Stinger GT by the Numbers

[seanmccubb]

Just got a new email update from Kia. Not sure if this page is new or not but it lists and compares the Stinger GT vs its competitors. Pretty awesome stats if you ask me!

http://www.explorekiastinger.com/landing_pages/lp/2017/07/stinger_t3/public/index.html

 

[ralzod]

I find it odd that they compared the GT to the 4-cyl A5, instead of the 6-cyl S5. At least they got the BMW right, using the 440 instead of the 430.

 

[Bamm1]

Yea, that is a real odd mixed bag of a competitor list.
They picked the base models for the A5 SB and the MB C-class.
Then they jump to the mid-level model for the Infiniti Q50.
Lastly, they throw in the upper trim levels for the BMW and the Lexus.


This car also apparently throws out the laws of Physics allowing it to take the same amount of time to get 60 mph as it does to get to 62 mph.........

 

[eljay]

Anybody else get a laugh over the irony of the title of the email: "Stinger: What you really need to know"? I really need to know the price and the date when I can do a test drive. Didn't see that info anywhere!

 

[seanmccubb]

Yeah that's pretty strange... Maybe they are trying to compare to similar prices (Under $50k)? Jumping from the A5 to the S5 is a big price difference ~$12,000

Audi A5 Sportback starting @ $42,600
Audi S5 Sportback starting @ $54,400

BMW 430 GC starting @ $43,100
BMW 440 GC starting @ $49,500

 

[Gilgamesh]

It's laughable. They sent out common knowledge that could easily be found without the email as someone said previously the things most people need/want to know is the price and release date. The only positive thing from thing we can hope for from this is that the pricing for the GT is in the low to mid 40's and hopefully that's fully load IMO. The negative besides there not being any new info would be that there's a possibility KIA thinks their product should be priced according to this list which would be very bad marketing on their part since they haven't proven themselves yet.

 

[dddd]

I guess they just simply forgot to compare the weight of the Stinger to the competition !!!!!

 

[STNGRNV]

It's laughable. They sent out common knowledge that could easily be found without the email as someone said previously the things most people need/want to know is the price and release date. The only positive thing from thing we can hope for from this is that the pricing for the GT is in the low to mid 40's and hopefully that's fully load IMO. The negative besides there not being any new info would be that there's a possibility KIA thinks their product should be priced according to this list which would be very bad marketing on their part since they haven't proven themselves yet.

Exactly. I think they are still trying to figure out what they price should be, and the constant comparison to luxury brands aren't comforting. They are probably losing sales by not releasing the price already. I'm looking at the 2.0 and have heard rumors from 29K to 35K. Hopefully, there isn't a production issue that is holding things up.

 

[Bamm1]

I guess they just simply forgot to compare the weight of the Stinger to the competition !!!!!

It got "misplaced" along with the fuel economy comparison chart.

Yeah that's pretty strange... Maybe they are trying to compare to similar prices (Under $50k)? Jumping from the A5 to the S5 is a big price difference ~$12,000

Audi A5 Sportback starting @ $42,600
Audi S5 Sportback starting @ $54,400

BMW 430 GC starting @ $43,100
BMW 440 GC starting @ $49,500

Here are the starting prices for the other models listed. The "targets" seem to be hovering in the low to high 40 grand range.

Q50 3.0t SPORT $40,650
AWD $2000

IS 350 F SPORT $44,525
AWD $1725

2017 C300 4MATIC Sedan $43,245 (0-60 time is for the 2018 model with the new nine speed auto but pricing has not been released yet)

 

[app_master]

Man, you guys (usa) have so many more competitive car options than we do here (australia), this should keep the prices pretty good for the prospective Stinger buyer.

Kia's aim is to get people to put real consideration toward a Kia (any model mind you) purchase when starting to compare "the brand" against such cars they have listed. To even be mentioned in the same breath (even if by their own account) as BMW, Lexus, Merc, Infiniti, Audi is some sort of win, right?

Sure it may not win on all specification fronts, I don't think that is the point either, but surely Stinger will win on value and price (even though we still don't know that last piece yet...)

 

[Gilgamesh]

IMO it's no win if they're simply placing themselves with those other established luxury brands. They have yet to establish themselves as a luxury car maker let alone prove themselves amongst the best.

Now if they come out and the prices are great, the vehicle performs, has great quality, and reliability then it will be a win as they've proven themselves at the very least in the short term. Until then it's perfectly fine for them to compare and show off the numbers, but they're still withholding what potential buyers really want to know.

I'm going to be perfectly honest if the Stinger is priced the same or higher than the competitors they listed and I'm talking the high end version of the Stinger I'll feel a bit insulted on the fact that they're unproven in this market, but yet they expect me as a consumer to pay the same or more than what established competitors are asking for their proven vehicles?

 

[Jumpy]

lol, that's all?

Why am I not getting these emails? I signed up for notifications like 2 months ago. Looks like I'm not missing much, though. And plus, I have you all to keep me updated

 

[Bamm1]

IMO it's no win if they're simply placing themselves with those other established luxury brands. They have yet to establish themselves as a luxury car maker let alone prove themselves amongst the best.

Now if they come out and the prices are great, the vehicle performs, has great quality, and reliability then it will be a win as they've proven themselves at the very least in the short term. Until then it's perfectly fine for them to compare and show off the numbers, but they're still withholding what potential buyers really want to know.

I'm going to be perfectly honest if the Stinger is priced the same or higher than the competitors they listed and I'm talking the high end version of the Stinger I'll feel a bit insulted on the fact that they're unproven in this market, but yet they expect me as a consumer to pay the same or more than what established competitors are asking for their proven vehicles?

Based on the survey that Kia sent out it looks like they are targeting $300 less than the base price of the BMW 440i Gran Coupe for their "fully loaded" GT. Kia will also be charging the same amount for the AWD option ($2000).

So...

• base 440i GC $49,500 / loaded Stinger GT $49,200
• base AWD 440i GC $51,500 / loaded AWD Stinger GT $51,200

A fully loaded 440i GC AWD is $65,000+

I guess the base and mid-level trim models (Q50, C300, etc.) were thrown in to show that the base and moderately equipped Stinger GT (with the 3.3T V6) trims start at a price point lower than the 4-cylinder / "lower power" V6 offerings from the competition (at $38,500 or $43,400 - numbers also from the survey)?

 

[Gilgamesh]

They're overestimating their current worth if they plan to have the GT cost near $50k even if it is fully loaded. Drop the price $10k and then we're getting closer to what the fully loaded GT is worth.

Edit: The Infiniti Red Sport AWD starts at $53k and while it's not fully loaded it's still pretty loaded it's no base model. You're getting a car that is an established luxury car with performance that not only rivals, but exceeds the Stinger GT. The only reason the Infiniti and some of these other vehicles cost so much is because you're also paying for the Brand associated to the vehicle. Sorry, but KIA isn't to that point yet where they can charge for their brand name. If I'm buying a KIA it's simply going to be for the vehicle as their name is still associated with being cheap and inferior to these luxury brands it intends to compete with.

 

[Bamm1]

They're overestimating their current worth if they plan to have the GT cost near $50k even if it is fully loaded. Drop the price $10k and then we're getting closer to what the fully loaded GT is worth.

Edit: The Infiniti Red Sport AWD starts at $53k and while it's not fully loaded it's still pretty loaded it's no base model. You're getting a car that is an established luxury car with performance that not only rivals, but exceeds the Stinger GT. The only reason the Infiniti and some of these other vehicles cost so much is because you're also paying for the Brand associated to the vehicle. Sorry, but KIA isn't to that point yet where they can charge for their brand name. If I'm buying a KIA it's simply going to be for the vehicle as their name is still associated with being cheap and inferior to these luxury brands it intends to compete with.

In the current issue of Motortrend they have a cover feature on future car models (2018+). In the Stinger section they have estimates for performance (what Kia is currently reporting), fuel economy (higher than the numbers we are seeing from ROW) and price (which they have maxing out at $41,000 - maybe a base GT with AWD). I could see ~$5000 more for all the options, putting it in alignment with the Acura TLX.

 

[eljay]

I agree. Kia can't really afford to get cocky about their pricing. I've watched the predicted MSRP of this car climb significantly since I first became interested last January, and I don't think I'm willing to once again raise my target price. Not that there's anything else out there that fits my wish list anywhere near as well--

 

[FluffyBottoms]

Another recent article that quotes the top of the line Stinger will cost "around $50k".

https://www.wired.com/story/kia-stinger-gt-review-nurburgring/

I'm not sure if KIA is floating these numbers to journalists in order to prep the US market for a higher price tag, but all the Nurburgring and winter test drives aren't going to immediately dispel the notion that many people have of KIA - that they're well-built economy cars.

That's not to say that at some point in the future, KIA can command a price relative to other top tier car brands, but it's not there yet. Personally, I'm ok with spending $42k - $45k all in for an optioned out GT, but anything more and I'll start reassessing the luxury brands they're trying to compete against. An A5 Sportback with the slick tech package can be had for $48k, and while it may not have a TT6, the dual-clutch tranny with the turbo 4 is seriously quick - and the styling and fit & finish are impeccable.

I had the Cadenza and loved it for it's reliability and how it met the needs of my family - but now that the kids are older, and are now in boosters vs car seats, I'm ready to enjoy driving again in a more dynamic car. And I want my next car to be the Stinger GT, if the price is right. In all honesty, I wanted the G80 Sport to be my next car, but it was priced way higher than I expected and is no longer on the list. I hope the same doesn't happen with the Stinger.

Just as an aside, here are some nice cars that we're priced to high and never got traction in the market:

Pontiac GTO
Chevrolet SS
Genesis G80 Sport

 

[STNGRNV]

I read that article, too. I was actually encouraged by it since it was the lowest prices I've seen in a while. I want the 2.0, but I need it to come in under 30k or I'll have to look elsewhere (probably Buick).

 

[ralzod]

I want the 2.0, but I need it to come in under 30k

The lowest price listed in the surveys was 31,900 for the Premium trim (below Lux, below GT). That got you the 2.0 RWD, standard audio, no nav, no blind spot detection, and no sunroof. Of course, that was just a survey; no guarantees that trim level or price point will ever materialize.

 

[STNGRNV]

The lowest price listed in the surveys was 31,900 for the Premium trim (below Lux, below GT). That got you the 2.0 RWD, standard audio, no nav, no blind spot detection, and no sunroof. Of course, that was just a survey; no guarantees that trim level or price point will ever materialize.

Yeah, I think those surveys are trying to see what people are willing to pay. I might step up for 31k depending on the options. I'm not sure if I would buy it with package you mentioned. I've been driving for decades without blindspot detection so that wouldn't be a deal breaker. Initially, the numbers on the 2.0 were mid 20s with the GT was in the high 30s.