Is it time to take Korean cars seriously?

[daemon]

Devil2575 said:

I'm not sure though, could another company have taken the 500 and made it such a success? I think there was an element of Fiat trading on the fondness that the many people, especially those in the motoring press, had for the original 500. For example how much press coverage did the 500 get in comparison to other cars.

In any case, the 500 has become a very fashionable car to own and i'd bet a great many people buy one based purely on that.

Indeed.

Great little cars.

[Fattyfat]

daemon said:

Not your first VW is it though?

Also your history is packed with mainstream brands offering some would argue style / image over substance?

And you have owned a Golf - probably the worst of the lot, the mk4 2.0 GTI.

So why have a swipe at the golf on here?

Suggesting the sales success of the Golf is linked to image is hardly a swipe. The VAG stable seem to do very well with a profitable approach to car manufacture and clever marketing. VW seems to have a fair bit of brand loyalty too.

Yes, the Mk4 GTI ranks up there as one of the worst I've owned.

[kiseca]

Devil2575 said:

daemon said:

Devil2575 said:

I think that in the small car market Fiat are anything but naff.

They have reinvented a part of their own history and marketed it very well.

I actually meant 'were' not are. The 500 was a god send for them. Apparently it makes up something like 70% of their sales. The rest of their range at the time was poor, therefore the 500s success wasnt down to the FIAT brand at the time.

I'm not sure though, could another company have taken the 500 and made it such a success? I think there was an element of Fiat trading on the fondness that the many people, especially those in the motoring press, had for the original 500. For example how much press coverage did the 500 get in comparison to other cars.

In any case, the 500 has become a very fashionable car to own and i'd bet a great many people buy one based purely on that.

I think it lives on brand but the brand was the original 500. I guess the closest we might get to guessing how it may have done as a product from another company would be to look at BMW's MINI. That seems to do just fine. On the other hand, New Beetle, despite still being a VW, remained a niche product.

[Blib]

kiseca said:

Devil2575 said:

daemon said:

Devil2575 said:

I think that in the small car market Fiat are anything but naff.

They have reinvented a part of their own history and marketed it very well.

I actually meant 'were' not are. The 500 was a god send for them. Apparently it makes up something like 70% of their sales. The rest of their range at the time was poor, therefore the 500s success wasnt down to the FIAT brand at the time.

I'm not sure though, could another company have taken the 500 and made it such a success? I think there was an element of Fiat trading on the fondness that the many people, especially those in the motoring press, had for the original 500. For example how much press coverage did the 500 get in comparison to other cars.

In any case, the 500 has become a very fashionable car to own and i'd bet a great many people buy one based purely on that.

I think it lives on brand but the brand was the original 500. I guess the closest we might get to guessing how it may have done as a product from another company would be to look at BMW's MINI. That seems to do just fine. On the other hand, New Beetle, despite still being a VW, remained a niche product.

I bought an original 500 too.

[white_goodman]

daemon said:

+1

As a "logical" decision they make sense, however as an emotional decision, they're not there yet.

People who buy an i10 do so because they are cheap and functional. People who buy a Fiat 500 do so because they "want" the car.

At last, something we agree on! For me, a small car needs to have a sense of fun and some style to compensate for its lack of space and performance and although flawed in many ways, the Fiat 500 has this and the Hyundai i10 (although apparently a very good car) just doesn't.

Thank you for addressing my points but you didn't need to and to be fair you did agree with some of them. You are entitled to your opinion, as am I but it just seemed like you were trying to enforce your opinion on others and I saw a few holes in your argument i.e, is a Kia Optima really inferior to a Vauxhall Insignia, Ford Mondeo or a Volkswagen Passat. I'm not so sure and in terms of styling and showroom appeal (IMHO of course), I would argue that it beats the Insignia and bears scrutiny against the Mondeo and Passat. I can't comment on dynamics until I have driven all three but based on the new Kia models that I have driven, they are more than a match to their mainstream rivals in this respect. If you were arguing that it was dynamically inferior to a 3-Series then I wouldn't have an issue with that but one large FWD family car handles much like another in my experience these days. At the end of the day, a lot of manufacturers have abandoned the large family car sector (Renault, Nissan, Subaru, Mitsubishi, Rover), so it's good to have another choice.

I don't own a Kia, neither do I work for them, so I have no loyalty to the brand but I think the improvements that they have made in their latest models over a very short space of time is quite remarkable and they seem to be able to churn out new models quicker than some of the more established manufacturers too. Back this up with arguably one of the best-looking ranges of ordinary cars (another reason to buy a Kia) and a best in business warranty and the reasons to buy a Kia are increasing by the day. Let's leave the Carens, Venga, Soul and Sedona out of this argument though, as they're all a bit of a hangover from the old days!

Certainly their efforts make some of the established players look a bit complacent. I used to sell VWs for 5 years, so have a fondness for them (despite owning a mk4 Golf GTi - one of the worst cars ever made) and to be fair a Golf would probably still be my go to choice if I was buying a car of that size too. Having said that, I hired a mk7 Golf (I'm guessing yours is a mk6?) when I was last back in the UK and it was a good car but in some ways I didn't like it as much as the mk5s and 6s that I used to sell (styling, interior quality, no blue lighting). I was also shocked to see that a car like the one I hired (white 1.2 TSI 5 door S, fairly basic spec, no alloys) would cost me 17k new and it doesn't even have the mult-link rear suspension as standard any more! Sounds like you got a pretty good deal but did you actually drive a Ce'ed and was it the latest model or did you just rule it out on price? I expect that if you had been buying new rather than nearly new, the Kia would have been more competitive against the Golf.

I'm not convinced that the Focus is still best in class. The mk1 was great, the mk2 a bit bland in the looks department but still good to drive and more roomy but I found the mk3 very disappointing. When we were looking for a new car for my wife last year, we test drove the Focus and rivals from Hyundai, Kia, Honda, Chevrolet and Toyota. I fully expected it to be a formality and the Focus to walk it but for the money it was no better to drive, more cramped, less well equipped and had a smaller boot (smaller than the mk2) compared to the others and I thought that the interior felt very cheap. I actually liked the Kia the best (yes it was a Forte but closely-related to the Ce'ed), as it looked great, had the most power, the nicest automatic gearbox and a nice quality interior, although a bit plain in its design. My wife is a bit of a badge snob though and preferred the Toyota (my 2nd choice), so as it was a similar price we bought that and to be fair it does have a more stylish interior. It annoys me that when I ask a Toyota/Honda salesman why they don't offer a Kia/Hyundai-rivalling warranty that the standard response is because our cars are better quality though. That doesn't make sense!

I did look at large SUVs last year and the 7-seat Santa Fe was by far the best value and also the most powerful in its class. I would definitely buy one next time (or a Sorento, which looks a bit better but a bit more expensive I think). My wife doesn't like change, so being able to keep it for a long time and still have warranty is very appealing. I drove a Santa Fe and it was very nice but of course it's still not an inconsiderable amount of money (to me), so yes of course, I would look at some other alternatives too and make sure I was getting a good deal. I think I would be looking at lowish spec though (which is still pretty high), as 30k+ for a Kia or Hyundai is pushing the boundaries a bit (as it would be for any mainstream manufacturer). I did try an ix35 (wouldn't recommend it). If you're looking for a rival to the Sorento, you would need to be looking at a Santa Fe (the Sportage would be the Kia equivalent to the ix35).

I would have bought a Forte for myself earlier this year but there were no used models available, the new car deals weren't the best at the time and they couldn't get me one with a manual transmission in the colour that I wanted. I also looked at the Rio, which was more in my budget new and it was good but not quite as impressive as the Forte (too cramped and refined) but to be fair it was comparable to the Fiesta that I also looked at. I ended up with a year old Honda Civic, as it had the space, spec, refinement and manual transmission that i was after for a similar price to a new Rio. For some reason, the Kia salesman couldn't comprehend why I would buy a year old Civic over a new Rio!

I haven't been in Canada for long and lived in the UK for 33 years, sold cars in the UK for 5 years and have a degree in Automotive Engineering, so I feel that I am qualified to comment on the UK car market. No, the Kia Forte Koup isn't available in the UK market but is equivalent to the Pro Ce'ed GT (which as I said earlier is the cheapest "hot" hatch in the mid-size hot hatch class). Of course, a powerful petrol-powered Optima probably wouldn't sell in the UK market but the diesels look competitive on paper, although I don't know how they stack up against the competition in terms of refinement and driveability.

Can we at least agree that Kia is now at least as good (if not better) than Vauxhall (or Peugeot for that matter)? I've driven many Vauxhalls over the last 15 years and they have all been pretty underwhelming. I think Kia is now a proper mainstream brand. Are there many truly "budget" brands left? Dacia? Proton? Perodua?

Edited by white_goodman on Wednesday 6th May 20:46

[ZX10R NIN]

daemon said:

Not your first VW is it though?

Also your history is packed with mainstream brands offering some would argue style / image over substance?

And you have owned a Golf - probably the worst of the lot, the mk4 2.0 GTI.

So why have a swipe at the golf on here?

Going by your own theory that means you should have a Porsche Cayman instead of a 370Z as the Porsche is the better car.

I can't comment on the Golf sized offerings but I agree Optima's will be sold on Equipment Warranty & Service Packages as well as looks.

At the same time I can say of the cars we drove the handling order went like this.

Mondeo
Passat
Optima
Octavia
Insignia

In terms of overall running costs for the next 5 years looks spec & interior, the order changed.
Optima
Mondeo
Octavia
Passat
Insignia

As I said my Brothers criteria was less than a 100 miles on the clock New or Pre Registered 19k to spend (with 2k to go towards upgrades) but had to have as much Kit on it as his weekend warrior M3.

He bought his for Fully Loaded for 18k & is very happy with it, you can buy a brand new 15 plate for 19K
Pre Reg 64, 3 Spec Car 50 miles on the clock.
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...
15 plate
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...

134bhp 234ft/lb Torque Average Fuel 57.6mpg £110 Tax


Skoda

105bhp 185ft/lb Torque Average Fuel 71mpg £0.00 Tax
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2014...


The clincher for my brother was 3 years free servicing 7 year warranty 2 years Free Recovery (minus the clutch & Turbo after the ReMap) & of course the equipment level.
Below is the Spec for his 64 Plate Optima it came with 79 miles on the clock cost £17990.00 he's the second owner, for a car who's job it will be to do his A Road/Motorway commute.
The engine is a bit noisier than the Ford but not so much when you're in it.

Here's his spec:
Electric Panoramic Roof Xenon Headlights Full Leather Interior Heated Front & Rear Seats Dual Climate Control Bluetooth with Voice Control USB Input Aux Input DAB Radio Single Disc MP3 Player Bluetooth Music Streaming 7" Touchscreen Headunit with Full European Navigation Ipod Connectivity Front & Rear Parking Sensors Rear Parkin Camera 18" Alloys Heated & Electric Mirrors Hill Start Assist Control Parallel Park Assist Lane Assist Blind Spot Assist Start Stop Cornering Lights Get Home Lighting Cruise Control Auto Lights/Wipers Electric 8 Way Adjustable Drivers Seat 550 Watt 12 Speaker Infinity Audio Premium Sound System

The Kia suited his needs because for him the Optima was the "better" car, the Passat & Octavia weren't any better to drive so it was hard to accept the lack of spec.

The new Mondeo impressed with handling & interior but it was an extra 3K to get near the spec of the Optima which didn't work for him but a good car none the less.

113bhp 193ft/lb Torque Average Fuel 78.5mpg £0.00 Tax
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...


Passat Interior, would you really say this is a better interior than the others?
138bhp 236ft/lb Torque £130 Tax Average Fuel 61.4mpg

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2014...

Vauxhall
128bhp 221ft/lbAverage Fuel 62.8mpg Tax £30


As you can see when looking for a decent sized saloon there really isn't much in it, that's when warranties & servicing become deal makers or breakers, this is where the Kia edges it with as good a fit & finish as the VAG/Ford stuff & a better equipment package.

So I say the Koreans are here, would I choose an Optima over a Mercedes No I wouldn't, would I pick one over the other cars listed above then Yes I would.

Here are the dyno results for the Optima:
Standard:
Engine BHP: 131.2 (surprised us with that figure)
Wheel BHP: 113.4
Torque FT/LB:234.1 Peak at 2800 rpm

After the Re Map & a K&N replacement filter
Engine BHP: 179.4
Wheel BHP: 149.7
Torque FT/LB: 276.8 Peak at 2900 rpm

Edited by ZX10R NIN on Thursday 7th May 02:19

[neil1jnr]

daemon said:

neil1jnr said:

As you said in another post that people would be forever justifying their choice by going on about the 7 year warranty etc, I hear people justifying their choice when they buy VW's; the interior quality is 'better' and they are 'better' made. I think you look more bizaare justifying why you paid a premium for perceived quality rather than why you spent less bought have yourself a 7 year warranty.

I didnt pay a premium for perceived quality, nor did i when i had the golf ever tell people i bought it because it was "better" made or because its interior quality is "better".

I bought it because it was the better car.

Having a good car was more important to me than having the longest warranty.

Ok, so if someone asked you why you bought the car, your answer would be becuase it is the best car?

[neil1jnr]

daemon said:

neil1jnr said:

Of course you are buying them becuase they are cheaper or have a longer warranty or have better spec as standard. It isn't having to justify it, its more of saying 'look what I got for my money'. That's what we are talking about on here, normal cars, not performance varients. Why buy a 1.6 diesel golf when you can try an equivilant Kia that is; cheaper, longer warranty and comes higher specced as standard. Your argument isn't making much sense to me?

Because overall its dynamically the better car. I'm not sure why you're not getting this. If you're doing 25K per year you want to be in the right car. For me it was either the Focus of the Golf as i didnt need the size of an Octavia, as they are the two best cars in their class. Personally it came down to looks - the focus looks odd to me with its extended wheelbase.

I can see why people would buy the Kia Ceed, but it wasnt for me.

If you look at any of what might be considered the best in class cars, they arent there because they are the cheapest or have the longest warranties. They are all round good cars.

THATS what KIA lacks at the moment, particularly with the Optima. Its an average at best car in a hugely competitive market in which buyers have the choice of other excellent cars.

As i've said already though, i'd probably have the IX35 and KIA Sorento in my top three if i was buying a 4x4 as i think they are good cars.

I am just interested in why you think people that buy Kia's would have to justify why they bought it by speaking about extended warranties and coming highly specced as standard. My point is proven becuase you have just had to justify to me why you would buy something more expensive than a Kia that has a shorter warranty and is less well specced as standard; the Golf drives better.

Out with Pistonheads though, badge snobs aside, I think buyers of most cars would put the Kia ahead of the Golf becuase it is cheaper/warranty/better specced etc, they don't care that it drives better. So looking at their point of view, you would have to keep explaining that the chassis is better and the engine is better etc.

[daemon]

white_goodman said:

Can we at least agree that Kia is now at least as good (if not better) than Vauxhall (or Peugeot for that matter)? I've driven many Vauxhalls over the last 15 years and they have all been pretty underwhelming. I think Kia is now a proper mainstream brand. Are there many truly "budget" brands left? Dacia? Proton? Perodua?

Yes, totally. As i've said already brands like Vauxhall and Peugeot should be very worried.

I dont think we're really that far apart on our views, perhaps just on how we express them

[daemon]

ZX10R NIN said:

Going by your own theory that means you should have a Porsche Cayman instead of a 370Z as the Porsche is the better car.

Yes, totally. Had a 2 year old Cayman with 9K mile been available for our budget of around £20,000 absolutely. Cayman is the better car.

ZX10R NIN said:

I can't comment on the Golf sized offerings but I agree Optima's will be sold on Equipment Warranty & Service Packages as well as looks.

Yup, not because they are a particularly good car.

ZX10R NIN said:

At the same time I can say of the cars we drove the handling order went like this.

Mondeo
Passat
Optima
Octavia
Insignia

Yes, so as i have said previously, typically Ford and VW at the top in terms of dynamics.

ZX10R NIN said:

In terms of overall running costs for the next 5 years looks spec & interior, the order changed.
Optima
Mondeo
Octavia
Passat
Insignia

Yes, so - as is your brothers prerogative - your priorities were running costs, looks spec and interior.

That wasnt mine and give the numbers of Optimas sold, its not how others view the Optima either.

ZX10R NIN said:

As I said my Brothers criteria was less than a 100 miles on the clock New or Pre Registered 19k to spend (with 2k to go towards upgrades) but had to have as much Kit on it as his weekend warrior M3.

Not sure why we're going over this again. There are alternatives that as you've already said, drive better, but that wasnt your brothers highest priority.

And thats fine.

Doesnt make the KIA the best car in its class though.

ZX10R NIN said:

So I say the Koreans are here, would I choose an Optima over a Mercedes No I wouldn't, would I pick one over the other cars listed above then Yes I would.

And thats fine. Yes, they are here. For me, they're not quite at their best yet. I am sure they will be. I have already said, 10 years time it will be a different landscape.

You're still being very subjective though - your brother had quite specific requirements and he bought the car that suited him. He put running costs and spec above driving dynamics and fair enough, he has a weekend toy of an m3 so thats fairly understandable. Maybe if - like 99% of the buying public - he didnt have an extreme weekend toy in the garage, driving dynamics would have been further up his list?

Objectively, Optimas are not setting the world on fire for other people and objectively speaking, its not a "great" car, in a class where there are many "great" cars.

ZX10R NIN said:

Here are the dyno results for the Optima:

Diesel car goes better with remap shocker?

Edited by daemon on Thursday 7th May 13:03

[daemon]

neil1jnr said:

daemon said:

neil1jnr said:

As you said in another post that people would be forever justifying their choice by going on about the 7 year warranty etc, I hear people justifying their choice when they buy VW's; the interior quality is 'better' and they are 'better' made. I think you look more bizaare justifying why you paid a premium for perceived quality rather than why you spent less bought have yourself a 7 year warranty.

I didnt pay a premium for perceived quality, nor did i when i had the golf ever tell people i bought it because it was "better" made or because its interior quality is "better".

I bought it because it was the better car.

Having a good car was more important to me than having the longest warranty.

Ok, so if someone asked you why you bought the car, your answer would be becuase it is the best car?

I've never really been asked to justify it, however if people were to ask my rationale i'd say it offered the best combination of driving dynamics, comfort, economy and even with high miles come resale time, have relatively good residuals. I'd also point them to any amount of reviews done by people with more time on their hands than me where its been compared against rivals and tends to come out top.

[daemon]

neil1jnr said:

I am just interested in why you think people that buy Kia's would have to justify why they bought it by speaking about extended warranties and coming highly specced as standard. My point is proven becuase you have just had to justify to me why you would buy something more expensive than a Kia that has a shorter warranty and is less well specced as standard; the Golf drives better.

I have generally found people who buy budget brands, when talking about their cars tend to justify why they bought it "but its got an extended warranty" or " but its got a great spec".

We are on pistonheads here, not mumsnet arent we? I'm unsure why picking the better driving car has somehow fallen below "having the best spec"?

Also, for the record, we paid £12,400 for a 9 month old Golf 1.6 TDI S 5 door in grey metallic from a main VW dealer with 13k miles. That was in line with what we were seeing for Ford, Vauxhall, KIA, Hyundai, etc at the time. We could have bought the same age 308 for £10K but i have a strong dislike for their 1.6HDI.

neil1jnr said:

Out with Pistonheads though, badge snobs aside, I think buyers of most cars would put the Kia ahead of the Golf becuase it is cheaper/warranty/better specced etc, they don't care that it drives better. So looking at their point of view, you would have to keep explaining that the chassis is better and the engine is better etc.

THen you would be wrong. The golf isnt the minority choice. Its a huge seller and with good reason.

If you look at this review of the best family hatches, the VAG group cars along with the Focus come out top.

http://www.whatcar.com/car-news/best-worst-family-...

If you then look at the top sales, again the Focus and Golf come out top (of the cars we're talking about)

http://www.carbuyer.co.uk/reviews/recommended/best...

So theres a direct correlation between the dynamically best cars and the best sellers.

So out there in the real world, the minority choice is still something like a KIA whereby you're buying it because its a bit cheaper and its got a bit longer warranty, not because its the better car.

And i guess, therein lies the reason for having to justify a left of field choice - "with so many dynamically good cars out there like the Passat and Mondeo, why did you buy a KIA Optima?"

Edited by daemon on Thursday 7th May 13:25

[daemon]

ZX10R NIN said:

Going by your own theory that means you should have a Porsche Cayman instead of a 370Z as the Porsche is the better car.

I can't comment on the Golf sized offerings but I agree Optima's will be sold on Equipment Warranty & Service Packages as well as looks.

At the same time I can say of the cars we drove the handling order went like this.

Mondeo
Passat
Optima
Octavia
Insignia

In terms of overall running costs for the next 5 years looks spec & interior, the order changed.
Optima
Mondeo
Octavia
Passat
Insignia

As I said my Brothers criteria was less than a 100 miles on the clock New or Pre Registered 19k to spend (with 2k to go towards upgrades) but had to have as much Kit on it as his weekend warrior M3.

He bought his for Fully Loaded for 18k & is very happy with it, you can buy a brand new 15 plate for 19K
Pre Reg 64, 3 Spec Car 50 miles on the clock.
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...
15 plate
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...

134bhp 234ft/lb Torque Average Fuel 57.6mpg £110 Tax


Skoda

105bhp 185ft/lb Torque Average Fuel 71mpg £0.00 Tax
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2014...


The clincher for my brother was 3 years free servicing 7 year warranty 2 years Free Recovery (minus the clutch & Turbo after the ReMap) & of course the equipment level.
Below is the Spec for his 64 Plate Optima it came with 79 miles on the clock cost £17990.00 he's the second owner, for a car who's job it will be to do his A Road/Motorway commute.
The engine is a bit noisier than the Ford but not so much when you're in it.

Here's his spec:
Electric Panoramic Roof Xenon Headlights Full Leather Interior Heated Front & Rear Seats Dual Climate Control Bluetooth with Voice Control USB Input Aux Input DAB Radio Single Disc MP3 Player Bluetooth Music Streaming 7" Touchscreen Headunit with Full European Navigation Ipod Connectivity Front & Rear Parking Sensors Rear Parkin Camera 18" Alloys Heated & Electric Mirrors Hill Start Assist Control Parallel Park Assist Lane Assist Blind Spot Assist Start Stop Cornering Lights Get Home Lighting Cruise Control Auto Lights/Wipers Electric 8 Way Adjustable Drivers Seat 550 Watt 12 Speaker Infinity Audio Premium Sound System

The Kia suited his needs because for him the Optima was the "better" car, the Passat & Octavia weren't any better to drive so it was hard to accept the lack of spec.

The new Mondeo impressed with handling & interior but it was an extra 3K to get near the spec of the Optima which didn't work for him but a good car none the less.

113bhp 193ft/lb Torque Average Fuel 78.5mpg £0.00 Tax
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...


Passat Interior, would you really say this is a better interior than the others?
138bhp 236ft/lb Torque £130 Tax Average Fuel 61.4mpg

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2014...

Vauxhall
128bhp 221ft/lbAverage Fuel 62.8mpg Tax £30


As you can see when looking for a decent sized saloon there really isn't much in it, that's when warranties & servicing become deal makers or breakers, this is where the Kia edges it with as good a fit & finish as the VAG/Ford stuff & a better equipment package.

So I say the Koreans are here, would I choose an Optima over a Mercedes No I wouldn't, would I pick one over the other cars listed above then Yes I would.

Here are the dyno results for the Optima:
Standard:
Engine BHP: 131.2 (surprised us with that figure)
Wheel BHP: 113.4
Torque FT/LB:234.1 Peak at 2800 rpm

After the Re Map & a K&N replacement filter
Engine BHP: 179.4
Wheel BHP: 149.7
Torque FT/LB: 276.8 Peak at 2900 rpm

Edited by ZX10R NIN on Thursday 7th May 02:19

Neil1JR. The above is a prime example of having to "justify" buying a KIA. You cant say its the best big saloon out there so you have to explain the reasons why.

Like really - i dont care why his brother bought what he did. He had his subjective reasons, but it doesnt make the Optima a good car.

If you buy a Passat or a Mondy, people know they're decent big cars. Everyone knows that. Even my mum knows that and shes in her 70s. You dont have to explain WHY.

[ZX10R NIN]

Is the Optima there or there about's then I'd say yes IMO, is it the Class Leader? No.

If it was to be my only Car & I had to buy new with a budget of 19k my priorities would be Looks Equipment Handling & Power Output, with those in mind my Top 5 would be this.

Mondeo
Optima
Octavia
Insignia
Passat

Everyone's needs are specific to them that's why people buy different cars but for me I'd consider the Optima.

[kiseca]

daemon said:

Neil1JR. The above is a prime example of having to "justify" buying a KIA. You cant say its the best big saloon out there so you have to explain the reasons why.

Like really - i dont care why his brother bought what he did. He had his subjective reasons, but it doesnt make the Optima a good car.

If you buy a Passat or a Mondy, people know they're decent big cars. Everyone knows that. Even my mum knows that and shes in her 70s. You dont have to explain WHY.

You explained why you bought your car earlier. The only difference between you explaining it and the explanations offered for the Optima is that the things that the Optima is good at don't matter to you. That's why you describe your reasons as reasons and the Optima reasons as excuses.

If you're using your mum as an example of a typical older person not very up to date with cars then they are making their choices on the car based on a reputation built over many years and generations of car. That does not mean that the current model is actually any good, but it is an area where Kia, no matter what they do, will not be able to compete for a very long time. I think it took Audi about 15 years to change their market perception. Lexus and Infiniti are still trying to forge theirs.

[daemon]

kiseca said:

You explained why you bought your car earlier. The only difference between you explaining it and the explanations offered for the Optima is that the things that the Optima is good at don't matter to you. That's why you describe your reasons as reasons and the Optima reasons as excuses.

The things that are good about the Optima are not directly related to the car itself - KIA has chosen to give it an increased spec, KIA have chosen to put a 7 year warranty on it, KIA have chosen to price it a little cheaper than its competitors.

Those are tactics to support the car in the marketplace. They are NOT traits of the car itself.

kiseca said:

If you're using your mum as an example of a typical older person not very up to date with cars then they are making their choices on the car based on a reputation built over many years and generations of car. That does not mean that the current model is actually any good, but it is an area where Kia, no matter what they do, will not be able to compete for a very long time. I think it took Audi about 15 years to change their market perception. Lexus and Infiniti are still trying to forge theirs.

I was using the reference to my mum as an example of how the likes of a Passat or Mondy are known to be good. With a KIA, you need to justify it - because its a left of field choice.

I totally agree with you by the way - its going to take time for KIA to crack the nut of mainstream acceptance, and as i've said, they're getting there with cars like the Ceed and Hyundai with the i30, etc. Very good cars. The IX35, very good car. Optima, not so much.

I've no doubt they WILL get there, i've said that already, but they're not quite there yet.

[SuperPav]

daemon said:

I was using the reference to my mum as an example of how the likes of a Passat or Mondy are known to be good. With a KIA, you need to justify it - because its a left of field choice.

I totally agree with you by the way - its going to take time for KIA to crack the nut of mainstream acceptance, and as i've said, they're getting there with cars like the Ceed and Hyundai with the i30, etc. Very good cars. The IX35, very good car. Optima, not so much.

I've no doubt they WILL get there, i've said that already, but they're not quite there yet.

Sorry, I'll partly disagree on this. Whilst I am with you in the sense that you never have to ask "what made you buy a Passat/3-series", the fact that it is high spec for the price IS very much a relevant reason/trait of the car. For exactly the same reason why people buy a Skoda over a Passat. Because it's a similar offering, but you get more for the same money.

A 7 year warranty is as much of a consideration of a car purchase as the servicing costs for many people (obviously not those who run on 3 year lease cycles).


Having said that, the Optima isn't Kia's best car, and is in an unfamiliar market segment to them, so yes, it won't be a de-facto choice anytime soon.

[daemon]

SuperPav said:

Sorry, I'll partly disagree on this. Whilst I am with you in the sense that you never have to ask "what made you buy a Passat/3-series", the fact that it is high spec for the price IS very much a relevant reason/trait of the car. For exactly the same reason why people buy a Skoda over a Passat. Because it's a similar offering, but you get more for the same money.

A 7 year warranty is as much of a consideration of a car purchase as the servicing costs for many people (obviously not those who run on 3 year lease cycles).


Having said that, the Optima isn't Kia's best car, and is in an unfamiliar market segment to them, so yes, it won't be a de-facto choice anytime soon.

Its a relevant reason, but its definitely not a trait of the car.

If Peugeot were to put a 7 year warranty on a 308 and up the spec, would that make it a better car?

No. It would be Peugeot supporting the car in the marketplace by offering incentives.

[daemon]

SuperPav said:

Having said that, the Optima isn't Kia's best car, and is in an unfamiliar market segment to them, so yes, it won't be a de-facto choice anytime soon.

From what i understand, the Optima sells very well in the states, its just european markets they havent cracked yet.

[SuperPav]

daemon said:

Its a relevant reason, but its definitely not a trait of the car.

If Peugeot were to put a 7 year warranty on a 308 and up the spec, would that make it a better car?

No. It would be Peugeot supporting the car in the marketplace by offering incentives.

If Peugeot were to up the spec, yes it would make it a better car. In the same way that a car with sat nav is better than a car without sat nav for the same price.

Your logic is like saying a Mercedes E-class with manual windows, steel wheels with hubcaps and no central locking would still a be good car in today's marketplace because of its inherent goodness. No, it wouldn't. It would be penny pinching ste.


Take your point re: warranty.. The warranty does not make it a better car, but equally does make it a more attractive package for some people.