Kia Rondo, Kia's new Mazda 5 Options

[afob3]

I'm not going anywhere yet..... As far as I have read the 2.4 in the Sonata and Optima are the same. Looking at them the only difference I see is the cover says Kia vs. Hyundai.

I like the v6 sonata I had as a rental and it does GO but I can't justify the gas when I'm driving 70 plus miles a day. If you like the 3.3 you need to get your hands on the 3.8 in the Azera and Entourage. I forget completely that I'm driving a van when I stomp on it.

[Alex2013GT]

when my wife got her Santa Fe, we looked at the Entourage. . . but it was out of our price range. I didn't take it out for a test drive, but I'm sure it would have been sweet (for a van) The interior was great too. That'll probably be her next car in a few years. As for me. . . Genesis here I come (haha maybe in like 10 years)

As far as the 2.4 in the sonata are you looking at the last gen. sonata?

[Bobzilla]

The new Sonata and Optima share the same Theta 2.4L. Great engine. With a 5-spd they pull hard.

[Silentwolf]

Thanks, wasn't sure.
As for engines then it isnt any contest on the Optima.
2.4 all the way
Lets compare:

2.4 i4
10.5:1
162 hp @ 5,800 rpm
164 lb.-ft. @ 4,250 rpm
24/34mpg

2.7 v6 (60deg. V)
10.4:1
185 hp @ 6,000 rpm
182 lb.-ft. @ 4,000 rpm
22/30mpg
+100lbs to weight of car
no manual

Um, ya. I think i'll take the i4.

Weird that Hyundai couldn't get more out a 60degree engine. Makes for a more balanced engine.

[afob3]

Yes they are both current generation 2007 models. I think the 2.7 is an older engine that I had in my 03 Santa Fe. IIRC the only 6 cylinder 3.3 or 3.8 from Hyundai is in the Sedona van. Even the new rondo (trying to keep on topic has the 2.7 as an option)

This post has been edited by afob3: Sep 18 2007, 07:41 PM

[silet]

I would stay away from the 2.7 V6. If 3.3 V6 is offered then that is a great choice.

[Alex2013GT]

I thought when I bought my Sonata the other engine choice was the 2.7L, but now thinking about it, that was in the older gen sonata's, and the new ones are either 2.4 or 3.3. . . ok brain's back in order B)

and back on topic. . . if you're driving 70+ miles a day, then i'm sure the added cost of gas for having the bigger engine might not be worth it to you. however, there are several people that when driving highway commutes at decent cruising speeds saw upper 20 mpg's on some sonata related forums that i've looked through. (some were saying they averaged 30+mpg but that might be a bit of a stretch) It seemed most people that had the 4cyl Sonata were getting about the same or worse MPG. So it seems (at least in the Sonata) that there probably wouldn't be much of a difference in MPG between the 2 engines. The EPA estimates pretty much agree with people's real world experience - 4cyl, 5spd manual - 21/31 and 6cyl, 5spd, auto - 19/28

[theman]

Even though the delta does not have much power it has alot going for it. It is so smooth, revs well, and has a very flexible power band. I really like that engine and always have no matter how short it is on power.

[Neanderthal]

Gee how did I miss this thread?
My d-i-l aka wife's daughter had a Rondo which we helped her buy. It was a great little package, all the safety gadgets including side bags everywhere, which fortunately inflated appropriately when some Lexusidiot T-boned her one fine night.

This was the four cylinder five-seat. Price was great.

Hurt her neck but she survived, the Rondo was a total, gave its life for her.

Car was very satisfactory as mom + 2 kids transport. She lives in a big city and wants the biggest heaviest vehicle she can saddle up. Rondo replacement turned out to be a Sorento LX 3.3. She wanted a Borrego but there wasn't an extra 10 grand lying on the kitchen table so Sorento it was.

I really liked the Rondo, it's a tidy package and as I recall drove nicely though it had accelerometer limitations given the mill and weight. Nothing unexpected, do the math.

I think MY 2009 was the last year, I still see a lot around. Too bad it didn't offer the 3.3, the 2.7 seems oddly low powered, kinda like Mopar's wacky 2.7.
IMO 2.7 just isn't enough volume=zoom for a V6, my wife had a 2.5 V6 Sebring which just wasn't quick. Make it 3.0 or make it a four.

So how did I miss this thread? I hate those time warps!