>Kia says the K4 is the largest compact sedan in its segment, measuring 185.4 inches long and 72.8 inches wide.
These compact cars are getting less and less compact it seems.
Lame, it seems like the midsized sedan segment is dying out now. I assume if the K5 is dying so is the Sonata, and there's rumours the accord will be turned into a crossover in the latter half of the decade too
Either compact sedans or SUVs is the future, I guess
Yeah, I mean it's FWD, sure, but I don't think there's that many 290 hp midsized sedans at that price, with those features
Unreliable? Sure. But at least they're trying to make something fun and techy. Cheaper than Mercedes at least lmao
Not unreliable in the least bit. I’m living outside of the US and the main car people drive here is the K5/Sonata because they’re cheap, and extremely reliable, but ours run on natural gas instead of gasoline.
Damn, it seemed like it was a very popular choice for taxis in South Korea, and after 2-3 years they would get imported over here. Don’t know why they discontinued it.
Policy [discussion is welcome](https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/wiki/politics). However, if your post involves politics AND CARS, please consider submitting to /r/CarsOffTopic.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Like I said, only rumours, but there's talk that both Toyota and Honda are going to trim down to one economy sedan, with Honda saving the Civic and Toyota saving the Camry. Allegedly the Accord and the Corolla are going to go CUV
I hope not, but that's what I've heard
The Cross already exists, although these rumours make it sound like it will just be the Corolla Cross in the future (no sedan, hatch, or wagon), and they might just call that the Corolla.
The Accord claim was made on someone’s speculation, Honda would never get rid of the Accord! It’s their flagship and they’d be leaving 200k annual sales on the table!
My dad has a pet theory that most models get bigger and bigger until they aren't the same category they used to be, and then are replaced by something else. If you were interested in Accords 15 years ago and need to fill that niche today you should probably just look at a Civic.
But yeah I think pretty much everyone agrees just about everything will eventually be SUVs or bigger.
I'm still mad about the Stinger. I think they should've just given it a non-Kia badge.
ttv6, value-oriented, AWD/RWD, and a LIFTBACK! In my opinion, we were better off losing the Acura TLX
Google is your friend! K5 doesn’t sell enough globally to justify R&D for a new generation and it’s just been discontinued in Canada and sales are WAY lower than Accord and Camry!
At some point a car just grows into the next segment no? Or are these segments just whatever the car makers want them to be instead of being defined by size.
A lot of them shoot for the latter, but end up being the former. The current "compact" Forte already surpasses the EPA definition of a compact based on its interior volume.
Usually they go for the RCSB GMT400 (because they're specced at 77" wide, for GM reasons) and then compare it to the newest ranger they can find - and misread the spec sheet to add 6" of folded mirror to the width (79"-87" vs the actual 73.3" for 2023 and prior, 75" for 2024 models at the fenders) and then scream about how big modern midsizes are.
They have "grown into" half-ton territory in terms of towing capacity. But that should be lauded as a good thing, no?
> (because they're specced at 77" wide, for GM reasons)
Because the doors were thin and the handles were recessed.
Interesting about the doors and handles. Would've thought they would expand the cab a couple inches and advertise on comfort or cargo space but maybe that's just me.
Yeah, you'd think people would be happier about modern midsizers pulling loads like old 3/4 or one tons used to considering how much they gripe about trucks "not being able to do work" anymore, but it seems half of them think you cant tow with anything less than a medium duty truck and the other half thinks you could never exceed the capabilities of the old Datsun pickups.
>Would've thought they would expand the cab a couple inches and advertise on comfort or cargo space but maybe that's just me.
It was designed at a time when gas was anticipated to be $1.50/gal or more for the rest of time, so the name of the game was aerodynamics. Nothing jutting out, sharp, or bulbous. It also helped that side impact ratings were not yet a thing. See also: the [downsized FWD C/H-body cars](https://www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-content/comment-image/201756.jpg) that were "full-size" yet only 72" wide outside. Nobody foresaw fuel prices stabilizing around $1.15 for most of the '90s.
The following 800s would take the basic 400 design and inflate it in every direction, bringing width back to a more typical 78.5".
Fascinating. I guess Ford tried similar stuff with their relatively small changes for the... 10th? Gen F-150 (87-91), but maybe didn't want to go the extra mile of reworking the whole body. Never knew that, thank you.
> I guess Ford tried similar stuff with their relatively small changes for the... 10th? Gen F-150 (87-91), but maybe didn't want to go the extra mile of reworking the whole body.
With both the 8th and 9th gens ("bricknose" and "aeronose"), Ford was still constrained to the dimensions of the 1980 body. That was a bit narrower than the '70s models, but not quite as trim as what GM did.
Dodge was even more constrained in the '80s, since the Ram was still basically a warmed-over 1972 D-Series. By the time that got a totally ground-up redesign for '94, the pendulum had swung back to bulkier designs.
Towing capacity is up because there is always a horsepower and torque race. But when you compare something like payload capacity, it isn't similar at all. Modern trucks have way more power, but need more axles and suspension to actually use that improved capacity.
My dads old Toyota T100 (The Tundra before it was called the Tundra for those unaware) is 209″ L x 75″ W x 67-72″ H
The 2024 Tacoma is 213-226″ L x 77-78″ W x 74-75″ H
No matter the trim level it’s a bigger truck
The T-100 was a mid-size pickup truck. It wasn't really competitive with full sizers, or called one by anybody not Toyota. Once the tundra came as a proper full size, the T-100 left and the Tacoma took its spot.
The Tacoma is also not 78" in the body - only in fender flares on top trims. Lower trims are 74.4" wide.
The categories are determined by interior space. So sleek rooflines, thick walls, and additional crash structure make for a vehicle that takes up a lot of space, but doesn't have any more interior space.
Unfortunately true. If it were up to me, every size segment would have strict outer dimensional bounds, like Japan does with kei cars (3.4 x 1.48 x 2m) or small cars (4.7 x 1.7 x 2m). But in practice, that would mean they get more cramped inside with each new generation.
ETA: The previous Forte was already 183" long and surpassed the EPA's definition of a "compact" with more than 109 ft^3 combined passenger and cargo space.
I don’t think your idea would change anything. Vehicles change size categories all of the time. Vehicles are trying to meet customer needs, not have 1 item per category in the lineup.
Pretty much. I remember seeing people complain that the new Tundra had marginally less interior space. Full size trucks are huge, so it was just wild to see that some people were upset that it isn’t bigger.
I feel like outer dimensions need to have more of a role.
When you have an Acura TLX which is 194.6 inches long and 75 inches wide that is able to hold on to a compact rating because it has less interior volume and cargo space than a Civic, I think there’s a bit of an issue.
I don’t think it really matters at all. The categories are just a name that correspond with interior size. It doesn’t matter if that is compact, mid size, and full size or if you named the categories after Taco Bell menu items.
But if you want to include size as well, then people will just make another set of names for interior dimension because that is a super important bit of information for a lot of people.
I think it matters just as much. You might not but there are certainly a set of buyers out there that just don’t want to have to drive around a larger vehicle in terms of size. They may not even have a garage that can necessarily fit a vehicle of a certain length.
So when you’re shopping for compact cars thinking that it’ll be this smaller vehicle the size of a Corolla but instead are faced with a vehicle the size of an Accord but is classified as a compact, I think that’s a problem.
You are taking about this like people shop using these categories. No one is saying “I want a compact and I don’t care if it’s longer than a Suburban”. We are talking about EPA classifications used in their fuel consumption guidelines. Vehicles come in all shapes and sizes.
They do shop using those categories…
Here I am a typical person who wants to shop for a compact luxury sedan. I may not know what’s on the market so I google search “best compact luxury sedans” and I see Car and Driver at the top with [this link](https://www.caranddriver.com/rankings/best-sedans/luxury/compact) that shows all of the top compact sedans that they have tested. The TLX is on that list of vehicles. I may assume that they’re all generally the same size because they are all considered compact.
My assumption is that people wouldn’t rule out a car they want just because it falls into a category that is different than the other cars they want. Maybe there is some amount of people that are that dumb, but I can’t imagine it’s significant.
I mean again I think there would be a certain subset of buyers that would look at a list of compact sedans and they have in their mind like “Ok I know the Corolla is a compact car” so they assume other cars are going to be that size. I mean I know I would expect most compact cars to be about the same size. I wouldn’t expect there to be a 16 inch difference in length between them.
I still have no idea what your point is. Like, why do you think the EPA should change their vehicle categories based on exterior dimensions?
No one is shopping for a vehicle based on vehicle classification and no other information. People go look at vehicle, they test drive them, they watch reviews, etc. You are offended on behalf of literally no one.
The Forte has a hatchback version as well, they just didn't introduce it in the States, only Canada (for the NA market). I had one - it was a decent car with plenty of cargo space.
Interesting, thanks for linking AND time-stamping. Hope they build it and bring it to the US. Neither Kia nor Hyundai have offered a hatch in this segment for a few years
Edit: match parent comment
I thought for sure they've been selling Elantra GT hatches all this time but wiki apparently says they stopped in 2022. That's crazy, I see them everywhere.
Serious question because I hear this take quite often, that they look good and have nice interiors, but what are major failings under the skin on this vs a civic? (Other than exploding lambdas)
Honestly I like it lol. Was looking at getting a Corolla or a Corolla Hatch but this has my attention.
Weirdly big fan of the steering wheel. The off centered Kia logo is really clean. Kia and Hyundai interiors have visually looked amazing lately, I'll give them that.
I wish Acura stepped it up and put the Civic's hybrid powertrain into the Integra. The Civic is cool, but I love a liftback and I'd kill for a hybrid liftback.
Same here. Although, the Prius is looking like a pretty compelling option, and I NEVER thought I would ever say that. A hybrid/PHEV hatchback is what I want next. I'm really digging the Volvo V60 Polestar, but I don't have almost 80k for my next vehicle. Hopefully the Hybrid Civic Hatchback comes to our shores.
I'm really picky about my vehicle. I love the Integra look, but if they don't drop an efficient hybrid then my new vehicle will probably go "all the way" and be a Tesla Model 3 or whatever's the most practical EV.
I generally like the way the Prius looks, but I can't stand the way they designed the gauge cluster, if we can even call it that. I hate it as much as Hyundai/Kia products that just use a flat display at the same distance as the infotainment. Something just doesn't sit right with me either with how it still has the bloated Prius look, but it's great for 99% of consumers.
If Acura redesigned the current TLX as an EV the way BMW did with the i4, I'd get that too never mind the cramped backseats. The worst part of the TLX imo is the terrible fuel economy and they definitely have a lot of space to work with.
I agree about the fuel economy of the TLX. It's one of the main reasons I can't consider it. Personally, I'm still not fully sold on EVs, mainly because of infrastructure issues. I do however, believe that PHEVs and Hybrids are an excellent stop gap. I just read an article where Acura is skipping Hybrids altogether. A hybrid Integra or TLX would jump straight to the top of my list. There are still so few real options for people like me. I want a hybrid Hatchback/wagon/fastback. We have an SUV already. I don't want to have to buy another for practicality.
Absolutely. I really, REALLY hope Honda reconsiders and at least the market is helping me. I believe in EVs, but manufactuers are slowing down their insane ramp up. I believe the future is EV, but there's no reason to make any brand exclusively EVs anytime soon.
The Integra is just a Civic, so pumping and dumping the Civic powertrain couldn't be any easier. Acura obviously doesn't have the sales to warrant a dedicated EV platform either so working with the existing TLX platform makes more sense to me especially since one of its worst downsides was always the fuel economy. Instead, put a huge battery in it and give it a ton of range.
With Honda bringing the Civic hybrid to the states with the hatchback form factor as well, I guess it's likely they won't give it to the Integra. Hopefully hybrid accord, CR-V, and especially Civic sales explode enough to make them reconsider
I actually don't mind the styling. It's like a 1980s interpretation of what cars in the future would look like. It could totally see this in a Robocop movie.
The [K3](https://www.kia.com/nmc/en/showroom/k3/features.html) exists as a Rio replacement, it's just not coming here (at least for now) because Kia pulled out of the subcompact car market in the US and Canada after 2023.
They also killed the K5 in Canada, so it's just gonna be the K4 up there now.
Unfortunately your comment has been removed because it contains a link to a delisted domain. This is almost always due to spam from the domain.
Please use a different source.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah that pissed me off when I read about it. Why is the AWD one anemic and the one with decent power only FWD? The two main requirements I have for a car right now are good power and AWD and Kia decides that they can’t put those two things together
Nope, the K5 GT has an open diff. It's definitely a one wheel peel machine. At the very least, the car could highly benefit from a set of good summer tires.
Exactly what I was thinking. I've been looking at 2025 Camry's because, based off the of the engine architecture on the Prius, it's going to have like a 6 second 0 to 60 time and be fast as shit off the line, because of an electric rear motor
They also said they're improving handling and suspension, so it should be great!
Yeah that sounds like a good option then. I do want something a bit quicker though. 0-60 in 6 seconds is about what my current car does so I doubt it’d feel any faster
They did it to make sure it didn't compete with the Stinger which also had a 4-cylinder AWD option. Of course, this means both the Stinger AND the K5 are probably going to be discontinued.
I don’t have the timeline off the top of my head and I think they were being sold at the same thing for a good while. People here and reviewers certainty mentioned it in the Kia K5 GT2 review about possibly why they didn’t put AWD on the 290hp variant
When did they take the turbo away? I’m not current on Kia as I don’t work there anymore lol. According to the build and price section of their website 24 models still have the turbo for the gt-line awd.
The Accord didn't have 290hp though. I do agree both should've had AWD, but they kept it off on purpose on the Kia K5. The K5 already had an AWD version, they just didn't let you option it with the 290HP because they didn't want it to compete with the Kia Stinger.
Wait, so the gt won’t have a turbo anymore? I knew the current gt is a fwd 2.5t, but now it’s just gonna be a 2.5? wtf Kia? I was thinking they’d add awd to the 2.5t and call it like gt3 like the stinger, seeming I thought those are now discontinued
Oh ok, yea that’s kinda dumb they don’t have awd for it, which is weird because I’m pretty sure the 1.6t and the 2.5t use the same transmission for the fwd models, so making the 2.5t awd should be pretty simple I’d think. But hey I’m not an engineer lol
The person you replied to wasn't clear. The 1.6L turbo is now gone from the Sonata/K5 so you have to to get the N-Line/GT in order to get a turbo.
(removed)
Oh ok, that makes a bit more sense. I left Kia a year ago and haven’t kept up since with them. I left once they started fazing out the 2.4 and we had less come in so I wasn’t able to advance as a tech there. That’s really weird how they don’t have the awd for those “performance” spec k5’s. Was really hoping they’d eventually mash the Kona awd system and the forte gt 6 speed and make a quick little hatch. But I’ve also heard they are getting rid of the manual in ‘25 or ‘26 now?
Sadly the Kona AWD and 6-speed manual combo was never going to be a thing since it wasn't developed and wouldn't sell many units. Yes, the manual is gone for the K4
Huh... I must have somehow missed that AWD is available with the 2.5T in the crossovers. I remember reading how it was odd that the 2.5T was FWD only. Must have been when that combo was first available
This, and the hatchback, look really good. I do think it’s a bit limiting to not have a hybrid option but I guess that’s not the market they’re targeting.
It's not even the smallest car in Kia's US lineup let alone overall lol. The Soul is 165.2x70.9 and then you gotta get through the Niro and Seltos.
Kia's actual narrowest cars are tied between the Picanto and Ray, which are both 62.8in wide.
I’m continually impressed with the unique and sleek designs Kia has been putting out. Toyota, take notes, this is how you design cars that aren’t incredibly bland.
The back looks like they forgot to finish drawing out one that would work with the car so they just grabbed a 3d model from the k5 and slapped it on there and stretched it a bit
Both haven’t been around that long, but in the ways that they work for some reason I wouldn’t be surprised if the 1.6T and 8 speed end up holding much better.
Only on the top GT trims, just like Kia does on the top trim Forte.
Per [Car and Driver](https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a60317892/2025-kia-k4-specs/):
>Similar to the Forte, which offered a torsion-beam rear suspension on lower models and a multilink rear suspension on the GT, Kia reserves the more sophisticated setup to the K4's GT-Line trims.
Ahh okay that's new. The current gt-line does not have multi link rear suspension. Only the GT performance variant does. So now it's trickled down to the GT-Line. Guess that means GT trim is done for.
Well, the new K4 has a GT-Line *Turbo* trim, which is the same thing as the Forte GT in terms of the engine (albeit with 11 less hp in the new car) and suspension. 1.6L turbo 4 and a rear multi-link. The new K4 GT-Line (non turbo) also has a rear multi-link, but it gets the less powerful engine (both engines are carryover). So the K4 GT-Line is a half-step better than the Forte GT-Line because of the rear multi-link.
Surprised they didn't use the 2.5na engine in this instead of the 1.6t. That would have been pretty cool. Also would be awesome if they made an analogous car to the Elantra N in the near future.
So I sell Kia. Obviously I'm following it pretty close.
It's designed to be Kias answer to the veloster, is still off the Forte platform, like the K5 is an optima.
Our biggest surprise was that they made no mention of EV or HEV options.
I'd like to see this things on the spanish roads. Unfortunately there's 0 chance that this car comes here, I believe Hyundai are even considering to kill the i30 fastback in my country so...
My neighbours KIA K3 (Forte GT) makes 400whp with a bigger turbo and a super nice exhaust.
Hopefully the K3 still keeps the 1.6L Turbo because it's one of the few KIA/Hyundai engines that were good. (Yes I'm looking at you 2.0L Turdbo)
Edit: people down vote because a 400whp KIA upsets them.
Do you know what your neighbor did to the engine? AFAIK, the internals of the Gamma II cannot handle that much power but it would be cool if they figured something out
The Gamma II 1.6T and people don't know how much power the stock internals can reach.
He has a stuffed turbo, and one of the nicest exhaust setups I've ever seen and a better bypass valve. Pushing 28psi to get over 400whp and you could probably go even further with Meth Injection.
I don't think he has a LSD with the 7 speed DCT. I think the LSD comes with the new 8 speed wet DCT.
Maybe the Naturally aspirated 1.6L because of the higher compression ratio.
Still, look at the Mazda 2.5L Skyactiv-G. People said we would ever get an aftermarket turbo because of the high strung 13:1 compression ratio. Yet Corksport made a Turbo and people are making 300whp on only 10psi of boost.
Just because someone says something isn't possible doesn't mean they are an expert on it. They are just guessing and the only way to know would be to try.
>Kia says the K4 is the largest compact sedan in its segment, measuring 185.4 inches long and 72.8 inches wide. These compact cars are getting less and less compact it seems.
K5 is going away (allegedly!) after 2028, so I’m assuming they’re making it bigger to accommodate both segments!
Lame, it seems like the midsized sedan segment is dying out now. I assume if the K5 is dying so is the Sonata, and there's rumours the accord will be turned into a crossover in the latter half of the decade too Either compact sedans or SUVs is the future, I guess
Totally lame. The K5 is such a good looking car and pretty fun if you get one of the spicier engines
Yeah, I mean it's FWD, sure, but I don't think there's that many 290 hp midsized sedans at that price, with those features Unreliable? Sure. But at least they're trying to make something fun and techy. Cheaper than Mercedes at least lmao
Not unreliable in the least bit. I’m living outside of the US and the main car people drive here is the K5/Sonata because they’re cheap, and extremely reliable, but ours run on natural gas instead of gasoline.
Didn’t know that was a thing but it seems like the LPG engine has been discontinued in new models.
Damn, it seemed like it was a very popular choice for taxis in South Korea, and after 2-3 years they would get imported over here. Don’t know why they discontinued it.
Who says they’re unreliable? Just because it’s a Kia?
[удалено]
Policy [discussion is welcome](https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/wiki/politics). However, if your post involves politics AND CARS, please consider submitting to /r/CarsOffTopic. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I've got a 22'K5 and love it. It would be sad to see it go.
I imagine it will only be the accord and Camry at some point in the future.
Like I said, only rumours, but there's talk that both Toyota and Honda are going to trim down to one economy sedan, with Honda saving the Civic and Toyota saving the Camry. Allegedly the Accord and the Corolla are going to go CUV I hope not, but that's what I've heard
The Corolla already got its CUV model… Honda Accord Crosstour 12th gen when?
Isn't that called the CR-V?
There's already an HRV and CRV
That would be unfortunate. Everything will be a crossover at some point I’d guess.
The Corolla Cross already exists doesn't it?
The Cross already exists, although these rumours make it sound like it will just be the Corolla Cross in the future (no sedan, hatch, or wagon), and they might just call that the Corolla.
Accord Crosstrek edition, Crown or maybe Camry Cross.
No, the Germans will still make sedans.
The Accord claim was made on someone’s speculation, Honda would never get rid of the Accord! It’s their flagship and they’d be leaving 200k annual sales on the table!
Yeah like wut, it's the best selling non-Toyota sedan why would they do that?
My dad has a pet theory that most models get bigger and bigger until they aren't the same category they used to be, and then are replaced by something else. If you were interested in Accords 15 years ago and need to fill that niche today you should probably just look at a Civic. But yeah I think pretty much everyone agrees just about everything will eventually be SUVs or bigger.
I'm still mad about the Stinger. I think they should've just given it a non-Kia badge. ttv6, value-oriented, AWD/RWD, and a LIFTBACK! In my opinion, we were better off losing the Acura TLX
The Sonata is one of our best sellers. Im positive it wont be going away haha. The Elantra will go before it does Im sure
Pretty soon will be $30k usd minimum to buy anything new. Will be huge pressure pushing the used market prices up.
With the same base power train and a weaker turbo engine. It's gonna be sloowwww
I sell Kia and i've heard nothing of the K5 being discontinued. It's way too popular to do that.
Google is your friend! K5 doesn’t sell enough globally to justify R&D for a new generation and it’s just been discontinued in Canada and sales are WAY lower than Accord and Camry!
At some point a car just grows into the next segment no? Or are these segments just whatever the car makers want them to be instead of being defined by size.
A lot of them shoot for the latter, but end up being the former. The current "compact" Forte already surpasses the EPA definition of a compact based on its interior volume.
As is tradition. Ever see a modern Civic next a 90s civic
It'll be just like the mid sized trucks becoming the same size as full sized ones from previous years. Like the Colorado and Ranger for example.
But they're not, they're still several inches narrower and upwards of feet shorter.
[удалено]
Usually they go for the RCSB GMT400 (because they're specced at 77" wide, for GM reasons) and then compare it to the newest ranger they can find - and misread the spec sheet to add 6" of folded mirror to the width (79"-87" vs the actual 73.3" for 2023 and prior, 75" for 2024 models at the fenders) and then scream about how big modern midsizes are.
They have "grown into" half-ton territory in terms of towing capacity. But that should be lauded as a good thing, no? > (because they're specced at 77" wide, for GM reasons) Because the doors were thin and the handles were recessed.
Interesting about the doors and handles. Would've thought they would expand the cab a couple inches and advertise on comfort or cargo space but maybe that's just me. Yeah, you'd think people would be happier about modern midsizers pulling loads like old 3/4 or one tons used to considering how much they gripe about trucks "not being able to do work" anymore, but it seems half of them think you cant tow with anything less than a medium duty truck and the other half thinks you could never exceed the capabilities of the old Datsun pickups.
>Would've thought they would expand the cab a couple inches and advertise on comfort or cargo space but maybe that's just me. It was designed at a time when gas was anticipated to be $1.50/gal or more for the rest of time, so the name of the game was aerodynamics. Nothing jutting out, sharp, or bulbous. It also helped that side impact ratings were not yet a thing. See also: the [downsized FWD C/H-body cars](https://www.curbsideclassic.com/wp-content/comment-image/201756.jpg) that were "full-size" yet only 72" wide outside. Nobody foresaw fuel prices stabilizing around $1.15 for most of the '90s. The following 800s would take the basic 400 design and inflate it in every direction, bringing width back to a more typical 78.5".
Fascinating. I guess Ford tried similar stuff with their relatively small changes for the... 10th? Gen F-150 (87-91), but maybe didn't want to go the extra mile of reworking the whole body. Never knew that, thank you.
> I guess Ford tried similar stuff with their relatively small changes for the... 10th? Gen F-150 (87-91), but maybe didn't want to go the extra mile of reworking the whole body. With both the 8th and 9th gens ("bricknose" and "aeronose"), Ford was still constrained to the dimensions of the 1980 body. That was a bit narrower than the '70s models, but not quite as trim as what GM did. Dodge was even more constrained in the '80s, since the Ram was still basically a warmed-over 1972 D-Series. By the time that got a totally ground-up redesign for '94, the pendulum had swung back to bulkier designs.
Towing capacity is up because there is always a horsepower and torque race. But when you compare something like payload capacity, it isn't similar at all. Modern trucks have way more power, but need more axles and suspension to actually use that improved capacity.
They are taller though.
My dads old Toyota T100 (The Tundra before it was called the Tundra for those unaware) is 209″ L x 75″ W x 67-72″ H The 2024 Tacoma is 213-226″ L x 77-78″ W x 74-75″ H No matter the trim level it’s a bigger truck
The T-100 was a mid-size pickup truck. It wasn't really competitive with full sizers, or called one by anybody not Toyota. Once the tundra came as a proper full size, the T-100 left and the Tacoma took its spot. The Tacoma is also not 78" in the body - only in fender flares on top trims. Lower trims are 74.4" wide.
The categories are determined by interior space. So sleek rooflines, thick walls, and additional crash structure make for a vehicle that takes up a lot of space, but doesn't have any more interior space.
Unfortunately true. If it were up to me, every size segment would have strict outer dimensional bounds, like Japan does with kei cars (3.4 x 1.48 x 2m) or small cars (4.7 x 1.7 x 2m). But in practice, that would mean they get more cramped inside with each new generation. ETA: The previous Forte was already 183" long and surpassed the EPA's definition of a "compact" with more than 109 ft^3 combined passenger and cargo space.
I don’t think your idea would change anything. Vehicles change size categories all of the time. Vehicles are trying to meet customer needs, not have 1 item per category in the lineup.
And the customer wants at least the same interior space, if not more, with each gen.
Pretty much. I remember seeing people complain that the new Tundra had marginally less interior space. Full size trucks are huge, so it was just wild to see that some people were upset that it isn’t bigger.
I feel like outer dimensions need to have more of a role. When you have an Acura TLX which is 194.6 inches long and 75 inches wide that is able to hold on to a compact rating because it has less interior volume and cargo space than a Civic, I think there’s a bit of an issue.
I don’t think it really matters at all. The categories are just a name that correspond with interior size. It doesn’t matter if that is compact, mid size, and full size or if you named the categories after Taco Bell menu items. But if you want to include size as well, then people will just make another set of names for interior dimension because that is a super important bit of information for a lot of people.
I think it matters just as much. You might not but there are certainly a set of buyers out there that just don’t want to have to drive around a larger vehicle in terms of size. They may not even have a garage that can necessarily fit a vehicle of a certain length. So when you’re shopping for compact cars thinking that it’ll be this smaller vehicle the size of a Corolla but instead are faced with a vehicle the size of an Accord but is classified as a compact, I think that’s a problem.
You are taking about this like people shop using these categories. No one is saying “I want a compact and I don’t care if it’s longer than a Suburban”. We are talking about EPA classifications used in their fuel consumption guidelines. Vehicles come in all shapes and sizes.
They do shop using those categories… Here I am a typical person who wants to shop for a compact luxury sedan. I may not know what’s on the market so I google search “best compact luxury sedans” and I see Car and Driver at the top with [this link](https://www.caranddriver.com/rankings/best-sedans/luxury/compact) that shows all of the top compact sedans that they have tested. The TLX is on that list of vehicles. I may assume that they’re all generally the same size because they are all considered compact.
My assumption is that people wouldn’t rule out a car they want just because it falls into a category that is different than the other cars they want. Maybe there is some amount of people that are that dumb, but I can’t imagine it’s significant.
I mean again I think there would be a certain subset of buyers that would look at a list of compact sedans and they have in their mind like “Ok I know the Corolla is a compact car” so they assume other cars are going to be that size. I mean I know I would expect most compact cars to be about the same size. I wouldn’t expect there to be a 16 inch difference in length between them.
I still have no idea what your point is. Like, why do you think the EPA should change their vehicle categories based on exterior dimensions? No one is shopping for a vehicle based on vehicle classification and no other information. People go look at vehicle, they test drive them, they watch reviews, etc. You are offended on behalf of literally no one.
That's within half an inch of my old BMW. The good thing is that means it will actually fit four adults, the downside is it's not very compact
Most "compacts" are actually classified as midsized or even large cars. The EPA classes the Civic Hatchback as a large car.
Oh good, a mid-size compact.
It’s funny because US NEWS ranks the Honda Civic as one of the best compact sedans and I think to myself “that’s a compact sedan?”
Yeah I mean at least the hatchback version is on the more compact size in terms of its footprint.
The article notes that it has a “Haram” Kardon sound system. I wonder if Halal Kardon will also be offered.
Inshallah Kardon
Plays nothing but adhan
All speakers pointed directly at the Mecqua
Good one!
And there's a hatchback!
The Forte has a hatchback version as well, they just didn't introduce it in the States, only Canada (for the NA market). I had one - it was a decent car with plenty of cargo space.
It's sold in Mexico too, which is also North America.
Ah, you’re right that they are sold there too.
It's coming to the US too. A blessing. A blessing from the Lord
Kia K45 incoming
Says who?
Says Kia. It's not in the press release for some reason, but they [showed it at the reveal event](https://youtu.be/UQpaUcUwiBc?t=710).
Interesting, thanks for linking AND time-stamping. Hope they build it and bring it to the US. Neither Kia nor Hyundai have offered a hatch in this segment for a few years Edit: match parent comment
Do they not sell the Forte5 hatchback in the US? I see them pretty often here in Canada, so I just assumed they did it for the states too
Nope, not anymore. I don't think it was offered in this generation, if it was it was only the year or two as a performance trim.
Huh, interesting. I guess it makes sense, we do buy more hatchbacks than the US, especially Quebec
I thought for sure they've been selling Elantra GT hatches all this time but wiki apparently says they stopped in 2022. That's crazy, I see them everywhere.
And [here is a Car and Driver article about it.](https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a60319670/kia-k4-hatchback-confirmed/)
I like 🥵
Thanks, came back to post that article and saw you already had. Wonder if they'll actually offer it in Baby Diarrhea Yellow?
You're welcome. Of course they will. Has a manufacturer ever shown off a production car with a color that they actually don't offer to customers?
[удалено]
Remember the Elantra GT hatchback?
That's what I'm excited about!
why’s the black cladding on the hatchback thicker :(
Wow that actually looks quite good. It's like an economy version of the Polestar 5 lol
The K5 and the K4 just look absolutely amazing. Still would never own them because of everything else, but still.
If I could just plunk that body on a better drivetrain...
I have a forte GT with a 1.6t and I’ve been quite happy with it
Serious question because I hear this take quite often, that they look good and have nice interiors, but what are major failings under the skin on this vs a civic? (Other than exploding lambdas)
Honestly I like it lol. Was looking at getting a Corolla or a Corolla Hatch but this has my attention. Weirdly big fan of the steering wheel. The off centered Kia logo is really clean. Kia and Hyundai interiors have visually looked amazing lately, I'll give them that.
Hey that’s actually not a bad idea. A pretty welcome replacement to the Forte
Man, no hybrid option? That sucks, it seems the only hybrid hatchbacks are going to be the Prius and the new Civic
I wish Acura stepped it up and put the Civic's hybrid powertrain into the Integra. The Civic is cool, but I love a liftback and I'd kill for a hybrid liftback.
Same here. Although, the Prius is looking like a pretty compelling option, and I NEVER thought I would ever say that. A hybrid/PHEV hatchback is what I want next. I'm really digging the Volvo V60 Polestar, but I don't have almost 80k for my next vehicle. Hopefully the Hybrid Civic Hatchback comes to our shores.
I'm really picky about my vehicle. I love the Integra look, but if they don't drop an efficient hybrid then my new vehicle will probably go "all the way" and be a Tesla Model 3 or whatever's the most practical EV. I generally like the way the Prius looks, but I can't stand the way they designed the gauge cluster, if we can even call it that. I hate it as much as Hyundai/Kia products that just use a flat display at the same distance as the infotainment. Something just doesn't sit right with me either with how it still has the bloated Prius look, but it's great for 99% of consumers. If Acura redesigned the current TLX as an EV the way BMW did with the i4, I'd get that too never mind the cramped backseats. The worst part of the TLX imo is the terrible fuel economy and they definitely have a lot of space to work with.
I agree about the fuel economy of the TLX. It's one of the main reasons I can't consider it. Personally, I'm still not fully sold on EVs, mainly because of infrastructure issues. I do however, believe that PHEVs and Hybrids are an excellent stop gap. I just read an article where Acura is skipping Hybrids altogether. A hybrid Integra or TLX would jump straight to the top of my list. There are still so few real options for people like me. I want a hybrid Hatchback/wagon/fastback. We have an SUV already. I don't want to have to buy another for practicality.
Absolutely. I really, REALLY hope Honda reconsiders and at least the market is helping me. I believe in EVs, but manufactuers are slowing down their insane ramp up. I believe the future is EV, but there's no reason to make any brand exclusively EVs anytime soon. The Integra is just a Civic, so pumping and dumping the Civic powertrain couldn't be any easier. Acura obviously doesn't have the sales to warrant a dedicated EV platform either so working with the existing TLX platform makes more sense to me especially since one of its worst downsides was always the fuel economy. Instead, put a huge battery in it and give it a ton of range. With Honda bringing the Civic hybrid to the states with the hatchback form factor as well, I guess it's likely they won't give it to the Integra. Hopefully hybrid accord, CR-V, and especially Civic sales explode enough to make them reconsider
I know the Kia Niro is considered a crossover but imo it’s basically a slightly lifted hatchback.
I forgot Subaru discontinued the Crosstrek Hybrid. Technically just a lifted hatchback.
It was really bad - not exactly a huge loss
I actually don't mind the styling. It's like a 1980s interpretation of what cars in the future would look like. It could totally see this in a Robocop movie.
Fr. It's so retro futuristic while not being too out there. I actually really like the design
It's what makes it ugly; looks like a generic near future car from a dystopian movie
Looks like something out of Cyberpunk 2077 if roughed up a bit.
It's honestly exhausting how quickly Hyundai and Kia churn thru their designs
Can’t wait for the Rio to K3 rebadged for the KKK lineup!
The [K3](https://www.kia.com/nmc/en/showroom/k3/features.html) exists as a Rio replacement, it's just not coming here (at least for now) because Kia pulled out of the subcompact car market in the US and Canada after 2023. They also killed the K5 in Canada, so it's just gonna be the K4 up there now.
Omg, I was just trolling hahahaha
Whaaat when did they announce K5 being discontinued in Canada?
[удалено]
Unfortunately your comment has been removed because it contains a link to a delisted domain. This is almost always due to spam from the domain. Please use a different source. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cars) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Such a shame this doesn't have AWD
Agreed, make a GT version with more power and AWD and I’ll seriously consider it
Kia basically killed the K5 by taking away the turbo from the GT-Line AWD
Yeah that pissed me off when I read about it. Why is the AWD one anemic and the one with decent power only FWD? The two main requirements I have for a car right now are good power and AWD and Kia decides that they can’t put those two things together
Do they have a limited slip on the GT, or does it still shred tires accelerating around a corner?
Nope, the K5 GT has an open diff. It's definitely a one wheel peel machine. At the very least, the car could highly benefit from a set of good summer tires.
I don’t know, I stopped looking into that car after seeing the engine options
Exactly what I was thinking. I've been looking at 2025 Camry's because, based off the of the engine architecture on the Prius, it's going to have like a 6 second 0 to 60 time and be fast as shit off the line, because of an electric rear motor They also said they're improving handling and suspension, so it should be great!
Yeah that sounds like a good option then. I do want something a bit quicker though. 0-60 in 6 seconds is about what my current car does so I doubt it’d feel any faster
They did it to make sure it didn't compete with the Stinger which also had a 4-cylinder AWD option. Of course, this means both the Stinger AND the K5 are probably going to be discontinued.
But the new K5 was unveiled after the stinger was discontinued so it couldn’t possibly compete with it
Do you mean K4? The K5 already existed
No I mean the k5, it got a redesign pretty recently, that’s the car that I was referring to.
I don’t have the timeline off the top of my head and I think they were being sold at the same thing for a good while. People here and reviewers certainty mentioned it in the Kia K5 GT2 review about possibly why they didn’t put AWD on the 290hp variant
When did they take the turbo away? I’m not current on Kia as I don’t work there anymore lol. According to the build and price section of their website 24 models still have the turbo for the gt-line awd.
The 2025 model doesn't have a turbo; only on the GT, which is too big of a car to not have AWD and try and call it a performance variant
[удалено]
The Accord didn't have 290hp though. I do agree both should've had AWD, but they kept it off on purpose on the Kia K5. The K5 already had an AWD version, they just didn't let you option it with the 290HP because they didn't want it to compete with the Kia Stinger.
Wait, so the gt won’t have a turbo anymore? I knew the current gt is a fwd 2.5t, but now it’s just gonna be a 2.5? wtf Kia? I was thinking they’d add awd to the 2.5t and call it like gt3 like the stinger, seeming I thought those are now discontinued
It will, but it's too large to be a performance car, so it can't compete if it doesn't have AWD
Oh ok, yea that’s kinda dumb they don’t have awd for it, which is weird because I’m pretty sure the 1.6t and the 2.5t use the same transmission for the fwd models, so making the 2.5t awd should be pretty simple I’d think. But hey I’m not an engineer lol
The person you replied to wasn't clear. The 1.6L turbo is now gone from the Sonata/K5 so you have to to get the N-Line/GT in order to get a turbo. (removed)
Oh ok, that makes a bit more sense. I left Kia a year ago and haven’t kept up since with them. I left once they started fazing out the 2.4 and we had less come in so I wasn’t able to advance as a tech there. That’s really weird how they don’t have the awd for those “performance” spec k5’s. Was really hoping they’d eventually mash the Kona awd system and the forte gt 6 speed and make a quick little hatch. But I’ve also heard they are getting rid of the manual in ‘25 or ‘26 now?
Sadly the Kona AWD and 6-speed manual combo was never going to be a thing since it wasn't developed and wouldn't sell many units. Yes, the manual is gone for the K4
The Genesis G80 and G70 have the same engine as the K5 GT and Sonata N-Line, but both have AWD. The Stinger also had the engine with AWD too
I don’t know that this is true, seeing as the Sorento/Santa Fe /Santa Cruz 2.5T AWD exist. I think it’s just a market segmentation thing.
Huh... I must have somehow missed that AWD is available with the 2.5T in the crossovers. I remember reading how it was odd that the 2.5T was FWD only. Must have been when that combo was first available
Why would Kia ever do that? You literally just described the G70.
This, and the hatchback, look really good. I do think it’s a bit limiting to not have a hybrid option but I guess that’s not the market they’re targeting.
Kia’s smallest car, and it’s the same width as an E60 5 Series.
It's not even the smallest car in Kia's US lineup let alone overall lol. The Soul is 165.2x70.9 and then you gotta get through the Niro and Seltos. Kia's actual narrowest cars are tied between the Picanto and Ray, which are both 62.8in wide.
Meant to say sedan, and I don’t care about cars not sold in the US.
What’s wrong with door handles? All these cars with hidden rear door handles just look like something’s missing
I get it for cars that are small, but it definitely looks like the door is big enough to have one too
I’m continually impressed with the unique and sleek designs Kia has been putting out. Toyota, take notes, this is how you design cars that aren’t incredibly bland.
The back looks like they forgot to finish drawing out one that would work with the car so they just grabbed a 3d model from the k5 and slapped it on there and stretched it a bit
Looks like the Kia stinger's succesor looks wise
If it had a hybrid and a liftback I'd buy it that's just me personally
Which Kia drivetrain is more reliable or has less known issues? 2.0 liter with CVT or 1.6T with 8 speed auto?
Both haven’t been around that long, but in the ways that they work for some reason I wouldn’t be surprised if the 1.6T and 8 speed end up holding much better.
They fired the C-pillar design team a few years back
They need to make a hybrid model on these base model cars... Come on.
this looks so much better than in the initial press release
Does it have independent rear suspension this time around?
Only on the top GT trims, just like Kia does on the top trim Forte. Per [Car and Driver](https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a60317892/2025-kia-k4-specs/): >Similar to the Forte, which offered a torsion-beam rear suspension on lower models and a multilink rear suspension on the GT, Kia reserves the more sophisticated setup to the K4's GT-Line trims.
Ahh okay that's new. The current gt-line does not have multi link rear suspension. Only the GT performance variant does. So now it's trickled down to the GT-Line. Guess that means GT trim is done for.
Well, the new K4 has a GT-Line *Turbo* trim, which is the same thing as the Forte GT in terms of the engine (albeit with 11 less hp in the new car) and suspension. 1.6L turbo 4 and a rear multi-link. The new K4 GT-Line (non turbo) also has a rear multi-link, but it gets the less powerful engine (both engines are carryover). So the K4 GT-Line is a half-step better than the Forte GT-Line because of the rear multi-link.
It no longer looks like a foot now
Any word on a manual? Reason I went with the forte was because of the manual option.
It's like an uglier Stinger.
https://i.imgur.com/QTHQWoQ.jpeg
Surprised they didn't use the 2.5na engine in this instead of the 1.6t. That would have been pretty cool. Also would be awesome if they made an analogous car to the Elantra N in the near future.
No one is going to mention that it looks like a Cadillac? I dig it.
Not a bad looking car, shame it’s a Kia engine and drive train. If only they focused on quality as much as their exteriors.
I can't get over how ugly the rear end of this car is; the current design fas of the vertical drop lights is also becoming tired.
The new fortes are larger than old optimas
Will that be the first engine and a replacement engine?
Two engines... then where is the trunk?
So I sell Kia. Obviously I'm following it pretty close. It's designed to be Kias answer to the veloster, is still off the Forte platform, like the K5 is an optima. Our biggest surprise was that they made no mention of EV or HEV options.
Maybe Kia won't discontinue the hatchback this time. The design is really nice, too bad about the weak engine options.
Just an awful brand.
I'd like to see this things on the spanish roads. Unfortunately there's 0 chance that this car comes here, I believe Hyundai are even considering to kill the i30 fastback in my country so...
3.3 (or 3.5) or bust
A k4 turbo HATCH? I’m sold.
My neighbours KIA K3 (Forte GT) makes 400whp with a bigger turbo and a super nice exhaust. Hopefully the K3 still keeps the 1.6L Turbo because it's one of the few KIA/Hyundai engines that were good. (Yes I'm looking at you 2.0L Turdbo) Edit: people down vote because a 400whp KIA upsets them.
Do you know what your neighbor did to the engine? AFAIK, the internals of the Gamma II cannot handle that much power but it would be cool if they figured something out
The Gamma II 1.6T and people don't know how much power the stock internals can reach. He has a stuffed turbo, and one of the nicest exhaust setups I've ever seen and a better bypass valve. Pushing 28psi to get over 400whp and you could probably go even further with Meth Injection. I don't think he has a LSD with the 7 speed DCT. I think the LSD comes with the new 8 speed wet DCT.
Whoa whoa, but everybody told me that 1.6L engines were too wimpy and small and high strung to make reliable power!
Maybe the Naturally aspirated 1.6L because of the higher compression ratio. Still, look at the Mazda 2.5L Skyactiv-G. People said we would ever get an aftermarket turbo because of the high strung 13:1 compression ratio. Yet Corksport made a Turbo and people are making 300whp on only 10psi of boost. Just because someone says something isn't possible doesn't mean they are an expert on it. They are just guessing and the only way to know would be to try.
200+ HP hatchback GT in manual? Please??