on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2014 Cadenza is Kia's take on the Hyundai Azera

No, this is not the oh-so pleasantly named Quoris rear-wheel-drive flagship sedan - this is Kia's new front-drive entry into the North American market, the Cadenza. (If that sounds familiar, it's because Kia has long used the Cadenza name in other markets.) And while it's a sharp-looking thing, it's not exactly an original masterpiece. Peel away that slick exterior and you'll find a trusty Hyundai Azera doing the grunt work.
That's no bad thing, though; the Azera's a smooth-sailing sedan. Under the hood is a 3.3-liter direct-injection V6 putting out 293 horsepower and 255 pound-feet of torque, mated to a six-speed automatic transmission with, oh yes, Sportmatic manual mode. That power hits the ground via a sport-tuned suspension with MacPherson struts up front and a multi-link rear configuration, matched with either 18- or 19-inch alloy wheels.
Inside, there's a whole host of nice leather surrounded by wood and chrome accents, with a driver-focused cockpit (sort of like the Optima) with a seven-inch TFT color touchscreen display. Premium options include things like Nappa leather seats, a panoramic sunroof, Kia's UVO infotainment system, HID headlamps with active lighting, heated seats and a heated steering wheel. Sounds comfy.

EPA says it will more closely monitor fuel economy claims from automakers

The unintended acceleration brouhaha at Toyota led to the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration tightening the vise on recall procedures. Likewise, the fuel economy kerfuffle that blew up with Hyundai and Kia's admission of overstated fuel mileage claims could lead to the Environmental Protection Agency policing automaker assertions by performing more audits.
At least, that's what a senior engineer with the government agency said while in Michigan giving a talk, according to a report in Automotive News. What that actually means, however, is still in question. Just ten to 15 percent of new vehicles - something like 150 to 200 cars per year - are rested by the EPA to verify automaker numbers. The EPA's own tests include a "fudge factor" to adjust lab mileage for real-world mileage, and the agency still relies on automakers to submit data for tests that it doesn't have the facilities to perform. How much more auditing can the EPA really expect to do, or perhaps a more relevant question would be how much more accurate could the EPA's audits become?
The price of gasoline, the psychological importance of 40 miles per gallon to a frugal car buyer, an automaker wanting to further justify the price premium of a hybrid, all of these things contribute to fuel economy numbers that insist on creeping upward. Perhaps the senior engineer encapsulated the whole situation best when he said, "Everybody wants a label that tells you exactly what you're going to get, but obviously that's not possible. A good general rule of thumb is that real-world fuel economy is about 20 percent lower than the lab numbers." If the lesson isn't exactly 'buyer beware,' it's at least 'buyer be wary.'

Insider trading ahead of Hyundai-Kia MPG debacle suspected

Reuters is reporting that large-scale insider trading may be at the heart of some particularly fishy stock-selling behavior, just prior to the original announcement about the Hyundai-Kia fuel economy ratings debacle.
On November 1st, Hyundai-Kia shares traded roughly 2.2 million times (the single highest-volume day of the year), and the stock price fell by about four percent. For reference, a standard daily trading volume for the stock in 2012 saw about 600k shares trading hands. On November 2nd, the company made public the bad news about the dropping fuel economy ratings for many of its models. In other words: No one outside of the company (and only a smallish group inside the company, we'd imagine) should have known anything about the impending bad news as of the first day of November. After the announcement, the stock price tanked, as you'd expect, and trading volume was way down as well.
Experts seem fully aware that the whole thing reeks of leaked information and subsequent insider trading. If chicanery on this sort of scale seems wacky to you, you'd be inline with the experts who report to Reuters that the level of trading is absolutely suspicious.