2015 Kia Lx on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hyundai-Kia forecasts slowest sales growth in 8 years

Even with the arrival of the new Hyundai Genesis Sedan (above) and the expected introduction of at least two other new vehicles in 2014, Hyundai-Kia is estimating its sales will only increase by about 4.1 percent this year. Bloomberg has found that figure, which works out to a total of 7.86 million vehicles worldwide, to be lower than average analyst estimates of eight million vehicles. If the automaker is correct, that figure will represent the most sluggish growth for the Korean brands since 2006.
Based on an exchange rate of 1,050 won to the dollar - right now it's trading at anywhere from 1,050 to 1,052 depending on where you look - Hyundai is predicting a 3.8-percent uptick for sales of 4.9 million units, while Kia is expecting a 4.7-percent uptick for sales of 2.96 million units. That exchange rate is predicted to be part of what will hamper sales this year, with a stronger South Korean won making Japanese cars more price-competitive when cross-shopped. It's unclear how Hyundai derived its exchange rate, but 1,050 won to the dollar almost matches the 52-week high for all of 2013.
The company chairman mentioned a "low growth era" in the world economy, and weaker US sales are rumored to at least part of the reason John Krafcik recently vacated the post of Hyundai Motor America CEO, a post that has been filled by executive vice president of sales, David Zuchowski. That unexpected news capped a year in which two top execs resigned over quality issues and recalls and Hyundai agreed to settle a consolidated lawsuit over inflated fuel economy ratings for $395 million.

Hyundai, Kia want to improve fuel economy by 25 percent

Hyundai and sister company Kia are giving themselves a little bit of time to make up a lot of ground in the fight for better fuel economy. We wonder if a recent multi-million fine might have something to do with this public target. The connected South Korean companies are vowing to increase their fleetwide fuel economy by 25 percent by 2020, Reuters reports. This will be done by further advancing their powertrains, looking at other ways to reduce weight, upgrading diesel engines and improving transmissions. That will all take money, but Kia and Hyundai will have $300 million less to invest thanks to a recent fine of more than $300 million from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Justice and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) for incorrect fuel economy numbers on around 1.2 million vehicles from the 2011-2013 model years. The civil penalties – $100 million of the total – are the largest in EPA history. In late 2012, Hyundai and Kia admitted to overstating the fuel economy of a number of models and said they'd change the official MPG figures and compensate owners. Hyundai spokesman Chris Hosford confirmed to AutoblogGreen that the company set the dramatic fuel-economy improvement targets. In the US, where Hyundai and Kia are operated as separate entities, Hyundai "remains committed to meeting the CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) requirements that have been set out by the US government," Hosford said The EPA recently released a report on fuel-economy and put Hyundai fourth in overall fleetwide fuel economy in the US among vehicle makers for the 2014 model year. The top three were Mazda, Honda and Subaru.

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.