I'd rather have a Renault I think. Americans have a certain idea about Renault based upon what we saw in the early 80's but most have no clue about what today's Renaults are like. They are a hell of alot nicer than Kia's I can tell you that. One nice thing about European cars, reliability aside, is that they don't suffer from the painfully generic, soulless look and feel you find in many, many Asian cars still today.

It seems that many Asian cars have this problem and for years the best they could do to attempt 'soul' or creativity in car design in most cases, was to imitate others. They have broken out of that mold in recent years to some extent, but not entirely.

Go test drive a brand new 4 cylinder automatic Camry if you need an example. Good reliable car, but painfully lacking in any zest or personality or anything that would actually compel a passionate person to buy one. Most European cars, IMO, even the cheapest most pedestrian ones, have some kind of personality and a little zing or quirk that makes them fun to drive.

 

maybe they want to make cars that young people can be able to afford insurance let alone payment. not even young people. just americans. i'm guessing you have a clean record and money. most of america does not.

 

My mom used to have the very first Hyundai Sonata that came to the US. After our horrific experience with the car, our family decided that we will never buy Hyundai again. However, i gotta say that i am changing my mind slowly but surely.

Almost all the Korean companies had image issues in the US. However, look at how Samsung improved their image from a cheap brand to a marquee name that rivals Sony's of the world. I think it is just a matter of time before we see Hyundai topping our reliability expectations.

(Samsung has no union and obviously has no labor issues but Hyundai does.. and i think this may be their achilles hill...)

 

i didn't read all the posts but here's my opinion.

Hyundai was looking like crap years back. Their styling was just not meant for anybody but now look at the SONATA it's almost a rip off the HONDA ACCORD. It's getting to the point where they make car that look decent. Also the 10 year warranty seem appealing. Give them more time and they'll be at TOYOTA and HONDA's level no doubt. Also i wouldn't mind buying the SONATA very nice looking car for a reasonable price.

 

Yes, Biznox, I actually have owned or driven many Euro vehicles, and some of them are quite nice. Some, however, I just would not own again.

Renault for example makes incredibly easy to keep running basic cars, and some rather plush feeling higher end cars. None of them give me an easy feeling ever since this one Dauphine and one Caravelle I once new... ('60's)

Fiat is an industrial giant that makes everything from little 350cc cars to huge trucks, and much else in Italy and elsewhere. Thing is, I've always felt Italian electrics have been a bit 'on edge' in their reliability. Doesn't seem to matter if it's a Fiat or a Ferrari.

Then of course there are the British cars I've owned ("Lucas, Lord of Darkness") - I made a promise to myself back in 1969 to NEVER own a British car again if I could help it. I love some of 'em, but even if someone gave me a Rolls or an Aston Martin, I'd trade it for something I felt more comfortable with.

Yeah, most of that is basing that on experiences I had seemingly long ago, but after all one MUST learn from experience or not learn at all.

My first Honda car was a '72 Z600 - one of the first two Honda models brought to the states for limited distribution (the N600 Sedan and the Z600 Coupe). The first Kias and Hyundais brought in were in reality a lot better cars...

There is one comment, though, that I just must take exception to: "One nice thing about European cars, reliability aside, is that they don't suffer from the painfully generic, soulless look and feel you find in many, many Asian cars still today." While many of the Japanese cars actually imported to the US are so similar one must look at the name tags, the box has personality and a soul. :D

 

If you want Renault just own a 2002+ Nissan, oops.

 

Not exactly. Renault is the dominant partner in that arrangement. Though they do use Nissan's excellent VQ motor in some of their cars.

But even if that was the case I'd rather have that then a damn Kia POS. I'd rather have almost anything than a Kia. There are even several Fiat's I'd prefer.

 

Even the minmum trim Punto and Panda?

But you are right that Nissan does sell more powerful motors standard than Kia, they ever sell more powerful engines standard than Honda or Mazda. But like Mazda with Ford, Renault did get the more beneficial end of the relationship.

But I hope we get the Renault Clio or Peugeot 205 based Nissan Sentra replacement soon, for Nissan's sake too.

 

I dunno where your getting your information from but my friend works at a Kia dealership. I happen to know alot about Kia electronics, they are way above Hyundai electronics wise. You'll find more luxury in a newer Kia than a hyundai (BTW Hyundai stands for Hope You Understand Nothing's Driveable And Inexpensive )

 

Do you mean wireing, ECU/TCU or do you mean every workable thing in the interior?

As far as I see the only differences between say a current Kia Sportage and Hyundai Tuscon is the interior, body and how the suspention is tuned. And for which engine, suspension as well as the wiring that goes along with both SUVs pretty much the same.

But I guess it makes sense considering that Hyundai has penned Kia as their more rugged devision and also more luxurious at times with the exception of the Hyundai Azera. But since you can buy both equivalents at about the exact same price I always have been a bit confused with that aspect.

 

Well if your friend knows as much as the average person working at a dealership, salesmen included, then his opinion is worthless.

Kia IS Hyundai. Hyundai IS Kia. They are built by the same company and use the same substandard crap. End of story. Saying Kia is better than Hyundai is like saying diarrhea tastes better than watery ****.

In another 10 years they may be close to the level Honda and Toyota are at now, but then Toyota and Honda will still be a decade ahead of them. They could have done themselves a favor by just trying to build quality cars from the beginning like Toyota and Honda did. It's alot easier to build a good reputation from nothing than it is to build a good reputation out of a sh*tty one.

 

The early Hondas were pretty sad. The first one I bought here in the US, in 1972, was worse than ANY current Kia/Hyundai ... a 1310 pound, two cylinder, 600cc, air cooled ultra, ultra cheap two place coupe on 10 inch wheels:



It was a lot of fun, though ... scurrying along on the freeways, dodging the larger pieces of debris and looking up at the lug nuts on the semis. I put nearly 48,000 miles on one! A lot of that screaming along at about 7000 RPM on the freeway. :D

 

Hopefully a few of those girls came with that car.

 

Naw, and my wifey wouldn't have let me keep her if I got one, anyway...

 

Of course dude. It's all relative. I'm not suggesting comparing ANY car from 1972 to a car from now. Quality and reliabilty have improved dramatically across the board in almost every car brand since then.

My point is that a 1972 Honda was damn reliable and well built when compared to the other cars offered for sale in 1972 at that price. The same is NOT true for Hyundais when they first came out. They were absolute shiite compared with everything on the market for quite some time. That was NEVER true of Hondas or Toyotas. Make sense?