The 2013 KIA Sportage was given a recall on the GDI system that utilized the FCV to control supply of fuel. I had this done, and lost TURBO. Turbo doesn't spool at all. The car used to do 14 PSI; barely does 8 PSI. In park, with the pedal to the medal, it doesn't rev above 4 RPM's. I paid for a turbo that no longer exists. This car used to beat my friend's posche and barely gets up to speed to pass a car. I've lost at least 60 HP in the car- doesn't even go to redline now.
After the FCV recall, I lost all the performance I enjoyed and paid for in this car. I went to 2 dealers only to be told it drives fine. Well I and everyone who’s driven this car totally disagree. The ECM reflash - the recall- consisted of updating the software originally supplied by the car maker and changing its Air/Fuel Ratio algorithms. The rule of thumb is 12-14/1 optimum. The new software seems to keep the Turbo's wastegate open too much during wide open throttle causing the Turbo Not "Spool Up" all the way, losing boost, and obviously power loss. So, why did KIA update the software instead of replacing the faulty FCV valve - because it's cheaper than re-engineering the FCV. Or, even more expensive but better yet, why not replace it with a tried and true fuel pressure regulator- Cost for KIA? Instead the easy route was to detune the car so it doesn't reach full boost, saving the FCV. So the car is now "killed in action."
But this did lead me to learn about certain safety issues that have me very concerned. The turbo is located near the firewall, on the backside of the engine. If the pressurized part and axial lode of the turbo Fails, and is spinning at an average of 150,000 rpm's, this can act like a grenade under the hood, throwing shrapnel everywhere, possibly causing both driver and passenger injury or death, as the force of the pieces of hot steel and aluminum from the axial lode, plus the inertia of rotating blades at 150 rpms, would penetrate through the firewall.
Kia Motors tried to charge me $470 to replace the timing belt. I refused, but when my engine was destroyed Kia Motors stated that I violated my warranty. They said because I failed to replace the timing belt at 60,000 miles I had violated my warranty. I proved to Kia that their Powertrain Warranty covered the timing belt for a 100,000 miles. My waring to consumers is that the judges in my case are enforcing a limited liability disclaimer that is located on page 29 of their consumer information manual and is not listed in any way as a limited liability disclaimer and it appear to exclude all of Kia's express warranties. There is a conflict between Kia Motors warranty and its required maintenance
In 2012 I bought a KIA Soul. The Car has been fine and not many problems. Although I got a flat tire on Friday evening only to find that instead of a spare tire in my car, there was a cheap tire inflator. Since the problem with the tire was the top of the air valve broke off it couldn't connect to fill my flat. Even if it could, the air would have come right back out. There are many tire problems, though which could have also happened that this air pump would not be able to be of help. I had to call a tow truck and have them tow me to a friends, where I had to sleep because the tire place I tried to bring it to was not able to fix the KIA tire valve. KIA's tire valve has a sensor on it to tell you when the tire is low. Normally it would have cost about $25.00 (including labor) to fix the valave. Instead you have to go to a KIA dealership and get a $195.00 (including labor). The worker in the KIA dealorship's repair place that I had to have it towed (another time) which was on the other side of town (about 18 miles from where I was, vs. there being numourous places under a mile away that I could have brought this. The distance would have also not been as bad, had I been able to have a spare tire on my car and just driven there. The KIA employee was so patient and understanding at me totally freaking out at him because
KIA DOESN'T INCLUDE A SPARE TIRE AUTOMATICALLY IN THEIR NEW CARS THEY SELL!
The KIA employee said all employess that sell cars know they need to tell the customer when the car is purchased that there is no spare and that they have the option of buying a $300.00 spare tire kit. This must be a policy created after my car was bought mine or else no one at the dealership in Las Vegas, NV (where I bought it) thought to mention, when the sales man made sure to sell me the add on accesory for my iPod, that I might want to get A SPARE TIRE!!! too.
Which is how this KIA views a spare tire. The salesman thinks a spare tire is less of a necessity in a car than the cable to connect my iPod. I think most people who have driven for a while would agree, their cars should include a spare tire kit and the electric air pump should be what is offered as an EXTRA.
I have owned over 10 cars in my life time varying from cheap to about $25,000.00. ALL OF THEM HAD SPARES!. I think I had a car that I bought for only about $300.00 more than KIAs spare tire kit.
The KIA tire kit, BTW, is so nicely designed to fit into the empty spot they sculpted into the car to make their spare fit just right. I have not started looking to see if I can get a cheaper spare tire kit yet. Although, since the sensor was not something I could get at most tire stores and I already know I can't get a another key made that is not KIA (which a spare key is over $250.00). If it costs the company so much for every small part of their cars it doesn't seem they could afford to sell a car for $20,000. Oh I forgot, it's not because it is so costly for them it's because they made their item just so that you can only look to them to replace it. Which is not smart business or caring about a customer. I know that many companies practice this. Just because something can be done or is not illegal, does it make it OK or the way you should do business.
This whole ordeal has cost over $300.00 AND HOURS OF UNNESSARY WASTED TIME FOR A FLAT TIRE THAT WAS NOT EVEN DAMAGED, This money was supposed to go to renewing my car registration on monday. I am not able to pay that now and sure I can't go get a tire to make sure I don't have this happen again.
I know that I am not wrong in thinking that selling a car without a spare is outrageous because even the tow drivers, the people who answered the phones to get the tow, the 12+ people I have already told about. The reaction to saying "KIA sold me my car without a spare" is "WHAT?!?!"
I would like to see KIA's focus group results that brought them to the conclusion that a spare tire should be seen as an add on. SHAME ON YOU KIA!
I am so grateful that this happened to me in Los Angeles. I go back and forth to Las Vegas and Los Angeles for work and if I would have had this same experience near Baker, CA or any other area where a repair place, let alone a KIA dealor, would be so much more difficult to get to.
THIS IS MY LAST KIA EVER. I HATE YOUR COMPANY NOW. Because of my job, I meet with clients and they see my car. Over 10 times a month someone asks "So, what do you think of the KIA Soul". Up until now, I have said nothing but really great things (the only negative I might add being it could have better gas milage).
This is now the only story I will share with them. I will point out that it doesn't matter anymore that the car is nice, the company doesn't care that a customer could unknowingly get stranded without a nearby place to for help when they could at least keep going after changing the tire.
How much profit does this one thing make for them that they can feel ok with doing this? How much money is their Soul worth?
Kia Motors Corporation Reviews
The 2013 KIA Sportage was given a recall on the GDI system that utilized the FCV to control supply of fuel. I had this done, and lost TURBO. Turbo doesn't spool at all. The car used to do 14 PSI; barely does 8 PSI. In park, with the pedal to the medal, it doesn't rev above 4 RPM's. I paid for a turbo that no longer exists. This car used to beat my friend's posche and barely gets up to speed to pass a car. I've lost at least 60 HP in the car- doesn't even go to redline now.
After the FCV recall, I lost all the performance I enjoyed and paid for in this car. I went to 2 dealers only to be told it drives fine. Well I and everyone who’s driven this car totally disagree. The ECM reflash - the recall- consisted of updating the software originally supplied by the car maker and changing its Air/Fuel Ratio algorithms. The rule of thumb is 12-14/1 optimum. The new software seems to keep the Turbo's wastegate open too much during wide open throttle causing the Turbo Not "Spool Up" all the way, losing boost, and obviously power loss. So, why did KIA update the software instead of replacing the faulty FCV valve - because it's cheaper than re-engineering the FCV. Or, even more expensive but better yet, why not replace it with a tried and true fuel pressure regulator- Cost for KIA? Instead the easy route was to detune the car so it doesn't reach full boost, saving the FCV. So the car is now "killed in action."
But this did lead me to learn about certain safety issues that have me very concerned. The turbo is located near the firewall, on the backside of the engine. If the pressurized part and axial lode of the turbo Fails, and is spinning at an average of 150,000 rpm's, this can act like a grenade under the hood, throwing shrapnel everywhere, possibly causing both driver and passenger injury or death, as the force of the pieces of hot steel and aluminum from the axial lode, plus the inertia of rotating blades at 150 rpms, would penetrate through the firewall.
Kia Motors tried to charge me $470 to replace the timing belt. I refused, but when my engine was destroyed Kia Motors stated that I violated my warranty. They said because I failed to replace the timing belt at 60,000 miles I had violated my warranty. I proved to Kia that their Powertrain Warranty covered the timing belt for a 100,000 miles. My waring to consumers is that the judges in my case are enforcing a limited liability disclaimer that is located on page 29 of their consumer information manual and is not listed in any way as a limited liability disclaimer and it appear to exclude all of Kia's express warranties. There is a conflict between Kia Motors warranty and its required maintenance
In 2012 I bought a KIA Soul. The Car has been fine and not many problems. Although I got a flat tire on Friday evening only to find that instead of a spare tire in my car, there was a cheap tire inflator. Since the problem with the tire was the top of the air valve broke off it couldn't connect to fill my flat. Even if it could, the air would have come right back out. There are many tire problems, though which could have also happened that this air pump would not be able to be of help. I had to call a tow truck and have them tow me to a friends, where I had to sleep because the tire place I tried to bring it to was not able to fix the KIA tire valve. KIA's tire valve has a sensor on it to tell you when the tire is low. Normally it would have cost about $25.00 (including labor) to fix the valave. Instead you have to go to a KIA dealership and get a $195.00 (including labor). The worker in the KIA dealorship's repair place that I had to have it towed (another time) which was on the other side of town (about 18 miles from where I was, vs. there being numourous places under a mile away that I could have brought this. The distance would have also not been as bad, had I been able to have a spare tire on my car and just driven there. The KIA employee was so patient and understanding at me totally freaking out at him because
KIA DOESN'T INCLUDE A SPARE TIRE AUTOMATICALLY IN THEIR NEW CARS THEY SELL!
The KIA employee said all employess that sell cars know they need to tell the customer when the car is purchased that there is no spare and that they have the option of buying a $300.00 spare tire kit. This must be a policy created after my car was bought mine or else no one at the dealership in Las Vegas, NV (where I bought it) thought to mention, when the sales man made sure to sell me the add on accesory for my iPod, that I might want to get A SPARE TIRE!!! too.
Which is how this KIA views a spare tire. The salesman thinks a spare tire is less of a necessity in a car than the cable to connect my iPod. I think most people who have driven for a while would agree, their cars should include a spare tire kit and the electric air pump should be what is offered as an EXTRA.
I have owned over 10 cars in my life time varying from cheap to about $25,000.00. ALL OF THEM HAD SPARES!. I think I had a car that I bought for only about $300.00 more than KIAs spare tire kit.
The KIA tire kit, BTW, is so nicely designed to fit into the empty spot they sculpted into the car to make their spare fit just right. I have not started looking to see if I can get a cheaper spare tire kit yet. Although, since the sensor was not something I could get at most tire stores and I already know I can't get a another key made that is not KIA (which a spare key is over $250.00). If it costs the company so much for every small part of their cars it doesn't seem they could afford to sell a car for $20,000. Oh I forgot, it's not because it is so costly for them it's because they made their item just so that you can only look to them to replace it. Which is not smart business or caring about a customer. I know that many companies practice this. Just because something can be done or is not illegal, does it make it OK or the way you should do business.
This whole ordeal has cost over $300.00 AND HOURS OF UNNESSARY WASTED TIME FOR A FLAT TIRE THAT WAS NOT EVEN DAMAGED, This money was supposed to go to renewing my car registration on monday. I am not able to pay that now and sure I can't go get a tire to make sure I don't have this happen again.
I know that I am not wrong in thinking that selling a car without a spare is outrageous because even the tow drivers, the people who answered the phones to get the tow, the 12+ people I have already told about. The reaction to saying "KIA sold me my car without a spare" is "WHAT?!?!"
I would like to see KIA's focus group results that brought them to the conclusion that a spare tire should be seen as an add on. SHAME ON YOU KIA!
I am so grateful that this happened to me in Los Angeles. I go back and forth to Las Vegas and Los Angeles for work and if I would have had this same experience near Baker, CA or any other area where a repair place, let alone a KIA dealor, would be so much more difficult to get to.
THIS IS MY LAST KIA EVER. I HATE YOUR COMPANY NOW. Because of my job, I meet with clients and they see my car. Over 10 times a month someone asks "So, what do you think of the KIA Soul". Up until now, I have said nothing but really great things (the only negative I might add being it could have better gas milage).
This is now the only story I will share with them. I will point out that it doesn't matter anymore that the car is nice, the company doesn't care that a customer could unknowingly get stranded without a nearby place to for help when they could at least keep going after changing the tire.
How much profit does this one thing make for them that they can feel ok with doing this? How much money is their Soul worth?