Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Quick Drive: 2018 Hyundai Ioniq Blue

      Low cost and high fuel economy figures

    “Despite the positives, the Ioniq finds itself between a rock and hard place.”

    That was how I closed my review of the 2017 Hyundai Ioniq SEL earlier this year. Despite me finding a lot to like about this hybrid, I found myself struggling as determining whether it was better or worse than the Toyota Prius. A few weeks ago, another Ioniq arrived in my driveway for a weeklong evaluation. This particular variant is the base Blue model, which is positioned as the mileage champ in the Ioniq lineup. Maybe this model could sway me in one direction or the other.

    • EPA figures stand at 57 City/59 Highway/58 Combined, up 2/5/3 when compared to the Ioniq SEL I drove last year. My average for the week was an impressive 62 mpg - a huge increase over the 45 mpg in the last Ioniq I drove.
    • Why the massive difference in average fuel economy? It comes down to the weather. The Blue was driven in a week where the average temperature was around 80 degrees, whereas the SEL was driven in conditions where it was below freezing. The warmer temps allowed the vehicle to rely more on electric power only. I would estimate that 30 to 40 percent of the miles driven in the Ioniq was just on electric only.
    • The powertrain is unchanged in the Blue. There’s a 1.6L Atkinson Cycle four-cylinder engine, a 32 kW electric motor, and a Lithium-ion Polymer battery that produces a total output of 139 horsepower. This is paired with a six-speed dual-clutch transmission. I had no issues with keeping up with traffic as the powertrain delivered decent acceleration. The dual-clutch delivered smooth and quick shifts.
    • Handling is a strong point to the Ioniq as it delivers little body roll and responds quickly to steering inputs. Ride quality could be better as the Ioniq does let in more jolts than the Kia Niro or Toyota Prius.
    • Another area the Ioniq doesn’t fare so well in us noise isolation. There is a fair amount of tire roar that comes inside at speeds above 50 mph. 
    • Telling the Ioniq Blue apart from the other models is quite easy. The front end has a plain black grille and vents in the bumper where the LED foglights would reside. 15-inch wheels with aero wheel covers come standard.
    • Aside from some missing features such as power adjustments for the driver’s seat, the interior of the Ioniq Blue is the same as the SEL. That means a simple and clean dash design, a set of front seats that become a bit uncomfortable during long trips, and a tight back seat for tall passengers.
    • For being a base model, the Blue comes well equipped. There is a proximity key, push-button start, 7-inch touchscreen with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto compatibility; Bluetooth, dual-zone climate control, and automatic headlights.
    • How much? The Blue begins at $22,220, and my tester came to an as-tested price of $23,210 with destination and optional floor mats.
    • As my week with the Ioniq Blue came to a close, I came to the realization that I liked it slightly more than the Prius. A lot of it comes down to the Ioniq offering better performance while returning just as impressive fuel economy figures as the Prius I drove back in 2016. The high amount of features for a low price also favors the Ioniq.
    • I still do think the Ioniq is in a bit of tough spot due to the large appetite for crossovers. This is evident when you compare the sales of the Ioniq to its sister model, the Kia Niro. Through the end of July, the Niro outsold the Ioniq by 6,716 units.

    Disclaimer: Hyundai Provided the Ioniq, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas

    Year: 2018
    Make: Hyundai
    Model: Ioniq
    Trim: Blue
    Engine: 1.6L GDI Atkinson-Cycle Four-Cylinder, Electric Motor, Lithium-ion Polymer Battery Pack
    Driveline: Six-Speed Dual-Clutch Transmission, Front-Wheel Drive
    Horsepower @ RPM: 104 @ 5,700 (Gas); 43 @ 0 (Electric); 139 (Total)
    Torque @ RPM: 109 @ 4,000 (Gas); 125 @ 0 (Electric)
    Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 57/59/58
    Curb Weight: 2,996 lbs
    Location of Manufacture: Ulsan, South Korea
    Base Price: $22,200
    As Tested Price: $23,210 (Includes $885.00 Destination Charge)

    Options:
    Carpeted Floor Mats - $125.00

     


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Good write up, very interesting and for me it confirmed that this car falls in the same category of BLAH car as the Prius. Both have ugly dashes, exterior is that blah coupe design that is so tiring and right now is just barely better than the gas cars in mileage. 

    I would rather just have a pure electric over this.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Those use cases will necessitate the purchase of something with a long range, like 300+. But even still, two hours at 11.5kW would put 50 - 70 miles of range back in the car. You might need to make one 10-minute DCFC stop if you had a really busy day, but otherwise, you could make it.
    • I can understand this, but then this is part of my daily life. With two kids with their own families and grandkids it is not uncommon for us to be out and about for the day, come home for a bit before heading out to help with the grandkids and their afterschool activities. Plus, with family that is living from both sides north and south of us, it would not be uncommon to drive 75 miles down south to deal with my wife's side of the family, see the nieces/nephews and then up north to my side to see folks and with both our parents in senior years with health issues, also moving back in forth. Course this is why Sun puts on about 15,000 miles a year on the SS. We all have different use cases.
    • That's all I'm worried about. I'm not going to spend a sht ton more money having a 19.2kW charger installed for the 1 day every 3 years I empty the battery, get home for 2 hours, and have to again drive enough that I couldn't make it back home...  
    • I could see settling on three charger rates, but definitely not one. A Bolt or Kia EV4 type vehicle simply does not need 19kW home charging.  It would be an excessive cost to retrofit a house and the number of buyers who actually use that rate would be pretty close to zero.  That would be like insisting that the Corolla has to have a 6.2 liter. It's excessive and doesn't fit the use case. Now, if we settled into 7.5kW, 11.5kW, and 19.4kW as a standard, that would probably achieve what you are proposing while still giving cost flexibility.  It would allow for entry-level EVs to get the lower cost / lower speed charger while allowing the larger vehicles or premium vehicles to have faster home charging.  For example, the EV6 could have a lower cost 7.5kW charger while the Genesis GV60 on the same platform could get the 11.5kW charger because it is a premium brand and higher cost vehicle.  Then any large EV with or near a 200kW battery could have the 19.4kW charger, but even then, unless it is a newly built house or a commercial fleet, it will still probably charge only at 11.5kW, as that's about the max that the vast majority of homes are wired to do.  Unless you're driving an EV with a 200kW battery to 10% every day, an 11.5kW charger can "fill" an EV to 80% overnight with room to spare, so most people (including me), won't want the extra expense of spending extra money just to say my EV charged faster while I slept.  Either way, it will be ready for me when I need to leave at 7 am.
    • @ccap41 @Drew Dowdell Thank you both, this is the kind of dialogue I feel the Auto buyers need to be made aware of and the various use cases in understanding as I feel most DO NOT really understand this and give into the FEAR Mongering of News Stories. While I still feel that everyone should have the same charging rate capabilities, I also understand both your points. I do feel that this will change electrical across the WORLD over time due to the need of charging.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings