[RioBravo]

Just stumbled across this:

“Now that the lower MPG rating is public, current owners will face a definite drop in the value of the car when trying to sell it or trade it in. Leaving this loss out of the equation is just plain wrong,” said Rob Carey, an attorney with the firm.

The law firm also is challenging the process for owners to claim reimbursement for the lower fuel economy, alleging that it creates “obstacles that will make it unnecessarily difficult and time-intensive for consumers to collect the modest sums owed to them for increased fuel costs.”

(Dated 11/8/12)

Someone smelled blood in the water.

 

[PLP]

bullshit.
The law firms are only seeking way to get money.

I own 2007 Rondo and 2009 Elantra. In both I can exceed the EPA numbers, just to make sure we do not get confusion - I can achieve smaller fuel consumption than the tests suggested.
Rondo - city I could get 25 MPG US, highway - 32+ MPG US (rated 19/26).
Elantra - city - 28-30, highway 32-35 (rated 24/33) - this one is hard to get solid numbers as I've had it for less than a month.
Of course I could make them to eat more as well.

I also owned 2004 Elantra which was rated 21/29 MPG US. My "life of car" average was 32 MPG US.


I understand the numbers could have been overestimated, but taking into account being 6spd transmission, GDI engine - you could really get 40+ MPG on for instance 1.8 MPI Elantra.

Honestly - I bet people do not know how to drive their cars. I am more than sure that at least 75% of them drive the car incorrectly - stop and go with WOT and then hard brakes.

see here:

skip to 2m45s to get the message.

 

[diabloninja]

The Rio still gets great fuel economy, all things considered.

 

[RioBravo]

There's a *huge* difference in fuel efficiency in driving 60mph on the freeway and driving 80mph. Some stretches of I-20 I'd get 35mpg; others, I'd get 40mpg, at 70mph. Big diff between running light and having the @ss end full of camping gear, too (I averaged 35mpg on the Joshua Tree trip, running 80mph). Just sayin', there's a lot of variable to consider.

I have no regrets.

 

[TJ85]

There is a Judge Judy gif that sums this all up perfect:

What next? Someone going to sue a tyre company because their tyres went flat? Sue the cereal company because they got to the bottom of the box and found there was no cereal left??

That lawsuit is just plain stupid.

 

[Kia_Charles]

Its not that they overstated the miles, its that they did the Fuel Efficiency tests wrong and came out with higher numbers. I for one at 35-38mpg in a 20 mile commute, my commute has alot of ups and downs in it. Two of my co-workers also have Rio's and they have stated the same.

In the end they did not do the standard test correctly for whatever reason and should pay the difference because MPG is the reason that i bought this car. If I would have seen 37 or 38mpg I would not have bought it.

 

[marleyfan61]

Those shrugging off the law suit are not thinking clearly. Kia performed the test wrong (knowingly?? who knows) and over-estimated the mileage numbers people use for purchase comparisons.

Fuel economy is a very large factor in most people's decision making process when considering a new car purchase. If two cars are rated the same, but one was calculated wrong, then I can expect the cost of ownership to be different between the two cars. Even if I drive them in exactly the same manner.

So thousands of people purchase the vehicle based upon an under-estimated cost of ownership factor. This factor can also affect the resale value of the car.

I may have made a different decision had accurate numbers been provided at time of purchase.

To use the ridiculous empty cereal box analogy. Two boxes of cereal claim you will get 50 bowls each. For one box you usually get 40 bowls while for the other one you get only 30 bowls. Then you find out it's because the second company had been overrestimating the amount of cereal in the box and should have been claiming you can get 40 bowls. It doesn't matter that for either box you could have used smaller bowls and gotten more than they claim.

 

[Racineur]

Hi, after all that has been said about FE and after this Hyundai/Kia reimbursement, I think that after all, the 1.6L GDI engine is not that much a fuel miser. It's surely a high tech engine and I'm very happy I have one in my Rio. As far as I"m concerned, my Rio get's very good mileage but not extraordinary one as I was told to expect when in the process of purchasing. I appreciate the fact that Kia acknowledges the facts now. For me, the good numbers should be 28mpg City and 35-38 Highway. Numbers that are not very high. I started to think about my MPG when my stepbrother proved me weeks after weeks he did better with his 2011 Fiesta and its non GDI older tech engine. But can you picture yourself driving a Fiesta or a Fit? Maybe an Accent but in no way a Fiesta for 2-3 MPG more.

 

[PLP]

they did the Fuel Efficiency tests wrong and came out with higher numbers.

In the end they did not do the standard test correctly for whatever reason and should pay the difference because MPG is the reason that i bought this car. If I would have seen 37 or 38mpg I would not have bought it.

If they ran the test incorrectly, they would know right away, right? So what's the case now? Why would it take 3 years to find out?

Sure, everyone looks on fuel economy. However, the numbers are JUST estimates. And let's face it - IF 2009 Elantra with 2.0 MPI 5 spd can get 33 MPG, 2013 Elantra with 1.8 GDI 6 spd should get 40.

 

[conwelpic]

just a bunch of greedy people led on by a greedy lawyer, none of it makes any sense. At this point there is no way you can say your there will be a drop in trade-in value just because of an EPA variation. At trade-in time, its more of the miles travelled the condition its in and how well its been maintained, 1-2 mpg is not really going to entering into it. The vehicles are still economical in the grand scheme of things. Also it depends what you are trading it in on too, there is as many variations to determine trade-in value as there is variations in driving that creates all these different mileages that people get.

As they said at the end of the video "if you want better economy change your driving style".

 

[TJ85]

The lawsuit is ridiculous. The Judge Judy gif is still most appropriate.

Joking aside, there is not much grounds to file the lawsuit against Kia. Its some money hungry law firm taking advantage of people that feel wronged by Kia/Hyundai.

Did Kia lie? No. They had mis-calculated an estimate. Kia/Hyundai did not have all appropriate information when calculating their mileage estimates. This went unchecked in North America for years before it was picked up. Hyundai/Kia rely on feedback just like any other company; if you dont tell them there is an issue they wont know. That is what has happened in NA for such a time. Hyundai/Kia and probably many other manufacturers are now going to be at the hands of unregulated legislation. Hyundai/Kia may be the first but they wont be the last.

Parts of the lawsuit also have no ground with Kia; the customers on leases/hire purchase. Those owners have to take up a separate claim with their financial institutions. These customers have the possibility of getting a counter claim for breach of contract.

Is fuel economy the sole factor in resale value?? Not by a long shot. There are countless factors that contribute to a cars resale value, fuel economy is not very high on the list. Its a desirable selling point but its not the only feature of the car. Car popularity, equipment levels, rarity, colour, region (where you live), origin (where the car came from), who drove it and where.. Many factors.

Fuel economy estimate being out will have little effect on resale value.

If owning the Kia Rio is so bad and you cant handle being seen in such a contraption from Hades himself then sell the damn thing. The car is very popular, stock levels are low, waiting lists are high. Someone will gladly take it off your hands and actually be happy in owning it.

At the end of the day, there is still nothing wrong with the car. Car still functions the same. It doesn't operate any differently. Its still using the same mileage as before. Only estimate was mis-calculated. There is nothing physically/mechanically wrong with the car.

 

[zergal]

Did Kia lie? No. They had mis-calculated an estimate. Kia/Hyundai did not have all appropriate information when calculating their mileage estimates. This went unchecked in North America for years before it was picked up. Hyundai/Kia rely on feedback just like any other company; if you dont tell them there is an issue they wont know. That is what has happened in NA for such a time. Hyundai/Kia and probably many other manufacturers are now going to be at the hands of unregulated legislation. Hyundai/Kia may be the first but they wont be the last.
.

I would have to respectfully disagree with the statement there. Yes, I would agree that Kia didn't lie per se and they DID mis-calculate an estimate. But you can't say that Kia didn't have all appropriate information when calculating their mileage estimates. and to be honest, you don't know this for sure. When you're the manufacturer, how hard is it to get information on your own product. NOW, whether not they USED the information they have is a different story.
Same goes with "Kia rely on feedback just like any other company". To a certain extent that is true, but there's also something called due diligence. I would say this is where Kia is guilty. They should have double checked their homework before handing it in (or out in this case).

I do agree though that mileage is rarely a deciding factor when buying a used car. I wouldn't even be able to tell what the last 2-3 cars that I bought used FEs were.

Chances are, people would forget all about this in 3-4 years when you go to sell it anyways..

 

[marleyfan61]

I believe what has been said is that MPG MAY affect resale value. The bigger issue is cost of ownership. Simply put, the affected cars are going to cost more to operate than expected. Kia skewed the numbers to make the cost of ownership appear lower. They have a responsibility to perform the tests properly and provide accurate information based on the tests. Nobody can deny that fuel economy is a major factor in new car purchase.

 

[conwelpic]

I agree with TJ85, very well put, check this out

Will fallout from Hyundai and Kia's L/100KM issues hurt resale values?

 

[RioBravo]

I worry less about fuel efficiency (due to the irregular terrain I drive in) than I do about reliability (due to the amount of miles, and the distances, I drive). I over-estimate my fuel costs for my trips, due to the fact that I carry a lot of crap, and I'm usually in hilly terrain...and trying to keep up with traffic so I don't get run over.

 

[spongebob218]

I worry less about fuel efficiency (due to the irregular terrain I drive in) than I do about reliability ...

+1. Reliability and functionality are much more important than MPGs. If it gets good mileage also, that's a bonus.

 

[Sdgc]

well lets hope my first kia is reliable... becasue i was sceptical about buying a kia after i was part of the hyundai hp scandal years ago... now its a mileage scandal! i just have bad luck!

 

[Sdgc]

btw... of course kia lied... thats what you do to sell more cars.. in the end, only about 20% of the people will get gas money back becasue they care that much... others dont. Just like the hp on the tiburon in 2002... oversize it, apologize after, and your set... in the end, the lie helped you sell more cars.

 

[Racineur]

btw... of course kia lied... thats what you do to sell more cars.. in the end, only about 20% of the people will get gas money back becasue they care that much... others dont. Just like the hp on the tiburon in 2002... oversize it, apologize after, and your set... in the end, the lie helped you sell more cars.

That's what I don't like about this whole thing: I've been lied. Even by 0.3L, I've been lied and it makes me think that I may have been lied on other aspects of the car. Probably non-important but a small lie is a lie. I can only be sure that other automakers lie too. Bizarre world.

 

[RioBravo]

well lets hope my first kia is reliable... becasue i was sceptical about buying a kia after i was part of the hyundai hp scandal years ago... now its a mileage scandal! i just have bad luck!

This is my second Kia...the first being an '03 Spectra GS, traded in at 6 years and 127,000+ miles for an '05 Mustang ragtop. Big mistake.