2015 Kia Sorento Lx on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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:

7 major automakers to build open EV charging network

A new joint venture established by BMW, GM, Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Mercedes-Benz and Stellantis will build a new North American electric vehicle charging network on a scale designed to compete with Tesla's industry-benchmark Supercharger network. The 30,000-plus planned new chargers will accommodate both Tesla's almost-standard North American Charging System (NACS) and existing automakers' Combined Charging System (CCS) options, effectively guaranteeing compatibility with the vast majority of current and upcoming electric models — whether they're from one of the involved automakers or not.  "With the generational investments in public charging being implemented on the Federal and State level, the joint venture will leverage public and private funds to accelerate the installation of high-powered charging for customers. The new charging stations will be accessible to all battery-powered electric vehicles from any automaker using Combined Charging System (CCS) or North American Charging Standard (NACS) and are expected to meet or exceed the spirit and requirements of the U.S. National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) program." Critically, the automakers involved will have a say in how the charging tech is implemented, guaranteeing that the hardware will play nicely with each automaker's in-house charging systems. Hyundai and Kia, for example, were hesitant to jump on board the Tesla NACS bandwagon earlier this year over concerns that the Supercharger network is insufficient for powering the two automakers' 800-volt charging systems; similar tech is used by Volkswagen and Porsche.  In addition to providing much-needed capacity and high-output charging for America's growing fleet of electric cars and trucks, the new network will integrate seamlessly with each automaker's in-app and in-vehicle features, rather than forcing customers to use third-party tools and payment systems, as is the case with some existing public charging infrastructure.  "The functions and services of the network will allow for seamless integration with participating automakersÂ’ in-vehicle and in-app experiences, including reservations, intelligent route planning and navigation, payment applications, transparent energy management and more. In addition, the network will leverage Plug & Charge technology to further enhance the customer experience," the announcement said.

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.