Topic: Day-by-Day Review: 2013 Kia Sportage; Day 1

[Autos_Editor]

James is impressed with the feature list of the Sportage SX, but does it feel worth its $40K price with all the goodies and a powerful 2.0L turbo-four?
Read More...

[easyrider]

I remember seeing the old sportage commercials with that crazy guy driving through the swamp. it's hard to believe how things change and that the /sportage can now push 40 grand.

[Adam D]

It's a Sportage. Goodies or not the cost it way too high for this vehicle.

[Snowman]

In 10 years Hyundai/Kia have moved from making good quality lower priced alternatives to their Japanese rivals to matching and exceeding in pricing.

[Blueprint]

Remember that Kia adheres to the "Sears pricing" philosophy. There are always rebates, and 144 month financing to move the metal.

The Sportage EX Luxury I tested had great looks and many buttons, too, but:

- the high-end radio sounded like crapola;
- the ride was stiff, with poor control over broken pavement;
- stability control is hyperactive, even in the dry;
- engine sounded Massey-Fergusonish;
- visibility was theoretical.

Our comparo featured 11 cute-utes, and the reviewers were a mix of reporter dudes and general public. The Kia finished ... 11th.

Most of my critics would be moderated on the base 23k$ fwd manual Sportage, because of its great value. At 39k$ pdsf, you're in Q5 territory...

[dencanad]

I like this little SUV, but there isn't a Kia on the planet that I would drop 40K on. 

[mixmanmash]

"So here it is: the turbo 2.0-litre GDI engine shared with Hyundai. This engine is now used in a multitude of vehicles from sports cars, as in the Hyundai Genesis Coupe, to crossovers… like this one."

One small error.  The 2.0 turbo in the Genesis coupe is not entirely the same.  While in most of the Hyundais and Kias they are direct injected, the Genesis coupe is port injected.  This means the cylinder heads are different.  Hyundai chose this route for the Genesis because it allows the aftermarket tuners more flexibility in changing out injectors for extracting more power.

[carcrazed]

It's priced $5K over what it should, IMO.

Sorento EX V6 Luxury with all of Sportage SX's features costs $40,729 including F&PDI.

[whaddaiknow]

It's priced $5K over what it should, IMO.

Sorento EX V6 Luxury with all of Sportage SX's features costs $40,729 including F&PDI.

It is priced more like 10k over what it should. The '13 RAV4 Limited can be had for $31K. No way I am paying more for the Sportage as well equipped as it may be. Hyundai/Kia still have a ways to go before they can claim the top feeder. Materials and ride quality still need a lot of work. At 40k, I expect a bit more than hard plastics inside my car.

[carcrazed]

It's priced $5K over what it should, IMO.

Sorento EX V6 Luxury with all of Sportage SX's features costs $40,729 including F&PDI.

It is priced more like 10k over what it should. The '13 RAV4 Limited can be had for $31K. No way I am paying more for the Sportage as well equipped as it may be. Hyundai/Kia still have a ways to go before they can claim the top feeder. Materials and ride quality still need a lot of work. At 40k, I expect a bit more than hard plastics inside my car.

You're comparing 2.0T with 260hp to a 4-cylinder with 176hp. And $31,700 isn't including the freight NOR options like NAV.

[whaddaiknow]

You're comparing 2.0T with 260hp to a 4-cylinder with 176hp. And $31,700 isn't including the freight NOR options like NAV.

And you're comparing a car that finished 11th out of 11 to a brand new design, and very well executed design at that ('13 RAV4). You don't expect two cars packaged the same way cost the same, do you? Because if you do, then a fully loaded Optima would be priced higher than the base E350. 

[Noto]

In 10 years Hyundai/Kia have moved from making good quality lower priced alternatives to their Japanese rivals to matching and exceeding in pricing.

While I agree with you in theory, it's not that Kia/Hyundai has made "great" quality..."good-er" is more like it.

I frequently rent cars (and they are almost always Kia/Hyundais).  I find that they offer exceptional options in economy cars, extraordinary styling, but they fall so far short in refinement.

I think they've come a long, long way.  I want them to succeed (and stop lying about fuel economy - 9.2L/100km on the highway over 400 straight (and on the 401, no hills to be spoken of) with cruise set at 110km/h in a 1.6L Rio made me want to cry - 8.6L/100km in an Elantra, 10.1 in a Soul, though shockingly only 7.5L in a Sonata), but until there is refinement, these brands remain 'economy' and not premium, luxury, or whatever other semantic description the marketing departments want to affix.

My $0.02.

- visibility was theoretical.

+1

How is such poor outward visibility legal?  Cross-traffic alert should be standard on a car that pathetic - and for almost $40k, I'd expect it!

I think as Kia/Hyundai have made a better name for themselves, price has creeped up...but their main selling point was that people were willing to forego the notion that Korean-reliability  was questionable to save a few grand...so maintain that - keep it below their competitors' prices by a few grand and I'd consider it.

[carcrazed]

You're comparing 2.0T with 260hp to a 4-cylinder with 176hp. And $31,700 isn't including the freight NOR options like NAV.

And you're comparing a car that finished 11th out of 11 to a brand new design, and very well executed design at that ('13 RAV4). You don't expect two cars packaged the same way cost the same, do you? Because if you do, then a fully loaded Optima would be priced higher than the base E350. 

I didn't bring up the 2013 RAV4, you did. 
If you're going to compare prices, you should at least make an effort to close the equipment gap as much as possible.  Plus, omitting freight in your quoted price is a mistake on your part.

[whaddaiknow]

You're comparing 2.0T with 260hp to a 4-cylinder with 176hp. And $31,700 isn't including the freight NOR options like NAV.

And you're comparing a car that finished 11th out of 11 to a brand new design, and very well executed design at that ('13 RAV4). You don't expect two cars packaged the same way cost the same, do you? Because if you do, then a fully loaded Optima would be priced higher than the base E350. 

I didn't bring up the 2013 RAV4, you did. 
If you're going to compare prices, you should at least make an effort to close the equipment gap as much as possible.  Plus, omitting freight in your quoted price is a mistake on your part.

Sure, but my point still stands - better equipped Sportage still should be priced lower than the RAV4. Or is freight on the RAV4 more than $8k? The RAV4 Limited with Technology package (NAV, shmav, blind spot, shmlind spot - the whole shebang) and 5/100,000 extra warranty is still cheaper than the Sportage. Anyone trying tyo defend Kia's pricing on this is a loon (in my eyes of course - in their mother's eyes they are still the next Einstein).

[carcrazed]

You're comparing 2.0T with 260hp to a 4-cylinder with 176hp. And $31,700 isn't including the freight NOR options like NAV.

And you're comparing a car that finished 11th out of 11 to a brand new design, and very well executed design at that ('13 RAV4). You don't expect two cars packaged the same way cost the same, do you? Because if you do, then a fully loaded Optima would be priced higher than the base E350. 

I didn't bring up the 2013 RAV4, you did. 
If you're going to compare prices, you should at least make an effort to close the equipment gap as much as possible.  Plus, omitting freight in your quoted price is a mistake on your part.

Sure, but my point still stands - better equipped Sportage still should be priced lower than the RAV4. Or is freight on the RAV4 more than $8k? The RAV4 Limited with Technology package (NAV, shmav, blind spot, shmlind spot - the whole shebang) and 5/100,000 extra warranty is still cheaper than the Sportage. Anyone trying tyo defend Kia's pricing on this is a loon (in my eyes of course - in their mother's eyes they are still the next Einstein).

I never said that the Sportage was priced right.  And you're still comparing the turbo engine in Kia vs. normal 4-banger.

It's priced $5K over what it should, IMO.

Sorento EX V6 Luxury with all of Sportage SX's features costs $40,729 including F&PDI.

RAV4 with Nav Pakg. $33,540 3.70% for 60mo. financing
Sportage EX with 4-banger & Nav. $34,979. 0.99% for 60mo. financing

End of discussion, Einstein.

[dirtyjeffer]

how come in every article like this, we get the "$40k for a Kia??  NO WAY!!"

yes, this Kia is close to $40k, but it has every single option...remember that recent small SUV test where the loaded up Escape was something like $43k?...this Kia is priced competitively with other similar vehicles when comparably equipped...could you get a lesser equipped RAV4 for $33k??..sure, but you can also get a lesser equipped Sportage for less too, likely less than the RAV4.

if you don't like things about the Sportage (steering, comfort, NVH, etc), that makes sense...but complaining about the price is silly, when it is only high because of its equipment level and still on par with its competition.

[Fobroader]

Id much rather pay $40K for this thing then $40K+ for a Tiguan/GLK. I like the looks of the Kia, its got mucho horsepower and its got more kit than you can shake a stick at.

[JRM]

I'll take the proven and more than adequately powered Rav4 through which one can see where one's going over the arguably sportier looking Sportage with an not so well proven overpowered for it's chassis turbo.

[whaddaiknow]

if you don't like things about the Sportage (steering, comfort, NVH, etc), that makes sense...but complaining about the price is silly, when it is only high because of its equipment level and still on par with its competition.

Since you won't read it, let me quote myself again.

You're comparing 2.0T with 260hp to a 4-cylinder with 176hp. And $31,700 isn't including the freight NOR options like NAV.

And you're comparing a car that finished 11th out of 11 to a brand new design, and very well executed design at that ('13 RAV4). You don't expect two cars packaged the same way cost the same, do you? Because if you do, then a fully loaded Optima would be priced higher than the base E350. 

Equipment level may be the same, the quality of that equipment and execution - not so much (as our friend Borat would put it)

[Fobroader]

I'll take the proven and more than adequately powered Rav4 through which one can see where one's going over the arguably sportier looking Sportage with an not so well proven overpowered for it's chassis turbo.

Have you seen the new Rav4....while I agree it will probably be very reliable, that front end.....yeeesssh. Different strokes for different folks I guess, Ill take the CUV with the overpowered turbo mill, if I had to suffer with one of these things Im going to at least enjoy myself when I tromp on the gas.