2004 Kia Sedona Ex Mini Passenger Van 5-door 3.5l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2020 Kia Stinger GT-Line becomes only 2.0-liter model on offer

The 2019 Kia Stinger comes in five flavors: 2.0L and Premium with the 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine, and GT, GTS, GT1, and GT2 with the 3.3-liter twin-turbo V6. Beyond the engine, the two lowest trims differ from the GT versions with different grilles, bumpers, wheels, and exterior trim. Having seen an early order guide, CarsDirect says Kia will replace the two base models with a single model that's been restyled with GT cues, while raising the price just $100. The new model is called the Stinger GT-Line, a trim that's been available in other markets for a while on everything from the tiny Picanto to the Sorrento crossover; the pictured car is a UK Stinger GT-Line. The model bolts on the grille and bumpers from the GT, black chrome trim and body-colored door handles, plus 18-inch GT-styled wheels. The cabin gets dressed up with a black headliner no matter the interior color, a leather-wrapped steering wheel, and headrests embossed with "GT-Line." The price will be $33,090 plus $995 destination, totaling $34,085, a figure that comes in an even $100 above the 2019 Stinger 2.0L. $34,085The loss of the Premium trim leaves a $6,410 gap between the GT-Line and the base GT trim. The Premium was the way to get a long list of luxury and convenience features paired with the four-cylinder, but it was only $110 less dear than the entry GT with the bigger engine but without the feature set. The price of that GT goes up, meanwhile, CarsDirect saying the 2020 GT will start at $40,495 after destination, a $200 increase over the 2019 model. Furthermore, with the Premium gone, the only way to option automatic emergency braking will be to spend more than $46,000 on the GT1 grade.  Engines don't change for next year, the 2.0-liter producing 255 horsepower and 260 pound-feet of torque, the 3.3-liter putting out 365 hp and 376 lb-ft, both shifting through an eight-speed automatic.

Here are some of the worst things we saw at CES

The word innovation implies something new and exciting. That's just as true for automobiles as it is for smartphones and computers. After all, who doesn't want to live in a world where the brightest minds are constantly pushing the boundaries of what's possible, seeking to make our lives better through science? To boldly go where no man has gone before? While it's true that innovation is mostly a good thing, history has proven that mankind's brightest ideas can sometimes turn into dim bulbs practically overnight. Ever heard of the Foot-o-scope? That device allowed people to get the best possible fit for a new pair of shoes, which is great. But the machines emitted horrendous amounts of radiation in the process of offering x-ray views of the feet of its victims, which is not great. While we're not going to suggest that anything we've seen at the 2016 Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas is as bad as a shoe-fitting fluoroscope, walking the seemingly endless halls at CES has taught us that an interesting lesson is just as true today as it was 100 years ago: Not all innovations are really all that... well, innovative. In fact, some of them are downright terrible. Check out the video above for a rundown of four terrible innovations from the 2016 CES Show. Feel free to share your thoughts about what we've chosen, or submit your own nominees for terrible tech, in the Comments. Weird Car News CES Kia Technology Videos Original Video CES 2016

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.