As mentioned in a previous thread I've been thinking about a new wagon to share shed space with the Magna. So today I test drove a brand new Hyundai i40 diesel wagon...
http://www.hyundai.com.au/vehicles/i40-tourer

I was hoping for a real thrill, something that would be a significant upgrade from my 16 year old 360,000km Magna wagon, but what a letdown. Thats not to say the i40 is a bad car, its not, but for $35,000 I'd hoped for a real lift in driving enjoyment. But at the end of 2 hours of running around I came to the conclusion that the only advantage that the i40 offered over my $1500 TF was better economy. Comfort, quietness, ride and power were all about the same as the Magna. Visibility is worse in the i40 (I'd hate to try and park it in a Woollies carpark) and it felt longer than the Magna even though it has a much less roomy and less practical rear end.

Of course the i40 had all the modern electronic crap, but none of that really interests me. What I mostly want is a nice cruisey ride on the long country drives that we regularly do.

These old Magnas are still a hard car to beat.

Of course the i40 had all the modern electronic crap, but none of that really interests me. What I mostly want is a nice cruisey ride on the long country drives that we regularly do.

These old Magnas are still a hard car to beat.


You would be surprised how many people buy a car for the modern electronic crap, with little regard to the other aspects of a car, details like engine, gearbox, servicing costs, etc.
Fundamentally, cars haven't improved that much since the Magna if you only consider the long distance driving experience. Perhaps the modern do-dads are there to disguise this?
Anyhow - if you have a sound Magna wagon, hang onto it, the trade up cost versus the improved driving experience is hardly worth it.

I was disappointed the day I discovered Mitsu wouldn't make a wagon version of the 380, I'd love one if it existed. I've done a number of trips in my TL wagon over the last 2 days delivering/picking up stuff that my TJ sedan couldn't cope with. Current crop of new Mitsus don't have the same practical load length of the wagon.

I was disappointed the day I discovered Mitsu wouldn't make a wagon version of the 380, I'd love one if it existed.

Totally agree with this, such a shame. I would like to update my TJ wagon, unfortunately there is no logical successor other than TL/TW (I never did learn to love those redesigned front ends... much prefer the TJ 'Bird of Prey' nose!). Pretty much need to look to the Europeans for a wagon that's useful as well as having some sort of performance, eg. Skoda or BMW.

To the OP, I would not have been as hopeful as you re the driving experience, A 100kW diesel Hyundai is not really wet dream material. However, I would have expected a big improvement in road/wind noise and handling so that's disappointing. Re the visibility thing, possibly deliberate so buyers spend more $$$ on the 'Rear Park Assist Camera' at around $1100!

This is pretty much why I decided to move up to a KL wagon from my TH Altera wagon when I broke the engine ......

The main thing on the KL that's bothering me is the clear is bubbling and a small amount is peeling, oh and the "usual" TCL not working.

Totally agree with this, such a shame. I would like to update my TJ wagon, unfortunately there is no logical successor other than TL/TW (I never did learn to love those redesigned front ends... much prefer the TJ 'Bird of Prey' nose!). Pretty much need to look to the Europeans for a wagon that's useful as well as having some sort of performance, eg. Skoda or BMW.

To the OP, I would not have been as hopeful as you re the driving experience, A 100kW diesel Hyundai is not really wet dream material. However, I would have expected a big improvement in road/wind noise and handling so that's disappointing. Re the visibility thing, possibly deliberate so buyers spend more $$$ on the 'Rear Park Assist Camera' at around $1100!

There are very few medium size wagons on the market. I would love to have the Skoda or VW wagons on my shopping list because the driving reviews are so good but I heard some horrendous stories about repair bills so anything 'European' is out of the picture. The power of the i40 diesel was surprisingly good. I was pretty impressed with it. But it was the ride experience that disappointed me. It was really not much better than the Magna. Apart from a few rattles when my wagon hits a bump there's not much to choose between the two.

Next test drive (somewhat reluctantly) is probably going to be a Kia Sportage. I sat in one at the same dealer and was surprisingly impressed. (The dealer sells both Kia and Hyundai). Its a different type of car altogether and not really a long distance tourer, but if I cant get a better 'ride' for about $30,000 then I can at least get better visibility, an easier thing to park, and a 7 year warranty to make up for it. Anyone here driven one?

Another option that might be worth investigating is the Mondeo wagon. I'm a VERY long way off being a Ford fan but it might avoid the big $$$ repair bills. A bit more go than the Hyundai and looks good, can't speak to handling and ride but by all that's holy it should be better than the Hyundai.

Another option that might be worth investigating is the Mondeo wagon. I'm a VERY long way off being a Ford fan but it might avoid the big $$$ repair bills. A bit more go than the Hyundai and looks good, can't speak to handling and ride but by all that's holy it should be better than the Hyundai.

I had considered the Mondeo but the cheapest new wagon in SA is $37,500. Too much for me.

I'm in the market for a wagon too, and was thinking of either a 2012 skoda superb, lot of kit for the price you pay, but as stated earlier pricey servicing and repairs. Or a 2010 - 2012 Mitsubishi outlander. Mainly for the split folding tailgate. Haven't had the pleasure of test driving either yet, but am interested to see the outlanders boot space. Anyone here driven or own an outlander?

I'm in the market for a wagon too, and was thinking of either a 2012 skoda superb, lot of kit for the price you pay, but as stated earlier pricey servicing and repairs. Or a 2010 - 2012 Mitsubishi outlander. Mainly for the split folding tailgate. Haven't had the pleasure of test driving either yet, but am interested to see the outlanders boot space. Anyone here driven or own an outlander?

Ex wife had one, for a couple of years. It was VERY thirsty for a relatively small car. Funnily enough she sold a beautiful Magna TF sedan to a friend when she bought the Outlander on impulse. The friend still drives the Magna (and loves it) but the Outlander has long gone.

Apparently the Mondeo's reliability is impressive.

Powershift gearbox excepted...

Just on 2 years ago, we replaced my wife's TF manual sedan with a Mits Outlander. The very base model - 2WD, manual transmission, 2L petrol engine. Yes - it is a nice car - it is newer than the TF, but my wife still likes the oomph you had with the TF. There are a few points we don't like about it...

Rearward visibility is awful. But then again, so was the old TF. Forward visibility for me is not good. I sit very high, and you can hide a B Double truck behind either A pillar at an intersection. Road noise is quite loud, but the again, so was the TF. The ride is harsh. The power is down compared to the TF, but once you wind it up, it gets along quite well. It has enough power to get it along at legal speeds, and not drop back too much on steeper hills, but not much more. Load it up or tow something heavy and you would feel it.

Good points - Economy is brilliant. We get about 6.3L/100 km @ 100 km/h. Steering is light and direct. Clutch and gearshift are very light. The main reason we bought a new car was access. We are both over 70 and really appreciate the ease with which we get in and out of the car. We bough t the base model, which is a 5 seater. They have a 7 seater option, but to get the extra seats in the back, they compromised on the middle seat legroom. Ours has heaps of legroom in the rear seat -much more so than my 2014 Pajero.

The body feels very rigid. Mits claim that they have a strong shell, and I have no reason to doubt this. I feel that if you hit something, the front would crumple badly, but that is how they are designed these days - have you seen a Nissan Xtrail after it hits a kangaroo? They have a plastic fender and the whole fender disappears.

If you are into automatic transmissions, the Outlander has a CVT trans. It felt very good when we tested it. It is odd - the engine seems disconnected from the rest of the car, but it gets the engine at the correct speed and it is more efficient then. In fact, Mits claim a better consumption for the auto than the manual tranmsision. I don't know about the long-term reliability of the transmissions though... Since neither of us like autos, we opted for the manual.

Lastly, the price. Mitsubishi are offering great deals at present on the Outlander. We got ours for $28500, but I reckon you could get one now for the low $28000's. Forget about trading your old magna on anything though. We were offered $500 for our TF by the local Hyundai.Nissan.Subaru dealer, and it was in magnificent condition. We got $3500 from the Mits dealer, but at the same time I was buying a new Pajero, so we had a fair bargaining power.

Anyone tried the Mazda6 Wagon?

We had an i40 tourer for 2 years. Traded it in disgust 6 months ago. Ours went back to the dealer 6 times with wheel alignment issues that could not be fixed (veered strongly to the left). Common in this model. Front suspension has very little travel and bottoms out a lot. You'd find it hopeless on country roads or bad city roads. Not made for australian roads. Lots of other faults and the most critical design flaws in a car I've ever owned or driven. However, economy was very good and the little diesel went quite well. We have a 380 and it just works so well compared to i40. Hyundai make some good cars but the i40 is not one of them. Steer clear.

@ erad:
Interesting observations! Pretty similar to the Lancer my wife has, with the same engine/gearbox combination.
Comments:
Forward visibility: A column has an airbag in it, hence the poor visibility. Need to keep your head bobbing around to see past it, especially on some corners.
Lack of oomph: yep, goes with the fuel consumption though.
Clutch and gearshift: best I've ever driven, interesting clutch slave cylinder setup and multiple synchro rings on some forward gears, apparently.
Harsh ride: Lancer is very harsh at low speeds, totally different to the previous CH Lancer, which is more like the Magna. What have they done to the suspension setup, I wonder. Lancer also has very noisy tyres!
Crumple zones: looked at the Lancer body design, the cabin structure is extremely solid, but from the rear screen back and the front screen forward, the car is very light weight. These crumple zones would just squash down in a serious accident, but that is by design, to reduce the maximum G force the occupants are subjected to. With 7 airbags and seatbelt pretensioners, the occupants should survive, hopefully, but in a multi-car accident, the Lancer would be reduced to about half its length! Pretty much a "walk away, buy a new one" proposition!

Relevant to this thread:
Load length! When my Magna wagon dies, I will be looking for something with a load length equal to that of the wagon, I can transport long objects, like 3m + timber, in the wagon easily. Fold down the rear seats, fold down the passenger seat, and put them in, may need to wind down the passenger front window and use the mirror as a prop. lol
Current Mitsus I've looked at at the dealer just won't do that, and that info for i40 etc. is just not available.

MadMax:
Regarding forward visibility, it is the rake of the front pillars which is my problem. I sit very high in the seat, and the blockage at eye level is bad. Not as bad as a Mazda BT50 - I cannot see even out the side windows on one of those. I have this problem with all cars, and at intersections, I have to duck my head to check for side traffic. My Pajero is fairly good because the front pillars are raked at a steeper angle.

Re the load length, the Outlander isn't too bad - I have carried some long lengths of 2 x 1 timber, but had the passenger window down to do it.

Re the suspension, I am critical of anything these days. It is firmly damped. It doesn't have a great range of travel in the suspension, hence it is fairly stiff. I compare the ride to my Pajero which is rfeally very good. Before that, I had a NL Pajero (I forgot to order springs with that one), a Range Rover (you get gravel rash on the elbows when cornering), and before that two Citroen DS models - now they really spoilt me for anything to follow.

Re perfomance etc, your Lancer shoudl be slightly better than the Outlander because it is smaller and more aerodynamic. Our main plus with this car is the access - we can step in or out of it with ease.

MadMax:
Regarding forward visibility, it is the rake of the front pillars which is my problem. I sit very high in the seat, and the blockage at eye level is bad. Not as bad as a Mazda BT50 - I cannot see even out the side windows on one of those. I have this problem with all cars, and at intersections, I have to duck my head to check for side traffic. My Pajero is fairly good because the front pillars are raked at a steeper angle.

Re the load length, the Outlander isn't too bad - I have carried some long lengths of 2 x 1 timber, but had the passenger window down to do it.

Re the suspension, I am critical of anything these days. It is firmly damped. It doesn't have a great range of travel in the suspension, hence it is fairly stiff. I compare the ride to my Pajero which is rfeally very good. Before that, I had a NL Pajero (I forgot to order springs with that one), a Range Rover (you get gravel rash on the elbows when cornering), and before that two Citroen DS models - now they really spoilt me for anything to follow.

Re perfomance etc, your Lancer shoudl be slightly better than the Outlander because it is smaller and more aerodynamic. Our main plus with this car is the access - we can step in or out of it with ease.

Tried lowering the seat, or moving it closer to the steering wheel while reclining the seat back more?
That, or you are very tall! No problems in the Lancer, I'm 6' in the old measurement.

The 2m load is a disappointment.

The suspension reminds me of a Sigma wagon I had, with previous-owner installed suspension. Harsh around town, brilliant on rough dirt roads. Might take the Lancer out on a dirt road and see how it performs, suspension wise. lol

At the end of the day it's still a Hyundai, I'm not brand loyal or anything and actually like the i40 and Hyundai have come along way however they still have a cheap feel to them

We had an i40 tourer for 2 years. Traded it in disgust 6 months ago. Ours went back to the dealer 6 times with wheel alignment issues that could not be fixed (veered strongly to the left). Common in this model. Front suspension has very little travel and bottoms out a lot. You'd find it hopeless on country roads or bad city roads. Not made for australian roads. Lots of other faults and the most critical design flaws in a car I've ever owned or driven. However, economy was very good and the little diesel went quite well. We have a 380 and it just works so well compared to i40. Hyundai make some good cars but the i40 is not one of them. Steer clear.

The 'pulling left' issue was something that I mentioned at the dealership before I took it for a drive. I read about it in the first 5 minutes pre-researching the car. The 'manager' claimed to have never heard of the problem. They are such f......king liars. You cant believe a word that comes out of a car dealers mouth.

When I returned the i40 and said I was pretty disappointed they didn't look at all surprised. They must have heard it a lot.

Now it looks like I have to scale down to something a bit smaller like a 2wd 'SUV'. Can anyone comment on the Kia Sportage vs the Nissan Qashquai? I haven't driven either. Reviews suggest the Nissan is better in most departments but I really want to know which one you'd rather sit in for 3 hours on a country highway.

(By the way, we will be keeping the Magna wagon. Our Pajero will probably be getting the flick. Anyone want one? Its in very good nick.))

The pulling left issue is complained about in lots of forums both here and overseas. The i40 is based on the Sonata platform which has the same issue in the states. This issue seems to be related to the electric power steering. Our 380 hasn't had an alignment in 40000km and still tracks perfectly with no uneven tyre wear. Dealers will always pretend they've never heard of problems. Sales come first!

Madmax:
Re the seat height, it is normally at its lowest setting. I have a very long back and short legs (Duck's disease) and have this problem with every car I drive. I also need to sit fairly erect, so that reclining the seat back doesn''t work for me - or I get backache. Years ago, we bought a new Sigma. We couldn't test drive the SE model, so we tried the base model. OK - so we ordered a new SE. When it came, I couldn't fit in the driver's seat - it had a height adjustable seat which even at its lowest setting was still 1" too high for me. Second day of ownership, the car was at the local tech college, getting a whole lot cut out of the seat base frames - even so it was still too high for me. We learnt from that lesson and now every car we look at has to de certain to fit me. The Outlander does - just, but the Pajero fits perfectly with even room to spare over my head.