Comments on: Review: 2008 Hyundai Tucson

By: Impulsive

Impulsive — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 03:19:32 +0000

… it’s FACK AFF, but close enough.

By: DeansterTJ

DeansterTJ — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 20:37:26 +0000

Ah fack off

By: Supermann1

Supermann1 — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 18:39:35 +0000

olds is an old fart recycling old memories cuz his brain hasnt kept up with changing world since 1954…a trait shared by most gm huggers on this site.

By: Got Handling?

Got Handling? — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 09:54:20 +0000

belive me TugJob, I was never in any doubt as to whether you thought this was a creative writing group. Does anybody have a clue what’s up with olds and the Soviet Russia fixation?

By: DeansterTJ

DeansterTJ — Sat, 31 May 2008 23:53:58 +0000

I don’t think the Tucson is a capable offroader, but I get your points. Well said ^

By: Jimi137

Jimi137 — Sat, 31 May 2008 20:21:29 +0000

About this cassette thing: i still use a cassette adapter for my ipod even today. I know i could pay like (£200 or probs $400 for u Americans) to get a new stereo with an ipod adapter but i would prefer to spend the money on something i use more than a few times a year. So i don’t think anyone should knock it for having that installed on it. And styling is a very subjective thing – personally i absolutly adore the Nissan 350Z but some of my m8s say that its the ugliest peice of **** to ever be built and would rather drive a 10 year old rusty vauxhall corsa than endure the torture of that. IMO the Tuscan aint to bad – it dosent make me want to vomit when i see one. And yeh the engine is a bit poor – but so what? U shud buy an off-roader for towing a caravan or for, wait for it…. off roading. I know that words probably sent the owners of SUVs shivering into a corner but its technically what they’re meant to do guys. If you want speed buy a sports car, or even a Ford Mondeo, but dont try and expect an off-roader to break any records.

Thats my 2 cents anyway!

By: beantownslut

beantownslut — Sat, 31 May 2008 17:44:21 +0000

Get an Escape

By: Impulsive

Impulsive — Sat, 31 May 2008 17:17:36 +0000

‘Deanster’, your perspective rules.

By: jamesfabin

jamesfabin — Sat, 31 May 2008 15:34:54 +0000

I have to disagree with most of your review. As a person who also reviews vehicles, I found the Tuscon to be a decent entry level SUV. I personally have a 2007 Lexus RX 350 AWD – which still comes standard with a cassette player (I’m not sure why, but at over $52K fully loaded, Lexus still sees a need for it). I’ve also personally experienced the Hyundai Tuscon stereo and it is far better then a set of soup cans. I feel you took this vehicle with a chip on your shoulder, comparing it to what you wanted it to be (more powerful, different looking, higher end stereo, faster acceleration), instead of truly comparing it to its competitors and the expectations of the targeted consumer who would actualize purchasing one of these. While the styling is very unique, it comes down to a matter of taste. Finally, the comment on the amount of nose dive when breaking with a high amount of force is far from realistic. Reading your review I had the feeling you do not posses the experience and knowledge to properly and fairly review a vehicle.

By: DeansterTJ

DeansterTJ — Sat, 31 May 2008 14:33:26 +0000

^ Easy on the thesaurus – we’re not in creative writing asshole.

Chris, some of the lines were tired and clicheed, but overall I agree that this thing is a nasty little design.

To inline6, no one cares if you’re a journalism major or someone that mops the cum off the peepshow floors (probably the latter) – this is a scratch blog. We post profanities incessantly and fight with each other like cats and dogs. Is the grammar in this review really our biggest problem? Douchebag.

By: Got Handling?

Got Handling? — Sat, 31 May 2008 11:51:51 +0000

Granted, its no FX35, but the author’s abundant scorn would surely be better saved for the day he reviews a Ssanyong Rodius or something equally abominable. This Hyundai is an ungainly looking hector for sure, but hardly worthy of such a drubbing.
.
The “article” reads more like a blog entry than a journalistic review, and while our author may be impatient to display himself as the next Clarkson, he, like so many younger men, would appear to have shot his invective load early. Perhaps with experience he will develop the patience to keep his heated outpourings pent up until a more opportune moment.

By: olds307

olds307 — Sat, 31 May 2008 06:38:02 +0000

In Soviet Russia, cow tips YOU!!

By: stick2clutch

stick2clutch — Sat, 31 May 2008 00:27:48 +0000

Crazier than buying one of these things would be reading that long article. What a waste of time. Glad I didn’t read.

By: nitehawk

nitehawk — Sat, 31 May 2008 00:05:43 +0000

sharpie on the contrary, I found this review very entertaining and gave me a good chuckle ;o)

By: sharpie

sharpie — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:40:59 +0000

Agreed with inline6, fine you don’t like the car, but you can at least TRY to stay neutral and lend yourself more credibility in reporting your findings. Instead, I find this “review” utterly USELESS!

By: 1c3d0g

1c3d0g — Fri, 30 May 2008 22:08:56 +0000

Haha…what a joke of a review. I happened to drive my cousin’s Tucson in a dry-climate country and it was the complete opposite experience for me. The SUV has almost no body roll, fairly good acceleration (you want to talk about anemic acceleration, just drive an old-school Blazer, now THAT’S piss-poor performance!), better speakers than most cars I’ve been in, and above all it’s pretty soundproof (quiet) inside the vehicle. Styling is so-so IMO, it could be better of course but I’ve seen MUCH worse. So really, I don’t know if the author hates this brand or this specific vehicle, but my real-life experience was much different than his.

By: Jordan

Jordan — Fri, 30 May 2008 21:22:28 +0000

jesus christ, did chris have a bad week or something?

By: mayer_ray_nagin

mayer_ray_nagin — Fri, 30 May 2008 21:12:05 +0000

The main things stylistically that bugs me about this vehicle are the nose and front fenders. Other than that it looks fine and at least it is not an abortion like the CRV and Rav4.

Other than that it’s good to know Chris converted his last girlfiend’s mix-tape from 1996 to MP3 so he can play it on his iPod and dream about losing his virginity someday.

By: Impulsive

Impulsive — Fri, 30 May 2008 20:06:35 +0000

OBJECTIVELY, it is ugly. And so is the CR-V and Rav4.

By: TomF

TomF — Fri, 30 May 2008 20:03:29 +0000

Most of these LLN “reviews” are love letters to mediocre products. This one is unnecessarily harsh about a mediocre product. I think someone at LNN just wanted to get a “tough” review on the record and picked an easy target.

For the record, I don’t think the Tucson is that bad a vehicle.

By: inline6

inline6 — Fri, 30 May 2008 20:00:27 +0000

As a journalism major, I can safely say that this is the poorest journalistic feature writing I’ve ever seen. The author refers to himself multiple times. He misspells words, uses redundant adjectives, uses commas and hyphens improperly, and goes on for 5 paragraphs about how awful the styling is (which is subjective), but doesn’t tell the reader WHY it’s ugly, and why its competitors look better.

The writing style is also conversational, not journalistic, and it sounds like the author is 17, not 28 or 29. It groans under the weight of tortured metaphors, incomplete colloqialisms, and slang terms. Some are fine. But every sentence? And there’s no word on fuel economy or emissions.

My advice to the author would be that he should have someone else proofread his postings.

By: Chris_Doane

Chris_Doane — Fri, 30 May 2008 19:31:33 +0000

Design is definitely subjective. I never expect everyone to agree with me.

Car reviews are basically opinion pieces. My opinion was that the design really doesn’t work. Others may like it.

-CD

By: xyunya

xyunya — Fri, 30 May 2008 18:33:35 +0000

I sort of find myself agreeing with hateful here. The design is subjective, and perhaps I am visualistic pervert but I see nothing wrong with looks inside and out. What is lucking here and article failed to address and analyze (excused it’s not Car & Driver or even NY Times) is that 70-80% of RAV-4 sold with I4. 4 cylinders CR-V & RAV have near 170 HP and torque in 165 range. V6 in this trucklette is about 180 HP and thirsty just like any 6 cylinder engine would be, make it thirstier then one in RAV-4, which is 270 HP. Furthermore, 90% of CR-V don’t have leather and Nav system, so compare it to typical CR-V which is around 23 large. Style aside drive those side by side and it becomes clear why not buy Tucson, except I hate styling of CR-V, but don’t mind RAV-4, which drives very close to CR-V, but cost couple large more then CR-EX with identical stuffing.

By: snoboardguy21

snoboardguy21 — Fri, 30 May 2008 18:28:43 +0000

“The CR-V will have more get up and go and its got less cylinders.” Let’s try to remember that quality doesn’t only apply to interior materials, it applies to grammar as well.

By: Impulsive

Impulsive — Fri, 30 May 2008 18:25:26 +0000

Granted, this thing is ugly … but so is everything mentioned with which it competes … the CR-V is just as ugly, and so is the Rav4 … price wins here.

By: NoNameDenton1

NoNameDenton1 — Fri, 30 May 2008 18:23:54 +0000

Maybe the next Tucson will take cues from the Genesis, least then it will make a styling statement.

By: hateful83

hateful83 — Fri, 30 May 2008 18:23:39 +0000

Isn’t styling a matter of taste? In which case I wouldn’t spend 5 paragraphs bashing the styling. I get the point, you don’t like how it looks. In my opinion the CR-V looks far worse. Also, it’s not like there isn’t a CD player to go along with that tape player. God forbid, a tape player. Given the choice I wouldn’t mind having both.

By: A4

A4 — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:36:28 +0000

are you sure youre still not 12?

By: johnnycanuck

johnnycanuck — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:19:03 +0000

‘If there is one thing this vehicle does well, it’s stopping. Which is great, because then you can get out of it and walk away.’

2008 award winner for best supporting line in a comedy or automotive travesty. Cheers Chris.

By: NoNameDenton1

NoNameDenton1 — Fri, 30 May 2008 16:54:07 +0000

Let’s hope the next version is better styled, have better engines and a much better suspension.

By: HemiRoadRunner

HemiRoadRunner — Fri, 30 May 2008 16:51:42 +0000

I like how they included the cow in the photo, which adds to the fact this thing looks like a peice of cow $H!T.