Topic: 2011 Kia Sportage EL Luxury; Day 1

[Shnak]

what were we talking about again?    Oh yes the Kia, nice suv I hear

We're talking about how James's coworkers are not representatives of the general population (for whatever reason, too rich maybe?) and probably shouldn't be used as a point of reference to negatively influence a car review.

[Stewart Warner]

Quoting James: "Unfortunately, there is always a downside with cost-cutting, and the evidence is there in the material feel. Everything is made from hard plastic which, like I said, looks great generates an unfortunate creaking that tends to occur with so many hard plastic pieces intersecting.

Touch the centre console, creak; hit a bump, creak"

Followed by: " I may have a slightly different opinion in terms of comfort and perception had my tester been a base model, but this EX Luxury version sure does make you wonder why anyone would spend big bucks on a premium brand"

Hard plastic and "creak" is why. Nice double standard there, though.

[wing]

You forget it about it after awhile, noticed the creaks the first two days big time, today not so much.

This is why I like doing a day-by-day, if I just wrote a review I would have forgot about the creaks and never mentioned it.  Thanks for reminding me!

[Shnak]

You forget it about it after awhile, noticed the creaks the first two days big time, today not so much.

This is why I like doing a day-by-day, if I just wrote a review I would have forgot about the creaks and never mentioned it.  Thanks for reminding me!

I'll be curious to see how it fares in the middle of winter when everything in the car is frozen though...

Then again, our Sportage has tons of hard plastics and pretty much no creaking at all... no complaints at all in that regards. Coming from our '04 VWs, it's been a HUGE improvement in terms of creaks/rattles.

[Dante]

nice but too pricey

This kind of post is exactly why I'd rather see reviews of middle of the pack trims... I bet a lot of opinions in this thread would be reversed if James was reviewing a $26k Sportage instead of a $33k one...

The EX is $29.5K. Still no cheap, but at least is well equipped.

I was mostly talking about the very well equipped LX AWD Automatic... which is around $27k. But yeah, from there the EX would look incredibly tempting for another $2.5k.

The LX AWD Auto is very well equipped as well, but at $27K it's not very cheap either. It's about in the same bullpark with other offerings.

[Shnak]

nice but too pricey

This kind of post is exactly why I'd rather see reviews of middle of the pack trims... I bet a lot of opinions in this thread would be reversed if James was reviewing a $26k Sportage instead of a $33k one...

The EX is $29.5K. Still no cheap, but at least is well equipped.

I was mostly talking about the very well equipped LX AWD Automatic... which is around $27k. But yeah, from there the EX would look incredibly tempting for another $2.5k.

The LX AWD Auto is very well equipped as well, but at $27K it's not very cheap either. It's about in the same bullpark with other offerings.

I'm not sure where $27k gets you in a CR-V, Forester or RAV4, but you're probably giving up on a few features to get into those vehicles at that price point.

But yeah, no doubt Hyundai and Kia's pricing is getting up there... as they get more popular, they'll start raising their prices. It is to be expected afterall.

[CanuckS2K]

nice but too pricey

This kind of post is exactly why I'd rather see reviews of middle of the pack trims... I bet a lot of opinions in this thread would be reversed if James was reviewing a $26k Sportage instead of a $33k one...

The EX is $29.5K. Still no cheap, but at least is well equipped.

I was mostly talking about the very well equipped LX AWD Automatic... which is around $27k. But yeah, from there the EX would look incredibly tempting for another $2.5k.

The LX AWD Auto is very well equipped as well, but at $27K it's not very cheap either. It's about in the same bullpark with other offerings.

I'm not sure where $27k gets you in a CR-V, Forester or RAV4, but you're probably giving up on a few features to get into those vehicles at that price point.

But yeah, no doubt Hyundai and Kia's pricing is getting up there... as they get more popular, they'll start raising their prices. It is to be expected afterall.

The CR-V LX AWD has an MSRP of $28,290 while the Sportage LX AWD has an MSRP of $26,795.  The CR-V LX doesn't have bluetooth, satellite radio, heated seats, and has less speakers......just to name a few things.  So the Sportage LX has more standard equipment and has a cheaper MSRP.  I have no idea what kind of discounts Honda has on the 2010 CR-Vs though.

[TopGun]

Holy crap 3,100 lbs seemed light to me...especially vs the Equinox at 3,700 lbs?  That's a big, big difference.

[Dante]

I just compared a Forester 2.5X Sport-Tech with the Sportage EX AWD / Metallic Paint and they are $29.795 versus $29,745.

Few +/- on each car, but the core specs are close.

[Factger]

Hyundai claims to have worked to shed weight and that the solid-feeling structure doesn’t add mass

The reason Hyundai is able to keep the weight down is because the Tucson is optimized for a four-cylinder engine.

Car & Driver

Tucson / Sportage same difference. Therefore not designed for a V-6. Only engine option is a 4 cylinder & 4 cylinder turbo .

2011 Tucson Auto AWD   -   3382LBS
2011 Tucson Manual FWD -  3179LBS
Sorry only have the Tucson stats

[Shnak]

Holy crap 3,100 lbs seemed light to me...especially vs the Equinox at 3,700 lbs?  That's a big, big difference.

Well the Equinox, just like the Regal (I'm opening a big can of worms here!), is a pig, it's well known. Something common to GM's I suppose. Most other compact AWD 4-cylinder CUVs are in the 3300-3500lbs range... Tucson/Sportage are 3350lbs, Forester is 3300lbs, RAV4 is 3570lbs (a bit high), CR-V is 3500lbs, Escape is 3500lbs, Outlander is 3527lbs. Really, only the Equinox sticks out as being really overweight at 3950lbs, by easily 400lbs.

[dragonflyjack]

   If I'm not mistaken, the Equinox is a substantially larger vehicle than any of those mentioned....hence, it's higher weight..
  It's also one great looking and very efficient load... Just sayin'    dragonfly

[wing]

It is larger but is classified as a compact so it is not significantly so.

[Truth be told]

   If I'm not mistaken, the Equinox is a substantially larger vehicle than any of those mentioned....hence, it's higher weight..
  It's also one great looking and very efficient load... Just sayin'    dragonfly

I had to google the Equinox just to remember what it looks like, but seriously, the equinox looks dated already.  Doesn't it have the same eco-tech engine the Regal has, they are both slow.

[Dante]

I've always seen the Equinox more comparable to SantaFe rather than Tucson. If you put them side by side,  you can see the difference. The Equinox, like most GM cars are porky and oversized.

I've seen the first Sportage (silver) on the road tonight. It looks short and tall, but I like it, especially from the rear. I'm probably one of those appreciating form over function sometimes. It wouldn't bother me that the rear window is so small and probably the visibility is not the best; it looks nice though.

[Leviathan]

I had to google the Equinox just to remember what it looks like, but seriously, the equinox looks dated already.  Doesn't it have the same eco-tech engine the Regal has, they are both slow.

Uh huh.

Chevrolet Total Sales Up 19 Percent in September, and Retail Sales Climb 34 percent

Nearly 85 percent of Equinox buyers choose the fuel-efficient 2.4L Ecotec direct injected I-4 engine, which delivers the segment’s best EPA-estimated fuel economy of 32 mpg highway and 22 mpg city.

To meet consumer demand, Chevrolet recently started producing Equinox models at the award-winning Oshawa Assembly plant, as well as the CAMI facility in Ingersoll. The plan utilizes excess capacity from the CAMI body shop to transport additional Equinox bodies from Ingersoll to Oshawa for paint and final assembly. Moving some Equinox production to Oshawa also allows the CAMI plant to increase GMC Terrain volume. This is the third production increase for the Equinox and Terrain, and will add the capacity to build 60,000 to 80,000 more vehicles for the Canadian and U.S. markets.

[sailor723]

"The creaks came back, which is rather unfortunate; they seemed to have returned along with the cooler weather we have been having. I do wonder, though, if the plastics and clips holding the panels in place would settle more over time and stop doing creaking. My tester has just over 4,000km on it."

That might be true but I would think that if they were going to stop by themselves 4,000 kms should enough of a break-in period.  Creaks and squeaks (even if I could be sure it was only for the first 5 or 6 thousand kms) would take this vehicle off of my list.

[Sival]

Doesn't it have the same eco-tech engine the Regal has, they are both slow.

That Ecotec engine is a Direct-Injection engine with 182 horsepower and 172 lb-ft, which compares favorably with most other 2.4-2.5L engines out there. It is one of the most advanced 4-cylinder engines in the class right now, more than engines from Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Mazda, Ford, Chrysler, VW, etc... From the top of my head, I think only the Hyundai DI 2.4L is probably better.

The Regal and the Equinox are laden with more weight than their competitors, one of GM's biggest problems right now, but their acceleration is in line with the 4-cylinder-equipped competition.