DCR
 |
|
http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1073158_2013-hyundai-genesis-coupe-first-drive/page-1
Some bits:
To sum how the Gen Coupe drives—at least for those who've been around sporty cars for a long time: Extrapolate how classic Japanese sports-car models like the Nissan 240SX or Toyota Supra might drive if they were still made today, and you won't be far off the mark.
|
We’ve covered the Genesis Coupe’s cosmetic changes already in depth in our preview, and in the full review over at The Car Connection—and you should browse through the attached galleries. But it comes down to this: If you at all took the previous Genesis Coupe for a test drive, the 2013 version might feel like a complete redesign, not a refresh, from the instant you first step inside. That's because Hyundai has facelifted the cabin where it counts: the instrument panel, the trims, and many of the details that the driver looks forward onto. On the outside, the more aggressive grille and airdam, new headlamps and hood altogether give it a more premium look, complemented in back with the new LED taillamps. And of course the palette of colors and materials has been completely revamped.
|
If you want a modest back seat, and you find the garish, over-the-top styling cues and boulevard-bruiser image of the American muscle cars a turnoff, you don’t have many choices—especially if you’re not willing to step up to a luxury brand like Infiniti or BMW.
For shoppers on a budget, the Subaru BRZ (and especially the Scion FR-S) are on their way and will no doubt be tough rivals on the track against the Genesis Coupe 2.0T. The refresh came right in time, to keep the Genesis Coupe relevant and on top of its game. And we’re thoroughly impressed that Hyundai can play to a different audience—demanding driving enthusiasts—with such focus.
|
|
NealX
|
|
Good review. I wonder why the pics are of a silver, base-trim version...While I like the looks of the Veloster, I think they went too far with the G in making them similar - where the G's overall shape needs a cleaner front. Strong effort, though.
I haven't seen the refresh in person, but I think the new guts with the previous design would be ideal.
|
Hondu
|
|
DCR wrote:
http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1073158_2013-hyundai-genesis-coupe-first-drive/page-1
Some bits:
To sum how the Gen Coupe drives—at least for those who've been around sporty cars for a long time: Extrapolate how classic Japanese sports-car models like the Nissan 240SX or Toyota Supra might drive if they were still made today, and you won't be far off the mark.
|
We’ve covered the Genesis Coupe’s cosmetic changes already in depth in our preview, and in the full review over at The Car Connection—and you should browse through the attached galleries. But it comes down to this: If you at all took the previous Genesis Coupe for a test drive, the 2013 version might feel like a complete redesign, not a refresh, from the instant you first step inside. That's because Hyundai has facelifted the cabin where it counts: the instrument panel, the trims, and many of the details that the driver looks forward onto. On the outside, the more aggressive grille and airdam, new headlamps and hood altogether give it a more premium look, complemented in back with the new LED taillamps. And of course the palette of colors and materials has been completely revamped.
|
If you want a modest back seat, and you find the garish, over-the-top styling cues and boulevard-bruiser image of the American muscle cars a turnoff, you don’t have many choices—especially if you’re not willing to step up to a luxury brand like Infiniti or BMW.
For shoppers on a budget, the Subaru BRZ (and especially the Scion FR-S) are on their way and will no doubt be tough rivals on the track against the Genesis Coupe 2.0T. The refresh came right in time, to keep the Genesis Coupe relevant and on top of its game. And we’re thoroughly impressed that Hyundai can play to a different audience—demanding driving enthusiasts—with such focus.
|
|
With the price jumping $2000, there better be big improvements.
|
CarGuyLee
|
|
|
For me the front end was always the weak part of this car for me, but the new front improved it majorly IMO. Haven't seen it in person next to a Volestor to know how similar they will look though.
|
DCR
|
|
Hondu wrote:
With the price jumping $2000, there better be big improvements.
|
By the looks of the article, there are big improvements.
Amazing concept...they improved just about everything over the previous generation.
|
JeffX
|
|
DCR wrote:
Hondu wrote:
With the price jumping $2000, there better be big improvements.
|
By the looks of the article, there are big improvements.
Amazing concept...they improved just about everything over the previous generation.
|
except they couldn't leave well enough alone and went and messed up the front end styling. The new mug looks hideous. The previous design was much better, IMO.
|
owequitit
|
|
DCR wrote:
Hondu wrote:
With the price jumping $2000, there better be big improvements.
|
By the looks of the article, there are big improvements.
Amazing concept...they improved just about everything over the previous generation.
|
I don't personally see the changes being enough to reverse the horrendous sales of this car.
I test drove the pre-MMC version, and while this probably has a lot of improvement, I doubt it will make it a compelling car over its rivals such as the 370Z. The biggest reason that would have lead to it being considered versus the Z or Mustang GT were the price differentials which are largely gone now.
While I am sure these are faster, they most likely don't have the chassis dynamics to make them compellingly obvious choices.
There MIGHT be more of a case for the 4 banger now, but then again, the old one was so pathetic that isn't hard to do. Stock for stock, it got its ass handed to it by a STOCK 8th gen Si. I don't think this one will quite have that problem.
I applaud the effort, but I think Hyundai still has a ways to go before they get the whole package right. And I agree with Jeff. This thing is absolutely horrendously styled in the front end. LED tails aren't going to cover for that. With my money, it would still be a Z, a Mustang GT, or something used.
|
Hondarulez
|
|
|
For $25k, I'd go with the Mustang or Camaro V6...both of these have "history" and are actually good cars. For over $30k, I would consider the V8 of the above models, or the 370Z. The Mustang V8 or Camaro SS are considerably more powerful and again, with great history and reputation. The 370Z also has great great reputation and it probably has better after market support. The 370Z also looks more expensive than the Genesis, IMO.
|
Hondarulez
|
|
|
For $25k, I'd go with the Mustang or Camaro V6...both of these have "history" and are actually good cars. For over $30k, I would consider the V8 of the above models, or the 370Z. The Mustang V8 or Camaro SS are considerably more powerful and again, with great history and reputation. The 370Z also has great great reputation and it probably has better after market support. The 370Z also looks more expensive than the Genesis, IMO.
|
DCR
|
|
|
I agree on the front end. It looks forced on there.
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
The problem is that $2K. They've now priced the 4 cylinder version away from Civic Sis and (allegedly) the upcoming Scion FR-S, which isn't necessarily bad because the old 4 cylinder wasn't even up to par with the Civic Si. However, they have now strictly entered V6 Mustang w/ track pack territory.
Unfortunately, at least in terms of instrumented data I could find, the Mustang V6 with the shorter axle ratio and track pack is more comparable in performance to the V6 Hyundai Genesis.
That V6 Genesis, meanwhile, is not only 370Z territory, but also within striking distance of Mustang GT territory. I don't believe the Hyundai would ride or handle any better than the Mustangs either, or even necessarily offer better quality.
Right now the most attractive car to me is the Scion FR-S.
|
Hondarulez
|
|
It seems to me that the Genesis coupe doesn't directly compete with the FR-S/BR-Z. The Genesis coupe is about as big as a mustang and camaro. It is MUCH bigger than the BR-Z/FR-S. It seems like the Genesis coupe is more of a cheaper GT coupe, while the FR-S is more of a compact sports car.
I agree though, for $25k+, it means that it will be competing with a somewhat loaded Mustang V6/Camaro V6. And for a fully loaded $35k Genesis coupe, it will be competing with a almost fully loaded Camaro SS, Mustang GT, and a fairly well equipped 370Z. Heck, you can get a smaller and slower but well equipped 128i at $35k.
|
Hondarulez
|
|
Inside Line tested the 2013 Genesis Coupe 2.0T:
http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2012/05/il-track-tested-2013-hyundai-genesis-coupe-20t-r-spec.html
Test Results:
Acceleration
0-30 (sec): 2.3 (2.9 w/ TC on)
0-45 (sec): 4.2 (5.4 w/ TC on)
0-60 (sec): 6.5 (8.0 w/ TC on)
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 6.3 (7.7 w/ TC on)
0-75 (sec): 9.0 (10.5 w/ TC on)
1/4-Mile (sec @ mph): 14.6 @ 96.6 (15.6 @ 94.8 w/ TC on)
Braking
30-0 (ft): 28
60-0 (ft): 112
Handling
Slalom (mph): 69.6 (67.0 w/TC on)
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.89 (0.87 w/TC on)
For comparison, the 2010 Genesis Coupe 2.0 hits 60 in 6.9 seconds (6.6 with rollout) and went on to a quarter-mile of 15.0 @ 91.8 mph.
There's noticeable performance gain but is 0-60mph in the 6's fast enough?
|
JP
|
|
Hondarulez wrote:
Inside Line tested the 2013 Genesis Coupe 2.0T:
http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2012/05/il-track-tested-2013-hyundai-genesis-coupe-20t-r-spec.html
Test Results:
Acceleration
0-30 (sec): 2.3 (2.9 w/ TC on)
0-45 (sec): 4.2 (5.4 w/ TC on)
0-60 (sec): 6.5 (8.0 w/ TC on)
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 6.3 (7.7 w/ TC on)
0-75 (sec): 9.0 (10.5 w/ TC on)
1/4-Mile (sec @ mph): 14.6 @ 96.6 (15.6 @ 94.8 w/ TC on)
Braking
30-0 (ft): 28
60-0 (ft): 112
Handling
Slalom (mph): 69.6 (67.0 w/TC on)
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.89 (0.87 w/TC on)
For comparison, the 2010 Genesis Coupe 2.0 hits 60 in 6.9 seconds (6.6 with rollout) and went on to a quarter-mile of 15.0 @ 91.8 mph.
There's noticeable performance gain but is 0-60mph in the 6's fast enough?
|
6.5s for Nor-to-Sixty is slightly better than 2012 Civic SI (73 hp less and 105 ft-lbs less of torque) and slower than 2011 VW GTI...
|
Hondarulez
|
|
JP wrote:
Hondarulez wrote:
Inside Line tested the 2013 Genesis Coupe 2.0T:
http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2012/05/il-track-tested-2013-hyundai-genesis-coupe-20t-r-spec.html
Test Results:
Acceleration
0-30 (sec): 2.3 (2.9 w/ TC on)
0-45 (sec): 4.2 (5.4 w/ TC on)
0-60 (sec): 6.5 (8.0 w/ TC on)
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 6.3 (7.7 w/ TC on)
0-75 (sec): 9.0 (10.5 w/ TC on)
1/4-Mile (sec @ mph): 14.6 @ 96.6 (15.6 @ 94.8 w/ TC on)
Braking
30-0 (ft): 28
60-0 (ft): 112
Handling
Slalom (mph): 69.6 (67.0 w/TC on)
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.89 (0.87 w/TC on)
For comparison, the 2010 Genesis Coupe 2.0 hits 60 in 6.9 seconds (6.6 with rollout) and went on to a quarter-mile of 15.0 @ 91.8 mph.
There's noticeable performance gain but is 0-60mph in the 6's fast enough?
|
6.5s for Nor-to-Sixty is slightly better than 2012 Civic SI (73 hp less and 105 ft-lbs less of torque) and slower than 2011 VW GTI...
|
Where did you find the time on Edmunds for the 2011 VW GTI? I can only find the road test for the 2010 model and it's as fast as the Civic Si (slightly slower than the Genesis): http://www.insideline.com/volkswagen/gti/2010/2010-volkswagen-gti-full-test-and-video.html
Then again, the Genesis has a base price of well over $27k, that's quite a bit more expensive than the Civic Si. It's still a few g's more than a GTI. The closest competitors to the Genesis 2.0 are the Camaro V6 and Mustang V6. Those performance numbers will not be enough to challenge those two modern muscle cars I'm afraid.
|
JP
|
|
Hondarulez wrote:
JP wrote:
Hondarulez wrote:
Inside Line tested the 2013 Genesis Coupe 2.0T:
http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2012/05/il-track-tested-2013-hyundai-genesis-coupe-20t-r-spec.html
Test Results:
Acceleration
0-30 (sec): 2.3 (2.9 w/ TC on)
0-45 (sec): 4.2 (5.4 w/ TC on)
0-60 (sec): 6.5 (8.0 w/ TC on)
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 6.3 (7.7 w/ TC on)
0-75 (sec): 9.0 (10.5 w/ TC on)
1/4-Mile (sec @ mph): 14.6 @ 96.6 (15.6 @ 94.8 w/ TC on)
Braking
30-0 (ft): 28
60-0 (ft): 112
Handling
Slalom (mph): 69.6 (67.0 w/TC on)
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.89 (0.87 w/TC on)
For comparison, the 2010 Genesis Coupe 2.0 hits 60 in 6.9 seconds (6.6 with rollout) and went on to a quarter-mile of 15.0 @ 91.8 mph.
There's noticeable performance gain but is 0-60mph in the 6's fast enough?
|
6.5s for Nor-to-Sixty is slightly better than 2012 Civic SI (73 hp less and 105 ft-lbs less of torque) and slower than 2011 VW GTI...
|
Where did you find the time on Edmunds for the 2011 VW GTI? I can only find the road test for the 2010 model and it's as fast as the Civic Si (slightly slower than the Genesis): http://www.insideline.com/volkswagen/gti/2010/2010-volkswagen-gti-full-test-and-video.html
Then again, the Genesis has a base price of well over $27k, that's quite a bit more expensive than the Civic Si. It's still a few g's more than a GTI. The closest competitors to the Genesis 2.0 are the Camaro V6 and Mustang V6. Those performance numbers will not be enough to challenge those two modern muscle cars I'm afraid.
|
5.8 seconds http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/hatchbacks/1203_2011_volkswagen_gti_first_drive/
6.1 seconds
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2010-volkswagen-gti-3-door-dsg-short-take-road-test
|
BachelorFrog
|
|
|
Nice thread...imma let you finish but Gen2.0T came dead last in recent MT comparo.
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
Yeah... those numbers are pretty terrible for a 274hp, 3400 lb car on summer tires. I think the commenters are spot on: That's probably in Hyundai horsepower, which is 0.8 of real horsepower.
At that kind of price, performance, and that ugly of a front end (fake hood scoops, really?), I'd just go ahead and get a Toyobaru or a Mustang V6.
|
Powered by Honda
|
|
Jeff wrote:
DCR wrote:
Hondu wrote:
With the price jumping $2000, there better be big improvements.
|
By the looks of the article, there are big improvements.
Amazing concept...they improved just about everything over the previous generation.
|
except they couldn't leave well enough alone and went and messed up the front end styling. The new mug looks hideous. The previous design was much better, IMO.
|
Agreed! They ruined it. It looks like crap now. sigh!
|
Powered by Honda
|
|
|
All numbers are with traction control ON! That probably took 1 second off right there.
|
DOHCtor
|
|
Powered by Honda wrote:
All numbers are with traction control ON! That probably took 1 second off right there.
|
Never go full retard man. Never
|
Hondarulez
|
|
JP wrote:
Hondarulez wrote:
JP wrote:
Hondarulez wrote:
Inside Line tested the 2013 Genesis Coupe 2.0T:
http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2012/05/il-track-tested-2013-hyundai-genesis-coupe-20t-r-spec.html
Test Results:
Acceleration
0-30 (sec): 2.3 (2.9 w/ TC on)
0-45 (sec): 4.2 (5.4 w/ TC on)
0-60 (sec): 6.5 (8.0 w/ TC on)
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 6.3 (7.7 w/ TC on)
0-75 (sec): 9.0 (10.5 w/ TC on)
1/4-Mile (sec @ mph): 14.6 @ 96.6 (15.6 @ 94.8 w/ TC on)
Braking
30-0 (ft): 28
60-0 (ft): 112
Handling
Slalom (mph): 69.6 (67.0 w/TC on)
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.89 (0.87 w/TC on)
For comparison, the 2010 Genesis Coupe 2.0 hits 60 in 6.9 seconds (6.6 with rollout) and went on to a quarter-mile of 15.0 @ 91.8 mph.
There's noticeable performance gain but is 0-60mph in the 6's fast enough?
|
6.5s for Nor-to-Sixty is slightly better than 2012 Civic SI (73 hp less and 105 ft-lbs less of torque) and slower than 2011 VW GTI...
|
Where did you find the time on Edmunds for the 2011 VW GTI? I can only find the road test for the 2010 model and it's as fast as the Civic Si (slightly slower than the Genesis): http://www.insideline.com/volkswagen/gti/2010/2010-volkswagen-gti-full-test-and-video.html
Then again, the Genesis has a base price of well over $27k, that's quite a bit more expensive than the Civic Si. It's still a few g's more than a GTI. The closest competitors to the Genesis 2.0 are the Camaro V6 and Mustang V6. Those performance numbers will not be enough to challenge those two modern muscle cars I'm afraid.
|
5.8 seconds http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/hatchbacks/1203_2011_volkswagen_gti_first_drive/
6.1 seconds
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2010-volkswagen-gti-3-door-dsg-short-take-road-test
|
I know that other mags have gotten faster times with the GTI. Same can be said with the Civic Si (0-60mph in 6.2 and 1/4 mile in high 14's). That's why I specifically asked to see if you have seen EDMUND'S numbers for the 2011 GTI. According to Edmunds, the way they test cars are not as aggressive as others. They say that they want to see more "realistic" numbers that can be achieved by most people, rather than dropping the clutch at like 6000rpm or brake torquing the engine that most people won't do.
|
Hondarulez
|
|
Powered by Honda wrote:
All numbers are with traction control ON! That probably took 1 second off right there.
|
Here are the numbers with traction control on:
Acceleration
0-30 (sec): 2.9
0-45 (sec): 5.4
0-60 (sec): 8.0
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 7.7
0-75 (sec): 10.5
1/4-Mile (sec @ mph): 15.6 @ 94.8
A regular Civic 5MT with a really good driver would have kept up with it all the way till 60mph! lol.
|
DCR
|
|
Those numbers look way too slow.
2013 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0T R-Spec
BASE PRICE $25,125
PRICE AS TESTED $26,605
VEHICLE LAYOUT Front engine, RWD, 4-pass, 2-door coupe ENGINE 2.0L/274-hp/275-lb-ft turbo DOHC 16-valve I-4 TRANSMISSION 6-speed manual
0-60 MPH 5.7 sec
QUARTER MILE 14.2 sec @ 98.4 mph
BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 111 ft
LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.97 g (avg)
MT FIGURE EIGHT 25.5 sec @ 0.69 g (avg)
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1205_2013_hyundai_genesis_coupe_r_spec_first_test/#ixzz1voqvl9sa
|
Hondarulez
|
|
DCR wrote:
Those numbers look way too slow.
2013 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0T R-Spec
BASE PRICE $25,125
PRICE AS TESTED $26,605
VEHICLE LAYOUT Front engine, RWD, 4-pass, 2-door coupe ENGINE 2.0L/274-hp/275-lb-ft turbo DOHC 16-valve I-4 TRANSMISSION 6-speed manual
0-60 MPH 5.7 sec
QUARTER MILE 14.2 sec @ 98.4 mph
BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 111 ft
LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.97 g (avg)
MT FIGURE EIGHT 25.5 sec @ 0.69 g (avg)
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1205_2013_hyundai_genesis_coupe_r_spec_first_test/#ixzz1voqvl9sa
|
This reminds me of the 2010 TL AWD 5AT. One mag got 0-60mph in 6.7s, but another mag did it in less than 6 seconds.....
I think the main problem with the Genesis is still the shifter..as pointed out by Edmunds,
".....but it has some type of thoroughly annoying drivetrain-saver system that bogs the power down temporarily just as you let the clutch out for the 1-2 and 2-3 shifts. Got around this by shifting at a slightly lower rpm...."
as well as MT,
"the shifter in the Genesis Coupe does not like to be rushed, and there were multiple editors who experienced trouble with the manual transmission during our drive. Specifically, when trying to quickly get from third to second gear in the canyons or on the track. The shifter is vague and doesn't provide good resistance between gates, which caused many of the drivers to hang a gear. You have to take your time while shifting, which doesn't really fit with a track-oriented production car."
I suspect MT was able to overcome that problem in their best run, but no such luck with Edmunds.
But even with the MT numbers, the Genesis is still slower than the Mustang V6 and Camaro V6.
It's funny that a Toyota Camry V6 SE actually matches the Genesis in 1/4 mile ET while posting a faster trap speed with less power, AT tranny, and more weight at the same price. Of course, handling is another story...lol
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
DCR wrote:
Those numbers look way too slow.
2013 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0T R-Spec
BASE PRICE $25,125
PRICE AS TESTED $26,605
VEHICLE LAYOUT Front engine, RWD, 4-pass, 2-door coupe ENGINE 2.0L/274-hp/275-lb-ft turbo DOHC 16-valve I-4 TRANSMISSION 6-speed manual
0-60 MPH 5.7 sec
QUARTER MILE 14.2 sec @ 98.4 mph
BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 111 ft
LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.97 g (avg)
MT FIGURE EIGHT 25.5 sec @ 0.69 g (avg)
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1205_2013_hyundai_genesis_coupe_r_spec_first_test/#ixzz1voqvl9sa
|
The InsideLine numbers are more attainable by the average joe... since they separate 1 ft. of rollout and don't use aggressive correction factors like other magazines (*cough MT cough*) or abuse the cars in general.
The comments from the drivers are great. The car transitions between over and understeer, suffers from apparent bump steer and is squirrelly. Couple that with the higher price and tepid performance and you really might as well go for either the 'Stang 6 or Toyobaru twins.
The backlash from the comments (and the IL commenters are usually quite level-headed) is hilarious.
|
mobis21
|
|
Yet ANOTHER example of Hyundai HP not being up to par. Those numbers are sad. Similar to the comparison I read where the new Hybrid Camry is almost equal to the TURBO Sonata in 0-60.
don't even get started on how Hyundai fudges their EPA estimates.
|
typer_801
|
|
|
This car is great news...another failed attempt by Hyundai at building a sports cars!!! Annoying drivetrain protection, so-so acceleration, and handling dynamics that don't impress.
|
Hondarulez
|
|
Road&Track published a new comparison test article: BRZ vs Genesis 2.0 vs MX-5.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/comparison/mazda-mx-5-miata-vs-subaru-brz-vs-hyundai-genesis-coupe
The Genesis has the fastest acceleration and the best lap time. But that is expected given its huge power advantage. In this test, Genesis again did 0-60mph in the 6's and 1/4 mile in mid 14's with a trap speed just under 100mph.
Subjective-wise, the BRZ is the best though. It's also interesting to see while both BRZ and MX-5 got around 20-25mpg in the driving/testing loop, the Genesis only managed less than 15mpg. I guess that's not too surprising since the Genesis is at 3500lb. This again shows while a boosted engine MIGHT return better mpg, weight is more important.
|
CarPhreakD
|
|
|
FYI, the newest V6 Nissan Altima nearly matches the Genesis 2.0t's handling numbers (vs. ESC on of course); it also outguns the 274hp engine in a straight line, to 60 and through the 1/4 mile.
|
|
|
| |
![[home]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/home.gif){kind=small}
![[rumors and news]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/rumors.gif){kind=small}
![[model release matrix]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/newmodelreleasematrix.gif){kind=small}
![[dealer network]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/dealernet.gif){kind=small}
![[desktop calendar]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/calendar.gif){kind=small}
![[exhaust notes]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/exhaust.gif){kind=small}
![[tov forums]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/forums.gif){kind=small}
![[links]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/links.gif){kind=small}
![[search]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/search.gif){kind=small}
![[sponsors]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/sponsors.gif){kind=small}
![[garage]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/garage.gif){kind=small}
![[login]](http://sohc.vtec.net/elem04/login.gif){kind=small}
