Kia, Hyundai's neglected smaller brother, plans to double their non-Korean sales by 2010 (!) to 1.9 million. How? Good question (I'm glad I asked). The Cee'd– a Golf competitor with a daft, sexually ambiguous name– has received solid reviews in Europe. Stateside sales continue to be… adequate. Plans for a Kia pickup truck were recently, wisely, cancelled. Fortunately for Kia, their Georgia (the y'all state, not the Central Asian country) manufacturing facility comes on line soon, Kia can then expand beyond America's import cap and take advantage of our not-so-hot currency. In truth, Kia is a brand in search of identity. While the Koup concept was a nice try at sportiness, Hyundai is the company that gets to do smoke-filled donuts on stage at the NY Auto Show. And the Optima sedan is still underpowered compared to the Sonata. But hey, whatever. Considering the affordability and relative fuel efficiency of their American lineup, Kia's continued growth is a possibility. Probably. Maybe. Eventually. Later soon.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Kia and Land Rover are the proverbial bottom dwellers when it comes to Carmax’s trade-in’s. They usually have the fewest cars with over 150k, and the most on a percentage basis with less than 100k (80% to 90% on average of all Kia’s/LR’s sent packing by their owners during the week.)
About a third of Toyota’s, Honda’s, Jeep’s (less the Wrangler), and Subaru’s have over 150k when traded in. Compare that to the 0% to 2% that Kia realizes on a weekly basis.
Can someone tell me where the real problem with Kia lies?
I’m only surmising here, Steven, but could it be the Kia owner demographics are peculiar in some way, and tilt towards limited use/low miles per year?
I bet Kia knows the answer but aren’t telling.
Let’s guess, though. Kias are what? They are: Cheap cars. Not exciting. Kind of appliances on wheels. Unoffensive looking. Low cost, generally. Kind of average quality and reliability, but given the price, not bad value at all. Kind of a non-brand, without the past (poor) reputation which Hyundai got by being the first South Korean manufacturer (and largely overcame with better quality cars than even Kia can produce).
Non-carguys (& gals) looking for modern-day Model A’s are likely to shop around, and functionally, they might see that Kia’s are significantly cheaper than say, a Nissan, Toyota, Honda and even Dodge, Pontiac and Chrysler.
They might even go so far as to drive the cars and realize the Kia cars are not so bad. And, here’s the kicker, they might say “well, I only drive 8000 miles a year, but I don’t want to spend a small fortune – but I want something new with a long warrantee – these Kia’s have all of that.”
Later on, once the cars are a few years old, they might decide to trade off the vehicle because they would like something with more safety equipment (improving all the time), perhaps their family size has changed (so they move up or down in car size), they may stick with Kia if their particular ride has been good enough to not hassle them with constant trips to the dealer for warrantee work.
Kia’s were based upon Mazda technology until early this century, then adopted just-post-Mitsubishi / Hyundai’s first self-designed technology when Hyundai bought 50% of Kia. So the cars aren’t really craptastic unreliable heaps, overall, and even have a decent reputation in the UK for “cheap and cheerful”. In fact, the Sedona minivan is one of the biggest sellers in the MPV market in the UK (albiet with a diesel engine available).
Nice looking exterior if the interior looks as good and MPG is in the 30s it will welcomed and will compete in the states.
If Kia can maintain their price points, I really think they have a shot at achieving this goal. Let’s be honest here, a large percentage of Kia buyers are credit challenged folks; considering the current state of things, I have no reason to doubt those ranks will swell. Combine that w/higher gas prices (something Kia offers value towards), and Kia just might clear this hurdle; if not by 2010, then certainly in the near future.
Steven Lang asked “Can someone tell me where the real problem with Kia lies?” I agree with menno and Sammy that the “problem” is more likely explained by buyer demographics than a shorter service life for Kias. I think most Camry and Accord buyers give little consideration to Kia, and maybe vice-versa with rock-bottom price and easier credit the key attractions.
But this hypotheses can be tested: that Carmax database should show similar earlier-tradein patterns for Kia’s closest competitors–Cobalts, Focuses and the like. Does that appear to be true?
It’d be fun to browse the Carmax data, but I suppose only licensed dealers and auction houses are allowed access. Inasmuch as Carmax also buys cars outright (not as a tradein), it might be a very good indicator of used car value trends. I bet values of 3 year old Expeditions or Tahoes have sunk like a rock compared to a year ago.
Kia has similiar cars as Hyundais
Sportage = Tucson
Azera = Amanti
Spectra = Elantra
Optima = Elantra
Kia makes decent cars. All of their cars are as good as domestic cars. Their 2.7/2.4 5spd auto Optima is a good offering. They have decent power and efficiency rating for today’s $4 market. Kia’s Ceed has been well received to the point where Hyundai is bring its version of Ceed, Elantra Touring. I just saws two of them other day in Houston along I-10.
I think Kia’s problem lies on that it doesn’t have the “it” car, yet. I am excited about their new V8 SUV and potential Diesel SUV.
I am Kia is coming up… it’s just taking some time.
Doubling sales by 2010? Just like Hyundai wanted 500,000 annual US sales last year? The wishful thinking by Hyundai execs continues.
Kia’s are notorious for their inferior quality and, no, I do not see any data showing that the Kia owner drives fewer miles than the average owner. Cadillac and Buick owners do fit that mold according to the Carmax data, but not Kia.
Oddly enough, Hyundai trade-in’s show a similar low in ranking (5% over 150k, 60+% under 100k), that may be partially attributable to the owner kicking it to the curb once the warranty period ends. Kia likely has that issue as well but the incidence of seeing ‘engine needs service’ or ‘transmission needs service’ is also far higher with Kia than the average brand as well.
I can create a little compilation this weekend if anyone’s interested.
Sure, Steven, why not? One very obvious conclusion to early-trade-ins-with-low-miles-cars might be that the cars are crap-tastic and people want out of them ASAP. And that they spend so much time in the repair shop, that they don’t get much time on the road!
I personally don’t think Kia cars are as well built as their Hyundai brethren, and the fact that the “worst” Hyundai for reliability (according to Consumer Reports) seems to be the
Kia-manufactured Hyundai Entourage.
BTW, anyone actually contemplating a Kia Optima should seriously consider the fact that there is only 15 horsepower between the 4 cylinder and V6, and that the V6 has timing belts, which cost $800 to change at 70,000 miles.
I know this because my wife’s prior 2002 Hyundai Sonata had this 2.7 V6 and it cost us $800 to change the timing belts at 70,000 miles.
Perhaps with Hyundai and Kia following Honda in moving away from these **** timing belts (and the expense of changing them) and moving to timing chains, will make people more willing to keep the cars longer.
Having an $800 scheduled maintenance come up is a real incentive to trade a car in, isn’t it? Especially when, if it is not done, the 100,000 mile warrantee is voided (and rightfully so).
The Hyundai Sonata and Kia Optima 2.4 litre four cylinder engines (dating from 2006 on) have cam chains. My wife has a 2007 Sonata (4 cyl.) and this is one terrific family car (albiet boring in a Camry/Accord way, I admit).
I think another problem is that buying a new Kia will ensure you get a crappy resale value later, so the Kia isn’t really a “good value” unless you keep it forever. Kind of defeats the purpose.
5 y.o. civic? 11 thousand.
5 y.o. Kia? 11 cents.
In my own personal experience, Kias aren’t bad cars at all. I’ve known some people who have owned them and never had a single problem (or at the most, very minor issues) with them. I’ve rented various Kia models and have been pleased with each.
However, on the flipside, they’re not great cars, either. There’s nothing about them that really stands out over the competition. They are what they are. Cheap transportation.
Would I buy one? Well, if their resale value and fuel economy improved, I’d be more likely to consider it…
Like a domestic vehicle, Kias are probably a good used car pickup for somebody on a limited budget. I wouldn’t buy one new unless they throw domestic-sized piles of cash on the hood (which they might).
That might be able to disinguish themselves if the market here continues to gravitate toward smaller cars. If they introduced something in the under one litre class, Kia only, they might be able to establish a niche.
Steven Lang, I’d be very interested in seeing that compilation.
I’m interested, too.
“Cee’d”? Where did they get such a weird name? Maybe it’s a Klingon word.
Kia, like Hyundai, actually builds very goods cars now. Their problem is IMAGE! Hyundai is still fighting that same battle, although the current Sonata and Azera have helped them gain significant ground.
When they first came to the U.S. market, it was with sub-standard cars at dirt cheap prices. They sold those cars to lower income buyers who often couldn’t/didn’t spend time or money to properly maintain them. As used cars, nobody wanted them!
Mitsubishi has spent years trying to repair (or create) their image. For years, all of their vehicles were inferior to all of the other Japanese competitors. To boost sales, they started financing anyone who dared to enter a showroom (rumors have persisted that they didn’t even bother pulling credit reports). Sales shot up and you only had to go to the nearest trailer park or government-assisted housing project to spot countless new Mitsubishis. Their short-sightedness failed to consider the effect this would have on future sales to the average middle-class buyer!
KIA I S DISRESPECTFUL COMPANY.
THEY DO NOT HAVE ANY CUSTOMER CARE.
I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO CONTACT THEM FOR 2 MONTHS BY MAIL ANND PHONE FOR A COMPLAINT BUT NO ONE CARES