Topic: Test Drive: 2012 Kia Rio5 LX+

[Autos_Editor]

The Kia Rio subcompact is a 'solid' car with good handling, but fuel consumption wasn't as good as expected.

Read More...

[markty1970]

It is interesting that my latest fuel consumption calculations for my 2006 Civic were 7.1L/100km. When compared to new vehicles with the latest technology, I guess I should be pretty happy.

I was interested in this vehicle but after this so so review maybe I'll hang onto the Honda for a while longer.

Mark

[mik101]

It is interesting that my latest fuel consumption calculations for my 2006 Civic were 7.1L/100km. When compared to new vehicles with the latest technology, I guess I should be pretty happy.

I was interested in this vehicle but after this so so review maybe I'll hang onto the Honda for a while longer.

Mark

You've discovered the true reason behind Honda not replacing the R18 in Civics yet.

Great new design from Kia. Huge value, lots of technology for the money. The design is a little "out there". I like it now, but time will tell how it holds up. A little disappointed by the mileage number, but it is automatic and it is winter. I'm sure with the manual and warmer weather it would be the same as the Accent (since it is the same drive-train in a very very similar car).

[Jaeger]

Great new design from Kia. Huge value, lots of technology for the money. The design is a little "out there". I like it now, but time will tell how it holds up. A little disappointed by the mileage number, but it is automatic and it is winter. I'm sure with the manual and warmer weather it would be the same as the Accent (since it is the same drive-train in a very very similar car).

Likely more significant than the season and transmission are the fact that it was a fairly green engine, that the car was running on chunky winter tires and presumably burning crappy winter gas.  I know that winter tires alone on my ride cost me over 1l / 100km in fuel consumption.

Jaeger

[JohnM]

I agree that winter, snows and not remotely broken in have to be behind the fuel number.  Chris does not seem to be generating great numbers - driving style?

Also note the hatch is 200 lbs heavier than the sedan.  Seems like a large penalty.

Tremendous value here though and I'd have to assume it is going to be reliable.

In terms of sidestepping over bumps, never mind the wheel size, what were the tire widths and sections?

Cheers,
John M.


ps - I don't have trouble hitting the fuel economy numbers in my Echo and know Corolla manual owners who do similarly well.  OTOH, I know a Corolla auto owner who get terrible mileage.

[kavatski]

We bought one of these as a second car about three months ago, but ours is the EX UVO model with manual transmission. It mostly gets used as a city car on short trips, and considering it's new and has really only been driven in the winter (well, what there was of it) on winter gas, I've been satisfied with a typical fuel economy reading in the 7.3-7.7 L/100 km range. One time that I filled it up and immediately got onto the highway for about 20 km resulted in a reading of 5.8 L/100 km when I got off. These onboard computers tend to be optimistic, in my experience, but still. Not too shabby.

For interest's sake, I just looked up the US EPA fuel economy figures for this car: 30/40 mpg (US) or 7.8/5.9 L/100 km. Seems like ours is right on the money.

There are some things I don't love about the car but fuel economy isn't one of my complaints.

[sailor723]

We bought one of these as a second car about three months ago, but ours is the EX UVO model with manual transmission. It mostly gets used as a city car on short trips, and considering it's new and has really only been driven in the winter (well, what there was of it) on winter gas, I've been satisfied with a typical fuel economy reading in the 7.3-7.7 L/100 km range. One time that I filled it up and immediately got onto the highway for about 20 km resulted in a reading of 5.8 L/100 km when I got off. These onboard computers tend to be optimistic, in my experience, but still. Not too shabby.

For interest's sake, I just looked up the US EPA fuel economy figures for this car: 30/40 mpg (US) or 7.8/5.9 L/100 km. Seems like ours is right on the money.

There are some things I don't love about the car but fuel economy isn't one of my complaints.

I wonder if the reviewers here should forget about quoting Canadian fuel economy numbers and just use the US EPA results. They seem far more relevant and "real world".

[D70]

Except for the tricky transition from reverse to 1st in a parking lot situation, a Hyundai / Kia manual transmission quirk, a great car to drive. The sedan I drove is the perfect stealth car

Real life economy

http://www.fuelly.com/driver/smileydriver/rio

One of the first Rios in Canada

http://www.flickr.com/photos/d70w7/6164241475/

[chrischasescars]

I agree that winter, snows and not remotely broken in have to be behind the fuel number.  Chris does not seem to be generating great numbers - driving style?

Also note the hatch is 200 lbs heavier than the sedan.  Seems like a large penalty.

Tremendous value here though and I'd have to assume it is going to be reliable.

In terms of sidestepping over bumps, never mind the wheel size, what were the tire widths and sections?

Cheers,
John M.


ps - I don't have trouble hitting the fuel economy numbers in my Echo and know Corolla manual owners who do similarly well.  OTOH, I know a Corolla auto owner who get terrible mileage.

Not driving style - I actually make an effort to drive reasonably economically. The reason is more the kind of driving I do - mostly city, lots of shorter trips, typically.

[libraman]

Maybe there should be more of these so that companies will supply more accurate numbers to Transport Canada and the EPA: http://www.motoringtv.com/honda-sued-due-to-over-inflated-mileage-claims-p149707

[ajay]

Is it nimble ? How is the steering feel ?

[dirtyjeffer]

while it is unlikely the press would get a top trim model for review (because they just can't get them quick enough and are often already sold while still on the boat), it would really do this car justice...the model i had as a rental was the same model Chris reviewed, and i thought it was so good, it made me consider one myself (albeit, with more toys)...it has everything one needs, and despite being a base trim, it isn't a stripper model built specifically for the marketing department to advertise a low price for a car most would likely consider a penalty box to drive for the next several years...about the only thing i didn't like in the LX+ was the harder material on the arm rest...the higher trims have softer material and a better gauge cluster too (but the regular one was fine too)...the rental had something like 15,000 kms on it, and i averaged 6.5L/100kms on it after two days of city driving in it (all my driving is city driving, unless i specifically make a road trip)...that is better than the low 8s i am currently at...as mentioned, i am driving it a little more aggressive than i normally would as the manual suggests varied RPMs for the first 1000kms and the temps are lower and we are on winter gas...since i had achieved decent numbers in the rental, i am confident i will achieve decent numbers in a few months when my driving returns to normal, summer gas returns and the temperatures rise...as decent as the LX+ model is, the SX model takes up such a notch...i still love the car every time i get in it, and it gets a TON of compliments from everyone who sees it, with a lot of interest and "wow factor"...no, it isn't going to win any races, but i didn't buy it for that reason...it has only been a weak today, but my only criticism is the cup holders in the center console could be a little wider and a little deeper...but hey, if that is Kia's biggest concern, i'd say that's a pretty strong compliment.

[kavatski]

Is it nimble ? How is the steering feel ?

For me, it feels nimble enough, like a small car should, but the steering isn't a high point, in my opinion. It's on the light side and doesn't have enough feel. Then again, like I said in the other thread, I'm coming out of a Mini Cooper S, so it'd be hard for anything to measure up to what I've been used to.

In the end, with the Rio you're choosing features and value for money over the superior driving dynamics offered by some of the competition. In our case that was a tradeoff we were aware of and willing to make. No regrets.

[dirtyjeffer]

i find the steering and handling in my SX to be quite good...of course, i have larger tires and sports suspension on this model, so it is likely to feel quite different...the rental LX+ i had prior to buying the SX felt pretty good i thought...like you said, not BMW/MB good, but it's also half the price of them.

[kavatski]

I imagine the SX corners a little sharper but the electric steering calibration is probably the same. It's somewhat relative, anyway, which is why I mentioned my previous car in case it sounded like I was being overly critical. The average driver buying this kind of car would probably like the steering just fine as it is.

It's certainly a competent little car, with lots of bang for the buck, that handles reasonably well and has enough power to avoid feeling slow (contrast with, say, a Fiat 500, a car that actually scared me a few times while driving on Nova Scotia's hilly highways.) We'll be taking it on its first real highway trip next weekend and I'm looking forward to seeing how well it'll do, fuel economy-wise.

[dirtyjeffer]

i would imagine the steering is the same, but i am not sure...i find the steering feel to be quite good...i always found the Focus to be a good handling car (we had 3 of them) and i don't find the Rio5 to be any less than that car was...in fact, i think it handles even better overall...i've never driven a Mini, but i would imagine a car that costs that much more should handle/feel superior.

[tortoise]

I don't think it costs more money to make a car with good steering.  My Protege5 probably has the best steering feel of any car I've driven,  including the G35 coupe and the BMW 3 Series (granted it was the XI).  The Honda Fit, and Mazda2 are both praised for  their steering,  despite costing the same as the Rio.

While it's something that would keep it off of my list I doubt most buyers will care once they see the value you're getting for the money.  And the looks.  The Rio is a fantastic looking car.

[dirtyjeffer]

I don't think it costs more money to make a car with good steering.

a lot of newer cars (Rio5 included) use electric steering, not hydraulic steering, so the "trick" is to develop a system that provides hydraulic like feedback feel through a system powered by an electric motor...i don't know if it will ever "feel" as good as the old days, but like you said, most people in this class of car likely don't care...they aren't buying a 135i, they are buying a decent sub-compact car.

[2JDM]

Best electric steering I have experienced is in the GTI (current generation).

[ajay]

The marginal gains in mpg that electric steering brings isen't worth the trade off in poor feedback to me . Excluding the Honda Fit and Mazda 2 in the sub compacts , maybe the Fiesta and Yaris too .