C&D Sneak Peek

Wouldn't a shill be marketing things that were better than the Muhstang GT?
They wouldn't market the "average" 0-60 for its price class.

>Guys I'm not shilling because there are other ways I could shill but I'm not!!!1!!!!1!!

*more efficient

>t. likes muscle cars with autotragics that are modeled after their 60s counterparts

>I wish we could get away from the 0-60 meme and take into account handling and suspension

Man me too, but that would be the worst for the Americans

Then get the AWD GT model. It’ll handle just like you want it to.

Hi. What would it take to get you into a new Kia today?

lol, I love these guys and how assblasted they get over someone posting anything about the Stinger.

> Kia looks better than that cheap plastic heavy Fiat
> calling a TDC 8-Speed auto
Now, I would agree with you that it should have a manual option. Maybe it will when they release the special edition this spring. We’ll just have to wait and see.
This isn’t me by the way.

>LEL people react mad when I open hundreds of threads about a KIA
>THATS SO FUNNY
Kys right now faggot

stop replying, he's autistic and is begging for attention.

>everything i don't like is autistic xD

> literally opened four threads ever over the course of a month
Why don’t you just stop being a colossal faggot and filter it out?

You’re probably right. If he continues to whine after this post we’ll know that he’s a Debby Downsyndrome who just got upset and won’t let things go.

That is the just of this entire imageboard. How new are you? Either way, let me be the first to welcome you to Veeky Forums. Everyone is faggots here. And every faggot that is annoying is autistic. I hope you enjoy your stay.

>16 gallon tank
>17mpg
>0-60: 4.4 seconds
>5-60: 5 seconds

It's a shame they couldn't think outside of the box and give it a V8 and/or manual. This is so disappointing. The car is geared and programmed for bench race numbers and nothing else. That thing had horrendous fuel mileage, little tuning ability compared to a V8, automatic is inferior on the track (Corvette even acknowledges this with the zr1, saying the auto is just there for boomers). I had high hopes for it but it's going to fall flat. There's no reason for a car enthusiast to buy.

>>>>TDC
Pretty sure it's a traditional torque converter auto.

i shouldn't even be in this thread. I find this car repulsive looking and I don't care about 0-60 times.

> no reason to buy
Except it’s luxury hatchback sedan for $39k that isn’t boring to drive. And the features and quality rivals Audi, BMW, Lexus, and Infiniti. The the ZR1 just doesn’t come with a TDC auto because it’s for pureists just like all of the Shelby’s. Yet, the TDC auto has been shown time and time again to be better and faster if tuned right.

It’s a TDC 8-Speed auto.

That’s because you can’t afford to buy one. So you come up with reasons notto like it. Also, how fast it is equates to how much fun you can have in it on the streets. At the end of the day, it’s a daily driver. A sports sedan that’s fun to drive. And it’s faster than the LS3 Camaros.

>Also, how fast it is equates to how much fun you can have in it on the streets.
It really doesn't, why do you think Toyobarus and MX-5s still sell fuckloads?

Bit ironic.

>I don't like aids because I don't have aids
>I don't like blacks because I'm not black
>I don't like autistic Veeky Forums users because I'm not an autistic Veeky Forums user

You sure are a dumb motherfucker

> why do you think slow cars still sell
Why do Kia Fortes sell? Why do Toyota Corollas sell? Why do Chevrolet Cruzes sell? Because some people are lame in the world and don’t care about their cars being fun.

And I didn’t say that you can’t have fun in cars that are slower, I said that I twisted to HOW MUCH fun you can have in it.

> equating not being able to afford a car to being fucking retarded
This level of autism cannot be charted. Scientists need to study you.

you can drive to the post office in a kia stinger or you can drive THROUGH the post office with a lotus carlton.

what sounds more fun?

>I don't like this absurdly expensive steak only because it's expensive
>No, there is no possible way it could taste like shit, or that the chef could fuck it up

Keep sperging

The Lotus Carlton is slower and a shit ton older. No luxury creature comforts what so ever. The Kia sounds more fun.

> M-series BMW’s are god machines and Audi A5 sportsbacks are amazing
> Kia made by the same people must be shit because it’s a Kia
Hmm. I trust the chefs that prepared the Stinger GT. BMW M-series chief engineer and Audi lead designer. Yeah. I think the car will be just fine.

> Kia made by the same people must be shit because it’s a Kia

Literally yes

Kia R&D
>Hey guys, I know you got poached from great auto companies, but we need you guys to copy your past designs
>Also, we have inferior technology and resources here, so the cars you design will never be as good as the brands you previously worked for

>Miatas aren't fun because they are slow
>Toyobarus aren't fun because they are slow
Seriously nigger? Is this what you're insinuating?

>The Kia sounds more fun

>Except it’s luxury hatchback sedan for $39k that isn’t boring to drive

It's a V6 and automatic. That's as boring as it gets.

>>Car and Driver reviews $60k OTD Kia Stinger
>>Oh boy, I can't wait to buy my $40k base model!

>Daily reminder to report Stinger threads and fill them with nice cars instead.

> being this naive
They were sniped from their companies for a reason. Kia isn’t going to pay them more than what BMW and Audi was just to make a sub-par car that couldn’t compete with the competition. The Stinger GT was made simply to show the world that Kia could make a car of this caliber in both quality and performance.

You either didn’t read what I said or you’re fucking retarded. Reread what I said, faggot.

> GTR is a V6 with an automatic, must be boring
You know what, I don’t think you’ve ever driven a car that’s faster than 14 sec in the quarter mile or faster than a 6-sec 0-60. Have fun being poor.

> reviews $50k Stinger RWD GT2 package
> literally only tech upgrades like proximity sensors, ventilated seats, driving assists, and an auto closing trunk
> but somehow that must make it faster than the $40k model without all that junk
Well, hello Mr. Autism. Nice to see you again.

>buying a turbo 6 Kia for $50k
Wew

Can get a scat pack 392 for $40k that will smoke Korean shit in every category while sounding significantly better

bit? more like pottery.

>waaah waaah stop bitching about me bitching about korean cars

This. You'd be a fool not to buy American.

> $41k for a Charger Scat Pack
> shitty hard plastic interior
> none of the performance upgrades the SRT has besides the engine
> no luxury features
> 0-60 in 4.2 sec
> 1/4 in 12.6 sec
I’d rather have the Stinger GT with all of the luxury features and better quality and be .2 sec slower for $39k.

Troll or retarded.

> retarded because someone prefers quality and creature comforts than .2 sec 0-60
Get the fuck outta here, Kid.

We've been making them turn for a few decades now too and I'm pretty sure they do print skidpad numbers too.

>preferring a KIA shitbox over a 6.4l N/A V8 engine which gives you goosebumps
Im german and normally I shit on musclecars but in this case you proven enough that you are a fucking underage benchracer who never drove a powerful car.

This is one of the cars that I own. Supercharged 4 cam 4 valve V8 with a 6 speed manual.

i like the stinger
there's nothing wrong with it

Also, wanting a more comfortable and better quality car doesn’t make you “an underaged benchracer”. It makes you a rational adult. Preferring “muh loud n/a V8” over a twin turbo V6 with all of the creature comforts of an Audi A7 and BMW 4-Series Grand Coupe is more evidence that you have the mind of a child.

>chassis rigidity

What does that have to do with anything? A Terminator Cobra is still much faster than whatever shitbox you drive.

A vert Terminator is still structurally strong. They come with subframes, sway bars, and an underchassis cross brace.

Especially a Whipple’d one.

what "creature comforts" does a 45k mustang not have that a kia does?
also, C/D put the 2017 mustang at 73dBa

kiamedia.com/us/en/models/stinger/2018/features

Look at the GT’s features. And a GT1 Trim is the price of a Mustang GT Premium with the Performance Pack.

So, take a look at the GT1 Trim as well.

all I see is that to match the mustang premium you have to go with the highest trim

what am I missing?

>>Also, we have inferior technology and resources here, so the cars you design will never be as good as the brands you previously worked for

This isnt how cars work. There is no "missing technology" or whatever the fuck. The only factor in consideration is the dollar and logistics.

The dollar to purchase and pay for the materials/labor that builds the vehicle (which will be the same no matter who builds it given both are roughly equal), and the logistics to source those materials, transport them, and the vehicle built(if assembly plants aren't in the country where the sale is intended to happen) to the end point of sale, which is where the big variance in cost actually lies between companies.

The Kia stinger will cost exactly what the numbers on paper say it will cost. If it were more expensive than what it could provide compared to the competition, it would never get approved for manufacturing. If it cost less than the equal competition, it will still be priced similar to competition to have a larger profit margin, rather than giving a consumer a massive deal for no reason.

kia GT1 missing;
vented seats
10spd auto
12" customizable dash
magnetic adjustable suspension
internet connection with ability to locate and remote start your car

and thats just what I've gleaned from skimming that page

Cant wait to pick one of these up in a few years, used, with the Kia negative-Tax that comes with the badge.

>clowns ITT willing to pay out the ass for the same performance but with a sticker that says BMW on it

>There is no "missing technology"
what?
you are arguing something completely different which, I guess what you're saying is valid

but, not all companies have open access to every automotive technology
Fiat isn't going to make a boxer engine, Subaru isn't going to have the tech to make a big V8
manufacturers can try to edge into a new market, but do so at great risk and typically with a conservative/cheap approach

Cadillac did a pretty great job with the CTS-v awhile ago
a great example would be the horrendous infotainment it had that marred the whole thing
but they sold it with a fantastic engine and at a discount to the germans they were competing with

I think kia will be trying to compete with the m3 amg c63 in the next 5-7 years if this experiment goes over well

So all stuff you don't need?

oh, sorry
I wasn't aware we were somehow qualifying these "creature comforts of an Audi A7 and BMW 4-Series Grand Coupe"
because I'm willing to bet those two examples have plenty of things you "don't need"

also, are you admitting the mustang is better equipped at a lower price than the kia?

Best part about this is that it's a kia and in 3 years you'll be able to buy a used one for 10k

No, it just seems like a pointless waste of money. I'm not into the interior either. I'd rather have a genesis for the price.

im sorry but i dont believe that 0-60 time

im gonna need to see video evidence before i believe that claim

True, there is very little trust in Kia and its a buyers market. The opposite with Mazda. Mazda3 used are overvalued to hell and back.

I mean, they're decent but you're absolutely right. That's actually my opinion about a lot of cars now.

Dang, North Korea stepping their game up

>10 year old Cadillac (up to 14 years old some models)
>4.6 0-60
>13.1@109mph quarter mile
>163mph top speed
>Manual only
>400hp on a V8 where using regular fuel is possible

This piece of crap Kia can't even compete with a 14 year old Cadillac. These stats were made with lesser tires too so they probably match in performance today.

And how much did it cost brand new

>1816 kg
>14L/100km
Holy shit. The LS3 Commodore is cheaper, lighter, uses less fuel and has more room for your mates. Plus there's heaps of room for upgrades.
Kia BTFO

~2006 CTS started at 30k and topped out around 50k for the v

$55k. And the Pontiac GTO with the same powertrain and performance was $32k

so what features does this kia have that a mustang doesn't?

>over FOUR THOUSAND lbs
Fucking hell, I can see why Randy said he wished it was lighter.

Also, why is there a kia-logo in the bottom right? That just looks like an advert for the car, not a review

You can get a loaded Mustang GT Premium for less money, which is a better car in every respect (including build quality).

Stop conflating KIA with Toyota and Honda - the build quality of gooks is not that of nips. Gooks make shit cars, always have.

KIA shills need to fucking neck themselves, this is going to be a worse forced-meme than the fucking Toyobaru BR-S.

>Except it’s luxury hatchback sedan for $39k that isn’t boring to drive.
>luxury
Pretty rich coming from someone who has only seen pictures of it online
>$39k
$50k+ for the version you fucks keep shilling
>isn't boring to drive
Again, pretty rich coming from someone who has only seen pictures of it. The handling really isn't getting any stellar reviews buddy.

>KIA

>luxury

>tfw KIA could make the best car in the world and no one would like it or respect it because it's a KIA

Will KIA ever be able to live down their reputation for making trash cars? I don't think they will, everyone who owns one is basically human garbage.

Maybe they shouldve went with a non garbage powertrain like an auto v6

Humans are garbage in general so...ya know...might as well get a....not a kia fuck that.

You have no idea what comes with a Premium, do you? There is literally 40+ features that the GT Premium+PP doesn’t have that the Stinger GT has Standard let alone the GT1 Trim which is at the same price point. You’re missing literally everything.

Mustangs don’t have ventilated seats.

TDC 8 speed auto vs TDC 10 speed auto, same shit both automatics.

Customizable dash (Oh! You got one!)

MagnaRide suspension. This isn’t available on the GT yet. Not until next year.

Internet connection. When has a Mustang ever had WiFi? Never.

Remote start. (Mustang with an automatic; you’re doing it wrong)

Did you even read the list of features on the GT or GT1 trims?

> same performance
Try less performance and less features.

Also, this isn’t me. Don’t be a faggot and assume anyone who says something to you is the same user. And no, again the Mustang is far less equipped even versus the standard Kia Stinger.

I think the Stinger will be an exception.

Am Australian car reviewer got a 4.7 sec 0-100km. So, I’m sure that more professional drivers can get lower times out of the launch control.

lol, Somekne is spreading my jpg. Nice.

> can’t compete
> 4.6 is apparently faster than 4.4
> 13.2 is apparently faster than 12.9
The Mich Pilot Sports’s on the Stinger aren’t that great. And if both cars had the same tires, the GT would still stomp the V.

> cheaper
Used.
> lighter
Pffsh.
> Uses less fuel
Except it doesn’t.
> more room
This is a lie.

Look and see for yourself.

Probably have to do that to put a manufacturer’s car in the magazine.

No you can’t. A fully loaded 2017 Mustang GT Premium is $45k+. The Stinger GT1 is $43,250. And the quality of the Mustang is significantly worse than the Stinger. I would know, I’ve been in both.

I’ve been in a Stinger. So, I would know about it’s quality.

The $50k GT2 is no faster than the base GT at $39k.

>The stinger has more room than a Commodore
>Weight doesn't matter
>Being fatter than a Commodore

> SS weighs at 3,924 lbs
> Stinger GT weighs at 4,004 lbs
> only 76 lbs heavier and comes with all that additional tech
Yeah, at that point, it really doesn’t matter which one weighs more as it’s such a close margin. And do you expect sedans to be lightweight? What kind of new level of autism do you have? Get the deck outta here with that nonsense.

Just because it's a sedan doesn't mean it has to be heavy. At least the Commodore has an amazingly stiff chassis. Time will tell if the Kia can love up to it (I doubt it)

The car was developed by Audi’s lead designer and BMW’s M-division chief engineer. I’m sure they’ve made it structurally sound. Also, it took a beating from Randy Pobst at Willow, and he said if he was going to get a sports sedan that this would be the one for him. So, that’s really saying something. If it can survive multiple runs from him then it’ll do just fine.

Kia is still at the bottom of the reliability stats.

That’s just a fake news meme. Kia has literally had no recalls in over three years.

TUV Fake news. Wow! You are stupid even for a shill.

That 0-60 is pretty pathetic for a twin turbo.

Sorry, there have been a total of three recalls over the last three years. And they were for airbags. Which a lot of cars have recalls for. Nothing mechanical.

It’s only running 7 psi. So, no it’s not. It’s quite impressive for a sedan.

Damn, look at the AWD power made from just a chip mail tune.

>Also, it took a beating from Randy Pobst at Willow, and he said if he was going to get a sports sedan that this would be the one for him.

Source or this is bs.
In the review Randy said it was too heavy but "good for a kia" which really doesn't say much.

Source? In that exact review, his words were “Remember when I said I wanted a rear drive sedan? Well, this could be it... this is the model for me. A 3.3 liter twin turbo V6.“ and “I’d like to see it a couple hundred pounds lighter”.

>he thinks that the charger is modeled after the original

>laughinggirls.jfif

>blacked out headlamps

Kill yourself before you kill someone else.

The original Charger is platformed off a Sedan chassis. So, there is merit to his statement.

Well, they are smoked lenses, not tint like some faggots like to think. And I run LED bulbs that are far too bright and even too bright with the smoked lenses.