed to pass 100k, which is kinda sad and probably horrifying for average drivers expecting 150 and 200k out of these cars. Either the turbo and/or the engine is gonna go before that number, so keep $4-5k ready in the saving account for engine replacement if the car makes it past 140k.
There is a reason you don't see many of these cars anymore.
That engine sounds like a clicking tick bomb at idle
in most cases, many cars are - e.g. VW
7.8 seconds to 60? Oh come on... I would think that with 201 hp and 195 lb/ft of torque it should be AT LEAST as quick as an si. The Civic si has 201 hp and only 177 lb/ft and gets a 0-60 of 6.9 - 7.1 so this is... disappointing.
i'm not boasting - just confirming - an 88' Cadillac is a boat not an Accord - it's much roomier than your Hyundai
i have never received as much as 24 mpg. the lies about oil prices compounded by mpg lies. i'm gone tesla whatever- if i live long enough to buy one.
i could roll that car over full tilt on the pylon course
7.8 seconds to 60 that dude must have been driving like a grandma. That is between 6.5 and 7.5 at the MAX
That is utterly ridiculous. The Genesis coupe is a faster in a straight line, but the handling is not even close. You could also get a V6 Mustang or Camaro for not much more money, but the fact is the BRZ and 86 stop better, handle better, can be easily driven at the limit, if you know what you are doing, and is a much more fun car. Plus, that 2.0T Hyundai engine is a dog. The 2013 version is better, but the turbo lags is terrible. You would be better served with a used STi over any of these.
slower than i thought
Super Slow.. Aftermarket parts will make it faster, dont know if they forged the internals, probably not. Looks nice, but most n/a stock tuners will walk away from this car in a drag.
Not bad, but I seen some SUVs twice as big as that car quicker than this car. This car is one of those cute hatchbacks meant for college kids to deliver pizzas with!
It does not hit 0-60 in 7.8 seconds because i get that almost with my non turbo. im starting to hate car videos on youtube because of terrible reviews like this shitty video. the veloster beats and frs almost always with a good driver. AND gets waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy better fuel economy.
***** dude you drive an Elantra. Research it. BRZ/FRS are actual sports cars. Light weight, RWD, low center of gravity.
Luis Rosas no you fucking didn't. The non turbo is an even slower turd. Don't lie.
You don't buy a Hyundai for its MPG or reliablity or value. You buy a Hyundai cause you can't squeeze the extra $3-4k for a GTI or focus ST or even civic SI.
i wish they got rid of that third door... i don't like it very much
lol wut? Speediest sport hatch? Please tell me you're joking. The Focus ST, VW GTI, WRX hatch, Mini Cooper S, and Fiesta ST are all faster.
This car is slow compared to my 2012 kia soul plus 6 speed manual ill hit 110 still in 4th gear lol
all I got from this was it is slow and not fun for daily.
Comparing to the frs. No comparison. The frs whether its faster or slower id rather own. How can you respect someone who thinks this pile is badass lol
neh
so gordan got 2 fucking faces?
haha.. an Accord is a boat, sorry ... if you don't think it is, you've never driven a car with sports tuned suspension.
If you are here watching this video because you are considering a VT, do yourself a huge favor and walk away and do not look back. I owned this car for 2 years and it was the biggest joke. The MT was terrible, it was so slow and just spun tires in first, under 30 mpg from a 1.6T that isnt fast, and atrocious handling over bumps. The only thing this car did well was decent cargo space. I ended up trading it in because it was unreliable and the engine made so many scary noises that the dealer refused to help me with because I had an air intake. Yea...don't look back.
Maybe take better care of your car next time.
you are correct - i drive an Accord - leather, sunroof, fully loaded, v6 - it's much better than your 2013 Veloster
See the smoke? They messed up the piston rings.... lol
For the money, you would be insane to get this over a base BRZ or Focus ST. Both of those are around $2K more for far better cars in every respect.
I beat a lot more hot cars with my VW 1.6L Beetle in 1970.... going less thatn 100 of course...
The Fiesta ST is gonna be better and for a few grand less!
maybe - but i don't own or desire a Hyundai like you
Still seems slow.
It looks good but not impressive for me.
Wow you guys must be crappy drivers! Or be in the Mountains! I see 6.5/6.8 to 60 & 15.0/15.5 Qtr (trans pending) on a lot of other websites & forums!
This is the new age PT Cruiser kinda vehicle. In a few years it will be ugly
Fiat 500 Abarth is quicker than this car . both from motorweek review.
sloowwww
Fwd ftl
A better driver will make that car in 15.5 sec. 1/4 mile
these are the slowest 0-60 out of any review video don't be fooled car and driver got it to 6.5 secs with the manual
Lol it's like they didn't want to hurt its feelings. There are 7000 pound trucks that run faster 1/4 miles than that.
Zzodakk go home, you're drunk.
SlowToster
still too slow
this is bs 100% they were paid to lie. . click on my channel ,my VT beats is vtecs,civics with type r engines.. I ran 5.4 to 60 mph and 14.6 1/4 mile with mild upgrades.. intake and resonator delete
+Race Turbo biggest lie ever. lol
Lol 5.6 zero to 60? That's as fast as early models of wrx sti
+Amer Hodzic my new channel is vt racing 1.. all my races and times and upgrades..
+Amer Hodzic our cars love the track.. 6 and 8 cly cars always come up to me and say i know you will beat me from the start.. so they got whell hop then they cant drive
Race Turbo type in VT racing 1 and all my races are there..
The Ford Focus ST is a great car that looks stupid. The Hyundai Veloster is a great looking car with no guts. I don't suppose it's possible that the two could get together?!
Mercedes, Audi, and VW have hatches that look and perform better.. Although the price is greatly different lol
+Heartagram yeah if you make a zillion dollars mayweather....
Martin Smith gutted civic hatch, upgrade the suspension and tires that's all you need. Easy to work on and fun.
My 2.0 focus is faster
Cool little car but overpriced. This should top out at $20k fully loaded. The non turbo should be $15k max. Hyundai and kia have improved alot but they are not honda toyota or nissan. Their prices should be much lower. Yes they have good looking vehicles but that doesnt mean you can jack up the prices. But its a company and like any other company profit is job #1. But learn hyundai and kia. You have to win the hearts of american buyers. You are not going to do that with high prices. LOWER PRICES