2001kia Optima Lx Automatic Green No Reserve on 2040-cars

Auto blog

In lifetime analysis, Kia Soul EV is way, way cleaner than diesel model

The heart of the matter is that the battery-electric Kia Soul is better for the environment. And not just because it doesn't create any emissions while on the road. From beginning to end, the Soul EV has a far lower environmental impact than its more conventional counterparts. TUV Nord, the German technical inspection group, says the Soul EV has a carbon footprint that is 40-percent smaller than the one from the diesel-powered Soul sold in Europe. That's factoring in everything from the materials that go into building the car to the recyclability once it's defunct to, of course, tailpipe emissions. Or lack thereof. Kia plans to start sales of the Soul EV in its native South Korea sometime this year and is keeping global sales expectations modest, saying it plans to make about 5,000 Soul EVs annually. The car will be priced at the equivalent of about $39,000 US in South Korea, though government subsidies will cut that down a bit. Kia hasn't set an official launch date for the car in the US, but expects for the Soul EV to be available to Americans by the end of the year, Kia US spokesman James Hope told AutoblogGreen. Check out the press release about the Kia Soul EV's TUV Nord score below and read our First Drive impressions of the model here. Kia Soul EV earns whole-life environmental certificate - Soul EV achieves major TUV Nord Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) certificate - ISO 14040 certification considers whole-life environmental impact of Soul EV (SEOUL) June 18, 2014 – The Kia Soul EV has become the latest model from the Korean brand to earn important certification for its outstanding whole-life environmental credentials. TUV Nord, an independent technical inspection organisation, has certified the new Kia Soul EV according to the ISO 14040 Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) standard. LCA examines the environmental impact of both the car and the overall manufacturing process throughout its whole life, taking into account factors such as choice of materials, tailpipe emissions and recycling. Comparing the Soul EV to its diesel counterpart currently on sale in Europe, the zero-emissions electric vehicle scored particularly strongly for 'Global Warming Potential', emitting 39.7% fewer greenhouse gases over the whole life of the vehicle, such as carbon dioxide and methane.

2014 Kia Cadenza

Teenage passengers are often among the first people I turn to for second opinions about a test vehicle. While they understandably aren't allowed behind the wheel - most aren't even old enough to drive - their honest and generally unbiased observations, coupled with a complete lack of understanding about what a particular vehicle costs, can provide a wealth of insight.
An open-minded approach is especially important when taking a closer look at the 2014 Kia Cadenza, a premium sedan from an automaker best known for providing affordable transportation for entry-level buyers. But unlike the Rio and Forte, low-priced compacts designed to cater to consumers looking for fuel economy and value, this more substantial four-door sedan asks for twice the out-of-pocket investment in exchange for promises of luxury and technology.
With an impartial mindset and a genuine curiosity, I recently spent a week with the more substantial Cadenza to see if it could live up to its aspirations.

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.