Topic: Test Drive: 2011 Kia Sportage SX

[sacrat]

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.

No one can forget the original Civic after Bubba Smith ("Hightower" in Police Academy) "adjusted" the seats so he could fit  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phHZ2HOkn8s

[E!Power]

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.

Yes, i agree. Actually they have an image an brand name, cheap, affordable, and vehicles for poor people made by a Korean based company. Some people wont be caught driving this brand. To some people it might be their dream car and car company. 

[safristi]

Why is it 20% cheaper in the US?

Why not?

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

....


 the Euro has crapped out and folks are exchanging it fer REAL VALUE.....

[E!Power]

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.

Yes, i agree. Actually they have an image an brand name, cheap, low resale value, and vehicles for poor people made by a Korean company. Though they are trying to change that, some people wont be caught dead driving this brand of vehicle. To some people it might be their dream car and car company because they think its the best. 

[Alex_S]

I thought the RAV4 and VW Tiguan were class leaders in the exterior looks departments (tho I was never a fan of the Rav4 interior).  The CRV would easily have taken it in my books if not for the "gaping jaw" front end which they refuse to fix...er update.

But wow, yet another fantastic looking vehicle from Kia and a boost to the Sportage value equation with increased hp AND a significant boost to fuel efficiency.  For me, it's not even close.  If i was in the market for a CUV, it would be an easy choice in the Sportage.

NOTE: I'll be honest and say I'm somewhat of a brand snob, partial to the European makes.  But at the same time, I can appreciate design and recognize value when it's there.  Numbers don't lie with Hyundai and Kia rocketing up the quality boards.  It's very possible my '00 Maxima will be traded in for a Sonata Turbo/Optima Turbo or Hyundai Azera..

[Alex_S]

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.

I thought this was an intersting statement.  Not saying it's wrong, but was wondering which vehicles one might consider "a better value".  With gas prices trending higher long-term, it makes sense that the public is placing a greater emphasis on fuel economy; Kia/Hyundai clearly standouts in this dept. For arguments sake, lets say quality of the Korean makes are now, better-than-avg. Add on class-leading HP, class-leading fuel efficiency, modern exterior/interior, feature PACKED (heated and cooled driver seats? would love to see how many other cars sub-$40CDN have this feature), tops or near tops in safety and undeniebly one of the best warranties in the business. 

As an aside, really enjoyed the banter on Kia's branding.  I believe that Kia's branding will rise faster than Hyundai or any other car manufacturer for that matter over the next 5-10 years.  The Korean's have been fortunate to learn from Toyota and realize that if you cut corners on quality, then the result is 12 MILLION+ recalls. Thus, quality from Kia/Hyundai should only improve.  Also, Kia looks to be focused on a slightly younger demographic and the Soul looks to be a HOT seller and likely perceived as cool.  The marketing team should be given credit for a sharp improvement in perception too - the Kia Hamstar commercial still one of the best auto adds i have ever seen (alongside with VW "The Force").  But most credit goes to Mr. Schreyer.  You make great looking vehicles (with quality up to snuff at the right price) and the public likely to forgive a multitude of sins..

[Oldsguy]

I thought the RAV4 and VW Tiguan were class leaders in the exterior looks departments (tho I was never a fan of the Rav4 interior).  The CRV would easily have taken it in my books if not for the "gaping jaw" front end which they refuse to fix...er update.

But wow, yet another fantastic looking vehicle from Kia and a boost to the Sportage value equation with increased hp AND a significant boost to fuel efficiency.  For me, it's not even close.  If i was in the market for a CUV, it would be an easy choice in the Sportage.

You are hinting at a question I have - admitting that I have never driven much less lived with a vehicle like this. My question is: what is the usefulness of a CUV like this, the Tiguan, Rav, Tucson, or the small Acura model whose name I cannot recall, to name a few? They seem too small to actually offer much cargo space and while they do offer AWD that seems their only real distinguishing feature - and at that, many are not sold with that anyway.

I just don't get the appeal. Is it simply a matter of sitting up a bit higher?

[Patrick_D1]

I thought the RAV4 and VW Tiguan were class leaders in the exterior looks departments (tho I was never a fan of the Rav4 interior).  The CRV would easily have taken it in my books if not for the "gaping jaw" front end which they refuse to fix...er update.

But wow, yet another fantastic looking vehicle from Kia and a boost to the Sportage value equation with increased hp AND a significant boost to fuel efficiency.  For me, it's not even close.  If i was in the market for a CUV, it would be an easy choice in the Sportage.

You are hinting at a question I have - admitting that I have never driven much less lived with a vehicle like this. My question is: what is the usefulness of a CUV like this, the Tiguan, Rav, Tucson, or the small Acura model whose name I cannot recall, to name a few? They seem too small to actually offer much cargo space and while they do offer AWD that seems their only real distinguishing feature - and at that, many are not sold with that anyway.

I just don't get the appeal. Is it simply a matter of sitting up a bit higher?

That's EXACTLY the appeal, and I don't get it either.

[nlm]

Toyota's RAV4 V6 would probably best the Sportage in both power and fuel economy regardless the numbers on the window sticker.

The two would be very close I think.

Speaking about functionality, IMO the curb-swinging cargo door is a -1 on the RAV.

[nlm]

....My question is: what is the usefulness of a CUV like this....
I just don't get the appeal....

IMO they are kool-aid. From a (very general) marketing perspective men with families don't want a minivan and look to a SUV. Females find SUVs too large and CUVs offer the *perceived* advantages of the SUV in a smaller package which is appealing to them, while still having a higher seat.  I reckon most buyers don't compare actual cargo space numbers and just give the cargo a quick glance over and most who puchase these vehicles do not need a lot of cargo room or have another vehicle for larger duties.

[Shnak]

I thought the RAV4 and VW Tiguan were class leaders in the exterior looks departments (tho I was never a fan of the Rav4 interior).  The CRV would easily have taken it in my books if not for the "gaping jaw" front end which they refuse to fix...er update.

But wow, yet another fantastic looking vehicle from Kia and a boost to the Sportage value equation with increased hp AND a significant boost to fuel efficiency.  For me, it's not even close.  If i was in the market for a CUV, it would be an easy choice in the Sportage.

You are hinting at a question I have - admitting that I have never driven much less lived with a vehicle like this. My question is: what is the usefulness of a CUV like this, the Tiguan, Rav, Tucson, or the small Acura model whose name I cannot recall, to name a few? They seem too small to actually offer much cargo space and while they do offer AWD that seems their only real distinguishing feature - and at that, many are not sold with that anyway.

I just don't get the appeal. Is it simply a matter of sitting up a bit higher?

That's EXACTLY the appeal, and I don't get it either.

Quick question, how tall are you?

[Jaeger]

I just don't get the appeal. Is it simply a matter of sitting up a bit higher?

That's EXACTLY the appeal, and I don't get it either.
[/quote]

I've never owned a CUV, but I did rent a Rav 4 for a week when I was with my family in Florida for a wedding.  I can tell you it served admirably as a family vehicle - and much better than any sedan I have owned due to the cargo capacity.  We were constantly hauling people and stuff around for all the wedding-related events (airport runs, rehearsals, hair dressers, you name it), and that tall cargo area was in constant use.  It swallowed passengers and their stuff, conveyed all around in cool comfort, and performed well when fully loaded - which was most of the time.  It made ample sense to me as a versatile family vehicle. 

It sure didn't offer much in the way of style, though.  If the Sportage functions as well as the Rav did, looking as sharp as it (the Sportage) does - I expect they'll sell a bunch.  While I still prefer a sedan, I don't think that it's fair to dismiss CUV buyers as mindless Kool-aid drinkers.


Jaeger

[aquadorhj]

i GET the CUV thing. 

higher seating position.  (it is nice.  )
fairly good looking outside (subjective of course, but they are usually inoffensive)
easy to just plop in and plop out of the cabin if you are of moderate height.  (sedans, you tend to DROP into seats, and have to stand up when you get out.)
usually competitively priced.

but most significantly,
cargo bay is easy to access, as small as they may be.  no bending required.   i LOVE hatchbacks.  i think they rule, and they are the best thing since sliced bread, BUT with occasional back pains, i do consciously be careful when lifting stuff out of hatchbacks because i have to bend my back.

CUVs, with their heights, don't require me to bend my back.  just grab things out of the hatch standing up.    (same with, i assume, child seats in the back seat.)

[Sir Osis of Liver]

I just don't get the appeal. Is it simply a matter of sitting up a bit higher?


That's EXACTLY the appeal, and I don't get it either.

I've never owned a CUV, but I did rent a Rav 4 for a week when I was with my family in Florida for a wedding.  I can tell you it served admirably as a family vehicle - and much better than any sedan I have owned due to the cargo capacity.  We were constantly hauling people and stuff around for all the wedding-related events (airport runs, rehearsals, hair dressers, you name it), and that tall cargo area was in constant use.  It swallowed passengers and their stuff, conveyed all around in cool comfort, and performed well when fully loaded - which was most of the time.  It made ample sense to me as a versatile family vehicle. 

It sure didn't offer much in the way of style, though.  If the Sportage functions as well as the Rav did, looking as sharp as it (the Sportage) does - I expect they'll sell a bunch.  While I still prefer a sedan, I don't think that it's fair to dismiss CUV buyers as mindless Kool-aid drinkers.


Jaeger

What you said is all true, but what if the Rav was 4-6 inches closer to the ground? That would give it better dynamics, better aerodynamics and better fuel economy, all else being equal. That's what I don't really get. People will buy an CUV, but won't consider a wagon, when in reality, they're one in the same, but for ride height.

My preference was for the Legacy wagon, but it was easier to get our handicapped daughter into the Outback, which is one thing, but few were buying the wagon. Now the Legacy wagon isn't even offered anymore, and the Outback is more CUV than it's ever been.

It's the same over at VW, where the Golf wagon offers more cargo floor space, at the expense of cargo height than the Tiguan, but the Tiguan sells better.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

i GET the CUV thing. 

higher seating position.  (it is nice.  )
fairly good looking outside (subjective of course, but they are usually inoffensive)
easy to just plop in and plop out of the cabin if you are of moderate height.  (sedans, you tend to DROP into seats, and have to stand up when you get out.)
usually competitively priced.

but most significantly,
cargo bay is easy to access, as small as they may be.  no bending required.   i LOVE hatchbacks.  i think they rule, and they are the best thing since sliced bread, BUT with occasional back pains, i do consciously be careful when lifting stuff out of hatchbacks because i have to bend my back.

CUVs, with their heights, don't require me to bend my back.  just grab things out of the hatch standing up.    (same with, i assume, child seats in the back seat.)

The back issue might be it for a lot of people. Older demographic and all that.

[Jaeger]

What you said is all true, but what if the Rav was 4-6 inches closer to the ground? That would give it better dynamics, better aerodynamics and better fuel economy, all else being equal. That's what I don't really get. People will buy an CUV, but won't consider a wagon, when in reality, they're one in the same, but for ride height.

My preference was for the Legacy wagon, but it was easier to get our handicapped daughter into the Outback, which is one thing, but few were buying the wagon. Now the Legacy wagon isn't even offered anymore, and the Outback is more CUV than it's ever been.

It's the same over at VW, where the Golf wagon offers more cargo floor space, at the expense of cargo height than the Tiguan, but the Tiguan sells better.

But there aren't a lot of choices in wagons (at least on this side of the pond).  And the reason is that people (in greater numbers) prefer the CUVs.  I'm sure ride height has something to do with it (outward visibility improved, ease of cargo loading / unloading improved), but regardless, the market has spoken.

The Tiguan is a particularly good (or bad, depending on perspective) example, because both rear passenger AND cargo room are significantly compromised - both of which would be deal-breakers for me.  The Rav isn't similarly inflicted however.  Neither, I expect, is the Sportage. 

Personally, I would rather drive a wagon with good handling dynamics than a CUV - but I do get why people choose CUVs.  Wagons weren't even on the map for my sister when she bougth her Tucson.  Neither were handling dynamics.    For better or worse, in North America, the CUV IS the new wagon.

Jaeger

[kenm]

SUV, CUV, SAV, mini-ute.......whatever you call these things (we can blame Subaru for blurring the category lines); put me in the camp with the people who wouldn't own one personally. Like some of the other posters, I would also choose a wagon first, but I'm starting to see the point of these vehicles. They're part of the trend of having smaller vehicles that are available with many of the features of their larger siblings. There are a lot of people who want the features of an SUV but don't need the large size or capacity. These smaller models are easier to park and the fuel economy of recent models has really improved a lot.

[Jaeger]

SUV, CUV, SAV, mini-ute.......whatever you call these things (we can blame Subaru for blurring the category lines); put me in the camp with the people who wouldn't own one personally. Like some of the other posters, I would also choose a wagon first, but I'm starting to see the point of these vehicles. They're part of the trend of having smaller vehicles that are available with many of the features of their larger siblings. There are a lot of people who want the features of an SUV but don't need the large size or capacity. These smaller models are easier to park and the fuel economy of recent models has really improved a lot.

Agreed on all of that.

Jaeger

[Sir Osis of Liver]

But there aren't a lot of choices in wagons (at least on this side of the pond).  And the reason is that people (in greater numbers) prefer the CUVs.  I'm sure ride height has something to do with it (outward visibility improved, ease of cargo loading / unloading improved), but regardless, the market has spoken.

The Tiguan is a particularly good (or bad, depending on perspective) example, because both rear passenger AND cargo room are significantly compromised - both of which would be deal-breakers for me.  The Rav isn't similarly inflicted however.  Neither, I expect, is the Sportage. 

Personally, I would rather drive a wagon with good handling dynamics than a CUV - but I do get why people choose CUVs.  Wagons weren't even on the map for my sister when she bougth her Tucson.  Neither were handling dynamics.    For better or worse, in North America, the CUV IS the new wagon.

Jaeger

Also very true. We had a 1995 Corolla wagon, which we really liked. Toyota couldn't give them away, so they were discontinued with the introduction of the original RAV4, which sold like hotcakes.

Even though the Corolla wasn't a paragon of handling, compared to the tippy RAV it handled like a go-cart. The Corolla also had more usable space, better mileage and a proper rear bumper.

Toyota kind of got back into wagons/hatchbacks with the Matrix and Venza. They are selling well here, but hardly making a dent in the US, so I wonder how long they will be around.

[safristi]

..is there that much of a difference between "HIGH" step in cars these days............Outback seems as high as  an Edge( a BIG SUV to me!) ......all these big step'n fetch it quasi wagons/Cuvs /mini Suvs........as always folks will pick one ov't the other on ...looks...price...interior...financing.....lets face it this "Tranche" covers a BIG SPREAD............a basic Elantra wagon thingy to a loaded Rav 4 /Sportage Turbo with all the toys.....................  $18K to $40 K.....thats a BIG arse SPREAD............maybe we need a "SUB-DIVISION" with hot tubs and soccer Moms....