2010 Kia Forte Ex Sedan 4-door 2.0l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2019 Kia Niro EV boasts 280-mile range

Kia first hinted at an upcoming fully electric Niro compact crossover with a concept at CES, and just a few months later, it's showing the production model. Unsurprisingly, it looks pretty much exactly like the normal hybrid models on sale now, eschewing some of the show car bits such as the grille with a message screen. It does have differences, though, such as the blocked-off, body color grille, which also houses the charging ports. It also has extra faux grilles on each end of the front bumper that have LED fog lights. They're mirrored by additional faux grilles on the rear bumper. Another difference from the show model is the estimated range. Using the WLTP estimate, Kia says the Niro EV with the 64 kWh battery will go about 280 miles on a charge. The concept shown at CES with the same size battery was estimated to have a range of 238 miles. We suspect that the latter number may be closer to the range on the U.S. test cycle. This is because the Hyundai Kona Electric with the 64 kWh battery the U.S. will get was rated for 292 miles on WLTP, but only 250 on the U.S. cycle. Also like the Kona Electric, the Niro EV will be offered with two battery choices. In addition to the aforementioned 64 kWh battery, a 39.2 kWh battery will be available providing about 236 miles of range on the WLTP cycle. If the Niro EV follows in the footsteps of its Hyundai cousin, we predict the U.S. will only get the model with the higher-capacity battery. There are still some details that have yet to be revealed, such as power, torque, and what the interior looks like. It will probably make the same 201 horsepower as the CES show car, and we wouldn't be surprised if it's the same electric motor as in the Kona Electric, since the power is the same and the battery size is the same. As such, it will probably produce 291 pound-feet of torque. Also, considering how much the exterior looks like the standard Niro, the interior will likely look basically identical, but perhaps different colors and perhaps a few extra premium features, again, a la Kona Electric. We should have all the details at the car's official debut in Paris. Related Video:

Kia teases K5/Optima again, in two different ways

When Kia teased a drawing of the third-generation K5 sedan for the Korean market — our Kia Optima — the pictured red sedan adopted a fastback shape and detailing somewhere in between evolution and revolution. The South Korean automaker has teased the K5 a second time with two different takes on the next-gen four-door, one of them tipped all the way to the side of revolution, the other presenting a refined evolution. The revolutionary takes (second and third in the gallery above) look as if the spirit of SEMA bled across the Pacific to Seoul. In these two drawings, the K5 has been lowered, widened, given a jutting front fascia rife with intakes, set on giant wheels with rubber-band tires, and slathered in color-shifting violet and lavender paint. The leanness makes the family sedan look more like a coupe, especially from the hippy and winged rear three-quarter.  The evolutionary take (the silver car that's first in the gallery), found on Kia's Korean site, looks more like the car everyone has a chance of getting. The drawing provides a handsome basis for the exaggerations in the other renderings; everything's here from the SEMA-fied version, only toned down. We gather that, on the outside, designers intend to make their statement with the sheetmetal behind the B-pillar. The lines create a fastback profile, stressed by the chrome cradle running from one A-pillar, around the backlight to the other A-pillar. If the shutlines are accurate, the decklid will be split by a dark portion that acts to extend the rear window graphic and a body-colored panel. Racy vents aft of the rear wheels tie into wide chrome exhaust finishers and a prominent, slatted diffuser.  Kia's thrown a lot of copy at what it's going for with the next K5/Optima, talking about the "evolution of dynamics" and noting how this car will turn the "Tiger Grille" into the "Tiger Face." Part of that involves merging elements of the grille and headlights into a more organic piece. The K5 looks like it will adopt a restrained version of the new headlight-grille combination recently shown on the redesigned Hyundai Grandeur (our Azera, no longer on sale here). We'll be seeing more of it in the future.

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.