Ya, you're right I just meant it felt disingenuous to compare to the M, AMG or RS. But you are right, the customization settings are similar. If the Kona N was AWD, it would be even more insane. Does the Kona have a limited slip deferential? I don't remember. I know the Elantra N has one, but I can't remember if the Kona has one. Regardless I love the Kona N and you made a great choice. I love what Hyundai is doing I want to get a Ioniq 5 N
Yeah it's got an LSD. Has launch control too. Wish it had AWD.
It's interesting, I looked at the c43 AMG specs of the same year as my Kona just this morning. It's noticeably better than the Kona, but not out of this world faster.
C43 AMG:
3.0T giving 385HP and 384 lb-ft while weighing 4,000lbs accelerating 0-60 in 4.5 seconds.
Kona N:
2.0T giving 286HP and 289 lb-ft while weighing 3,300lbs accelerating 0-60 in 5.1 seconds.
C43 AMG has 9.625 HP per 100 pounds.
Kona N has 8.666 HP per 100 pounds.
That makes the AMG c43 11% more powerful for the weight.
It's noticeable to the tune of half a second faster 0-60 and 0.8 quicker 1/4 mile (12.7 vs 13.5)
So its noticeable, but not out of this world.
Id imagine you'd notice more of a difference if you went to c 63 AMG. But wonder what the difference would be if you went to an AMG SUV.
GLA 35 AMG, the smaller SUV has a turbo 4 producing 302 HP, 295 lb-ft weighs 3,900...doing 0-60 in 4.7 and quarter mile in 13.8. (the Kona does a faster 1/4 mile than the GLA 35 AMG)
So maybe the Kona doesn't keep up with the sedans, but it can be In the ball park of the AMG SUVs for performance.