"Hyundai brings out the all-new 2012 Eon"

[neezy03]

*ghosthunter Thanks for posting that article... Already read that while searching the web...

I just want to get feedback from actual owners that are member of this forum. I'd appreciate if you guys could share your experiences. Thanks in advance!

[renzo_d10]

^ Yung nagsulat po nung article ay forumer din po dito. :-)

Had the chance to sit on an Eon when I checked something sa isang Hyundai dealership, I was amazed that it wasn't as cramped and small as expected. Would probably feel small when 4 people are added inside pa. But for an everyday car, it should be good.

[neezy03]

Thanks for the input renzo-d10... And I also know that its written by Niky... :-)

How about the engine performance...?

[niky]

Didn't get a chance to V-Box. It feels as quick as the bigger 1.0 competitors... but "feel" can be deceiving, since it's geared low. Since the old Alto could do 0-100 km/h in 17 seconds (with just one not-so-overweight driver on board... 19-21 seconds with passengers)... the Eon should do it in around the same time.

600 to 800 kms per full tank!

Estimate lang. Given it's a 32 liter tank, times 20 km/l, 640... times 26 km/l... 832 kms. Don't know if it can hit the magic 30 km/l. If it could, it could maybe do 1000 kms on one tank. Asking Hyundai if they'd like to try Sorsogon to Pagudpud...

top of the line is manual too? no a/t?

Apparently, since Hyundai has the i10 to sell to people who are willing to pay extra for an auto, they've not bothered to engineer the Eon for an automatic transmission. It would cost them too much to develop a new AT for the Eon only, as they did with the MT. (the Eon's transmission is different from the i10's... just got word from Hyundai last week.)

[neezy03]

I'm curious if the EON can handle Manila to Baguio road trip? Will its 3 cylinder petrol engine be a big concern?

[niky]

Long gone are the days that anything smaller than 1.5 would overheat and die on the way up to Baguio. Transmissions have more gears, cooling systems are better and engines are better.

[germs]

Comparing the alto and the eon, the alto has 12 valves compared to the eon's 9. What difference would this make?

[niky]

Better breathing. More power for the displacement.

The number of valves indicates how much air can flow through the head. Older cars had two valves per cylinder... one in, one out... so put two circles inside a big one, and it's obvious the total size of those small circles will be very limited.

From there, we went to three-valve and four-valve heads. Four small circles inside one big one will have a bigger total area than two or three. Theoretically, the best is five. Toyota briefly dallied with five valve heads (The famous Toyota "20V" 4-AGE...) which gave terrific flow and power, but five-valves have very little real-world benefit over four.

Four-valves have power benefits over three-valves, but not necessarily economy benefits... one of the best engines of the past decade, the Honda 1.3 iDSi... which was capable of 23+ km/l and up to 30 on long stints... had a three-valve head. The space where the fourth valve should have been was taken up by the second spark plug. The new generation 1.3 is not as economical... they sacrificed the old system and installed a four-valve head and VTEC, which gave them a class-leading 100 hp out of a 1.3... but meant that they gave up the edge in economy.

So... it's all about power. But note that the Eon's 55 bhp is very good for the engine size. And also note that despite being bigger and with a four-valve head, the Suzuki K10 is still known as an outstandingly economical engine. In the end... the on-paper specs don't matter as much as the actual performance and economy. ;)

[niky]

Better breathing. More power for the displacement.

The number of valves indicates how much air can flow through the head. Older cars had two valves per cylinder... one in, one out... so put two circles inside a big one, and it's obvious the total size of those small circles will be very limited.

From there, we went to three-valve and four-valve heads. Four small circles inside one big one will have a bigger total area than two or three. Theoretically, the best is five. Toyota briefly dallied with five valve heads (The famous Toyota "20V" 4-AGE...) which gave terrific flow and power, but five-valves have very little real-world benefit over four.

Four-valves have power benefits over three-valves, but not necessarily economy benefits... one of the best engines of the past decade, the Honda 1.3 iDSi... which was capable of 23+ km/l and up to 30 on long stints... had a three-valve head. The space where the fourth valve should have been was taken up by the second spark plug. The new generation 1.3 is not as economical... they sacrificed the old system and installed a four-valve head and VTEC, which gave them a class-leading 100 hp out of a 1.3... but meant that they gave up the edge in economy.

So... it's all about power. But note that the Eon's 55 bhp is very good for the engine size. And also note that despite being bigger and with a four-valve head, the Suzuki K10 is still known as an outstandingly economical engine. In the end... the on-paper specs don't matter as much as the actual performance and economy. ;)

[niky]

Damn internet connection.. lagged!