2021 Kia K5 Lxs on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Subaru ice driving and Mercedes-AMG G 63 | Autoblog Podcast #571

In this week's Autoblog Podcast, Editor-in-Chief Greg Migliore is joined by Green Editor John Beltz Snyder. They kick things off by talking about the cars they've been driving: the 2019 Mercedes-AMG G63 and Autoblog's long-term Kia Stinger. Then they discuss hooning the Subaru BRZ, WRX and WRX STI on ice at the Subaru Winter Experience. Then they talk news, specifically Amazon investing $700 million in EV startup Rivian, and Maserati finally launching the Alfieri. Finally they help spend a listener's money on a new, green car. Autoblog Podcast #571 Get The Podcast iTunes – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes RSS – Add the Autoblog Podcast feed to your RSS aggregator MP3 – Download the MP3 directly Rundown Driving the 2019 Mercedes-AMG G63 Long-term Kia Stinger update Subaru Winter Experience Amazon invests in Rivian Maserati Alfieri on its way Spend My Money Feedback Email – Podcast@Autoblog.com Review the show on iTunes Related Video:

Kia's promised "four-door coupe" Cub concept... isn't

Kia appears to have pulled a quick one on the world with its Cub Concept. As it turns out, the machine isn't the four-door coupe they promised at all. Instead, the little showcar is a five-door hatch with suicide rear doors. That's certainly fine by our reckoning, but it isn't quite what we were expecting to see on display at the Seoul Motor Show. The concept was penned at the company's design studio in Seoul with direction from Peter Schreyer, and it gets its thrust from a 204-horsepower, 1.6-liter direct-injection four-cylinder engine. With 195 pound-feet of torque on hand, we suspect the Cub would have little trouble hustling down the road.
Indoors, the Cub serves up black leather seats with yellow accents as well as a new Driving Information System that uses a gesture camera to control various operations. Right now, there are apparently no plans to put the Cub into production anywhere in the world, but we wouldn't be surprised to see some of the hatchback's elements make their way to the show room floor.

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.