2008 Kia Sorento Ex on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2015 Kia Soul EV whirrs in to the Windy City

Earlier this week, we got our first glimpse of the 2015 Kia Soul EV out on the road, completely uncovered. And even before then, executive editor Chris Paukert had the opportunity to drive a camouflaged electric Soul prototype on Kia's home turf in Korea. But now, finally, officially, the electron-happy Soul makes its debut at the Chicago Auto Show.
Powering the Soul EV is an 81-kilowatt electric motor that sends 109 horsepower and 210 pound-feet of torque to the front wheels. That's not immensely powerful, with Kia quoting a 0-60 time of "fewer than 12 seconds," but we're big fans of the instant torque thrust that EVs like the Soul provide. Top speed is electronically limited to approximately 90 miles per hour.
Kia says the Soul EV is good for roughly 80 to 100 miles of driving range.

2014 Kia Forte

Forte 2.0 Keeps Kia Competitive In The Compact Crop
Looking back just a few years, America's compact segment was filled with bland, uninteresting cars that traded largely on low prices and high fuel economy. In today's landscape, though, things couldn't be more different - this class now boasts some of the most attractive cars on the market, not to mention features and technologies once reserved for luxury cars.
Filling Kia's role in this important market, the 2014 Forte has helped make the South Korean automaker a contender among compact cars with the sedan launching earlier in the year and the Koup and Forte5 hatchback hitting dealers soon. When the Forte first launched in 2010, it was a much-needed replacement for the Spectra, but it still had lingering drivetrain refinement issues. In the end, the model didn't really move the needle for Kia, let alone the segment. Now the second-generation Forte sedan has arrived in an effort to bolster the company's lineup, a portfolio that includes impressive models like the Optima, Sorento, Soul and even the subcompact Rio.

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.