RE: Kia Pro_Cee'd GT: Review
Discussion
daveco said:
Its performance figures are still poor. An E46 325 with less hp and less torque is quicker, even though it weighs about 150kg more.
The GT86 was the same; I don't get it.
My train of though was similar, my old E36 323 with 35 less hp and less torque was as quick as this 200hp warm hatch bloater!The GT86 was the same; I don't get it.
I still like it though!
seismic22 said:
My train of though was similar, my old E36 323 with 35 less hp and less torque was as quick as this 200hp warm hatch bloater!
Out of interest, as quick at what? Unless you actually want to do full-bore racing starts, 0-60 is grossly unfair on the FWD car. How do they compare say 50-70? Also, your E36 probably weighed less than this. Yes it's a shame that modern cars have got so heavy, but unfortunately it's pretty much true across the board. This is on a par with its competition in weight terms.
I do wonder how the likes of the Germans to to an even greater extent the Japanese are concerned about Kia's commitment to this market. The veneer of 'quality' German is about as thin as Creosote's waffer thin mint and the Japanese are pitching their cars at a much more competitive market than ever before. If Kia make headway, I wonder in to which of these areas it will be first.
drivin_me_nuts said:
I do wonder how the likes of the Germans to to an even greater extent the Japanese are concerned about Kia's commitment to this market. The veneer of 'quality' German is about as thin as Creosote's waffer thin mint and the Japanese are pitching their cars at a much more competitive market than ever before. If Kia make headway, I wonder in to which of these areas it will be first.
Yep, never under estimate the power of Korea. They are resilient and determined and are surely keeping the traditional motor industrey execs awake at night....
seismic22 said:
Love the look of this car and Kia as a brand but how is this GT not faster?
Over 200bhp combined with a reasonable torque figure of 195 lbt-ft, it must weigh a fair bit. I know its not all about 0-60 times etc so maybe its mid range is better, but still.....?
Perhaps gear ratios are to blame? Or maybe Kia are being conservative with their 0-60 quotes.Over 200bhp combined with a reasonable torque figure of 195 lbt-ft, it must weigh a fair bit. I know its not all about 0-60 times etc so maybe its mid range is better, but still.....?
drivin_me_nuts said:
I do wonder how the likes of the Germans to to an even greater extent the Japanese are concerned about Kia's commitment to this market.
Toyota in the 90s had the MR2, GT4 and Supra. They scrapped them to sell Corollas.Since the Koreans have come in with cheaper and reliable cars, they are having to look at other markets (GT86 etc.).
I'm trying to think of an exciting Honda or non-Evo Mitsubishi. Least Nissan have the GTR and 370z (with a SX in the pipeline).
First Korean halo supercar in 10 years?
Adamski2010 said:
Main Article said:
Kit levels are good, as you'd expect, with Bluetooth, voice recognition, air, cruise, auto lights, CD/radio with iPod connectivity and plenty more besides.
audidoody said:
My old Audi S3 had 210hp and was regarded as a very hot hatch in its day (1999). Amazing that 204hp in a hatchback is now regarded as "warm". I am very tempted. If this had four rings or a blue propeller badge on the front people would be queuing up to pay £35,000 for it.
Doubt it, when a BMW 118i Sport is £22,670 (only 170 bhp but 0-60 in 7.2 and also only 137g/km), and a 125i M-Sport is £3k more.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff