2015 Kia Forte Sx on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Kia pulls covers off 2015 Sedona with New York as its backdrop

This, ladies and gentlemen, is the 2015 Kia Sedona. The automaker is sticking firm with its convictions in the minivan segment, but it's hedging its bets, saying the Sedona's "CUV-like styling and proportions offer all of the functional convenience of the segment while defying its design limitations."
The 2015 Sedona can be configured to seat either seven or eight occupants, and its size specifications put it right at or near the top of its class in most categories, including leg room. Kia says this is the final piece of the styling puzzle that started when design director Peter Schreyer took the helm of the Korean company's studio. We certainly see some masculine cues, especially with its high belt line and relatively small windows. We think the end result is pretty attractive though it falls clearly in minivan territory, you're welcome to draw your own conclusions after scrolling through the image gallery above.
Kia promises the new Sedona will provide "an element of desire" with "improved driving dynamics" to go along with all that room inside. To that end, the new Sedona's chassis is reportedly 36-percent stiffer than the best of its competition, due to a body shell crafted from 76-percent high-strength steel. Kia expects a five-star safety rating from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, though the van has yet to be crash tested.

Kia unveils K4 sedan concept in China

Among the dozens of foreign automakers eager to showcase their wares to the Chinese market, Kia arrived at the Beijing Motor Show with the new K4. Though technically categorized as a "concept," the K4 previews a sedan which Kia intends to launch in China later this year.
The K4 is a midsize sedan measuring 186 inches long and riding on a 106-inch wheelbase that makes it bigger than the Forte (sold in the Far East as the K3) and just a few inches shorter than the Optima (aka K5). The form is draped in familiar Kia-style bodywork, with a high trunk and low nose to give it a wedge shape and a familiar if somewhat new take on the headlights and grille seen on other new models from the Korean automaker.
Power comes from a 1.6-liter turbo four (smaller than the engines available in the Optima/K5) mated to a seven-speed DCT. Kia has also fitted the K4 concept with push-button ignition, UVO infotainment system, rear-view camera, six airbags and stability management. In short, everything you'd expect from the latest product of a global automaker.

What do J.D. Power's quality ratings really measure?

Check these recently released J.D. Power Initial Quality Study (IQS) results. Do they raise any questions in your mind? Premium sports-car maker Porsche sits in first place for the third straight year, so are Porsches really the best-built cars in the U.S. market? Korean brands Kia and Hyundai are second and fourth, so are Korean vehicles suddenly better than their US, European, and Japanese competitors? Are workaday Chevrolets (seventh place) better than premium Buicks (11th), and Buicks better than luxury Cadillacs (21st), even though all are assembled in General Motors plants with the same processes and many shared parts? Are Japanese Acuras (26th) worse than German Volkswagens (24th)? And is "quality" really what it used to be (and what most perceive it to be), a measure of build excellence? Or has it evolved into much more a measure of likeability and ease of use? To properly analyze these widely watched results, we must first understand what IQS actually studies, and what the numerical scores really mean. First, as its name indicates, it's all about "initial" quality, measured by problems reported by new-vehicle owners in their first 90 days of ownership. If something breaks or falls off four months in, it doesn't count here. Second, the scores are problems per 100 vehicles, or PP100. So Power's 2015 IQS industry average of 112 PP100 translates to just 1.12 reported problems per vehicle. Third, no attempt is made to differentiate BIG problems from minor ones. Thus a transmission or engine failure counts the same as a squeaky glove box door, tricky phone pairing, inconsistent voice recognition, or anything else that annoys the owner. Traditionally, a high-quality vehicle is one that is well-bolted together. It doesn't leak, squeak, rattle, shed parts, show gaps between panels, or break down and leave you stranded. By this standard, there are very few poor-quality new vehicles in today's U.S. market. But what "quality" should not mean, is subjective likeability: ease of operation of the radio, climate controls, or seat adjusters, phone pairing, music downloading, sizes of touch pads on an infotainment screen, quickness of system response, or accuracy of voice-recognition. These are ergonomic "human factors" issues, not "quality" problems. Yet these kinds of pleasability issues are now dominating today's JDP "quality" ratings.