S
Seamus J. Wilson
Who makes the hyundai engines and transmissions?
Thank you,
Seamus J. Wilson
Thank you,
Seamus J. Wilson
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
B
Bob
HyundaiSeamus said:Who makes the hyundai engines and transmissions?
Thank you,
Seamus J. Wilson
S
Seamus J. Wilson
D
Dances With Crows
Please don't top-post. Message rearranged for easier reading
comprehension.
IIRC, Hyundai makes their own engines and transmissions *now*, but
earlier (late 80's-mid 90's), some of their cars used engines and
transmissions that were designed by Mitsubishi and may have been
Mitsubishi-manufactured. I don't know the details; I wasn't that
interested in Hyundai cars until ~2002. Details/cites/whatever from
people who know more about the engines/transmissions used in earlier
Hyundai models would be appreciated.
Seamus, it might help if you were a little more verbose in asking your
original question. Why do you want to know who makes the engines and
transmissions? Reliability? Servicing of an older car? If we knew
that, we might be able to tell you more useful info, or something.
http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html is snarky and abrasive,
but it's a good guide to asking good questions on Usenet and getting
good answers. HTH,
comprehension.
Thank you for the reply.
IIRC, Hyundai makes their own engines and transmissions *now*, but
earlier (late 80's-mid 90's), some of their cars used engines and
transmissions that were designed by Mitsubishi and may have been
Mitsubishi-manufactured. I don't know the details; I wasn't that
interested in Hyundai cars until ~2002. Details/cites/whatever from
people who know more about the engines/transmissions used in earlier
Hyundai models would be appreciated.
Seamus, it might help if you were a little more verbose in asking your
original question. Why do you want to know who makes the engines and
transmissions? Reliability? Servicing of an older car? If we knew
that, we might be able to tell you more useful info, or something.
http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html is snarky and abrasive,
but it's a good guide to asking good questions on Usenet and getting
good answers. HTH,
K
Krazy Kanuck
I've recently read that in the Santa Fe 's the transmission is perhaps made
by Hyundai but is a design by Porche and their AWD is from Acura...perhaps
someone else could confirm or dispute this?
by Hyundai but is a design by Porche and their AWD is from Acura...perhaps
someone else could confirm or dispute this?
J
Jacob Suter
Krazy said:I've recently read that in the Santa Fe 's the transmission is perhaps made
by Hyundai but is a design by Porche and their AWD is from Acura...perhaps
someone else could confirm or dispute this?
Tiptronic/Shiftronic computer licensed from Porsche. The transmission
is nothng special.
AWD from Subaru, the leaders in AWD design and implimentation.
JS
J
Jason
Tiptronic/Shiftronic computer licensed from Porsche. The transmission
is nothng special.
AWD from Subaru, the leaders in AWD design and implimentation.
JS
Heh... I've driven vehicles from both Subaru and Porsche. If Hyundai
got anything from them they managed to f- it up pretty badly by the
time it made it into any of their cars.
S
Seamus J. Wilson
I could not have posed a simpler question.
Seamus J.
Seamus J.
T
theta
Seamus said:Who makes the hyundai engines and transmissions?
Thank you,
Seamus J. Wilson
Hyundai Motor Company.
T
theta
Krazy said:I've recently read that in the Santa Fe 's the transmission is perhaps made
by Hyundai but is a design by Porche and their AWD is from Acura...perhaps
someone else could confirm or dispute this?
No, the tranny is not a Porsche design and AFAIK they don't design
automatic transmissions.
The AWD system design and/or the actual hardware is either from the
former Steyr-Daimler-Puch or BorgWarner.
R
Richard Steinfeld
Hi, Seamus.
What Bob has requested is that you follow net etiquette
("netiquette") to make it easier for people to understand the
thread. He's asked you to post your addition to a previous post
at the bottom instead of at the top. Personal emailing is casual,
and people (including myself) often top-reply. In that case, the
other party already knows what he sent -- he's got the context in
his head, and you're just firing off a quick answer -- and a
grunt can do fine between two friends.
In this case, you're in a public forum, so other people can zero
in better if they can follow what you're quoting from top-down.
The other thing to consider is that the newsgroup service that
some people use, usually provided by their ISP, may toss an
earlier post. So, carrying relevant parts of a thread above your
addition will give everyone a shot at the context. This is
especially true if you're replying after a few days have passed.
On the other hand, large quotes get unwieldy when the thread
becomes long, and it's a good idea to clip out a lot of what's
come before in such a case.
In this post, I've eliminated everything from the previous thread
because I'm following up on an aside. It's the poster's call as
to how to write. However, the guiding beacon should always be to
put oneself in the _reader's_ shoes and write clearly so that the
other person doesn't have to work hard to understand you.
Regarding HTH's request that you provide more "meat" in your
question, I can't agree. I think that he wanted to a bit more
context, since there's some intersting history that he can
provide regarding Hyundai's engines. This may be similar to an
explanation of how Yamaha got from making pianos to making
motorcycles and stereo equipment, and OE CD drive components.
Korean corporate histories are probably full of interesting
information like this, and probably family intrigue and
infighting as well: corporate soap operas. I feel that your
question was clear, and an appropriate answer, I think, would
have been the first one that you got.
I hope that I've been clear, and I also hope that I've gotten the
names of your responders correct -- I have a real hard time
keeping people's "handles" and names straight. In fact, it's
become too difficult for me, and I just wing it. At this point,
I'd prefer that everyone just use the names that their parents
gave them, and stop with the handles altogether.
Richard
What Bob has requested is that you follow net etiquette
("netiquette") to make it easier for people to understand the
thread. He's asked you to post your addition to a previous post
at the bottom instead of at the top. Personal emailing is casual,
and people (including myself) often top-reply. In that case, the
other party already knows what he sent -- he's got the context in
his head, and you're just firing off a quick answer -- and a
grunt can do fine between two friends.
In this case, you're in a public forum, so other people can zero
in better if they can follow what you're quoting from top-down.
The other thing to consider is that the newsgroup service that
some people use, usually provided by their ISP, may toss an
earlier post. So, carrying relevant parts of a thread above your
addition will give everyone a shot at the context. This is
especially true if you're replying after a few days have passed.
On the other hand, large quotes get unwieldy when the thread
becomes long, and it's a good idea to clip out a lot of what's
come before in such a case.
In this post, I've eliminated everything from the previous thread
because I'm following up on an aside. It's the poster's call as
to how to write. However, the guiding beacon should always be to
put oneself in the _reader's_ shoes and write clearly so that the
other person doesn't have to work hard to understand you.
Regarding HTH's request that you provide more "meat" in your
question, I can't agree. I think that he wanted to a bit more
context, since there's some intersting history that he can
provide regarding Hyundai's engines. This may be similar to an
explanation of how Yamaha got from making pianos to making
motorcycles and stereo equipment, and OE CD drive components.
Korean corporate histories are probably full of interesting
information like this, and probably family intrigue and
infighting as well: corporate soap operas. I feel that your
question was clear, and an appropriate answer, I think, would
have been the first one that you got.
I hope that I've been clear, and I also hope that I've gotten the
names of your responders correct -- I have a real hard time
keeping people's "handles" and names straight. In fact, it's
become too difficult for me, and I just wing it. At this point,
I'd prefer that everyone just use the names that their parents
gave them, and stop with the handles altogether.
Richard