Hyundai i30 SR v Elantra SR Turbo 2016 Comparison

Hyundai i30 SR and Elantra SR Turbo
Comparison Test

Hyundai's i30 SR has been recently upgraded ahead of an all-new i30 range set to arrive in April next year.

That new car will ride into town on a newish platform – one that has been applauded in the Elantra SR Turbo application.

We recently matched up the soon defunct i30 SR against new kid on the block, the Elantra SR Turbo, as part of a comparison of affordable hot hatches (stay tuned for that). It seemed an appropriate moment to look at what each has to offer.

And more importantly, which to buy?

To hatch or not to hatch…
If you like your hot(ish) hatch to be... well, a hatch, then the i30 is the only option out of these two.

But the naturally-aspirated and direct-injected i30 is down on power and torque against the newer, turbocharged Elantra, despite the hatch's larger engine displacement. According to RedBook, power to weight ratios are 93.1W/kg for the i30, 108.3W/kg for the Elantra. On a scale of hotness, the Elantra is boiling, the i30 simmers.

Around the track at Haunted Hills, where our testing took place – and out on the road – the Elantra was rarely short of performance. It was very strong from the mid-range up to the redline, whereas the i30 was somewhat anaemic down low, and really needed to be working higher in the rev range for best effect.

The Elantra's seven-speed dual-clutch transmission was also a blessing, providing one more ratio to enhance the power delivery of the engine at any speed. In contrast, the i30 felt like there was a gap between second and third, and this was particularly prevalent around the track, when power just fell in a hole up some grades and out of faster bends. The same symptom was apparent to a lesser extent on the road.

In terms of passive dynamics, the i30 rode slightly sharper than the Elantra, but handling was not as secure or consistent as the sedan's. At extremes the i30 felt more likely to move into a lift-off oversteer stance, but was also more prone to run wide with the power applied on the exit.

Around the track the roles were reversed. The i30 felt more playful – albeit not as tidy – but again, it lacked the power of the Elantra. Whereas the Elantra was quite punchy out of the corners, the i30 did need a little more planning for optimal speed on the exit. To illustrate, the i30's best lap time at the track was 1:11.85, the Elantra was essentially a second and a half faster at 1:10.32 – and we're talking about a track that's just 1.4km in length.

Both cars rode on the same size rubber: 225/45 R16 (91V for i30, 91W for Elantra). While the i30's tyres were supplied by Nexen, the Elantra's come from the better known brand, Hankook.

Behind the wheel, both cars were similar in design, but the i30's driving position was compromised by its manual transmission. The driver's seat had to be adjusted precisely for clutch take-up, whereas the Elantra had a big foot rest on the left and the driver could sit further back at an appropriate distance from the brake and accelerator.

We found both cars were fitted with comfortable front seats, but the Elantra's were less aggressively bolstered than the i30's making entry and exit a little easier. Cornering harder the occupants naturally felt more secure in the i30's seats.

Leaving aside one of these cars has a boot and the other is a hatchback, they were similar in overall footprint. There's a certain amount of slicing and dicing that goes into comparing the two for accommodation, on paper at least.

Overall length was 4300mm for the i30, versus 4570mm for the Elantra. Just 50mm separates the two for wheelbase measurement (2650mm for the i30, 2700mm for the Elantra). This translated to boot space places the Elantra 80 litres ahead of the i30 (458 versus 378 litres). On the slightly longer wheelbase, the Elantra's rear-seat kneeroom was marginally better than the i30's, but the snug toeroom under the front seats was very close for both cars.

The sunroof in the sedan reduced the amount of available rear-seat headroom. Taller occupants (over 180cm) might find the rear-seat headroom in the i30 to be borderline too, but not to the same degree as in the Elantra. While the Elantra has adjustable vents in the rear, the i30 didn't, which might be a problem for passengers on warmer/colder days.

We've written in the past that the Elantra chassis could handle more power, and the SR Turbo proves that very point. There's every reason to expect the next i30 on the same platform and boasting the same mechanicals will be even more capable than the sedan.

So why buy the current i30? There are some minor packaging advantages, and we wouldn't say the interior design is decades behind the Elantra's, although the Elantra's design is at once more stylish and more conventional. The i30's dash is very reminiscent of a Ford Fiesta's, circa 2008.

If you prefer the way a naturally-aspirated, direct-injected engine produces its power over a turbo engine, the i30 delivers on that front. But unless you can get a really good deal on an i30 SR now, wait for the turbo model...

Price: $28,990 – $31,290 (plus on-road costs)
Engine: 1.6-litre four-cylinder turbo-petrol
Output: 150kW/265Nm
Transmission: Six-speed manual, seven-speed dual-clutch
Fuel: 7.7L/100km, 7.2L/100km (ADR Combined) / 9.5L/100km, 9.4L/100km (as tested)
CO2: 176g/km, 163g/km (ADR Combined)
Safety Rating: Five-star ANCAP

Also consider:
>> Ford Focus Sport (from $28,190 plus ORCs)
>> Honda Civic RS (from $31,790 plus ORCs)
>> Mazda 3 SP25 GT (from $31,790 plus ORCs)

Price: $26,550 (plus on-road costs)
Engine: 2.0-litre four-cylinder petrol
Output: 124kW/210Nm
Transmission: Six-speed manual
Fuel: 7.3L/100km (ADR Combined)
CO2: 170g/km (ADR Combined)
Safety Rating: Five-star ANCAP

Also consider:
>> Ford Focus Sport (from $28,190 plus ORCs)
>> Holden Cruize SRi Z-Series (from $27,140 plus ORCs)
>> Mazda 3 SP25 GT (from $31,790 plus ORCs)