Topic: Test Drive: 2013 Kia Sportage SX

[SaskSpecV]

$30 buys a loaded Accord (4 cyl) – ten grand less than the CUVs. Plus it's a car so it will go around a corner.

Not really an accurate comparison - for the equivalent Sportage (2.4L, fully loaded) you're looking at about 34K.  So it's only about a $4g difference, and the Sportage has AWD and extra bells/whistles.  And probably incentives on the hood, too.  That being said I'd take the Accord too - but in 6MT trim with cloth seats...

I don't think the Sportage is seriously overpriced, but there's at least 4 or 5 CUVs I'd put my own money on before this one (Forester, CR-V, Escape, RAV4).  it's certainly hard for it to claim the "value" crown like Kias of yore.

[Jaeger]

What a great little vehicle. The only one in this class Id ever actually consider buying. So for only $2k you can get the engine with almost 100 horsepower more.......its strange people buy the one without the turbo. Good review!

Sent from my Galaxy S3

Not a very steep premium for a massive boost (pun intended) in power.

[random006]

Beware of KIA. My experience has been that they advertise a great warranty but do anything to avoid honouring it.  Pretty much have to sue.

Can't agree with you on this one.  I had no issues at all getting warranty work done throughout my 5 year warranty on my Sorento.  The only thing where I thought they glossed over something was with the sunroof but looking back I could not prove it.

That being said, there are bad apples in every barrel and KIA is no exception, I'm sure.

[dirtyjeffer]

i drove one of these late last year (likely a 2012 model)...it was a nice vehicle, and was one i was considering.

[PJ]

"Regarding longevity and reliability, I can only offer anecdotal evidence in the form of my brother, who bought a previous-generation 2005 Kia Sportage and still drives it. With over 200,000 km on the odometer, he’s had no major issues and although wary at first, has become a booster of the brand. "

Shrug.  I have a 95 Grand Cherokee with 316K km on it and no major repairs.  It can tow 5000 lbs (and has towed my travel trailer throughout the interior of BC), can go offroad (and has many times) and gets about 15 L/100 km city and 10 L/100 km hwy despite it's age.

CUVs are too heavy and gets bad mileage for a wagon and have none of the abilites of an SUV.  I just don't see the point of these things.

[safristi]

I thought the Sportage got panned a while back for terrible steering and poor centering.always having to correct to go down the road in a straight line..that would be intolerable  even with heated foot massagers and bum defrosters............

[libraman]

Beware of KIA. My experience has been that they advertise a great warranty but do anything to avoid honouring it.  Pretty much have to sue.

Can't agree with you on this one.  I had no issues at all getting warranty work done throughout my 5 year warranty on my Sorento.  The only thing where I thought they glossed over something was with the sunroof but looking back I could not prove it.

That being said, there are bad apples in every barrel and KIA is no exception, I'm sure.

Maybe I should try a dealer in Quebec...

[greengs]

Not a huge fan of small turbo gas engines in SUVs.  IMO Acura got it right when they went back to a V6.  With the 4 cyl Turbo in these vehicles you will get no benefit in fuel efficiency, in many cases you will get worse mileage.   (unless strictly highway low load runs). 

CX-5 would be my choice as well.  I know they are bringing the diesel Mazda 6 next year I don't see why not the diesel CX-5.