Wife’s car and she loves it. Comfortable, economical and easy to drive. Yes, higher rev range is required for brisk driving, but it is sure footed when you do, and has a more compliant suspension than it’s sibling, the Rio. I turn off LKA, and turn on Cruise Control, in the first 100 metres of driving, happy days thereafter. Looks better that all of its rivals especially in pearl black.
Thanks for the insight, @Scargoman! If you have the time, we'd love to hear more about your thoughts. Submit an owner review here: www.carsguide.com.au/owner-reviews/submit
I test drove this car here in Ireland today, very impressed, it's definitely not an SUV though, it's a slightly taller hatchback, that's all, they have a body kit on the front end to make it look wider. I drove the 1.0L 3 cylinder turbo 100 Hp 6 speed manual and over 50 Kms got 3.5 L/100 Km, new tight engine with 40 km on the Odometer. Very impressed, so why do we need very expensive hybrids ? this was driving 60-80 Km/hr it has plenty of power for normal people. Interior very nice and very happy to see kia have analogue instrument cluster, I hope they don't change this in the future, i hate all these screens in cars. Nice analogue easy to use climate controls, my current car has climate, radio in menus and it's irritating, I hate it. My current car is a VW id3 Electric with 77 Kwh battery, Kia dealer offered me 15,000 Euros it cost 41K new 2.5 years ago, this is my 3rd EV and won't be making this mistake again, cost to run is low, depreciation high, cost to buy high, 350 km range and long charge times and the interior of this Stonic was a lot nicer. So from my perspective, the Stonic is a very nice car and the 1.0L 100 hp engine is pretty good.
as an owner of one for just over a year now, i can say the seats aren’t as bad as made out and are quite comfortable. and the worst thing about it has been the lack in power as you really have to lay into the small engine to get anywhere at a reasonable pace.
I found the seats comfortable too. Test drove the 1.0L 3 cylinder 100 HP 6 speed manual today here in Ireland, more than enough power and very economical, I likes it a lot. I really liked the manual climate controls compared to my current car which has everything buried in menus in a touch screen, it's bonkers and dangerous.
A lot of hate flying around for this car. What are you all doing thrashing your engines? It works just fine. I love my 2022 Stonic which looks exactly the same as the 2023 version really. It's been the perfect car for my needs. Also please check your 36 unread messages lol.
@@miskatonic6210 I drove the 1.0L 100 Hp 6 speed manual here in Ireland and found it plenty powerful, less power would be fine for mostly town driving and occasional longer trips.
I drove the base model Stonic for a week on a trip to Griffith and Wagga Wagga. The base model is 18mm shorter than the next version up and has no centre armrest or rear USB. These would have been preferable. Two issues with the tech that I didn't like; once you use the reversing camera to get out of a space the screen keeps showing the reverse image for about 30 seconds after you have started going forward, for someone relying on the GPS to navigate that was really annoying. Also, the lane-keep-assist kept yanking the steering wheel and throwing the car into large potholes that I was trying to avoid. LKA is a dangerous feature and should be removed from all vehicles in my opinion. The Sport Automatic would be my pick for the best features but still under $30k.
I didn't have that issue with the camera in the 2024 model I drove today. I didn't have any LKA on the one I drove, I hate those systems also but you can usually turn them off, the ones that actually steer and keep in lane are far better. These systems usually switch back on again when you start the car, this allows the car to get more points in the likes of the European NCAP safety tests but all these systems do is annoy the driver, some cars even beep at you if it thinks you're getting too close to the edge. I test drive a 2024 Stonic 1.0L turbo 100 hp Manual today here in Ireland, very impressed with it and the fuel economy and having manual controls for climate was very nice vs touch screen in my electric car that I hate.
Yeah I drove the 1.0L turbo 100 hp here in Ireland today, very impressed with it and the fuel economy making me wonder why manufacturers bother making very expensive hybrids ? they don't get better economy.
Just get the turbo and manual and it's great. Why do reviewers always review the worst combinations nobody would buy anyways? Do some research first, it's kind of your job? You should recommend the preferable options.
Great little car biggest biggest letdown is that bloody 1.4 l engine. It's terrible. Would be great if it was fitted with like a 1.6 needs more power. Yes I know the GT line has a 1 l 3 cylinder turbo but not everyone's going to buy that. Just saying just my opinion
It's the same engine with a different car around it? You'll obviously get a lot more car for your money in a i30, because it's a class above, but it's also slower, because it's heavier.
I drove one, totally gutless as an auto, mostly due to a lack of low down torque. It's either move at a glacial pace or it's all downshifts and revs. It really needs the 1.6 to make it reasonable.
No, it doesn't. You just need to get the 1.0 Turbo manual, which is quite sporty for what is a tiny city car. What do you expect the car to do? Win races in front of Walmart? Not a single brand uses 1.6 liter engines in subcompact cars any more, you expert.
@@miskatonic6210 Your comment is beyond ignorant. Not available as a manual in our market, the 1.4 and 6 speed torque converter combo is gutless even for me (and I'm not a lead foot). I don't care what engines are used as long as they perform reasonably.
The 1.4 Suzuki BoosterJet is a gem though. Barely any turbo lag, smooth and quiet but also fun with the little bump in the torque curve. The 1.6 M16A is great too, low tech, not even direct injection and my average is 5.7 and that includes many shorter trips, traffic and opening it up all the way on the autobahn regularly. Doesn't even cheat by burning engine oil like a lot of other "frugal" engines.
I don’t know how the reviewer got 8’s for fuel economy? Most likely too many cold 3km school runs. Ours runs a high at 6.2l/100km to a low 5.7l/100km on a 20km mix of town/hway running. In fact the more you put the boot in the better the fuel economy!
Wife’s car and she loves it. Comfortable, economical and easy to drive. Yes, higher rev range is required for brisk driving, but it is sure footed when you do, and has a more compliant suspension than it’s sibling, the Rio. I turn off LKA, and turn on Cruise Control, in the first 100 metres of driving, happy days thereafter. Looks better that all of its rivals especially in pearl black.
Thanks for the insight, @Scargoman! If you have the time, we'd love to hear more about your thoughts. Submit an owner review here: www.carsguide.com.au/owner-reviews/submit
I test drove this car here in Ireland today, very impressed, it's definitely not an SUV though, it's a slightly taller hatchback, that's all, they have a body kit on the front end to make it look wider.
I drove the 1.0L 3 cylinder turbo 100 Hp 6 speed manual and over 50 Kms got 3.5 L/100 Km, new tight engine with 40 km on the Odometer. Very impressed, so why do we need very expensive hybrids ? this was driving 60-80 Km/hr it has plenty of power for normal people.
Interior very nice and very happy to see kia have analogue instrument cluster, I hope they don't change this in the future, i hate all these screens in cars.
Nice analogue easy to use climate controls, my current car has climate, radio in menus and it's irritating, I hate it.
My current car is a VW id3 Electric with 77 Kwh battery, Kia dealer offered me 15,000 Euros it cost 41K new 2.5 years ago, this is my 3rd EV and won't be making this mistake again, cost to run is low, depreciation high, cost to buy high, 350 km range and long charge times and the interior of this Stonic was a lot nicer.
So from my perspective, the Stonic is a very nice car and the 1.0L 100 hp engine is pretty good.
as an owner of one for just over a year now, i can say the seats aren’t as bad as made out and are quite comfortable. and the worst thing about it has been the lack in power as you really have to lay into the small engine to get anywhere at a reasonable pace.
No turbo version?
chip tuning 120pk > 140pk Torque 171Nm > 230Nm
yes, seats are apparently designed by an orthopedic surgeon, so definitely have support, and are comfortable
I found the seats comfortable too. Test drove the 1.0L 3 cylinder 100 HP 6 speed manual today here in Ireland, more than enough power and very economical, I likes it a lot.
I really liked the manual climate controls compared to my current car which has everything buried in menus in a touch screen, it's bonkers and dangerous.
I have i stonic not the gt line but it has leather seats.they said it was special edition.
A lot of hate flying around for this car. What are you all doing thrashing your engines? It works just fine. I love my 2022 Stonic which looks exactly the same as the 2023 version really. It's been the perfect car for my needs.
Also please check your 36 unread messages lol.
If it has to be thrashed, its a piece of shi-ite
@@Fanta.... I found the 1.0L 3 cylinder turbo absolutely fine. 100 Hp.
Why do they even review the non turbo and compare it to rivals with a turbo? That engine is obviously not the engine of choice.
@@miskatonic6210 I drove the 1.0L 100 Hp 6 speed manual here in Ireland and found it plenty powerful, less power would be fine for mostly town driving and occasional longer trips.
I drove the base model Stonic for a week on a trip to Griffith and Wagga Wagga. The base model is 18mm shorter than the next version up and has no centre armrest or rear USB. These would have been preferable. Two issues with the tech that I didn't like; once you use the reversing camera to get out of a space the screen keeps showing the reverse image for about 30 seconds after you have started going forward, for someone relying on the GPS to navigate that was really annoying. Also, the lane-keep-assist kept yanking the steering wheel and throwing the car into large potholes that I was trying to avoid. LKA is a dangerous feature and should be removed from all vehicles in my opinion. The Sport Automatic would be my pick for the best features but still under $30k.
LKA I find really worthwhile maybe the roads in nz are more suited for that
I didn't have that issue with the camera in the 2024 model I drove today.
I didn't have any LKA on the one I drove, I hate those systems also but you can usually turn them off, the ones that actually steer and keep in lane are far better.
These systems usually switch back on again when you start the car, this allows the car to get more points in the likes of the European NCAP safety tests but all these systems do is annoy the driver, some cars even beep at you if it thinks you're getting too close to the edge.
I test drive a 2024 Stonic 1.0L turbo 100 hp Manual today here in Ireland, very impressed with it and the fuel economy and having manual controls for climate was very nice vs touch screen in my electric car that I hate.
This is a great car. The turbo engine is great for daily driving and its responsive on the road. Great car and recommended.
Yeah I drove the 1.0L turbo 100 hp here in Ireland today, very impressed with it and the fuel economy making me wonder why manufacturers bother making very expensive hybrids ? they don't get better economy.
I hate all those reviews of cars with full options - just usless. Cheap oh yeah but I will show you hte most expensive which is not longer cheap.
I agree, it's annoying.
Just get the turbo and manual and it's great.
Why do reviewers always review the worst combinations nobody would buy anyways?
Do some research first, it's kind of your job?
You should recommend the preferable options.
Great little car biggest biggest letdown is that bloody 1.4 l engine. It's terrible. Would be great if it was fitted with like a 1.6 needs more power. Yes I know the GT line has a 1 l 3 cylinder turbo but not everyone's going to buy that. Just saying just my opinion
100%
Which small SUV do you recommend??
I have i stonic not the gt line but it has leather seats.they said it was special edition.
Kia gave South Africa the Sonet in 2021 not the Stonic the Stonic was launched 2019 already for Britain & Europe later Australasia .
What you guys choose between a kia Stonic 1.4L 100hp vs Huyndai i30 1.4L 100hp?
I thought the engines were 1.0, not 1.4L.
It's the same engine with a different car around it? You'll obviously get a lot more car for your money in a i30, because it's a class above, but it's also slower, because it's heavier.
@@Čangrizavi_Cinik 1.0 is only in the GT-Line Stonic.
I drove one, totally gutless as an auto, mostly due to a lack of low down torque. It's either move at a glacial pace or it's all downshifts and revs. It really needs the 1.6 to make it reasonable.
No, it doesn't. You just need to get the 1.0 Turbo manual, which is quite sporty for what is a tiny city car.
What do you expect the car to do? Win races in front of Walmart?
Not a single brand uses 1.6 liter engines in subcompact cars any more, you expert.
@@miskatonic6210 Your comment is beyond ignorant. Not available as a manual in our market, the 1.4 and 6 speed torque converter combo is gutless even for me (and I'm not a lead foot). I don't care what engines are used as long as they perform reasonably.
Gt line totally worth it if you can afford it
Not with that rubbish DCT.
what is dct? @@corporatepsychobabble188
The fuel consumption is very poor for a 1.4 litre, my 1.4 Suzuki gets 5.6 average.
Hyundai and Kia NA petrols are quite poor in terms of fuel consumption. Suzukis are better in terms of fuel consumption
I have the 1L Turbo does 600ks on a tank of petrol around the city I drive in ... on the open roads does 720ks
The 1.4 Suzuki BoosterJet is a gem though. Barely any turbo lag, smooth and quiet but also fun with the little bump in the torque curve.
The 1.6 M16A is great too, low tech, not even direct injection and my average is 5.7 and that includes many shorter trips, traffic and opening it up all the way on the autobahn regularly. Doesn't even cheat by burning engine oil like a lot of other "frugal" engines.
I don’t know how the reviewer got 8’s for fuel economy? Most likely too many cold 3km school runs. Ours runs a high at 6.2l/100km to a low 5.7l/100km on a 20km mix of town/hway running. In fact the more you put the boot in the better the fuel economy!
you look like Ellen Ripley, i like it
dont like how this car drives at all. jerky automat dct gearbox and very hard suspension and no sound deadening att all. seams to run ok in engine.
5ft10 is 178cm.
Rubbish car
Had it 6 months and engines rattling, which says is normal.ABSOLUTELY RUBBISH