2004 Kia Optima Ex Sedan 4-door 2.7l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Kia GT4 Stinger concept headed for Detroit with 315 rear-drive horsepower

With reveals expected to include the 2015 Ford F-150, the new Chevrolet Corvette Z06 and the high-strung Lexus RC F performance coupe (among many others), there are plenty of vehicles we're looking forward to seeing at the Detroit Auto Show. But now, with a rendered teaser image and short press release that includes some savory details, Kia may have just hit the top of our list with its GT4 Stinger Concept. Not even looking at the above image (which you can click to enlarge), Kia managed to grab our interest with just one sentence in said release detailing the car's powertrain: "A turbocharged 2.0-liter that pumps 315 horsepower to the rear wheels."
This low, wide concept has the face of a Kia-fied Audi R8, but the previous teaser stated that the concept will be a 2+2 hatchback. There is little other information to go on, but we'll see the concept car live in just 10 days. Until then, scroll down for the brief press release.

2015 Kia Sorento shows its new face in fashion-forward Paris

It seems like we've been catching glimpses of the 2015 Sorento for ages now, but Kia has finally revealed the European version of its revised crossover at the 2014 Paris Motor Show.
For the latest Sorento, Kia a few of the elements from the Cross GT concept and adapts them for the road. The production model has the brand's familiar mesh grille up front and headlights that wrap around the body with large foglights below. It features a modified version of the concept's swept-back stance that thankfully removes the awkwardness from the original design. Kia says that shaping the latest crossover was truly a global effort with input coming from Korea, Germany and the US.
For Europe, powertrains amount to a trio of four-cylinder engines with a 2.4-liter gasoline unit with 185 horsepower, a 2.0-liter diesel with 182 hp and 2.2-liter diesel with 197 hp. They're all available with a six-speed automatic, and a six-speed manual is offered on the petrol mill and 2.2-liter oil-burner.

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.