2019 Kia Optima S on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Why Kia doesn't need a premium brand

Hyundai's creation of the Genesis luxury brand means it and fellow Korean brand Kia have finally hit the mainstream in the U.S. – as far as products are concerned – after nearly three decades of trying. Which is about as long as it took Toyota and Nissan to roll out Lexus and Infiniti, respectively. It's history repeating itself. Genesis is supposed to be the way Hyundai's premium models get the respect they deserve, without carrying the baggage of a name associated with frugality. Hyundai has, in fact, built up a reputation over the last decade or so for cars that compete head-on with class leaders, rather than aim to be 90 percent as good for 75 percent of the price. And because Kia shares a number of components with Hyundai, its vehicles have also steadily become not only better mainstream vehicles, but have continued to aim higher than their price points. Does Kia need to follow now in its parent's steps with a prestige brand to market its most expensive models? I'm aware of the Kia K900, the company's deepest foray into luxury territory notably occupied by Lexus. Kia, however, has consistently been pushing this $60,000 full-size luxury sedan along with $0 down, low monthly payment lease deals. Turns out there really aren't many people looking for a full-size Kia luxury sedan. Or maybe they're just waiting to get it for $20,000 in a couple of years. Consider the K900 and Genesis when I convince you Kia already makes upscale cars to rival those with premium badges. They just don't happen to be its most expensive model. Shortly after Hyundai's announcement it would spin its luxury models off into the Genesis brand, I spent a few days with a 2016 Kia Sorento SXL. And I'm willing to call it a more convincing attempt to get people out of luxury cars than the K900. Driving the Sorento is not an emotional experience. You feel parental driving it, thinking you might've forgotten to pick your kids up until you remember you don't actually have kids. But after settling into the nicely stitched and perforated leather seats, you respect its comfort, quiet and amenities. The headliner is soft, the stitching on the dash top is convincingly real and everyone is impressed by the sharp graphics on the touchscreen and the slick powered shade that reveals an expansive glass roof. A Kia Sorento costing more than $46,000 sounds absurd until you wonder how much better an Acura MDX or Lexus RX350 is when those cost as much as $10,000 more.

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.

2014 Kia Optima Hybrid shows its freshened face

Think back to the 2013 New York Auto Show, and you'll recall that the already attractive Kia Optima midsize sedan was re-schnozzed for the 2014 model year. The hybrid version was left alone, visually, though its powertrain was updated to provide more oomph and slightly better fuel economy. And now, the whole thing comes full circle - the fresh-faced 2014 Optima Hybrid is making its debut here at the Chicago Auto Show.
The new look is really the only news here, with a reworked front fascia that combines restyled Hybrid-specific LED lighting elements and new enhancements that Kia says improves aerodynamics. A similar touch-up has been given to the rear end, and new 16- and 17-inch wheel designs are also available.
Under the hood, the Optima Hybrid's powertrain is unchanged, the four-cylinder gasoline-electric system still putting out a combined 199 horsepower and 235 pound-feet of torque. Fuel economy is also unchanged for 2014, with the LX model estimated to achieve 36/40/38 miles per gallon (city/highway/combined), and the higher-grade EX estimated to net 35/39/37 mpg.