.  But the sign on the building with BMW Salespeople will be HARRY FAIRBAIRN BMW.

Still SIR Arnolds motor group though.

 

Christ has he bought them too? Getting bloody hard to buy a car and not give AC any money.

The number of turbos means nothing, one big turbo will flow more air than 2 small ones, big power Supras often ditch the twin turbo setup for a big single.

 

For which application, drag races? And what about the lag, (un)usable power-band and drive-ability? I think it's quite irrelevant what heavily modded Supras do to what we are talking about here (stock, usable performance). And again, BMW's engineers have already answered that in the latest M3/4 where they went down the twin-turbo way instead of a big single (among other manufacturers) so it must mean something.

 

 

I think you are missing the point with this car a little, it's not a sports car, it's a GT and not aimed at the M4 / GT-R market. It has more power than the other cars in the class, will make lots of lazy torque and will probably give half reasonable fuel consumption (hence not having a stratospheric power output). KIA see this as their 'halo' car, if it is successful and if there is demand for a hotter version then I wouldn't be surprised to see a pared down, high power, 4wd variant in the future. That is a couple of big ifs though...

 

I could never consider it a sports car. My point on the engine was only from a technological point of view (ie what kind of engines they have developed/how much power they can confidently extract from them etc.) I don't disagree with the rest.

Edit: Quoted wrong post!

Edited 11 January, 20179 yr by Brian69

For which application, drag races? And what about the lag, (un)usable power-band and drive-ability? I think it's quite irrelevant what heavily modded Supras do to what we are talking about here (stock, usable performance). And again, BMW's engineers have already answered that in the latest M3/4 where they went down the twin-turbo way instead of a big single (among other manufacturers) so it must mean something.

 

Turbos are just a fan driven by exhaust gasses, whether there are 1 or 2 they will require the same exhaust flow rate to produce a similar intake flow rate. I would suggest that the twin turbo setup used by Nissan is due to the fact that it is easier to pack in 2 small turbos in the engine bay than a larger single turbo especially with a V configuration engine, BMW use a sequential twin turbo system (only a single turbo running up to a certain point where it switches to parallel twin) to improve low down response rather than top end power. Audi are running a single turbo in the new V6 RS4, similar to the current S4 setup but with an echarger system 'torque filling' at lower revs.

 

With regards to Supras, when I had mine a friend had his converted to run a Boostlogic T61 single turbo setup with the correct supporting modifications. He was making positive boost at exactly the same point in the rev range as my stock sequential turbo car, then made more boost through the rev range with full boost approx. 500rpm earlier than the twin switch over point on a stock car. His car made 540bhp from the stock 3 litre displacement with better throttle response and less lag. The design of the turbo and its size is far more important to throttle response and ultimate power than the number of turbos.

Turbos are just a fan driven by exhaust gasses, whether there are 1 or 2 they will require the same exhaust flow rate to produce a similar intake flow rate. I would suggest that the twin turbo setup used by Nissan is due to the fact that it is easier to pack in 2 small turbos in the engine bay than a larger single turbo especially with a V configuration engine, BMW use a sequential twin turbo system (only a single turbo running up to a certain point where it switches to parallel twin) to improve low down response rather than top end power. Audi are running a single turbo in the new V6 RS4, similar to the current S4 setup but with an echarger system 'torque filling' at lower revs.

 

With regards to Supras, when I had mine a friend had his converted to run a Boostlogic T61 single turbo setup with the correct supporting modifications. He was making positive boost at exactly the same point in the rev range as my stock sequential turbo car, then made more boost through the rev range with full boost approx. 500rpm earlier than the twin switch over point on a stock car. His car made 540bhp from the stock 3 litre displacement with better throttle response and less lag. The design of the turbo and its size is far more important to throttle response and ultimate power than the number of turbos.

 

I think you're  straying off topic here. This is not about BT vs TT. Sure enough a well supported and thought after BT setup can work wonders but only "with correct supporting modifications" as you say (and enough money I would add) and that usually rules it out from a performance/cost point of view of a car manufacturer. Which is why you see all these alternatives like twin-turbos or turbo+low end aids like supercharger or echarger instead of huge single turbo implementations.

 

The point remains that the Stinger's 110hp per litre output is not exactly an impressive value by today's standards where even a mere Golf R or Cupra make almost 50% more power per litre. Again, this hasn't got to do with whether the car is good overall but more like a note on Kia's technological progress. Hope it's clear now.

I think you're  straying off topic here. This is not about BT vs TT. Sure enough a well supported and thought after BT setup can work wonders but only "with correct supporting modifications" as you say (and enough money I would add) and that usually rules it out from a performance/cost point of view of a car manufacturer. Which is why you see all these alternatives like twin-turbos or turbo+low end aids like supercharger or echarger instead of huge single turbo implementations.

 

Perhaps we are straying off topic however my point was that you do not need to go twin turbo to make more power and retain drivability as you were originally claiming. There are many reasons car manufacturers go for twin turbo setups, packaging in the engine bay or adoption of a sequential system are examples, but twin turbos have no inherent advantage over a larger single turbo when it comes to power generation.

 

When I mentioned supporting modifications I was talking about things like an appropriately sized intercooler, larger injectors and a stronger clutch for the power output, nothing that would improve the response of a turbo.

 

I do see your point about the specific output, but it is very similar to the other vehicles in its class...

It's probably that a 450hp Kia doesn't suit their projected market. Expect an 'extreme' version in a few years.

 

It would be that little bit too thirsty, too expensive to insure and tax (especially new) and maybe a little too frightening to drive.

Also there would be more strain on the car so likely more expensive for Kia during the warranty period.

It's probably that a 450hp Kia doesn't suit their projected market. Expect an 'extreme' version in a few years.

It would be that little bit too thirsty, too expensive to insure and tax (especially new) and maybe a little too frightening to drive.

Also there would be more strain on the car so likely more expensive for Kia during the warranty period.

This....

they arent aiming that at petrol heads. Its aimed at existing customers to give them a better performance car thats still maneageable by a typical driver..

Edited 11 January, 20179 yr by mac11irl

This....

they arent aiming that at petrol heads. Its aimed at existing customers to give them a better performance car thats still maneageable by a typical driver..

 

But are their existing customers the "45k sports/super-saloon" type? I have a feeling not. You can't just jump from superminis and hatches to this kind of cars, both as a brand and as a KIA customer, it takes many years and models to get there, although you do have to start from somewhere...

But are their existing customers the "45k sports/super-saloon" type? I have a feeling not. You can't just jump from superminis and hatches to this kind of cars, both as a brand and as a KIA customer, it takes many years and models to get there, although you do have to start from somewhere...

 

Maybe it's just a loss leader for the brand to drive sales of their more 'normal' cars.

Audi probably doesn't make that much from the R8 relative to the A3/A4 but it gets the badge seen in more exciting places.

Edited 11 January, 20179 yr by Aspman

But are their existing customers the "45k sports/super-saloon" type? I have a feeling not. You can't just jump from superminis and hatches to this kind of cars, both as a brand and as a KIA customer, it takes many years and models to get there, although you do have to start from somewhere...

No, but equally the latest Optima was a fairly butch, shapely looking lump compared to its predessors and stable mates..

also they are probably like every marque - trying to crack into another demographic of sales, in this case the 30's low level executive who wants a car with good, if not mega, performance at a reasonable cost and practicality.

also worth remebering that outside petrol heads people see the headline numbers as being a big engine with turbos strapped on and equating that with "it must have loads of powerrrr" with that size engine. that the premium brands can chuck more power out isnt seen as a surprise, of course bmw have faster cars, they are special..

Kia has been spending a lot of time developing its range over the last few years. It has invested heavily in its GT range as well as it's dealer network. My local dealer is all too happy to lend me a car for a day knowing I wouldn't be making any deals there and then.

The new stinger is quite a jump and I'm surprised it is coming to the UK but I'm glad. It's not going to be the best in class, but it will be a decent rival to the mainstream BMWs, Audi's etc.

I like it, found this:

 

 

 

Kia must be doing something right, good market share after a reasonably new start.

I like it, found this:

 

 

 

Kia must be doing something right, good market share after a reasonably new start.

 

Only just seen it and at some point showing the interior I thought I accidentally skipped to a previous generation S4/S6 video... This looks too much like a half-finished Audi-copy (main aircraft type vents, wide horizontal Climate unit, console) which I imagine is exactly what you don't want to see in a supposed premium flagship. And yet weirdly enough, the side vents are totally different as if they didn't have access to the rest of the Audi's data  :D 

 

I can understand the "Maserati inspired" rear lights but the interior is hard to overlook. They should have gone with a unique KIA design and stick to it or at least try to copy more creatively. You don't enter in this class with so obvious copying, it almost felt Chinese in my eyes.

^^^

 

The Audi influence will be the Peter Shreyer connection...   As I said I really like that - yes it has Audi influences but also a lot more to it that is of interest design-wise - like the third gen FD RX8 rear lights...

Which car designer ever really designed something that much very different other than evolution's of what went before until the one that came up with the Fiat Multipla, then Nissan Juke and now the new Honda C-HR.

 

Better make that in the past 3 decades.  Mini  / Fiat and some others were obviously miles different from what went before.

Edited 13 January, 20179 yr by Offski

It's nice, Kias are nice looking cars right now, but I think they've raced up the price point a bit too quickly.

 

Just because something is in the same price bracket as Audi/BMW/MB doesn't mean it's fighting in the same market. 

 

Real competitors here might be more the Ford ST, CTR, VXR crowd that are less likely to look down on a badge.

Apart from Lexus, which Asian manufacturer has made a success of the large luxury market, certainly not Nissan and now Hyundai have started with a large one which I've already forgotten about.

Hyundai Kia are getting a bit ahead of themselves, to me.

Kia 's 7 year warranty has so many get out clauses, for example I had a problem(random not working as it should) with the stereo on my cee'd which would of been covered if I was the first owner, but as I was the second owner I t wasn't covered as the car was more than 18 months old.... other items hare not covered on the second owner after 18 months....though my cee'd was a 59 plate so it may have changed since

Apart from Lexus, which Asian manufacturer has made a success of the large luxury market, certainly not Nissan and now Hyundai have started with a large one which I've already forgotten about.

Hyundai Kia are getting a bit ahead of themselves, to me.

 

They did it in part by not even trying. Toyota created Lexus and Nissan Infinity because they knew they couldn't sell luxury under their original branding.

 

Citroen is trying it now with DS.

 

My mate is looking to buy a new motor next year, he does a lot of miles and he's considering Kia/Hyundai for the warranty and value. But he doesn't want one, he want's an Audi A6, Lexus, 5 series etc.

 

Kia is still a head/wallet choice. I don't think this will change that, maybe a start but not the whole way.

Edited 14 January, 20179 yr by Aspman

They did it in part by not even trying. Toyota created Lexus and Nissan Infinity because they knew they couldn't sell luxury under their original branding.

 

Citroen is trying it now with DS.

 

My mate is looking to buy a new motor next year, he does a lot of miles and he's considering Kia/Hyundai for the warranty and value. But he doesn't want one, he want's an Audi A6, Lexus, 5 series etc.

 

Kia is still a head/wallet choice. I don't think this will change that, maybe a start but not the whole way.

If you aren't claiming the depreciation as a tax deduction the Europeans and Lexus are the standouts I would think.

Not too sure why people are hell bent on it being a competitor to bmw etc, Why is it not a Honda/ Ford/ WV/ Skoda competitor? If you are looking at the top point car of these brands ie Golf R, Superb 280, focus ST, Type R, would you not also consider the Stringer.... I would, at least test drive it.

 

That being said, it needs them side indicator either clear or tinted. 

Not too sure why people are hell bent on it being a competitor to bmw etc, Why is it not a Honda/ Ford/ WV/ Skoda competitor? If you are looking at the top point car of these brands ie Golf R, Superb 280, focus ST, Type R, would you not also consider the Stringer.... I would, at least test drive it.

That being said, it needs them side indicator either clear or tinted.

Isn't it supposed to be £50,000? What Performance VW/Skoda/Ford is that much - genuine question.

Isn't it supposed to be £50,000? What Performance VW/Skoda/Ford is that much - genuine question.

I would have thought it's the price point that determines who your competitors are.

Isn't it supposed to be £50,000? What Performance VW/Skoda/Ford is that much - genuine question.

I think 43k, but i recon after 6 months they will sell them for closed to the price of a golf r and the 280 superb 33k?