2008 Kia Rondo Lx Wagon 4-door 2.7l V6 All Routine Maintenance Performed On Time on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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 In back, the vehicle-spanning taillight element from the concept car appears to have been replaced by a conventional set of lamps – there's camo where the lighting element should be.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.

NACTOY winners, and driving the Genesis GV60, Polestar 2, Mercedes-AMG GLS 63 | Autoblog Podcast #813

In this episode of the Autoblog Podcast, Editor-in-Chief Greg Migliore is joined by Senior Editor, Electric, John Beltz Snyder. This week, we discuss the North American Car, Truck and Utility of the year winners: The Toyota Prius, Kia EV6 and Ford Super Duty (and Greg explains his votes). In other news, we talk about GM offering $7,500 incentives for EVs that lost their tax credits, another possible calendar change for the Detroit Auto Show and Stellantis potentially scaling back its auto show presence. Greg spent his winter break with the Genesis GV60 and Polestar 2, while John has been driving the Toyota Prius Prime and Mercedes-AMG GLS 63. Finally, they take to Reddit for this week's Spend My Money question, and pick a sedan under $6,000. Send us your questions for the Mailbag and Spend My Money at: Podcast@Autoblog.com. Autoblog Podcast #813 Get The Podcast Apple Podcasts – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes Spotify – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast on Spotify RSS – Add the Autoblog Podcast feed to your RSS aggregator MP3 – Download the MP3 directly Rundown Toyota Prius, Ford Super Duty, Kia EV9 are 2024 North American Car, Truck, Utility of the Year winners GM offers $7,500 incentive for EVs losing tax credit Detroit Auto Show going back to January? Stellantis done with auto shows, or is it? Cars We're Driving: 2024 Genesis GV60 Performance AWD 2024 Polestar 2 RWD 2023 Toyota Prius Prime XSE Premium 2024 Mercedes-AMG GLS 63 Spend My Money Feedback Email – Podcast@Autoblog.com Review the show on Apple Podcasts Autoblog is now live on your smart speakers and voice assistants with the audio Autoblog Daily Digest. Say “Hey Google, play the news from Autoblog” or "Alexa, open Autoblog" to get your favorite car website in audio form every day. A narrator will take you through the biggest stories or break down one of our comprehensive test drives. Related video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings. Green Podcasts Ford Genesis GM Kia Mercedes-Benz Toyota Truck Crossover SUV Electric Hybrid Luxury Performance Sedan Polestar

U.S. appeals court preserves $210M Hyundai-Kia fuel economy class settlement

A U.S. appeals court restored a $210 million nationwide class-action settlement for hundreds of thousands of owners of Hyundai Motor Co and Kia Motors Corp vehicles whose fuel economy estimates were inflated. By an 8-3 vote on Thursday, in a case closely watched by class-action lawyers, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Pasadena, California, said vehicle owners had enough in common to let them settle as a group. It also rejected arguments by owners opposed to the settlement that the claims process was too burdensome, and that lawyers for the class had colluded with the automakers to extract a "sweetheart deal" that undervalued their claims. The case began after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency found flaws in Hyundai's and Kia's testing procedures, prompting the automakers to lower fuel efficiency estimates for about 900,000 vehicles from the 2011, 2012 and 2013 model years. Lawyers for objecting drivers had no immediate comment. Hyundai said it was grateful for the decision. Kia and its lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The decision by Circuit Judge Jacqueline Nguyen upheld a settlement approved in June 2015 by U.S. District Judge George Wu in Los Angeles. Wu "made careful findings, which the objectors here largely do not challenge, and which more than support the judgment," Nguyen wrote. The decision reversed a divided three-judge 9th Circuit panel's January 2018 rejection of the settlement and decertification of the class action. That panel said Wu failed to assess whether differences in state laws prevented certification of a nationwide class. It also said used car owners should have been excluded because it was unclear whether they had relied on the South Korean automakers' fuel economy claims. Lawyers had said it would become much harder to obtain nationwide settlements if the panel ruling stood. Nguyen had dissented from the panel ruling. Circuit Judge Sandra Ikuta, who wrote it, dissented on Thursday. Ikuta accused the majority of failing to determine what law should apply to the nationwide class or how the settlement, and thus attorneys' fees, should be valued. "The majority's failure to correct these errors may be beneficial for the class action bar, but it detracts from compliance with Supreme Court precedent," Ikuta wrote. The 9th Circuit covers nine western U.S. states, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands.