Fuel consumption figures (Korea)

[app_master]

 

[app_master]

2.2 diesel 2wd 17" wheels @ 14.8km/l
2.2 diesel 2wd 18 @ 14.5
2.2 diesel awd 17 @ 12.2
2.2 diesel awd 18 @ 11.7
2.0 turbo awd 18 @ 9.6
2.0 turbo awd 19 @ 9.4
2.0 turbo 2wd 19 @ 10.1
2.0 turbo 2wd 18 @ 10.4
3.3 TT 2wd 19 @ 8.8
3.3 TT 2wd 19 @ 8.4

 

[app_master]

I'll be honest, I'm a little disappointed in those (if legit). Some smart cookie here can do the conversions. Local mpg/consumption testing might be done differently to Korea.

 

[Bamm1]

I am assuming those are the "combined" highway and city figures. If those numbers are true for the US as well it looks like the 3.3T Stinger will likely end up with the same fuel economy numbers as the G80 Sport and G90 3.3T (17 city / 23 highway / 20 combined). I was expecting an improvement given the weight savings vs. the 500-800lb+ heavier G80 and G90. The German "targets" are getting ~20% better fuel economy. That is a significant. Even the Ford Fusion Sport with its 2.7TT 325/380 V6 paired with an ancient 6-speed auto gets 3 more mpg on the highway.

 

[Bamm1]

I was not able to track down any information to allow a comparison of the 2017+ EPA test method with the test method used in Korea. But I was able to track down fuel economy numbers for the closest current approximation of the Stinger GT AWD:

Genesis G80 Sport HTRAC

Korea (mpg)

• City: 16
• Highway: 23
• Combined: 19

US (mpg)

• City: 17
• Highway: 24
• Combined: 20

The Kia Niro just launched recently and it faired better, picking up ~ 3 mpg in each measure. But that likely means the EPA test is more favorable for Hybrids than the Korean test.

A one mpg gain is a wash for the G80 Sport, so it looks like another "compromise" we will be undertaking for the price reduction (compared to the Germans) is fuel economy. That is disappointing.

• Lexus IS350 AWD - 21 combined
• Cadillac ATS 3.6 AWD - 22 combined
• Jaguar XE 35t AWD - 23 Combined
• Mercedes C43 - 23 Combined
• Audi S5 Sportback - 24 Combined
• BMW 440i xDrive Gran Coupe - 25 Combined

 

[app_master]

There is no doubt those cars know how to milk every mpg for testing. Still disappointing the stinger could not get closer knowing how testing works. Real world results could be very different.

For most enthusiast purchasers (like me) this spec will be low on their priority. Pretty sure most everything about the stinger (gt) was to achieve performance and luxury...e.g chassis, brakes, tyres etc... not to save fuel.

For value purchasers they'll look to the 4 turbo anyway (or diesel if in your market) for everyday fuel saving drives. These buyers are likely considering other Kia models or will be once in showroom for that purpose. The diesel is the true miser in the range and will be very important for euro markets.

The aim here for Kia is/was changing their market perception. The Stinger is already doing this ... and it's not even out internationally. The next step for Kia will be to reach then surpass those makes you listed above. It'll happen, book it.

 

[lostnspace]

Hmm...that's......German power...without the German fuel economy. Honestly though, how reliable are fuel economy estimates with all the cheating going on these days. It could be that Kia is just being honest or overstating to help level real world experience/expectations.

 

[hej]

Hmm...that's......German power...without the German fuel economy. Honestly though, how reliable are fuel economy estimates with all the cheating going on these days. It could be that Kia is just being honest or overstating to help level real world experience/expectations.

My BMW & Audi both definitely hit their highway estimates, and often even a little better. That said, I've noticed that most cars seem to average in the 20~22mpg range for combined fuel economy regardless of EPA numbers.