Topic: Test Drive: 2011 Kia Sportage SX

[Jaeger]

Yes, I'm an Imperial mpg guy.  You posted that pic where, when I did the math (as I recall), you were getting 42 mpg at 120 kmh - right?  Of course it could have been downhill (my kid, smartass, tells me don't believe everything you see on the internet dad.

I can't speak to your math or the conversion to imperial mpg, but the pic was what I got as an average Oakville to Niagara-on-the-lake - 6.7l/ 100km going, 7.0 on the return leg.

Of course a pic can be faked.  Just like every report of "real world fuel consumption" in that long thread could be a complete lie - including Erik' report of 33mpg (US) (7.0l/100km) - only slightly worse than my outgoing journey and the same as my return trip - all  from a larger, much more powerful and much heavier vehicle.  If you weren't there, you can't know for sure. What was your point again?

Just so we're clear - I'm not suggesting Erik is lying - I'm saying anecdotal reports either mean something to you or they don't.

Jaeger

[Shnak]

Keh-vin, had you said "I wish Kia would offer a Sportage turbo with less equipment for around $30k", I would have taken zero offense to that, obviously. But saying "$37k is too much for a Kia" without taking into consideration trim level and equipmeent is just stupid and ignorant. That's all.

[greengs]

I think Kia agrees $37k might be too much for people wanting the 260hp so they are coming out with a $34K version for 2012 with less features while keeping the $37k version as option. 

I think it's a cool looking CUV.  Turbos are all about how you drive them.  I'm sure you can achieve those numbers if you're careful.  Inside Line has a long term test Optima Turbo and they are only getting 21mpg so far.  So with a turbo you mileage will vary widely depending on how much you like the boost!

C&D shows 0-60 in 6.1s for this vehicle, 6.4s for the Rav 4 V6 and 6.7s for the Forester with ancient 4 speed. 

[Guy]

Keh-vin, had you said "I wish Kia would offer a Sportage turbo with less equipment for around $30k", I would have taken zero offense to that, obviously. But saying "$37k is too much for a Kia" without taking into consideration trim level and equipmeent is just stupid and ignorant. That's all.

Yes, especially these days of $60K + Hyundai's. Times have changed, time to move on...

[Dante]

Looking through the specs on kia.ca, the unique and functional features on the Sportage, compared to what the competition offers, are:
- cooled/vented driver seat
- tilt/retractable panoramic roof (others offer fix panoramic roof or large sunroofs).

Am I missing anything?

No HIDs though and those would be functional IMO.

[conwelpic]

new for 2012 is the SX with UVO at $2000 less - $34,995 MSRP.  No change in MSRP for the top model for 2012 still MSRP of $36,995

[Shnak]

But saying "$37k is too much for a Kia" without taking into consideration trim level and equipmeent is just stupid and ignorant. That's all.

A tad harsh.  Brand is incredibly important in terms of perceived value.  Kia has made substantial gains in a very quick period of time.  It is completely understandable that quality gains could outpace perceptions.  Like it or not, but Kia still lacks the pedigree of other options at or near the mid to high 30s price point. 

Show me another CUV in the mid-30's with more features than the Sportage... I'm curious to see what you come up with.

[Shnak]

Beyond the Kia issue, my original point was mostly about people complaining about the pricing of the very top trim... newsflash, the top trim of every single vehicle out there is always a lot more expensive than the starting price of that vehicle. There's no difference here with what Kia's done with the Sportage and what Honda does with its CR-V... both offer a low to mid $20k base price, and max out just before $40k. Complaining that the top of the line is too expensive just doesn't make sense to me.

And of course, add to that the infamous "for a Kia" qualifier, and that doesn't help things. As far as I'm concerned, if you're still using "for a Hyundai/Kia" as a qualifier, you haven't been following what's been happening over the last few years in the car market... ie. you're ignorant.

[Mike]

But saying "$37k is too much for a Kia" without taking into consideration trim level and equipmeent is just stupid and ignorant. That's all.

A tad harsh.  Brand is incredibly important in terms of perceived value.  Kia has made substantial gains in a very quick period of time.  It is completely understandable that quality gains could outpace perceptions.  Like it or not, but Kia still lacks the pedigree of other options at or near the mid to high 30s price point. 

Show me another CUV in the mid-30's with more features than the Sportage... I'm curious to see what you come up with.

There isn't, but that isn't his point.  There a lot of people in this world who would take a BMW with wind up windows and a moped engine for $35K over a Kia that comes with its own Butler and helipad if they are priced the same.  It is all about Brand identity and prestige to them.  And before you say their dumb for thinking this way, their money talks just as much as yours does when buying a car.

It is a strange world we live in.

[Shnak]

Shnak et al - my  apologies...I didn't mean to turn this into a pi$$ing contest.  Yes, it's a brand thing, yes, it's probably ignorant on my part to assume it's too much having not actually gone and looked at one in real live HD 3D Panorama colourvision...I know they've come a long way, so far in fact I'd probably consider almost anything they or Hyundai sell over a Honda or Toyota.  Never gave much thought to "saying what's been said a thousand times before" which I guess you've heard enough of, driving a Hyundai and all (people's assumptions of the car probably don't add up to your experience etc.).  Let's all go out and buy a sucker and be friends again.

Fair enough. I just hate the "...for a Hyundai/Kia" saying... that's all. 

[Guy]

But saying "$37k is too much for a Kia" without taking into consideration trim level and equipmeent is just stupid and ignorant. That's all.

A tad harsh.  Brand is incredibly important in terms of perceived value.  Kia has made substantial gains in a very quick period of time.  It is completely understandable that quality gains could outpace perceptions.  Like it or not, but Kia still lacks the pedigree of other options at or near the mid to high 30s price point. 

Show me another CUV in the mid-30's with more features than the Sportage... I'm curious to see what you come up with.

There isn't, but that isn't his point.  There a lot of people in this world who would take a BMW with wind up windows and a moped engine for $35K over a Kia that comes with its own Butler and helipad if they are priced the same.  It is all about Brand identity and prestige to them.  And before you say their dumb for thinking this way, their money talks just as much as yours does when buying a car.

It is a strange world we live in.

 

[nlm]

Looking through the specs on kia.ca, the unique and functional features on the Sportage, compared to what the competition offers, are:
- cooled/vented driver seat
- tilt/retractable panoramic roof (others offer fix panoramic roof or large sunroofs).

Am I missing anything?

Two sunroofs or is that what you meant by panoramic?
HP to fuel economy ratio (you know what I mean?), if we agree with the stated ratings.
Supposed torque-vectoring awd, although not info provided in article.
Centre locking diff, although again more info would've been nice.
Those are giant looking wheels, functional no, but larger wheels seem to be regarded as upgrades by most.

[E!Power]

Beyond the Kia issue, my original point was mostly about people complaining about the pricing of the very top trim... newsflash, the top trim of every single vehicle out there is always a lot more expensive than the starting price of that vehicle. There's no difference here with what Kia's done with the Sportage and what Honda does with its CR-V... both offer a low to mid $20k base price, and max out just before $40k. Complaining that the top of the line is too expensive just doesn't make sense to me.

And of course, add to that the infamous "for a Kia" qualifier, and that doesn't help things. As far as I'm concerned, if you're still using "for a Hyundai/Kia" as a qualifier, you haven't been following what's been happening over the last few years in the car market... ie. you're ignorant.

But saying "$37k is too much for a Kia" without taking into consideration trim level and equipmeent is just stupid and ignorant. That's all.

A tad harsh.  Brand is incredibly important in terms of perceived value.  Kia has made substantial gains in a very quick period of time.  It is completely understandable that quality gains could outpace perceptions.  Like it or not, but Kia still lacks the pedigree of other options at or near the mid to high 30s price point. 

Show me another CUV in the mid-30's with more features than the Sportage... I'm curious to see what you come up with.

There isn't, but that isn't his point.  There a lot of people in this world who would take a BMW with wind up windows and a moped engine for $35K over a Kia that comes with its own Butler and helipad if they are priced the same.  It is all about Brand identity and prestige to them.  And before you say their dumb for thinking this way, their money talks just as much as yours does when buying a car.

It is a strange world we live in.

 

I must say this is a nice vehicle. A lot of the newer features are there, and plus they may have caught up to the RAV4/CRV etc (which is a 2005/07 design model). It may have taken Kia/Hyundai seven years to do it, but this vehicle is at least on par with the current competition.

As for the price, it is justifiable. All the Research and Development Dollars for all the years they have spent trying to improve their vehicles/brand has to be paid for someway or another. At a price close to $40,000 it may be stretching it, but some early adopters would buy this newly designed vehicle.

I agree that Kia still lacks the pedigree. I also agree that they have made strides on their products within the past few years.

[Frontier1]

Let's look at it this way, to me an early Civic and a Pony, no difference, they were both a pile of junk.  Now today let's look at a Civic, Elantra, Forte, we have to give credit to the Koreans for catching up and in many ways exceeding the Japanese.  Somehow Honda made people forget the original Civic and to me Hyundai/Kia have made me forget their original models.  But brand snobs will continue to live on no matter what.

[hemusbull]

I don't accept that value is just the equipment, options and so on material stuff. Value is, before all image and brand name, something that is eventually built up few decades. This applies equally to german luxury vehicles as well to Honda, Toyota and so on. Kia offers the first portion of the "value", the second one - image and brand name is still missing! But I think, Kia broke all previously established time criteria ...so only the time gona show us is this right or it's a too high price for the 2.0 l turbo version of Sportage.

[greengs]

Shnak, your eagerness to defend Hyundai and Kia from being devalued illustrates just how powerful brand identity can be.  In a way you are demonstrating my point about the impact of brand association on consumer behaviour.  We all fall prey to it.

Anyways, don't want to hijack the thread anymore than I already have.

I agree.  Just try to price out a lease on the Kia Sportage SX.  The residual is horrible, making it very hard to lease when compared to other more established brands in the class.  IMO it will take at 3-5 yrs before this changes, and with that quality perceptions of Kia (and Hyundai)

[Dante]

Looking through the specs on kia.ca, the unique and functional features on the Sportage, compared to what the competition offers, are:
- cooled/vented driver seat
- tilt/retractable panoramic roof (others offer fix panoramic roof or large sunroofs).

Am I missing anything?

Two sunroofs or is that what you meant by panoramic?
HP to fuel economy ratio (you know what I mean?), if we agree with the stated ratings.
Supposed torque-vectoring awd, although not info provided in article.
Centre locking diff, although again more info would've been nice.
Those are giant looking wheels, functional no, but larger wheels seem to be regarded as upgrades by most.

Yes, that's the panoramic sunroof. Those are 18", a size offered on other small SUVs.

I was mostly refering to the feature content not the powertrain.
Toyota's RAV4 V6 would probably best the Sportage in both power and fuel economy regardless the numbers on the window sticker.

[aaronk]

Too expensive for a Kia. Nice little 'ute if you're in the market. You might as well get a hatchback car/wagon though - small SUV's don't make a lot of sense to me. Plenty of cars come with AWD, offer similar cargo volume and are a better value.

[Travel360]

Why is it 20% cheaper in the US?

[Ex-airbalancer]

Why is it 20% cheaper in the US?

Why not?

Why can you get 3 bottles of wine in Italy for 9 euros?