2003 Kia Rio Needs Work On Brakes Replaced Lines Still Leaking Brake Fluid on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hyundai predicts 250-mile electric vehicle by 2020

Hyundai will start selling a battery-electric version of its Ioniq in the US later this year, but the company is ready for much more. Hyundai is forecasting having an EV with a 250-mile single-charge range by the end of the decade. Hyundai executive Ahn Byung-ki told Automotive News that, while electric-vehicle technology development has been steady during the past six years, it will accelerate during the next two. Think of it as the "hockey stick" effect, but for South Korean automakers instead of Silicon Valley tech giants or Canadian hockey players. The Ioniq, which will also get plug-in and hybrid variants, will have a single-charge range of 110 miles when the EV version arrives in November. After that, Hyundai and its Kia and Genesis sister companies may develop a 200-mile range EV for 2018, and then that 250-mile-range car for 2020. Byung-ki isn't concerned that the Ioniq will quickly be outdated because the longer-range vehicles will also be priced higher. The Hyundai executive also said the company had no plans to take on Tesla Motors in the luxury EV market. The Ioniq EV was unveiled at the New York Auto Show this past March. A hybrid version of that sedan debuted in South Korea in January, while the EV went on sale in South Korea last month. Overall, Hyundai, Kia, and Genesis are planning to introduce 10 hybrids, eight EVs, eight plug-in hybrids, and two hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles by the end of the decade. The Hyundai group's only electric vehicle currently sold in the US is the Kia Soul EV, which has a single-charge range of 93 miles as well as some dancing hamsters in its commercials. Neither the Tesla Model 3 nor the Chevrolet Bolt can make that second claim. 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.

Kia GT spied looking like a rakish, sexy Forte

Just over four months ago, we told you that Kia would offer a production version of its handsome GT concept. Now, we have images of the svelte new four-door testing in Germany. It looks like we're getting a sexy, rear-drive performance sedan the size of a Kia Forte. And we're pretty stoked. Judging by our spy images, Kia is going to stick pretty close to the concept car's rakish lines. That means more four-door coupe than three-box sedan, which is precisely the kind of thing Kia could use. Beyond the overall shape, the headlights retain the same interesting shape as the concept, albeit in a more production-focused look. They crown a production-spec fascia, with more conventional vertical intakes. In back, the vehicle-spanning taillight element from the concept car appears to have been replaced by a conventional set of lamps – there's camo where the lighting element should be. Speaking of the tail, look at those tailpipes. Few things shout "Rawr, I'm a performance car," like a meaty set of quad exhausts. It's hard to tell here, but the rear fascia looks much more conventional than the GT concept, too, which went with a very aero-intensive design. Under the skin, our spies tell us the GT rides on a shortened version of the rear-drive platform slated to underpin the upcoming Genesis G70 – that backs up the reports that the GT would challenge the BMW 4 Series Gran Coupe. Our most recent report pointed to a range of four and six-cylinder engines from 2.0- to 3.3-liters. Our spies suggest that twin-turbocharged V6 will put out anywhere from 365 to 400 ponies. Obviously, this would be a range-topping model, but what a range-topper it would be. It's like a budget M4. Our best intelligence points to the GT's production debut at the 2016 Paris Motor Show, with an on-sale date in just under a year.