2014 Kia Optima Hybrid Ex on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hyundai And Kia Penalized $350 Million For Overstated MPG Claims

Nearly two years after Hyundai and Kia announced they exaggerated fuel economy numbers for several of their most popular models, the two Korean automakers have paid a heavy penalty for the transgressions. The Department of Justice and Environmental Protection Agency announced a settlement Monday that will cost the two car companies approximately $350 million. The financial sum includes a $100 million fine, the largest ever levied under the Clean Air Act, and about $200 million in forfeited greenhouse-gas emissions credits. At a time when car buyers rank fuel economy as a top concern when they head to dealerships and the federal government has mandated increased efficiency, Attorney General Eric Holder said the settlement should serve as a warning to automakers not to fudge their numbers. "This will send a strong message that cheating is not profitable," he said. The settlement ends a federal lawsuit filed against the automakers in U.S. District Court, but it's important to note that it doesn't end a class-action lawsuit filed on behalf of consumers. A preliminary settlement in that case, based in Los Angeles, was approved last month, but final approval isn't expected until July 2015. Officials with the EPA said the $100 million figure roughly equals the economic benefits the two companies received from exaggerating the mileage claims on the window stickers of new cars. Fuel-efficient boasts helped Hyundai and Kia establish a strong foothold in the U.S. marketplace. Advertisements for the Hyundai Elantra stated the vehicle achieved 40 miles per gallon in highway driving, and helped the car win the prestigious North American Car Of The Year honors at the Detroit Auto Show for its 2012 model. In July 2011, the advocacy group Consumer Watchdog began receiving complaints from consumers that the Elantra and other Hyundai models fell short of their stated mileage claims in real-world driving. The group wrote to the EPA and Hyundai, asking both to investigate. Government officials said Kia had overstated the mileage on its popular Kia Soul crossover by 6 miles per gallon, and more than a dozen overall models were affected. On Monday, EPA administrator Gina McCarthy said the violations were "egregious." Based on the exaggerations, the EPA calculated that Hyundai and Kia had underreported the greenhouse gas emissions of their fleets by about 4.75 metric tons over the estimated lifetime of the vehicles. That figure aided in the $200 million credit forfeiture.

Kia previews upcoming Niro hybrid crossover

Kia is gearing up to launch a new hybrid crossover. Called the Niro, it's touted as the first of its kind in South Korea. And here we have our first glimpse of what it will look like. Previewed in this pair of teaser renderings, the Niro will be a dedicated hybrid crossover. The automaker says that the powertrain will be based on a 1.6-liter version of Hyundai's Kappa engine producing 105 horsepower and 108 pound-feet of torque. That seems a little low to us for an engine that size, considering that the same size engine in the Rio produces 138 hp and 123 lb-ft, but we'll see how the final specs work out. It's slated to be paired to a six-speed dual-clutch transmission, an electric motor good for another 47 hp, and a 1.56-kWh battery pack. The hybrid powertrain will be packed into a compact crossover with what looks to be a fairly sleek design. Up front, you'll see the brand's signature tiger-nose grille, angular headlights, sculpted flanks, a relatively high belt line, and an aggressive rear end. Of course, the wheels on the final version won't fill the wheel wells quite as much, and you can expect them to be wearing narrower tires with low rolling resistance, as befits a dedicated hybrid. The Niro name was previously applied to a more rounded crossover concept unveiled at the 2013 Frankfurt Motor Show. The production model with its hybrid powertrain will form part of Hyundai-Kia's endeavor to reduce its average fleet fuel consumption by 25 percent by 2020. It's slated to launch in some markets in the first half of next year. Related Video:

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.