Kia decided to build a not-boring car

Meh, why not.
Kia and Hyundai got their start building little econo shitboxes, and they got pretty good at it.
> owned an 02 Elantra for 12 years
> most trouble free car I've ever owned
Toyota made it's name building reliable little econo shitboxes. Now they build Lexus.
I'm not going to judge based on brand. If it's good, then it's good.
My expectation is that it'l be mediocre. Satisfyingly fast enough and having sporting pretensions, but without actually being that sporty. I don't have expectations for the handling or grip limits either.
But like I said, if it's good, it's good.

avoid the 2.0t like the plague, if its like anything in the genesis coupe and sonata, its an awful and lifeless engine

the lambda v6 are rock solid but dont get very good mpg

I just can not deal with automatics. Shift logic is never going to be as good as human interaction.

>why wouldnt you buy this?
Mustang GT is faster, but the kia looks more luxury. I'd spend my shekels on the GT.

>up to $51k
lmao jesus

>twin turbo
>v6
>only 360hp
Wut

>no Tau V8
ONE JOB

I'm getting it but I'm waiting for the newer models when the fix the chinks.

Korea needs to distinguish itself from everyone else. What is it you get specifically from Korean cars? They are just a reaction/imitation of other markets for 10% off and a dubious warranty. They don't need to make the fastest car, cheapest car in the segment, etc., just offer something you can't get elsewhere playing to Koreas strength. The tech market is super strong there, why not go the tech route? Just seems like they have no direction other than find a hot market and try to undercut them, feels more like a Chinese strategy than a Korean one.

all that fuckin torque tho

Toyota adopted the same strategy when Lexus first began. Undercut the Europeans with a competitive product. However, I'm still a bit concerned, because the original Lexus LS was actually a tank in terms of comfort and reliability, on top of undercutting the S-Class on price.

I look at something like the Kia Optima today, and sure it undercuts Camry and Accord, but it doesn't have better quality or reliability at all, so to undercut the competition is to be expected.

tl:dr essentially I agree with you

Kinda funny how all the new Korean cars coming out look exactly like Audis. And how all the new Audis coming out look exactly like Korean cars.

this

No

After being in an "X car looks like Y car" frenzy, and finding that Y car looks like Z car, etc etc you notice that all cars are generally following a trend that is hot at the moment

MPG for the 3.3 model?

>I'm autistic enough to require a standard transmission
>I'm not sold yet on what's so good about it to make me want to drop $33k+
>might as well wait and see if it turns out to be some miracle car or just an expensive kia that's a bit quick and has RWD

lmao
>cucked microdick manlet who can't drive and has to resort to number of cylinders to feel superior to randumbs on the internet
I can tell you don't have a car or you drive your moms minivan
lmao

I'd take a 70hp s12 hatch over a v8 camry all day any day

Shame that Kia is right at the bottom of the reliability chart.

Even Ford and GM are better, how fucking bad.

THIS

Nice shitposting.

Because an SS Commodore or XR6T is better in every way?
Why are so many people clamoring over the stinger when the Commodore out performs it in every metric while being cheaper?

Because those cars are ugly.

Because there is no new commodore

You're ugly
Nothing wrong with buying a 2017 car.

Someone isn't a fan of facts. Let me guess you actually think JD Poor is a reliable source of information.

Wouldn't buy any of the bottom two.

Sperg more

>Buying an unknown car over a prove design
Have fun beta testing.
The Kia probably drives like shit.

Good news, Dacia not (quite) the worst.

>Implying I'm buying the first version of a car
lol

Twin Turbo 3.3L V6 in RWD or AWD with an 8 speed auto that shifts fast as fuck. The RWD is reported to go 0-60 in 4.9 sec and the AWD in 4.7 sec. that's a 13.2 sec - 12.9 sec in the quarter. Pretty quick car. I kinda want to get one next year.

24 mpg in comfy mode. 35 mpg in eco mode. And laugh at the mpgs in fun mode.

Forgot a reply. The first version of this car came out this year in Korea. It's been put to the test. And this car has been thoroughly tested prior to it even being released. I'd put my faith in this car.

Funny, considering the Koreans hired an ex-Audi designer.

And BMW's former M series lead engineer.

You must not know how this works user

Why they have tried this hard to make it look like it was made exclusively for the Australian market is beyond me.

Auto rwd in heavy cars are pretty based for going fast in a straight line as long as they have the torque for it, which this seem to have.
But sometimes you just feel like driving like a dick, if you know what I mean? *Eurobeat intensifies*

Supposedly the Genesis G70 rides on the same platform, but it'll be smaller and lighter than the Stinger.
It also looks nicer imo.

>kia decided to build a not-boring car
>0-60 in 5s
kek

>kia decided to build a not-boring car

Good, can you post some details of that instead then.

>not boring car
>looks just as forgettable as every other major car brand
yup it's a kia.

Pffsh. Those FD-esque rear tails.

>24 mpg
>35 in eco
Sold. Much better than my prelude.

I'm buying later model because they usually have better stuff on them or they fix alot of issue from older models.

I wouldn't expect that 35 mpg though. If I get the GT, then I don't think I'd drive it that lightly even in eco mode.

Though the turbo 4 cyl will obviously get a lot better mileage. I'll still go for the tt V6 and hope to get at least 30-32 mpg in eco mode.

Also, starting prices:
$33k for Turbo I4.
$39k for Twin Turbo V6.

They have been working on this thing like no other. I'm sure there might be some option tweaks in the later models. But, the performance won't be any better. Just look at the Genesis coupe. It's all the same shit.

Would never pay that much for something that says "Kia" on it.

Veeky Forums hates what it cannot afford.

Too true lol

Which one have the 360 camera and blindspot? I really hoping they replace the NAV and put a bigger one.

Pffsh. I own four cars. And might be trading my 2006 Mazdaspeed 6 for one of these tt V6 RWD Stinger GTs.

>why wouldnt you buy this?
>8spd auto

You're answering your own questions buddy

I think that's the GT with the GT2 package.

My 10 year old Cadillac goes faster than that. The performance numbers suck

And my 2003 cobra goes faster than both. What's your point?

>"sports sedan" tuned on the burgerking
>yet it's slower round a track than a FWD 4 cylinder turbo Focus

My point is it's a shitty bench racing car, it's not fun, it's not fast.

Thats a black car. Very ugly.

No it's not. If someone ran around the track and I got slower times then the Focus ST, someone wasn't pushing it to its limits. A car that can run a 0-60 in 4.7 seconds is significantly faster than an ST.

Randy Pobst said it was fast. It's fast. Just because your modded V can outrun it doesn't make it any less of a great car.

>loses to a base turbo 4 Camaro
>loses to a Focus ST
this was in the hands of Randy Pobst, mind you

Has Randy ever shat on a car? The Cadillac was faster stock. With run flat GT tires from 2004 lol

Show me something that matters in daily usage please

>only thing that matters around a track is 0-60 time

>I-it's faster than an ST, it has to be!
>gets proven wrong
>D-DOESN'T MATTER IN DAILY USAGE
it's a Nurburgring-tuned """"sports sedan"""" that's SLOWER THAN A FUCKING FOCUS ST and only barely beats a 1.4l turbo Fiat 124, there is literally no excuse

Why would you buy a GT car to go slower than a base Camaro?

This. Its not like I'm racing everday to get a ticket.

Once it's released with all the revisions done, then we'll see what it can really do. Remember, the one Randy Pobst drove was the Korean version before it was made faster (and louder) for the US market.

GM said it runs a 0-60 in 4.7 (the same as the Stinger GT), but everyone else said it actually runs a 5.0 sec on the factory tires.

Then this car has no purpose. Stick to your Kia Soul

who the fuck buys a ugly ass Camaro?

Why does it look so fat?

because it is, it's well over 4000lbs

It's very heavy, > 4000 punds.
Apart from that it seems to be very good. It would probably BTFO an E39 M5 desu.

>It would probably BTFO an E39 M5
lol no, it can't even compete with a fucking Focus ST

Its a long car.

why the fuck does this matter? What the fuck are you towing, your own fat ass?

>What the fuck are you towing, your own fat ass?
over 4000lbs of pigfat "sports sedan"

Who the fuck pays $50k to go slower than a base Camaro?

You'll see when it's released.

Again. That was the pre-production car before thy made it 4-tenths faster in it's 0-60. This is a sedan that starts at $39k for the tt V6. Do you expect it to do miracles? Is a 4.7 sec 0-60 mph and a 12.9-13.2 sec in the 1/4 mile not good enough for your tastes?

How about we compare it to it's actually competition bracket?

and all of those will be better built, better handling and a nicer place to be in

That's a ton of buzzwords

I don't care how (hardly) fast it is. I want something fun. Every car in it's segment is boring as fuck. They could have stood out with a manual or V8. But no.

> for at least $15k more
The interior of the Stinger GT isn't that bad actually.

The Stinger GT will be fun. Hell, even the 4 cyl Stinger will be peppy and probably fun to drive as well.

youtu.be/u0lDj9HIb64

I fell asleep watching that

Yeah, the Nurburgring is kinda boring to watch. But, the car seems to handle pretty well.

So the 2.0L turbo i4 is 0.7sec faster to 60 than my decade old 2.4L NA i4 in my pigfat sedan?

Why would you ever buy this over an IS350 or similar? The IS350 has two turbos less and is only 50hp behind the V6.

>auto and over 4000lbs
>fun

yeah, it kinda sucks 'cause I'm sure that they spent a metric shitload of cash to make this happen and it's a pretty large risk given the Korean market doesn't really go for this kind of stuff. But instead of them taking a slightly bigger risk and making it super unique, or do one thing better than anyone else (price point, power, unique engine configuration, handling, anything dammit) they made it somewhat expensive and pretty much just another RWD car lacking a manual transmission. I guess to be fair, that's more money they didn't wanna throw, and this is just testing the waters.

That being said, I really want Hyundai/Kia to do really goddamn well, they're getting so good as it is, and everybody wins if a big manufacturer starts pumping out cool shit.

Oh well. They'll git better soon.