Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Kia designer, Peter Schreyer was a designer for Audi and Volkswagen before working at Kia, which explains the pseudo-Germanic look of its cars.
Yep, do they look German or do they just look like the work of Schreyer?
Hyundai/Kia is approximately now where Honda/Toyota were in the 80s as far as market penetration and reputation go. Shaking off their initial missteps and really coming into stride now.
Yep, do they look German or do they just look like the work of Schreyer?
Hyundai/Kia is approximately now where Honda/Toyota were in the 80s as far as market penetration and reputation go. Shaking off their initial missteps and really coming into stride now.
An excessively complicated Korean sedan with zero proven record.
I'm not sure it's any more complicated than a Genesis or even an Optima.
Quote:
A complete waste of corporate resources.
Even if it doesn't sell well, it's a risk worth taking if for no other reason than to test the waters, even if it's not the best segment in which to do so.
Quote:
God help the person that needs to get this car repaired.
Because Kia will somehow go out of business in a few years and close down all its dealerships or because it will abandon just the Stinger owners and refuse to work on their cars? Not sure I see where your logic is here.
this car was originally meant to be a sports car to compete with the BRZ and FR-S! Kia botched it!
No, Kia realized it needed to build up credibility from the ground up in a larger segment that is at least a little bit open to change (as opposed to plunging itself straight into the Mustang/Camaro/Challenger hegemony), so it went with a safer choice. If it sells well, I'm sure we'll see a coupe someday.
Right, because other manufacturers can lay claims to this nebulous "look" you are trying to attribute to them.
You obviously don't know much about automotive design.
Kia has blatantly ripped off Mercedes design for years. Mercedes used to be known for their "double oval" headlights on their E and C classes, take a look at the Kia Amanti.
Mercedes
Kia
This extends to interiors as well. Kia has copied them so much that Mercedes has completely changed the styling of their cars several times to differentiate them. Now go take your uneducated opinion elsewhere.
No, they didn't. A luxury line would be a new brand (e.g., Genesis for Hyundai). They simply made a more upscale sports sedan.Right, because other manufacturers can lay claims to this nebulous "look" you are trying to attribute to them.Unfortunately, you are probably right. It's a nice concept but I fail to see whom it will attract in such numbers as to make the business case viable.
Thank you.
That is one of my points.
That and the complicated suspension system. How much to replace a shock absorber? Or the shock module. More electronic crap.
Five driving modes? Who repairs that when it malfunctions.
An expensive rear wheel drive automobile where there in little market need.
Why not put all of the engineering and development and manufacturing costs back into the inexpensive sedans/SUV's ? Make them better and more comfortable.
That is one of my points.
That and the complicated suspension system. How much to replace a shock absorber? Or the shock module. More electronic crap.
Five driving modes? Who repairs that when it malfunctions.
An expensive rear wheel drive automobile where there in little market need.
Why not put all of the engineering and development and manufacturing costs back into the inexpensive sedans/SUV's ? Make them better and more comfortable.
Dumb management at the highest levels.
So it's the electronically adjustable suspension that you're saying is overly complicated? This isn't some newfangled technology that Kia is using its customers to beta-test. This tech has been available on cars going on, what, two decades now? As not putting putting R&D costs back into "inexpensive" cars/SUVs a) because they already have put plenty of R&D costs into their inexpensive cars/SUVs, b) because they're trying to enter a different market segment not just stay in the ones they're in now, and c).because new(er) tech is expensive so you roll it out on more expensive cars first, then it eventually ends up in the inexpensive cars/SUVs. Even entry-level cars today feature technology that was once only available on high-end cars.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
