[Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
So you decide from the following reviews which engine is preferred from a performance perspective - I wouldn't argue that the Encore maybe under 10 secs in 0 to 60 , just as the Sante Fe 2.0T can test quicker than the Motor Trend test - it's rumored that MT had the ECO function engaged while testing. So I saw one test that had the Sante Fe AWD at 7.5 secs but anything in the 8.5 sec range is plenty quick. But most reviews do list the Encore's limited power output as a negative - good fuel economy though.
From Edmunds:
On the downside, the Encore's engine, a 1.4-liter turbocharged four-cylinder shared with the Chevrolet Cruze and Sonic, is underwhelming. Its 138 horsepower is outmatched by the Encore's 3,200 pounds, and that's not factoring in additional passengers or cargo you might be carrying. Not helping matters is the six-speed automatic's rush-to-the-top gear programming; it's meant to optimize fuel economy but also blunts the Encore's responsiveness.
Additional from autoblog:
Like it is in the 2,700-pound Sonic, the 1.4 turbo is tuned to deliver 138 horsepower at 4,900 rpm and 148 pound-feet of torque at 1,850 rpm. While that's enough to make the humble Sonic a fun car, it's not exactly a groundswell of muscle for the heavier Encore, which starts at 3,190 pounds for a front-drive model like our tester. Informal acceleration runs on our part generated a best 0-60 time of 10.0 seconds with two aboard – we're guessing the official time will end up being somewhere in the high nines. More ominously, colleagues from other outlets reported 12-second times with three people and a bit of gear aboard an all-wheel-drive example. In either case, that means you'll be staring at the taillights of every other vehicle we've mentioned to
From Edmunds on the 2.0T Sante Fe
We've found the Sante Fe 2.0T engine impressive, with a smooth delivery of power that is on par with that of some V6 engines. As a result, this Santa Fe gets up to highway speeds with authority. Gearchanges from the automatic transmission can be a bit delayed, but the changes are so smooth that this minor sluggishness will likely go unnoticed. Budget permitting, we prefer the 2.0T engine, but the base engine will likely satisfy most drivers.
, Thu, 17 Apr 2014 18:18:43, Tue, 15 Apr 2014 07:55:07
, Tue, 15 Apr 2014 12:51:12, Tue, 15 Apr 2014 13:18:02, Wed, 16 Apr 2014 04:01:35, Tue, 15 Apr 2014 13:27:22, Fri, 11 Apr 2014 07:17:33, Fri, 11 Apr 2014 13:14:27
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
