2003 Strong Running Kia Sorento Lx Extra Clean No Reserve Take Me A Home on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hyundai confirms a shift to EVs, unveils fuel cell SUV

SEOUL — Hyundai confirmed on Thursday it was placing electric vehicles at the center of its product strategy — one that includes plans for a premium long-distance electric car as it seeks to catch up to Tesla and other rivals. Like Toyota, Hyundai had initially championed fuel cell technology as the future of eco-friendly vehicles but has found itself shifting to electric as Tesla shot to prominence and battery-powered cars have gained government backing in China. Hyundai's debut of its more modestly priced Ionic hybrid and electric has been well-received. But the pure electric's per-charge driving range is much shorter than the Tesla Model 3 or Chevrolet Bolt. Toyota is now also working on longer-distance, fast-charging electric vehicles. Hyundai first started signaling this strategic shift back in May when it first discussed plans to launch an electric sedan under its high-end Genesis brand in 2021 with a range of 500 km (310 miles) per charge. It will also introduce an electric version of its Kona small crossover with a range of 390 km in the first half of next year. "We're strengthening our eco-friendly car strategy, centering on electric vehicles," Executive Vice President Lee Kwang-guk told a news conference, calling the technology mainstream and realistic. The automaker and affiliate Kia, which together rank fifth in global vehicle sales, also said they were adding three plug-in vehicles to their plans for eco-friendly cars, bringing the total to 31 models by 2020. Underscoring Hyundai's electric shift, those plans include eight battery-powered and two fuel-cell vehicles — a contrast to its 2014 announcement for 22 models, of which only two were slated to be battery-powered. Hyundai also confirmed a Reuters report that it is developing its first scaleable, dedicated electric vehicle platform, which will allow the company to produce multiple models with longer driving ranges. HYDROGEN SUV Hyundai unveiled a near production version of its new fuel cell SUV with a driving range of more than 580 km per charge, compared with the 415 km for its current Tucson fuel cell SUV. The mid-sized SUV will be launched in Korea early next year, followed by U.S. and European markets. A fuel cell electric bus is slated to be unveiled late this year, while a sedan-type fuel cell car is also planned. Even so, analysts noted that gaining traction with fuel cells was going to be a long hard slog partly due to a lack of charging infrastructure.

2018 Kia Stinger GT AWD Review: A 1,400-mile grand tour in Kia's grand tourer

They call the 2018 Kia Stinger a GT. It's powerful and sleek with a low-slung seating position, quick steering and, even with all-wheel drive, a tail-happy nature. It looks killer in red. And with its V6-powered engine, the letters GT are even festooned upon its liftgate. Well, that's nice, but how does it actually deliver on the grand-tourer formula of rapid, comfortable and stylish transportation? Well, to find out, I put the Stinger GT to a grand-touring test. Starting in the western Rockies and the remote ski town of Crested Butte, Colo., my destination would be home in Portland, Ore. The Google-suggested way is 18 hours on mostly Interstates 70, 15 and 84. However, interstates are boring and are better suited to a perfectly capable but utterly soulless family transportation appliance. A proper grand tour should include two-lane highways and scenic detours, so that's exactly what I'd do. It would add hours and miles, but also, most hopefully, a vastly more memorable experience. Well, as my photos will attest, the scenery didn't disappoint. And, as you'll see in the videos, neither did the Stinger. Episode 1: Setting Off Episode 2: It's a hatchback! Crested Butte, Colo., to Moab, Utah Crested Butte is way off the beaten path, a charming mountain village deep in the western Colorado Rockies mostly free from the usual uber-commercial, Disney-like feel of ritzier, easier-accessed ski towns. Its main street thoroughfare, authentically Western rather than engineered to be so, is surrounded by scattered subdivisions and majestic mountains beyond. It had been buried in 9 feet of snow just a few weeks prior. The local citizenry didn't seem particularly bothered by that. Though most of that 9 feet had melted, the ground was still very much white, requiring the Stinger GT to shed its usual summer rubber in favor of Michelin Pilot Alpin PA4 winter tires. These are specifically intended for performance car applications like the Stinger, sacrificing just a smidge of icy traction in favor of superior handling and steering feel when on dry pavement. There's no need to delay the verdict here: after 1,400 miles, the Stinger felt just as generally compelling and dynamic on the Alpins as when I drove it last November in Southern California on summer tires. The other half of the Stinger's snow defense is the GT's optional all-wheel-drive system, which adds $2,000 to its price tag (as-tested $52,300).

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.