General Kia Rondo Thread

[Bob]

The 2.7L has 20 HP more than than the 2.4L 4 cylinder. It's actually kind of crazy that the two engines are so close in terms of displacement and performance. I'm sure the V6 drives better due to the added torque and the 5 speed auto vs 4 speed auto in the 4 cylinder.

The car is all back together and fully operational. I think it runs a little smoother now, so maybe the new plugs and TB cleaning did something there. We'll see if there is any impact on fuel economy.

[Bob]

Another gem from Edmunds:

What makes the Rondo feartastic?

Well, it's not dissimilar to the Fit in the acceleration category. That is, if you yanked out the Fit's sewing machine motor and dumped in a 500ci V8 from a 1970 Eldorado. And strapped on a blower. What it may lack off the line, it more than makes up for once you're up to speed.

Kicking down two gears summons power than is completely unnecessary and will put you into the triple digits before you can curse someone else's mother.

It also compares to the Fit in terms of handling. If you put a 500 pound dumpster to the roof of the Fit. And filled the dumpster with 500 pounds of moldy cantaloupes. You see, the Rondo weighs a staggering 1000 pounds more than the Fit. And where the Fit is happy to bound and dance through corners, the Rondo makes like it's about tip over and scatter your moldy melons all over the road. I can't imagine how frightening it looks from the outside.

So now that you're barreling towards your favorite corner, a corner you've sped through a hundred times in the trusty Fit, you suddenly realize that the Rondo's going a thousand miles an hour and is on the verge of tipping over. This is more than a little scary, but also more than a little fun! It's feartastic!

https://www.edmunds.com/kia/rondo/2007/ ... astic.html

[kevm14]

The 2.7L has 20 HP more than than the 2.4L 4 cylinder. It's actually kind of crazy that the two engines are so close in terms of displacement and performance. I'm sure the V6 drives better due to the added torque and the 5 speed auto vs 4 speed auto in the 4 cylinder.

The car is all back together and fully operational. I think it runs a little smoother now, so maybe the new plugs and TB cleaning did something there. We'll see if there is any impact on fuel economy.

There were a number of 90s smaller displacement V6s like that. Suzuki had one also. Even Chrysler had their shitty 2.7L.

[Bob]

I feel like the Hyundais and Kias of the 2000s were just reasonably well reverse engineered versions of 90s Japanese cars. Remember, the Accord had a 2.7L V6 in the 90s as well.

[kevm14]

Ok but Nissan and Toyota didn't. Well, not in the US....

[Bob]

Unfortunately, they also copied the 90s Honda design choice of using a timing belt instead of a chain. Even worse, it has a 60k mile change interval.

[Adam]

I feel like the Hyundais and Kias of the 2000s were just reasonably well reverse engineered versions of 90s Japanese cars. Remember, the Accord had a 2.7L V6 in the 90s as well.

I agree with this statement.

Hyundai's Beta-family 4 cylinder even looks a lot like the 20-valve A series Toyota engine (with the exception of the ITBs).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyundai_Beta_engine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_A_ ... (20-valve)

[Bob]

After reading some of these long term tests, I am convinced that the gas mileage is just generally lousy and there's nothing wrong with the Rondo. At least it helps to rationalize buying an inefficient car to replace it if I get questions about fuel efficiency of the replacement car.

[Bob]

I think the transmission whine is getting worse, or maybe it just seemed worse this morning after not driving it all weekend.

[Bob]

Got 21.3 on my last tank, which was nearly all post-coil. I'm not going to declare victory based on a single data point, but this is somewhat promising.