Virginia Kia Car Dealers

Lay it on me Car_Man. What does February hold for those of us ready to pull the trigger? Looking for the following scenario: 2011 Sorento EX 2.4L with 4WD 36 months/45,000 miles Residual: ? Money Factor: ? Customer Cash: ?

m6user: By way of comparison, this may help. Here is the first quote I received on a different Sorento: MSRP - 34880.0 - INVOICE - 33150.00 Selling price - 31565.00 - 1000.00 kia rebates = 30565.00 - 1000.00 kia loyalty or competitive = 29565.00 Plus VA tax,VA tags and 99.00 doc fee

I just bought a new Kia Sorento, EX, V6 engine, AWD, with PK2 (sunroof, etc.). I paid $31,999 before taxes and fees, and got 0% financing. I got the titanium silver with black interior. I wanted the Limited package too with the premium audio and the navigational system but it is incompatible with the roof rails and I really need the roof rails. I made my choice after 3 months of research. I considered Chevy Equinox, Honda CR-V, Mazda CX 7, and Hyundai Veracruz. The Veracruz was a little too big for my needs and I read some very bad reviews about the quality of this car. The CR-V does not have enough power for my taste. Same with the Equinox: not enough power. Before buying I drove the Sorento for a couple of hours on a highway and on city streets. It has power and acceleration. It handles very well. I found the car to be responsive, behaves well in winding roads at higher than the recommended speeds. For me this is important as I am a Mazda 3 driver. The heavier V6 engine makes the car handling feel a little heavier not only compared to Mazda 3 but also to CX 7 but I really liked the 276 horses under the hood. This is where the Mazda looses the battle for me even with the turbocharged engine which by the way was too noisy for my taste. The Sorento V6 is quieter. Another advantage of the Sorento over CX7 is the space: it feels a more spacious than the Mazda. More leg room for the rear seats and significantly more cargo space. The mileage is also a bit better. I did not like the Sorento maintenance schedule but decided that I can put up with this. It requires, for example a timing belt change after 60K miles compared to the required timing chain life of 180K miles for Mazda. Anyway, after all was said and done, I chose Sorento over CX 7. Five hours later still feel good about it :)

Awesome deal-congratulations aalsherri! Unfortunately (for me) this confirms a suspicion that I should have made a lower initial offer to purchase my '08 LX V6! Oh well... Still, based on the gap between what you say the car cost compared to the final price out-the-door it sounds like either vehicle title taxes and registration fees are noticeably higher in your area-or you may have ended up saddled with some relatively high dealer fees. Above the price negotiated for my Rondo ($15,088 after the $4k mfgr rebate) I paid $399 for "dealer services", $10 for "online filing fees", $584.61 for VA titling taxes (3%), $36.27 for "dealer business license tax" (never should have let this one go w/o protest), $38.75 for registration (tags) and $10 for VA title fee for a total of $1,078.63. Sounds like you ended up paying about $225 morr for fees, licenses & taxes (& options/warranties?) above the base price for your car. You got a great deal in any case!

Will do. I'm hopeful our Rondo will be somewhat more fuel efficient than our '98 Toyota Sienna. I consider myself a "closet" hypermiler" and will be quite disappointed if I'm unable to manage 30+ mpg with our Rondo on the highway at 60-65 mph after break-in. In all honesty though all the complaints I've read from owners concerning poor fuel economy results from their V-6 Rondos gives me pause. My current commuter vehicle is a '05 Mazda 3i (2.0 L w/5-speed manual). When I purchased the car the EPA hwy rating was 35 mpg and since the revisions were made to the EPA test procedures the 3i manual has been rated for 32 mpg highway. My 3i recently passed the 60k mile mark and average mpg based on all fillups since purchase is now 38.6 mpg-or nearly 7 mpg more than the car's current EPA highway rating. The lowest tank I've calculated with my 3i was better than 32 mpg for the first fill up and during the break-in period. Note: all of my 3i's results are available for viewing at www.brianbauer.org. Look for results for 2005 Mazda3 2.0 L w/manual transmission. My car's results are the ones from Chesterfield, VA. I'm planning to post mpg results for our Rondo on this site too. Note that I did consider the 4-cylinder version of the Rondo but since the EPA highway ratings were the same for both with the v-6 turning in 2 mpg less in the city cycle I didn't feel the difference between the two was significant fuel-economy wise. On the other hand after test driving a 6-cylinder Rondo, then a 4-cylinder Optima followed by another 6-cylinder Rondo I felt the 6-cylinder was noticeably quieter, smoother and generally more refined compared to the I-4. I also feel a 5-speed automatic offers increased flexibility and taller highway gearing over a 4-speed. On the other hand, the Optima we test drove (an '09 I-4 w/5-speed automatic...EPA highway rating 32 mpg) did appear to cruise a bit more "freely" on level ground in top gear than either of the 6-cylinder Rondos we drove. Of course, I'm also fairly sure that the Rondo outweighs the Optima by a few hundred pounds too. Still, if the dealership had a light-colored I-4 powered Rondo on the lot I would have taken it for a test drive. However, there was only one 4-cylinder Rondo on the lot and it was a dark color. I also realize the '08 v-6 is only rated for 20 more hp and 20 more ft/lb of torque over the '08 I-4. From what I've read both engines were re-tuned for higher output for 2009 models, but there were no '09 Rondo's on the lot when I was shopping. In any case I would not have been willing to forego the $4k rebate in order to gain a few more hp-and the v-6 versions EPA ratings are unchanged for '09. I'm also curious if those owners who have been getting poor mpg results with their v-6 Rondos were careful to follow the break-in recommendations listed in the owners manual. I've noted that after stating no special break-in procedure is needed, Kia does recommend some precautions over the first 600 miles, including: Keep engine speeds between 2k and 4k rpm Don't maintain a constant speed for long periods ("Varying engine speed is needed to properly break in the engine") Avoid allowing the engine to idle longer than 3 minutes at a time. Frankly, with the automatic transmission I don't see how any owner could follow these recommendations if they simply shift the transmission into "drive" and leave it there. I've also been surprised by all the posts I've read from owners (both on this forum and others) who drove their vehicles off the dealer's lot and immediately took them on fairly long highway trips-implying these new engines were most-likely broken-in by driving at steady speeds w/the cruise control set. To me that's exactly what most manufacturers recommend AGAINST! As a result I've been keeping my Rondos transmission selector in sportmatic mode most of the time so that I my choose and vary the transmission shift points, maintain engine rpm in the recommended range generally avoid the allowing the transmission to select the relatively tall 5th gear during the break-in period. Except when you're maintaining 55+ mph on the highway the only other time engine rpm in a v-6 Rondo will be over 2k rpm with the transmission in "D" is while the vehicle is accelerating in the lower gears. Of course doing these things lowers fuel economy, but I'm hopeful the long term benefits will be well worth sacrificing some fuel economy over the first few tanks. My Rondo is approaching the 300 mile-mark now (the odometer showed 17 miles when we took it for a test drive) and subjectively I feel the engine seems to be running smoother at idle and spinning more freely as the number of miles add up. In any case I'm hoping a careful break-in will pay dividends in engine longevity and fuel economy over the long haul as it has with the other engines I've broken-in this way. Of course I may be deluding myself as I've read that with the tight manufacturing tolerances used today there's little need to treat a new engine any differently than you would normally. In any case, if my Rondo's engine turns out to be a disappointment down the road at least I'll know for that it was not due to a failure to follow the manufacturer's recommendations during the break-in period.