MM Full-Review: 2014 Kia Cadenza
06-11-13, 02:25 PM
#1
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
MM Full-Review: 2014 Kia Cadenza
A Review of the all-new (to the U.S. market) 2014 Kia Cadenza.
http://www.kia.com/us/#/cadenza
IN A NUTSHELL: Kia finally replaces its long-gone full-size Amanti sedan, and does it quite well.
CLOSEST AMERICAN-MARKET COMPETITORS: Chevrolet Impala, Hyundai Azera, Ford Taurus, Nissan Maxima, Toyota Avalon, Buick Lacrosse
(The Lexus ES350, price-wise, could very loosely be considered a competitor, but that is debatable)
Kia Motors generally made its initial worldwide reputation selling small, somewhat Spartan, and often poorly-built vehicles, either under their own nameplate, or, like the old Ford Festiva/Mazda 121, under contract for other automakers. The company's first attempt, about ten years ago, to market a full-size premium sedan in the United States was an Americanized version of their Opirus sedan, which, though not done on identical platforms, shared a number of components with the Hyundai XG and later Azera sedans. The U.S. version (and that of some other countries) was called the Amanti, and was styled far differently than any of its Hyundai cousins....it combined a Mercedes E-class front end with a Lincoln Town-car roofline and a Jaguar-esque rear end. I thought it was a handsome car myself, though a number of auto journalists and enthusiasts accused it, with some justification, of simply copy-catting.
I also liked the Amanti's ride comfort, which, by modern standards, was quite soft (the way a lot of South Koreans like it for their home market). But, not surprisingly, it rolled like a beach ball in corners (I'm not exaggerating)....and wanted to plow straight ahead. I found it one of the worst-handling vehicles (along with the Smart-for-Two, Ford Excursion, and Buick Roadmaster) that I've sampled in the modern era. Its handling was only slightly less-ponderous than the battleship-like Roadmaster, simply because the Amanti's front-end wasn't quite as large or heavy, and had a lighter V6 in it instead of the Roadmaster's big 5.7L V8. The Excursion's road manners were even worse...but I won't directly compare them to sedans because the Excursion was an F-250/350 heavy-duty truck frame.
The first-generation Amanti, for a number of reasons (partly its bad press) was nowhere near being a sales-success here in America, and Kia tried again with a second-generation model, which firmed up some of the Roly-Poly handling, but also took out some of the nice softness it had over bumps. The second-generation car was no more of a success than its predecessor had been, and Kia quietly dropped it from the American market in 2009. This, in marked contrast to Hyundai, which decided to keep the also-slow-selling FWD Azera here despite the fact that it was being trumped in sales by the new RWD Genesis luxury-sedan.
In the meantine, Kia, in 2009, decided to replace the Opirus/Amanti series with two new full-size premium sedans...a FWD model called the Cadenza, and a larger (K9) model. I won't go into the K9 much, as it was primarily for the Korean market (not for the U.S.) and based more or less on the RWD Hyundai Genesis. The Cadenza, though (perhaps because of the Amanti's poor sales), was also kept out of the American market...until now. Kia's reputation here in America, though, kept improving all the time (along with its sales)....so company management (apparantly) decided to give the premium-sedan slot here in the U.S. another try. The Cadenza that will be initially sold here is the same one that has been in production since 2009...minus (as usual for many automakers) some of the powertrains and options available overseas. It will, of course, be slotted one level above the hot-selling Optima (which, IMO, is an excellent mid-sized sedan....I highly recommend it). Usually, Hyundai vehicles are considered more upmarket/premium than their Kia cousins, but this time, that's not necessarily the case. The Cadenza's 35K base price is significantly higher than the new Hyundai Azera's 32K, though the Cadenza will compete more directly with the FWD Azera than with the larger RWD Hyundai Genesis (or, of course, the MUCH larger, more expensive V8 RWD Hyundai Equus).
For 2014, initially, the U.S.-market Cadenza, in most areas, will only be available in one trim level (Premium), although some trim-packages are offered, and, of course, just one body style....a four-door sedan. All Cadenzas get a 3.3L V6 with 293 HP, 255 ft-lbs. of torque, and a Sport-Shift 6-speed automatic transmisson (Kia, fortunately, avoids the mistake that Chevy made by putting four-cylinders in the base-level Impalas). The V6 runs on regular gas (which is recommended). As with the new Impala, though, there is, at least for now, no AWD option....an option increasingly expected in this class of car.
For the basic review, I looked at a Satin-Metal Cadenza (that's what they call the paint color, which is grayish-champagne) with an all-black leather interior....a beige interior is also available. I also wanted to check out the extra-cost two-tone white/black interior, which I thought looked stunning. They had only one of those on the lot, which (not surprisingly) was being used by the dealerships's General Manager, so, for obvious reasons, I just sat in it and didn't test-drive it. The white interior is part of an extra-cost White Interior Package (the package itself doesn't cost anything, but it requires the Luxury and Technology Packages which cost $3000 each, so, in effect, it's $6000).
MODEL REVIEWED: 2014 Kia Cadenza
BASE PRICE: $35,100
OPTIONS:
Luxury Package: $3000
Cargo Tray: $80
Wheel Locks: $55
DESTINATION/FREIGHT: $800 (Not bad for a car this size)
LIST PRICE AS REVIEWED: $39,035
(This particular car had a second add-on sticker with $495 worth of dealer-maintenance on it, but I didn't include it in the list price)
DRIVETRAIN: FWD, Transversely-mounted 3.3L CVVT V6, 293 HP @ 6400 RPM, Torque 255 ft-lbs. @ 5200 RPM, 6-speed Sport-Shift automatic transmission.
EPA MILEAGE RATING: 19 City, 28 Highway, 22 Combined
EXTERIOR COLOR: Satin Metal
INTERIOR: Black Leather.
PLUSSES:
Long 10/100 and 5/60 Kia standard warranties...but parts of them may (?) not be transferable.
Smooth, powerful V6.
Smooth quiet 6-speed automatic.
Flat cornering with little body roll.
Fairly quick steering response.
Good noise isolation.
Well-placed brake pedal for large feet.
Handsome (IMO) exterior.
Twin gas struts to hold up the hood...no cheap prop-rod.
Upscale-looking interior...particularly in white.
Well-crafted interior.
(Mostly) nice interior-trim materials.
Nicely-done Nappa leather seat-coverings.
Adequate front/rear legroom.
Well-done steering wheel with wood rim.
Relatively easy-to-use stereo *****.
Almost-killer stereo sound.
Silky-feeling headliner and sun visors.
Side-mirror-mounted turn-signal indicators.
Classy Infiniti-style analog clock.
Decent outward visibility from inside....even to the rear.
Large, roomy trunk.
Well-shaped trunk lid opening.
Relatively good interior headroom despite twin sunroofs and droop-down rear roofline.
MINUSES:
Some brake-pedal sponginess.
Head-scratching underhood layout.
Very poor (IMO) exterior paint-color choice.
Adequate but So-so paint job for a car of this class.
Junk-grade shift-paddles on the steering column.
Smallish (but till adequate) glove box.
Trunk-lining materials not particularly impressive for a car of this class.
Temporary spare tire.
Chrome side-mouldings mounted much too low for optimum protection.
No AWD option.
Rear seat does not fold for added cargo-space.
Probably should have been introduced to the American market before now.
EXTERIOR:
Though clearly the largest of the American-market Kia sedans, there is no mistaking the Cadenza's exterior styling as coming from the Kia coupe/sedan family. It has the (by now) familiar Tiger-Snout grille up front in black with a nice chrome-surround, the swept-back projector-type headlights, humpback- whale roofline with the droop-down rear, conservatively-styled fenders, and VW-style taillights/rear end. A nice chrome body-side moulding is included on both sides of the car......but mounted MUCH too low for adequate parking-lot protection (the new Chevy Impala makes the same error by mounting it too low). The twin side-mirors have nice turn-signal indicators in them for safety. The droop-rear roofline impacts rear-seat headrom slightly, but has very little impact on the trunk-lid opening (more on this later). The outside door-handles are painted body color (and look OK), but, IMO, on a car of this class, would look nicer if they were done with chrome-strips (like on my Buick Verano). The paint jobs, for a car of this class, again, were OK but did not particularly impress me. The dealership did not have Cadenzas in stock in all 6 colors, but, on the colors I did look at, the paint jobs, though smooth and generally free of orange-peel, were definitely not in the Lexus/Audi/Cadillac/Infiniti class. And, on the Cadenza, Kia (almost) repeats the same mistake that Hyundai did by offering its big Equus in only four colors....white/black/silver/gray. The Cadenza, at least for now, only comes in six
colors (which still isn't much for a car of this class)....and they are so dull, even with the White Pearl, which on many cars looks stunning, that, IMO, they make Clancy's Funeral Home look cheerful in comparison (see the attached Kia web-site above for the color-chips). Come on, guys......you're not selling this car to morticians (at least the white leather interior is stunning....that makes up for some of it). 18" wheels with handsome turbine-style alloy wheels and 45-series tires come standard, with 19" turbine-alloys and 40-series tires on the Technology package. All four doors, hood, and trunk lid seemed to close with a reasonably solid thunk.
Paint-colors aside, though, I was generally pleased with the Cadenza's looks and exterior styling. Like its smaller, less-expensive Optima brother, I consider it basically a good-looking car.
UNDERHOOD:
Open up the solid-feeling hood, and two nice gas-struts hold it up for you without having to fool around with a cheap manual prop-rod. The battery, on the right front, is exposed and it's relatively easy to reach and clean the terminals, and the dipsticks/fluid-reservoirs/filler-caps are also relatively easy to reach, but the rest of the underhood layout, as in a number of luxury/premium cars, is a nightmare. The transversely-mounted 3.3L V6 is crammed pretty tightly (though not the tightest I've seen), and blocks easy side-access to many components. The huge plastic engine cover blocks virtually everything on top of the engine except the oil filler-cap. Other underhood components are hidden under various panels and covers. It's well-known that most car-owners don't do much of their own work underhood any more, leaving it to dealer or independent technicians/mechanics......and this is a classic
example why.
INTERIOR:
Although the exterior, IMO, wasn't bad-looking by any means (I felt it was handsome), I generally found the Cadenza's interior (especially in the optional white leather) to be noticeably more upscale-looking than the outside. The dual sun-visors were done in a really plush soft-fur fabric that felt like velvet.....something that you don't often find in far more expensive cars. There was adequate head room for guys my size (6' 2" and a baseball-cap) in front under the sunroof-panel, and (barely) enough in the rear, with the droop-down roofline (the rear seat has its own sunroof and panel). The seats, regardless of the color, had a nice Nappa-leather covering that really looked and felt like it belonged in an upscale car, though, like with most Kia products, the cushions were padded a little firmer than I generally like (I usually like Cush-Tush). With the optional package, front seats are both heated/ventilated, while outboard rear seats are heated. Most of the interior trim was well-done, though I thought that the wood-tone strips were a little dull, and the artificial flat-metallic sheen on the inside door handles rather cheap-looking. The dash, door-panels, and most of the rest of the interior surfaces had soft-padded, high-quality-feeling materials. The glove box, though still adequate-sized, seemed a little small, and couldn't seem to hold much more than the Owners' Manual packet and some of the registration papers. Legroom was fine up front for large/tall persons, and generally OK in back. The primary/secondary gauge displays varied with programming and optional packages. The control layout was generally well-done (as with many Asian-designed cars), with clearly marked buttons/*****. The chrome-trimmed analog clock, in the middle of the dash amid a group of climate-control buttons, adds a nice classy Infiniti-style touch inside. Despite the droop-down rear roofline, because of the way the C/D pillars and rear-windows are designed, visibility out the rear is not bad. The stereo-sound was excellent (especially with James Brown and some funk), but I wouldn't quite call it a killer stereo. I also liked the fact that it had simple, easy-to-use volume/tune ***** and frequency readout, though the rest of the video screen, as usual, had its complexities. The only really cheap touch insides, IMO (besides the metallic flat-sheen on the door-handles), were the flat-black plastic shift-paddles for the transmission, mounted as usual, on the steering-wheel. They looked (and felt) almost as bad as the ones typically used in many Ford/Lincoln products....the Ford paddles feel like they are going to fall off right in your hands. But most of the hardware inside (and especially the excellent power-mirror switch, which can feel flimsy on many vehicles) seemed class A in solidness.
CARGO COMPARTMENT/TRUNK:
Open up the solid-feeling trunk lid, and, as expected with a car of this size, you are greeted with a pretty-good sized trunk (by today's sedan-standards). A nice first-aid kit is attached to the left wall of the trunk....something that is often found in premium/luxury-grade cars. The trunk lid itself is also fairly large.....the slant-rear roofline doesn't impact on the size of the lid-opening much like it does with some sedans. Otherwise, considering the car's price, I wasn't impressed very much with the general level of trim in the cargo compartment. The thin fabric/carpet material on the floor felt like something out of an econobox, and the trim material on the sides/walls also didn't have much of a plush feel.The rear seats don't fold down to expand the cargo area (some automakers omit that feature to increase the rear cross-beam strength of the unibody frame), though there is a small center pass-through hole for long narrow items like skis or fishing poles. My car had the optional ($80) rubber cargo-tray, which lines the floor and protects it from spills and liquids. Under the trunk's floor was.....(you guessed it)....the usual temporary spare tire.
ON THE ROAD:
Since the road-manners of the new Chevy Impala and Cadenza are being closely compared in a number of auto-press reviews (and generally rank high in them), I'll make my own brief comparison here, having driven both:
Start up the 3.3L V6 with a nice engine START/STOP button, and the engine comes to life and idles with the silky smoothness/quietness of a Lexus. On the road, there is some chuffling exhaust noise during significant acceleration, but, for the most part, the engine remains smooth, quiet and refined. Its power level, especially lightly-loaded, is more than adequate for normal everyday driving, and, while not a dragster, has enough torque to give you a mild shove in the back.....about like that of the new Chevy Impala's 3.6L V6.
On the road, the Cadenza is also similiar to the new Impala in other (but not all) areas. The Cadenza's 6-speed Sport-Shift automatic is smooth and quiet, and I found its shift-paddles and lever-bump easier to manually shift with than the Impala's awkward rocker-switch button on top of the shift-lever. But the flat black shift paddles themselves, though, like those on a number of Fords, looked and felt like something out of the plastic-reject bin. It was very difficult IMO, at moderate-cruise, to tell much if any difference from the V6 Impala. Both rode reasonably smoothly (with the Kia maybe very slightly firmer), and both had exemplary road/wind-noise isolation. The Kia had noticeably less body roll on sharp steering-inputs (almost sports-sedan-flat, I might add), but the Impala had noticeably quicker steering-response....this, with the Impala, seemed to be more a function of the steering-rack ratio itself than actual suspension differences. The Cadenza's brake pedal was located very well for my big size 15 gorilla-shoes not hanging up on it while lifting from the gas (so was the Impala's), and both braking systems were smooth, but the Cadenza's pedal had noticeably more sponginess and free-play at the top.
THE VERDICT:
Certainly Kia has come out with a very credible replacement for the old Amanti, though it can be argued that, being introduced to the Korean market in 2009, it's a little late in reaching these shores. However, I can understand at least some of the caution of Kia officials in not moving to quickly to replace an American-market flagship that didn't sell before (Infiniti, with the defunct Q45 flagship, of course, had the same problem). But, now that the new Cadenza IS here, I think it will sell (or have the potential to sell) if people simply forget the old stereotypes they keep hearing about the company (most of which are grossly out of date) and actually go to dealerships or auto shows and look at the car. It obviously doesn't have one of the traditonal Kia bargain-basement prices, but, after reviewing at the car, I think you get what you pay for....and then some. It competes very well with its full-size FWD competitors, has arguably the best-crafted interior of the bunch (as good or better, in some ways, than the new Avalon's much-hyped new interior), uses good solid materials inside and out, and drives like one would expect a car of this class to.
Gripes? The cargo compartment could use some nicer materials (though, of course, it's more important for passengers to be comfortable than the luggage). The ride is reasonably comfortable, but I think it would be even better with higher-profile tires....this ongoing obsession by automakers with handling over ride is getting a little long in the tooth, though the 1Gen Kia Amanti was arguably TOO sloppy in its handling. The exterior paint colors are enough to make you take Prozac. But, other than that, in actuality, I really couldn't find much to complain about with this car.......an excellent effort on Kia's part. I'd be happy to own one myself.
And, as always, Happy Car-Shopping.
MM
http://www.kia.com/us/#/cadenza
IN A NUTSHELL: Kia finally replaces its long-gone full-size Amanti sedan, and does it quite well.
CLOSEST AMERICAN-MARKET COMPETITORS: Chevrolet Impala, Hyundai Azera, Ford Taurus, Nissan Maxima, Toyota Avalon, Buick Lacrosse
(The Lexus ES350, price-wise, could very loosely be considered a competitor, but that is debatable)
Kia Motors generally made its initial worldwide reputation selling small, somewhat Spartan, and often poorly-built vehicles, either under their own nameplate, or, like the old Ford Festiva/Mazda 121, under contract for other automakers. The company's first attempt, about ten years ago, to market a full-size premium sedan in the United States was an Americanized version of their Opirus sedan, which, though not done on identical platforms, shared a number of components with the Hyundai XG and later Azera sedans. The U.S. version (and that of some other countries) was called the Amanti, and was styled far differently than any of its Hyundai cousins....it combined a Mercedes E-class front end with a Lincoln Town-car roofline and a Jaguar-esque rear end. I thought it was a handsome car myself, though a number of auto journalists and enthusiasts accused it, with some justification, of simply copy-catting.
I also liked the Amanti's ride comfort, which, by modern standards, was quite soft (the way a lot of South Koreans like it for their home market). But, not surprisingly, it rolled like a beach ball in corners (I'm not exaggerating)....and wanted to plow straight ahead. I found it one of the worst-handling vehicles (along with the Smart-for-Two, Ford Excursion, and Buick Roadmaster) that I've sampled in the modern era. Its handling was only slightly less-ponderous than the battleship-like Roadmaster, simply because the Amanti's front-end wasn't quite as large or heavy, and had a lighter V6 in it instead of the Roadmaster's big 5.7L V8. The Excursion's road manners were even worse...but I won't directly compare them to sedans because the Excursion was an F-250/350 heavy-duty truck frame.
The first-generation Amanti, for a number of reasons (partly its bad press) was nowhere near being a sales-success here in America, and Kia tried again with a second-generation model, which firmed up some of the Roly-Poly handling, but also took out some of the nice softness it had over bumps. The second-generation car was no more of a success than its predecessor had been, and Kia quietly dropped it from the American market in 2009. This, in marked contrast to Hyundai, which decided to keep the also-slow-selling FWD Azera here despite the fact that it was being trumped in sales by the new RWD Genesis luxury-sedan.
In the meantine, Kia, in 2009, decided to replace the Opirus/Amanti series with two new full-size premium sedans...a FWD model called the Cadenza, and a larger (K9) model. I won't go into the K9 much, as it was primarily for the Korean market (not for the U.S.) and based more or less on the RWD Hyundai Genesis. The Cadenza, though (perhaps because of the Amanti's poor sales), was also kept out of the American market...until now. Kia's reputation here in America, though, kept improving all the time (along with its sales)....so company management (apparantly) decided to give the premium-sedan slot here in the U.S. another try. The Cadenza that will be initially sold here is the same one that has been in production since 2009...minus (as usual for many automakers) some of the powertrains and options available overseas. It will, of course, be slotted one level above the hot-selling Optima (which, IMO, is an excellent mid-sized sedan....I highly recommend it). Usually, Hyundai vehicles are considered more upmarket/premium than their Kia cousins, but this time, that's not necessarily the case. The Cadenza's 35K base price is significantly higher than the new Hyundai Azera's 32K, though the Cadenza will compete more directly with the FWD Azera than with the larger RWD Hyundai Genesis (or, of course, the MUCH larger, more expensive V8 RWD Hyundai Equus).
For 2014, initially, the U.S.-market Cadenza, in most areas, will only be available in one trim level (Premium), although some trim-packages are offered, and, of course, just one body style....a four-door sedan. All Cadenzas get a 3.3L V6 with 293 HP, 255 ft-lbs. of torque, and a Sport-Shift 6-speed automatic transmisson (Kia, fortunately, avoids the mistake that Chevy made by putting four-cylinders in the base-level Impalas). The V6 runs on regular gas (which is recommended). As with the new Impala, though, there is, at least for now, no AWD option....an option increasingly expected in this class of car.
For the basic review, I looked at a Satin-Metal Cadenza (that's what they call the paint color, which is grayish-champagne) with an all-black leather interior....a beige interior is also available. I also wanted to check out the extra-cost two-tone white/black interior, which I thought looked stunning. They had only one of those on the lot, which (not surprisingly) was being used by the dealerships's General Manager, so, for obvious reasons, I just sat in it and didn't test-drive it. The white interior is part of an extra-cost White Interior Package (the package itself doesn't cost anything, but it requires the Luxury and Technology Packages which cost $3000 each, so, in effect, it's $6000).
MODEL REVIEWED: 2014 Kia Cadenza
BASE PRICE: $35,100
OPTIONS:
Luxury Package: $3000
Cargo Tray: $80
Wheel Locks: $55
DESTINATION/FREIGHT: $800 (Not bad for a car this size)
LIST PRICE AS REVIEWED: $39,035
(This particular car had a second add-on sticker with $495 worth of dealer-maintenance on it, but I didn't include it in the list price)
DRIVETRAIN: FWD, Transversely-mounted 3.3L CVVT V6, 293 HP @ 6400 RPM, Torque 255 ft-lbs. @ 5200 RPM, 6-speed Sport-Shift automatic transmission.
EPA MILEAGE RATING: 19 City, 28 Highway, 22 Combined
EXTERIOR COLOR: Satin Metal
INTERIOR: Black Leather.
PLUSSES:
Long 10/100 and 5/60 Kia standard warranties...but parts of them may (?) not be transferable.
Smooth, powerful V6.
Smooth quiet 6-speed automatic.
Flat cornering with little body roll.
Fairly quick steering response.
Good noise isolation.
Well-placed brake pedal for large feet.
Handsome (IMO) exterior.
Twin gas struts to hold up the hood...no cheap prop-rod.
Upscale-looking interior...particularly in white.
Well-crafted interior.
(Mostly) nice interior-trim materials.
Nicely-done Nappa leather seat-coverings.
Adequate front/rear legroom.
Well-done steering wheel with wood rim.
Relatively easy-to-use stereo *****.
Almost-killer stereo sound.
Silky-feeling headliner and sun visors.
Side-mirror-mounted turn-signal indicators.
Classy Infiniti-style analog clock.
Decent outward visibility from inside....even to the rear.
Large, roomy trunk.
Well-shaped trunk lid opening.
Relatively good interior headroom despite twin sunroofs and droop-down rear roofline.
MINUSES:
Some brake-pedal sponginess.
Head-scratching underhood layout.
Very poor (IMO) exterior paint-color choice.
Adequate but So-so paint job for a car of this class.
Junk-grade shift-paddles on the steering column.
Smallish (but till adequate) glove box.
Trunk-lining materials not particularly impressive for a car of this class.
Temporary spare tire.
Chrome side-mouldings mounted much too low for optimum protection.
No AWD option.
Rear seat does not fold for added cargo-space.
Probably should have been introduced to the American market before now.
EXTERIOR:
Though clearly the largest of the American-market Kia sedans, there is no mistaking the Cadenza's exterior styling as coming from the Kia coupe/sedan family. It has the (by now) familiar Tiger-Snout grille up front in black with a nice chrome-surround, the swept-back projector-type headlights, humpback- whale roofline with the droop-down rear, conservatively-styled fenders, and VW-style taillights/rear end. A nice chrome body-side moulding is included on both sides of the car......but mounted MUCH too low for adequate parking-lot protection (the new Chevy Impala makes the same error by mounting it too low). The twin side-mirors have nice turn-signal indicators in them for safety. The droop-rear roofline impacts rear-seat headrom slightly, but has very little impact on the trunk-lid opening (more on this later). The outside door-handles are painted body color (and look OK), but, IMO, on a car of this class, would look nicer if they were done with chrome-strips (like on my Buick Verano). The paint jobs, for a car of this class, again, were OK but did not particularly impress me. The dealership did not have Cadenzas in stock in all 6 colors, but, on the colors I did look at, the paint jobs, though smooth and generally free of orange-peel, were definitely not in the Lexus/Audi/Cadillac/Infiniti class. And, on the Cadenza, Kia (almost) repeats the same mistake that Hyundai did by offering its big Equus in only four colors....white/black/silver/gray. The Cadenza, at least for now, only comes in six
colors (which still isn't much for a car of this class)....and they are so dull, even with the White Pearl, which on many cars looks stunning, that, IMO, they make Clancy's Funeral Home look cheerful in comparison (see the attached Kia web-site above for the color-chips). Come on, guys......you're not selling this car to morticians (at least the white leather interior is stunning....that makes up for some of it). 18" wheels with handsome turbine-style alloy wheels and 45-series tires come standard, with 19" turbine-alloys and 40-series tires on the Technology package. All four doors, hood, and trunk lid seemed to close with a reasonably solid thunk.
Paint-colors aside, though, I was generally pleased with the Cadenza's looks and exterior styling. Like its smaller, less-expensive Optima brother, I consider it basically a good-looking car.
UNDERHOOD:
Open up the solid-feeling hood, and two nice gas-struts hold it up for you without having to fool around with a cheap manual prop-rod. The battery, on the right front, is exposed and it's relatively easy to reach and clean the terminals, and the dipsticks/fluid-reservoirs/filler-caps are also relatively easy to reach, but the rest of the underhood layout, as in a number of luxury/premium cars, is a nightmare. The transversely-mounted 3.3L V6 is crammed pretty tightly (though not the tightest I've seen), and blocks easy side-access to many components. The huge plastic engine cover blocks virtually everything on top of the engine except the oil filler-cap. Other underhood components are hidden under various panels and covers. It's well-known that most car-owners don't do much of their own work underhood any more, leaving it to dealer or independent technicians/mechanics......and this is a classic
example why.
INTERIOR:
Although the exterior, IMO, wasn't bad-looking by any means (I felt it was handsome), I generally found the Cadenza's interior (especially in the optional white leather) to be noticeably more upscale-looking than the outside. The dual sun-visors were done in a really plush soft-fur fabric that felt like velvet.....something that you don't often find in far more expensive cars. There was adequate head room for guys my size (6' 2" and a baseball-cap) in front under the sunroof-panel, and (barely) enough in the rear, with the droop-down roofline (the rear seat has its own sunroof and panel). The seats, regardless of the color, had a nice Nappa-leather covering that really looked and felt like it belonged in an upscale car, though, like with most Kia products, the cushions were padded a little firmer than I generally like (I usually like Cush-Tush). With the optional package, front seats are both heated/ventilated, while outboard rear seats are heated. Most of the interior trim was well-done, though I thought that the wood-tone strips were a little dull, and the artificial flat-metallic sheen on the inside door handles rather cheap-looking. The dash, door-panels, and most of the rest of the interior surfaces had soft-padded, high-quality-feeling materials. The glove box, though still adequate-sized, seemed a little small, and couldn't seem to hold much more than the Owners' Manual packet and some of the registration papers. Legroom was fine up front for large/tall persons, and generally OK in back. The primary/secondary gauge displays varied with programming and optional packages. The control layout was generally well-done (as with many Asian-designed cars), with clearly marked buttons/*****. The chrome-trimmed analog clock, in the middle of the dash amid a group of climate-control buttons, adds a nice classy Infiniti-style touch inside. Despite the droop-down rear roofline, because of the way the C/D pillars and rear-windows are designed, visibility out the rear is not bad. The stereo-sound was excellent (especially with James Brown and some funk), but I wouldn't quite call it a killer stereo. I also liked the fact that it had simple, easy-to-use volume/tune ***** and frequency readout, though the rest of the video screen, as usual, had its complexities. The only really cheap touch insides, IMO (besides the metallic flat-sheen on the door-handles), were the flat-black plastic shift-paddles for the transmission, mounted as usual, on the steering-wheel. They looked (and felt) almost as bad as the ones typically used in many Ford/Lincoln products....the Ford paddles feel like they are going to fall off right in your hands. But most of the hardware inside (and especially the excellent power-mirror switch, which can feel flimsy on many vehicles) seemed class A in solidness.
CARGO COMPARTMENT/TRUNK:
Open up the solid-feeling trunk lid, and, as expected with a car of this size, you are greeted with a pretty-good sized trunk (by today's sedan-standards). A nice first-aid kit is attached to the left wall of the trunk....something that is often found in premium/luxury-grade cars. The trunk lid itself is also fairly large.....the slant-rear roofline doesn't impact on the size of the lid-opening much like it does with some sedans. Otherwise, considering the car's price, I wasn't impressed very much with the general level of trim in the cargo compartment. The thin fabric/carpet material on the floor felt like something out of an econobox, and the trim material on the sides/walls also didn't have much of a plush feel.The rear seats don't fold down to expand the cargo area (some automakers omit that feature to increase the rear cross-beam strength of the unibody frame), though there is a small center pass-through hole for long narrow items like skis or fishing poles. My car had the optional ($80) rubber cargo-tray, which lines the floor and protects it from spills and liquids. Under the trunk's floor was.....(you guessed it)....the usual temporary spare tire.
ON THE ROAD:
Since the road-manners of the new Chevy Impala and Cadenza are being closely compared in a number of auto-press reviews (and generally rank high in them), I'll make my own brief comparison here, having driven both:
Start up the 3.3L V6 with a nice engine START/STOP button, and the engine comes to life and idles with the silky smoothness/quietness of a Lexus. On the road, there is some chuffling exhaust noise during significant acceleration, but, for the most part, the engine remains smooth, quiet and refined. Its power level, especially lightly-loaded, is more than adequate for normal everyday driving, and, while not a dragster, has enough torque to give you a mild shove in the back.....about like that of the new Chevy Impala's 3.6L V6.
On the road, the Cadenza is also similiar to the new Impala in other (but not all) areas. The Cadenza's 6-speed Sport-Shift automatic is smooth and quiet, and I found its shift-paddles and lever-bump easier to manually shift with than the Impala's awkward rocker-switch button on top of the shift-lever. But the flat black shift paddles themselves, though, like those on a number of Fords, looked and felt like something out of the plastic-reject bin. It was very difficult IMO, at moderate-cruise, to tell much if any difference from the V6 Impala. Both rode reasonably smoothly (with the Kia maybe very slightly firmer), and both had exemplary road/wind-noise isolation. The Kia had noticeably less body roll on sharp steering-inputs (almost sports-sedan-flat, I might add), but the Impala had noticeably quicker steering-response....this, with the Impala, seemed to be more a function of the steering-rack ratio itself than actual suspension differences. The Cadenza's brake pedal was located very well for my big size 15 gorilla-shoes not hanging up on it while lifting from the gas (so was the Impala's), and both braking systems were smooth, but the Cadenza's pedal had noticeably more sponginess and free-play at the top.
THE VERDICT:
Certainly Kia has come out with a very credible replacement for the old Amanti, though it can be argued that, being introduced to the Korean market in 2009, it's a little late in reaching these shores. However, I can understand at least some of the caution of Kia officials in not moving to quickly to replace an American-market flagship that didn't sell before (Infiniti, with the defunct Q45 flagship, of course, had the same problem). But, now that the new Cadenza IS here, I think it will sell (or have the potential to sell) if people simply forget the old stereotypes they keep hearing about the company (most of which are grossly out of date) and actually go to dealerships or auto shows and look at the car. It obviously doesn't have one of the traditonal Kia bargain-basement prices, but, after reviewing at the car, I think you get what you pay for....and then some. It competes very well with its full-size FWD competitors, has arguably the best-crafted interior of the bunch (as good or better, in some ways, than the new Avalon's much-hyped new interior), uses good solid materials inside and out, and drives like one would expect a car of this class to.
Gripes? The cargo compartment could use some nicer materials (though, of course, it's more important for passengers to be comfortable than the luggage). The ride is reasonably comfortable, but I think it would be even better with higher-profile tires....this ongoing obsession by automakers with handling over ride is getting a little long in the tooth, though the 1Gen Kia Amanti was arguably TOO sloppy in its handling. The exterior paint colors are enough to make you take Prozac. But, other than that, in actuality, I really couldn't find much to complain about with this car.......an excellent effort on Kia's part. I'd be happy to own one myself.
And, as always, Happy Car-Shopping.
MM
06-11-13, 02:48 PM
#2
Lexus Fanatic
Thanks for doing this review. I am a secret Kia fan and have been wondering about this new sedan. Looks great, and looks like it will sell. Im sure Honda and Toyota cringe when they see how well the Optima and Sonata sell right now. They are all over the streets. This is just one more for the masses.
06-11-13, 02:58 PM
#4
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
06-11-13, 03:14 PM
#5
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Thanks. Like the recent Impala review I did, this car, despite its few flaws, was a generally enjoyable experience. 
It drives like a 40K car. Like I said in the review, Kias today cost more......but they deliver more.
And as far as the "I'll Pass" attitude goes, guess what?
One never knows what the future may bring. Two or three years ago, when the first spy-shots and displays of the then-future Buick Verano first appeared on the Internet and in auto-mags, I thought to myself "Yeah, that's just what we need, GM......another half-baked, under-engineered, cheaply-constructed Chevy-based compact with a triple-shield emblem on it to make one think that it is upscale. I was ready to doze off and fall asleep right on the spot. 
Then I read more about the car, actually went and looked at it, test-drove it..........and saw just how wrong my first-impression had been. Today, of course, a Verano sits in my parking-space. 
A $42K with Luxury and Technology Packages KIA, I'll pass.
And as far as the "I'll Pass" attitude goes, guess what?
One never knows what the future may bring. Two or three years ago, when the first spy-shots and displays of the then-future Buick Verano first appeared on the Internet and in auto-mags, I thought to myself "Yeah, that's just what we need, GM......another half-baked, under-engineered, cheaply-constructed Chevy-based compact with a triple-shield emblem on it to make one think that it is upscale. I was ready to doze off and fall asleep right on the spot. Then I read more about the car, actually went and looked at it, test-drove it..........and saw just how wrong my first-impression had been. Today, of course, a Verano sits in my parking-space.
Last edited by mmarshall; 06-11-13 at 03:18 PM.
06-11-13, 03:17 PM
#6
Thanks. Like the recent Impala review I did, this car, despite its few flaws, was a generally enjoyable experience.
It drives like a 40K car. Like I said in the review, Kias today cost more......but they deliver more.
And as fs far as the "I'll Pass" attitude goes, guess what? One never knows what the future may bring. Two or three years ago, when the first spy-shots and displays of the then-future Buick Verano first appeared on the Internet and in auto-mags, I thought to myself "Yeah, that's just what we need, GM......another half-baked, under-engineered, cheaply-constructed Chevy-based compact with a triple-shield emblem on it to make one think that it is upscale. I was ready to doze off and fall asleep right on the spot. Then I read more about the car, actually went and looked at it, test-drove it..........and saw just how wrong my first-impression had been. Today, of course, one sits in my parking-space.
It drives like a 40K car. Like I said in the review, Kias today cost more......but they deliver more.
And as fs far as the "I'll Pass" attitude goes, guess what?
One never knows what the future may bring. Two or three years ago, when the first spy-shots and displays of the then-future Buick Verano first appeared on the Internet and in auto-mags, I thought to myself "Yeah, that's just what we need, GM......another half-baked, under-engineered, cheaply-constructed Chevy-based compact with a triple-shield emblem on it to make one think that it is upscale. I was ready to doze off and fall asleep right on the spot. Then I read more about the car, actually went and looked at it, test-drove it..........and saw just how wrong my first-impression had been. Today, of course, one sits in my parking-space. That's true,Mike.
I won't be in the market for a new car for a couple of years and feelings can change.
Trending Topics
06-11-13, 04:24 PM
#8
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
06-11-13, 04:55 PM
#9
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Thanks.
In what way? To me, the latest-generation Hyundai Sonata/Elantra/Tucson are all three classic eyseores (inside and out), with their Kia counterparts far-better looking. But, of course, styling is objective. For instance, I once saw a fairly young couple, in a Pontiac showroom, fall in love with a new Aztek and take one home that very afternoon.
Hyundai's and Kia's are now competent and offer some strong competition but I'm probably the only person who finds Kia styling an eye sore.
To me, the latest-generation Hyundai Sonata/Elantra/Tucson are all three classic eyseores (inside and out), with their Kia counterparts far-better looking. But, of course, styling is objective. For instance, I once saw a fairly young couple, in a Pontiac showroom, fall in love with a new Aztek and take one home that very afternoon.
06-11-13, 04:58 PM
#10
Lexus Test Driver
Much appreciated review on an interesting car. Glad to see Kia moving upmarket.
As far as those body side molding being too low. They aren't meant to act as protection. They are simply decorations, like on most cars these days. Styling has long replaced practicality with today's cars.
So a bit of an off-topic question. When you do your tests, how many miles would you estimate you put on? I ask because it's always been an industry thing for dealers to sell new cars with as low miles as possible. I am wondering how or why they are allowing you to test out their cars with the risk of incresed miles on the odometer. Thanks for the explanation.
As far as those body side molding being too low. They aren't meant to act as protection. They are simply decorations, like on most cars these days. Styling has long replaced practicality with today's cars.
So a bit of an off-topic question. When you do your tests, how many miles would you estimate you put on? I ask because it's always been an industry thing for dealers to sell new cars with as low miles as possible. I am wondering how or why they are allowing you to test out their cars with the risk of incresed miles on the odometer. Thanks for the explanation.
06-11-13, 05:05 PM
#11
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Both are very nice cars inside and out, but there is a difference in the underpinings and tires.. The Cadenza, while not what I call soft (few vehicles today are), is, IMO, noticeably more comfortable to drive than the Avalon...........the new Impala, even more so.
Last edited by mmarshall; 06-11-13 at 05:10 PM.
06-11-13, 05:24 PM
#12
Lexus Champion
As mentioned in another thread, C&D just did a comparo with some of the cars being discussed here. The Caenza and Azera were the two quietest cars in their test.
The order of finish was 1. Avalon 2. Impala 3.Dodge Charger 4. Chrysler 300S 5, Cadenza 6. Azera
The Cadenza had the highest as tested price by a few grand, but may have more content, not sure.
The order of finish was 1. Avalon 2. Impala 3.Dodge Charger 4. Chrysler 300S 5, Cadenza 6. Azera
The Cadenza had the highest as tested price by a few grand, but may have more content, not sure.
06-11-13, 05:47 PM
#14
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Thanks.
Actually, this car dates back to 2009. We are only now getting it in the American market. And Kia has had cars in this class before in the American market.....the admittedly slow-selling 1 and 2Gen Amanti. The company, of course, has even larger and more expensive cars in South Korea(along the lines of the Hyundai Equus) that we don't see here.
Yes, I agree that it is more styling than practicality. But I was pointing out that if they are going to take the time to actually put those strips on (which, IMO, never should have been taken off in the first place), then why not do it in a sensible way that actually accomplishes something?
Not off-topic at all......and yes, legitimate questions. There are a number of answers to those questions, but I'll start by saying that, first, being a pro-buisnesss state, Virginia is fairly liberal about the number of miles that can legally be on a car's odometer and still be sold as a new car instead of used (this, of course, also affects demos). Sometimes (but not often) I actually review demos, if regular models are too hard to find or if the shop wants to keep the miles down. I ran into that with the Nissan 350Z some years ago, for instance, (but not with the 370Z though, which I could do a normal review on). As a result, I couldn't really do a thorough review of the 350Z at all, besides a very short general write-up. They had only one 350Z demo at the time, and limited me to only a few blocks....barely nothing, especially for a fast sports car. Second, the total number of review-miles I put on any one car, of course, varies with traffic, road-conditions, average speed, condition of the road (for example, to minimize the chance of damaging wheels/tires/suspension, I don't delibrately speed over deep potholes and really bad pavement, especially on today's low-profile tires and stiffer underpinnings). Sometimes salespeople want me to put a fair number of miles on a car...they think they might sell it easler that way. Some salespeople, of course, already know me (from car-shopping with other customers and helping them through their deals), so they don't mind me spending a little time with their cars....they figure it might bring in an extra customer or two.
I don't write up full-reviews on the local test-drive circuit the manufacturers use at the annual D.C. Auto Show, because they are basically just a few miles of stoplights and more-or-less rough, potholed city streets...not enough to truly determine a car's overall road manners, though it does give you good idea of suspension/tire stiffness.
When it comes to customer-referrals, though, I have my limits........and my ethics. I've actually been offered referral-money by a dealership (I won't say which one) to steer customers their way and try and sell them on that company's products. I politely said thanks but no thanks. I don't believe in that. If or when I shop with someone or discuss a new-car purchase with them, it is purely objective, based solely on my view and opinions of the vehicle and auto-manufacturer alone.....and nothing else, including referral-money, can be involved.
And, last, sometimes I myself actually want to get the car back to the dealership ASAP. Though I kept it out long enough for a proper review, I found driving the diminutive Smart-for-Two, for example, about as enjoyable as a lesson in Algebra from a cross-eyed math teacher.
Glad to see Kia moving upmarket.
As far as those body side molding being too low. They aren't meant to act as protection. They are simply decorations, like on most cars these days. Styling has long replaced practicality with today's cars.
So a bit of an off-topic question. When you do your tests, how many miles would you estimate you put on? I ask because it's always been an industry thing for dealers to sell new cars with as low miles as possible. I am wondering how or why they are allowing you to test out their cars with the risk of incresed miles on the odometer. Thanks for the explanation.
I don't write up full-reviews on the local test-drive circuit the manufacturers use at the annual D.C. Auto Show, because they are basically just a few miles of stoplights and more-or-less rough, potholed city streets...not enough to truly determine a car's overall road manners, though it does give you good idea of suspension/tire stiffness.
When it comes to customer-referrals, though, I have my limits........and my ethics. I've actually been offered referral-money by a dealership (I won't say which one) to steer customers their way and try and sell them on that company's products. I politely said thanks but no thanks. I don't believe in that. If or when I shop with someone or discuss a new-car purchase with them, it is purely objective, based solely on my view and opinions of the vehicle and auto-manufacturer alone.....and nothing else, including referral-money, can be involved.
And, last, sometimes I myself actually want to get the car back to the dealership ASAP. Though I kept it out long enough for a proper review, I found driving the diminutive Smart-for-Two, for example, about as enjoyable as a lesson in Algebra from a cross-eyed math teacher.
Last edited by mmarshall; 06-11-13 at 06:21 PM.
