When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Haha well you kinda answered your "SO..." part when you said you know it has its flaws.
However we put it, even if the car has its flaws, Kia is the winner since people are associating a Kia with BMW, Mercedes, Audi. That's some accomplishment.
For me, I think the flaws are its interior quality, weight, and the 8AT. Perhaps these are the sacrifices Kia had to make in order to price the car low.
No one has mentioned it, but in some ways, the Stinger reminds me a bit of the Holden Commodore and Ford Falcon in Australia. Big, 350+hp, RWD.
It remains to be seen what the interior quality actually is, I really want to go drive one soon if I can find a dealer that has one. But if the Genesis line has anything to say about it, the Kia/Hyundai interiors aren't at all worse than the Germans for a lower price tag.
I've been saying this for a while but it's getting harder and harder to justify the badge tax on some of the luxury cars these days. The mainstream options are all just as good or better for a lower price.
there's no doubt the interior will be cheaper than the germans. This is still a Kia, not a Genesis.
the question then becomes- do you see value in spending 15-20k more on a car with similar features, just because the rear doors are softer to the touch?
there's no doubt the interior will be cheaper than the germans. This is still a Kia, not a Genesis.
the question then becomes- do you see value in spending 15-20k more on a car with similar features, just because the rear doors are softer to the touch?
Tons of people will continue to see the value in the badge more so than anything else. Look at how many CLA's Mercedes sells and how many 320i's BMW sells. Those are just for the badge, not for the enthusiast. The quality is better, but not THAT much better. Even the new Accord has soft touch materials everywhere you actually touch and not the places you never will. Even my Jeep has the same thing and a stitched dash and a ton of other things that you only saw in the luxury brands not too long ago.
Whatbis you mean? It' a good value proposition compared to the big boys, at a good value proposition price point. It's clear Kia and Hyundai want to rid themselves of their past and be considered as brands equal if not better than the mainstream offerings.
there was a time when people would have laughed at the thought of Kia (myself included) and wouldn't touch their cars with a 50 foot pole. This car helps them shed that just a wee bit more. I have a feeling they're not expecting this car to sell in droves. But it puts them in the light they want to be considered under.
Tons of people will continue to see the value in the badge more so than anything else. Look at how many CLA's Mercedes sells and how many 320i's BMW sells. Those are just for the badge, not for the enthusiast. The quality is better, but not THAT much better. Even the new Accord has soft touch materials everywhere you actually touch and not the places you never will. Even my Jeep has the same thing and a stitched dash and a ton of other things that you only saw in the luxury brands not too long ago.
You're now talking about 2 different things. Brand name is one thing that people are willing to spend 15k on. Soft touch materials? While some say yes, the majority likely wouldnt even notice. Many less people will choose to spend 15k more just because of the softness factor.
also I never see 320s here. And rarely see CLA250s. Every one seems to splurge for the more expensive versions. At least in my city.
also, I don' know what accord you were sitting in, but I recently was in a new 2.0T Sport and it was hard plastic galore. The touring trim is nice. But anything below that is much more Spartan
Well I can relate to where SamDoe is coming from....recently test drove a new A4 2.0T and a Accord 1.5T touring. I was quite impressed by how good the Accord is vs the A4, given the price difference.
If not; $51870CA for Stinger GT vs $55945CA for a 340i,.... that Kia is *so dead*.
There are buyers who are opting for the Stinger GT when they could have had an AMG or M for not much more (due to heavy discounts); when was that ever said for the TLX?
Originally Posted by SamDoe1
Once again the misinformed statements flow like water.
The $52k Stinger GT is the fully decked out with every option under the sun model. If you do the same for a 340i you'll be well into the $65k range. FWIW, the base GT is $40k.
The Stinger's competition (from BMW) is more the 4 Series Gran Coupe which is even more expensive.
The G70 will be the 3 Series competitor.
Originally Posted by TacoBello
there's no doubt the interior will be cheaper than the germans. This is still a Kia, not a Genesis.
the question then becomes- do you see value in spending 15-20k more on a car with similar features, just because the rear doors are softer to the touch?
Originally Posted by SamDoe1
It remains to be seen what the interior quality actually is, I really want to go drive one soon if I can find a dealer that has one. But if the Genesis line has anything to say about it, the Kia/Hyundai interiors aren't at all worse than the Germans for a lower price tag.
I've been saying this for a while but it's getting harder and harder to justify the badge tax on some of the luxury cars these days. The mainstream options are all just as good or better for a lower price.
Overall, the interior of the Stinger doesn't match the Germans, albeit in certain areas is as good or better (such as the leather; need to spend more $$ to get good leather from the Germans).
The biggest issues would be harder plastics on/near the bottom (not that big of a deal for me) and not all the metal-looking bits being aluminum.
While the buttons on the center stack, the speaker covers and trim on the dash is aluminum, Kia, unfortunately cut some costs by going w/ silver-painted door releases, paddle shifters and the trim on the knobs - which is something I'd like them to see them correct for the next gen Stinger, if not for the MCE (as having all the touch-points made out of quality materials is a pet peeve).
All the shiny bits in the G70 are metal.
This is where Hyundai's greater resources come into the picture.
Hyundai can make all those bits real metal as they can amortize the costs throughout the growing Genesis lineup (currently planned for at least 8 models, but more likely 9; 10 if Genesis ends up getting that 2-seater hybrid sportscar).
Kia, right now, has to make due with just the Stinger and K900 (altho there is talk of them doing premium crossover).
So, while not matching the Germans, comparable to the interiors of sedans like the ATS, Jaguar XE, etc.
Also, it seems that the USDM Stinger's interior is not quite as nice as the KDM Stinger (another point of contention for prospective Stinger buyers).
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
Now you mentioned it... i think this car should have been introduced by Genesis instead of KIA.
This car is not needed in the segment that KIA is in... but Genesis needs it.
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
But G70 is not a 4 door coupe with a hatch,,, which is what every manuf. is going after these days.
G70 is boring when compared to Stinger.
Perfectly fine as a Kia as Kia and Hyundai/Genesis compete with each other - including in the luxury market in Korea (which goes back to the Stinger being an entry-level luxury model that just happens to be not be under a separate luxury badge - just as Infinitis and Acuras are Nissans and Hondas in Japan, not to mention the Toyota Century and Crown Series).
It's also smart that H and K aren't competing head-to-head with each other in the luxury segment.
The Stinger slots btwn the G70 and G80 in size and the K900 slots btwn the G80 and G90 in size.
Look for the next K900 to adopt a sleeker profile (whereas the next G90 should retain that traditional "box" limo shape); wouldn't be surprised if it also adopted the fastback bodystyle.
Sure. For one, this is not an Honda. It is an Acura, remember the site... the name? It starts and ends with an A? The body sheet is all different from an Accord, and there is no Honda TLX even in Russia (where the Acura TLX also exists). Acura has made a terrific job dissociating the TLX from the Accord, justifying the premium with the styling alone. Didn't I say that it was not an Honda?
Not to revive this post, but even the mighty NSX is just a Honda in other markets.
Btw, appears that the NSX will be getting competition from Hyundai - either as a Hyundai, an one-off N model or as a Genesis.
And Honda execs, themselves, have stated that Acura is a separate sales channel.
You're now talking about 2 different things. Brand name is one thing that people are willing to spend 15k on. Soft touch materials? While some say yes, the majority likely wouldnt even notice. Many less people will choose to spend 15k more just because of the softness factor.
also I never see 320s here. And rarely see CLA250s. Every one seems to splurge for the more expensive versions. At least in my city.
also, I don' know what accord you were sitting in, but I recently was in a new 2.0T Sport and it was hard plastic galore. The touring trim is nice. But anything below that is much more Spartan
I see tons of both around here, along with base model C300's with couch casters for wheels. They are all obviously the base lease spec models because they all look the same.
I drove both the Sport and the EXL. I was happy with that interior for that car for the price they were asking. I also drove a 328i not too long ago and was not happy with the interior of that car for that price, it looked like it belonged in something $15k cheaper and had hard plastic galore. Same with the A4 I had as a rental. The point with a Honda is to make a cheap interior appear to not be cheap and they hit that out of the park.
Sooooooooooooo......... My and buddy I went to test drive some GT2 Stingers today. The only reason why we don't have them in our garages right now is because I had the will power to get us out of there somehow. We're both younger professionals, make 6 figures, need four doors, etc. Basically we're the ideal candidates for a car like this. Mark my words, one of us if not both of us will own this car by the end of this year.
We had a super cool salesmen who kept encouraging us to dog the shit out of the car. Of course we both abided without any hesitation. We launched it, drifted it, hit 100mph+ on the highway. I've never met a salesmen quite like this guy before in my life. If you are in the Northern Virginia area and want to do a test drive at this dealership, feel free to message me for their contact info.
Without going too far into the details, they were willing to do $41K for the car plus taxes, title, etc (RWD GT2). This involves leasing the car for the manufacturer rebate, and then buying out the lease at the one year mark. This process involves an additional $1,000 roughly in fees to refinance.
I could leave a super long review after an extended test drive, but would rather not. Let me just say that if there is ANY car in the market that gives remotely near the bang-for-buck this car does, please tell me so that I can check that car out as well. I LOVE the fact that it is a hatchback, rear legroom is great in my perspective (5'10), has all the features you would expect in a car these days if you're spending 40k+ (HUD, heated & cooled seats, heated steering wheel, rear cross traffic alert, power folding side mirrors, etc.), makes amazing low end power, and is a lot of fun to drive. I'll nit pick about a couple of things... The transmission could be a little bit more responsive. It does not shift like an M3 or RS4, but then again it costs almost half the price. I'm not a huge fan of the shifter. You use the shifter to put it into everything except for park. "Park" has its own button. Also worth noting is the warranty Kia offers with their cars if you're worried about reliability. Basically the best in the market.
Here are some pictures:
Cement Stinger:
According to our sales guy this is apparently a European Stinger. No clue why it is here. It does not have amber in the front headlights and you will notice it has the "Stinger" badge as opposed to the "Kia" badge on the rear and some other places.
One reason why I'm hesitant on waiting to purchase this car is because I'm worried it may suffer the same fate as the GT-R when it first came out. Way too much car for the price.
Yah.. the part i dont understand is why didnt they use the 440GC instead of 640GC?
440GC is a hatch just like Stinger.
IMO, S5 sportback and 440GC are what Stinger is going after... not 640GC - which is just a normal sedan (with less head room).
Didn't even catch that. I imagine more people would cross shop the 440GC with the Singer GT, than the 640GC.
The price gap is a lot smaller from the Stinger GT to the base 440GC as well. 38.3k for the Stinger GT to 43.3k for the 440GC
I'm just wondering if we are into performance bargain, what do people feel about the Dodge Charger RT Scat Pack. It's about $40k and makes 485hp. It's even faster than the Stinger. It'd also bigger than the regular 3 series, etc. Heck, from the reviews, it even has pretty decent handling.
I am not going to get into the details but you do not have a lot of Dodge Scat pack buyers crossshop BMW/Audis and vice versa.
Just as a Hellcat is the same price, or maybe even cheaper than a M3... yet people who buy want to buy Hellcat will get hellcat and M3/M4 buyers will not consider a Hellcat even tho it will blow the doors and some off the M3/M4.
One reason why I'm hesitant on waiting to purchase this car is because I'm worried it may suffer the same fate as the GT-R when it first came out. Way too much car for the price.
I'm waiting a bit longer for the lease MF's to come down. Right now the demand is high and that'll change pretty quick. Once that happens, I may very well lease one. I don't want to buy because the resale on something like this will be abysmal.
I'm waiting a bit longer for the lease MF's to come down. Right now the demand is high and that'll change pretty quick. Once that happens, I may very well lease one. I don't want to buy because the resale on something like this will be abysmal.
That is a good point. With Kia's warranty though you may be better off keeping it long term and beating the piss out of the car haha.
When do you think you're going to get your next car? You are planning on daily driving it right?
That is a good point. With Kia's warranty though you may be better off keeping it long term and beating the piss out of the car haha.
When do you think you're going to get your next car? You are planning on daily driving it right?
Probably when the weather starts getting nicer here since it'll be much easier to sell the wife's car at that point. So like May-ish but we're not in any hurry to do anything. I'm heavily leaning towards getting a 2017 CPO Golf R but leasing one of these may not be a bad idea.
Kia's warranty is good but I'm concerned over the aftermarket for something like this. The Golf R has a TON of stuff for the aftermarket where you can't really get bored. Once the warranty expires, you slap a new tune on it and magically have what feels like a different car. Also the Golf R with Remus exhaust is .
Also, yes daily driver. I already have a not daily lol.
If you get a Golf R, get it with the DSG. The 6MT in that car sucks.
You prefer an automatic to a manual? I understand that the DSG is more efficient, but sorry IMO the 6MT doubles the fun, specially in a small car. I already had the traumatic experience of a 1980 automatic Rabbit, no thanks.
We’ve tested a couple of 2018 Stingers before, first a rear-drive example and then another with all-wheel drive. Both cars were top-of-the-line GT models powered by a 365-hp twin-turbo 3.3-liter V-6 and with $50,000 sticker prices. All Stingers share a rear-wheel-drive chassis with the Genesis G70; our test car’s all-wheel-drive system added $2200 to its sticker price and a claimed 181 pounds to its curb weight, which still totaled only 3845 pounds on our scales.
This time, our test vehicle represents the Stinger that most people will pay monthly for, and it has a sticker price of $37,000. Under its hood is a turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four that also does duty, albeit mounted sideways, in the less expensive, front-wheel-drive Kia Optima and Hyundai Sonata family sedans.
The four-cylinder is rated at 255 horsepower, and its torque peak of 260 lb-ft hits at just 1400 rpm. It isn’t quite as smooth as some other turbocharged 2.0-liters out there and it doesn’t rev as high, topping out at a 6500-rpm redline, but the double-overhead-cam engine gets the job done, with a flat torque curve and a nice kick just over six grand.
The powertrain’s shortcoming is the eight-speed automatic transmission, which Hyundai/Kia designed and builds in house. It’s geared well for this package and its performance is satisfying around town, but play Lewis Hamilton on your favorite twisty road and the eight-speed is lethargic. Flicking the paddle shifters delivers an eventual gearchange, but they could be snappier.
[...]
The 2018 Stinger 2.0T isn’t perfect, but its strong performance, style, and spaciousness is a compelling combination. Sure, we prefer the Stinger GT with its additional power and features, but the four-cylinder Stinger remains a driver’s car, and with a base price just under $33,000 (with rear-wheel drive), its value is undeniable.
You prefer an automatic to a manual? I understand that the DSG is more efficient, but sorry IMO the 6MT doubles the fun, specially in a small car. I already had the traumatic experience of a 1980 automatic Rabbit, no thanks.
You need to drive it before you judge. I am all about 6MT cars... but it was boring as fuck in the Golf R I drove. The shifter felt very anemic and the clutch was meh also. It was one of the first times I drove a manual car and thought to myself "wow, I'd be happier with the auto"
The 6MT Golf R was not that fun and we know it is way slower than the DSG version. I see no reason to go with it. As I've read on vwvortex, apparently the 6MT was an afterthought on that car, only added to appease the purists. But it's not very good.
If I were to get one, it would definitely be the GT. I guess I care about straight line performance too lol...Whereas the GT is as fast, if not faster than anyone else in the 3 series segment, while being much cheaper, the 2.0T is quite slow. It's on par with C300 and IS200t but the A4 2.0T and 330i are much faster. It could've used another 30hp or so, given its high curb weight.
You need to drive it before you judge. I am all about 6MT cars... but it was boring as fuck in the Golf R I drove. The shifter felt very anemic and the clutch was meh also. It was one of the first times I drove a manual car and thought to myself "wow, I'd be happier with the auto"
The 6MT Golf R was not that fun and we know it is way slower than the DSG version. I see no reason to go with it. As I've read on vwvortex, apparently the 6MT was an afterthought on that car, only added to appease the purists. But it's not very good.
Well there are some (1) people who would rather drive a manual Rav4 than a Ferrari with a DCT
I could leave a super long review after an extended test drive, but would rather not. Let me just say that if there is ANY car in the market that gives remotely near the bang-for-buck this car does, please tell me so that I can check that car out as well. I LOVE the fact that it is a hatchback, rear legroom is great in my perspective (5'10), has all the features you would expect in a car these days if you're spending 40k+ (HUD, heated & cooled seats, heated steering wheel, rear cross traffic alert, power folding side mirrors, etc.), makes amazing low end power, and is a lot of fun to drive. I'll nit pick about a couple of things... The transmission could be a little bit more responsive. It does not shift like an M3 or RS4, but then again it costs almost half the price. I'm not a huge fan of the shifter. You use the shifter to put it into everything except for park. "Park" has its own button. Also worth noting is the warranty Kia offers with their cars if you're worried about reliability. Basically the best in the market.
Kia did a fine job w/ the Stinger, but there definitely are things that can be improved upon - such as the aforementioned 8 spd AT.
Problem w/ that 8 spd AT is that it is an auto that was developed as a luxury gearbox and not with much performance in mind (the Q60 RS has the same issue with its trans).
That transmission is holding back what that 3.3TTV6 can do (Kia also seems to have limited torque at the lower gears in order to prolong the life of the transmission).
There have been signs that Kia has been testing a Stinger with a (wet?) DCT (supposedly w/ the V8), but Kia has denied that there will be a Stinger with even more performance (could just be corporate-speak).
Personally, while a V8 Stinger would be great, that's not as needed as a more performance-oriented trans, esp. as tuners have already modified the 3.3TTV6 so that it puts out over 400HP.
Would also like to see a Stinger with firmer coils/bushings and a larger sway-bar - to sharpen up the handling beyond being a Gran Turismo.
Originally Posted by oonowindoo
Yah.. the part i dont understand is why didnt they use the 440GC instead of 640GC?
440GC is a hatch just like Stinger.
IMO, S5 sportback and 440GC are what Stinger is going after... not 640GC - which is just a normal sedan (with less head room).
For marketing purposes.
More impressive to the typical layperson if the Stinger can beat the 640GC and a base Panamera in certain areas.
Originally Posted by MSZ
Still can't believe Kia isn't offering the 2.0T in Canada. If it's available I would've bought one by now.
Reportedly, Canada will eventually get it - either later this year or early next year.
Originally Posted by iforyou
If I were to get one, it would definitely be the GT. I guess I care about straight line performance too lol...Whereas the GT is as fast, if not faster than anyone else in the 3 series segment, while being much cheaper, the 2.0T is quite slow. It's on par with C300 and IS200t but the A4 2.0T and 330i are much faster. It could've used another 30hp or so, given its high curb weight.
Kia needs to stick in the 2.0T variant that can be found in the i30N.
Not only more power/torque but one of the best sounding 4-bangers.
While definitely a minority, there have been a few buyers who passed on an M4/M4 or AMG for the top spec Stinger GT.
One of the mods on a Lexus forum - not only traded in his RC-F, but also sold his '17 IS F Sport (which had replaced his '17MY A4) - so a 2-for-1.
Well there are some (1) people who would rather drive a manual Rav4 than a Ferrari with a DCT
That's all fine and dandy but I drove both the 6MT and the DSG in the Golf R and the DSG wins hands down. It's so much faster and engaging than the manual is and the farts and bangs it makes when the cogs swap is magical. The 6MT is pretty crappy, it's an ok box that feels like they lifted it out of the base Jetta. The clutch sucks, the feel sucks, the throw sucks. It was definitely an afterthought for a car designed to be a DSG model. A manual transmission in a car designed to be a MT car is awesome, anything else isn't nearly as fun.
I feel like the Stinger would be the same way with the MT being an afterthought to appease the purists even though it sucks.
Well there are some (1) people who would rather drive a manual Rav4 than a Ferrari with a DCT
I drove a 599 GTO w/ the dual clutch while my wife and I were on our honeymoon .. I will respectfully disagree with that 1 person who wants to drive a manual Rav4.
I love manuals .. but holy shit, the transmission / shifting is an engineering marvel and made me giddy AF.
There's nothing like feeling 0 interruption of power and seeing the speedo sweep into triple digits with what seems like only a few seconds
That's all fine and dandy but I drove both the 6MT and the DSG in the Golf R and the DSG wins hands down. It's so much faster and engaging than the manual is and the farts and bangs it makes when the cogs swap is magical. The 6MT is pretty crappy, it's an ok box that feels like they lifted it out of the base Jetta. The clutch sucks, the feel sucks, the throw sucks. It was definitely an afterthought for a car designed to be a DSG model. A manual transmission in a car designed to be a MT car is awesome, anything else isn't nearly as fun.
I feel like the Stinger would be the same way with the MT being an afterthought to appease the purists even though it sucks.
I drove a 599 GTO w/ the dual clutch while my wife and I were on our honeymoon .. I will respectfully disagree with that 1 person who wants to drive a manual Rav4.
I love manuals .. but holy shit, the transmission / shifting is an engineering marvel and made me giddy AF.
There's nothing like feeling 0 interruption of power and seeing the speedo sweep into triple digits with what seems like only a few seconds
I won't even suggest that the Golf is anywhere nearly as good as a 599GTO but the speed of a DSG is mesmerizing. There's literally zero power interruption and the turbo stays spooled the whole time.
01-11-2018, 09:38 AM
I imagine more people would cross shop the 440GC with the Singer GT, than the 640GC.
.
I understand that the DSG is more efficient, but sorry IMO the 6MT doubles the fun, specially in a small car. I already had the traumatic experience of a 1980 automatic Rabbit, no thanks.
