I hope anyone considering this car takes 3 minutes to read this. I traded in a 2005 honda pilot that was literally running on dollar bills for this 2013 Sportage EX on both the sticker and dealership's notion that the MPG rating was true to form in our terrain. A week into ownership I was only logging 18mpg on hwy. I called it in and they said let it break in at 5k miles. I continued to log complaints to be heard and at 5k miles on my 50 mile, 80% hwy 20% rural (Pennsylvania) commute i logged 19mpg. I did a controlled fuel test with the same result. Kia issued their mpg program but it's pennies. This is a terrible vehicle performance wise and is extremely overrated...take heed.
UVO is pretty awesome though a little buggy. Exterior design is great.
Fun to drive, but very frustrating to own.
MPG is absolutely overrated by AT LEAST 5 mpg. Either test the car in all conditions before publishing rating or take into consideration. Most buyers look to MPG first in this economy and it's a terrible practice to overstate MPG to attract buyers.
Performance, performance, performance....leaves much to be desired. Their 5 year warranty makes a statement about their quality i have come to determine.
It's a bit uncomfortable and storage and drive space is tight.
There are many other cars out there that fit the bill if you are looking for a efficient crossover.
Not economical in the least bit.
I find this post hard to believe. I have a 2014 kia sportage and I am getting 27-29 on the highway and about 22-23 in the city. Maybe this person has a LEMON car ( bad one of the bunch ) but I absolutely love this car. It is very stylish, it does not have too many blind spots. I can get up and go pretty fast and for being an SUV it makes pretty sharp turns. If I were to go car shopping again for a smaller SUV with an awesome warranty I would most definitely buy this car all over again.
I often wonder about some of these reviews - that are SO far off from believable. 18hwy? Either this person is doing something wrong, or has a terribly defective vehicle. I will finish this comment with my rant that I added to another person's complaint about MPG on Sportage. I have seen people drive with all kinds of quirks. I had a girlfriend that could NOT keep a steady peddle. She was constantly goosing it; every 2-3 seconds she would push the throttle (I suppose to feel that jump) and then let off. Impossible to have any reasonable mpg under such condition. And, here is already another comment from someone stating 28-29 hwy, which completely agrees with what I have seen on a 2014 model. SO, HERE IS MY FULL COMMENT:
Can't help but chime in here. I believe Kia needs the benefit of the doubt, and someone with contrasting viewpoint. I understand the displeasure; the 2007 CX9 I leased was rated 18/24, but was getting only 15.5 in early months (later getting past 16, barely), and struggled to get close to 22 hwy. They have not improved much. However, Kia has made a huge outreach to make it right with buyers. On a positive note - I justed rented a 2014 Sportage LX AWD for a 600 mi trip a week ago. It is only rated 26 hwy, but from Vegas to LA I got 27.2 (very hilly terrain), with speeds in excessive of 80. This tells me - that at 70 or less I would have seen 30 mpg or close to it, and that's for an AWD model. I was thoroughly impressed with the vehicle, more than any of the 6 others rented in recent years. It was the most QUIET vehicle I have driven in this century (for sure), and aside from the ones I've rented, I've owned 9 new vehicles from 2000 to 2014. The Sportage rode very well, and got up challenging hills very well also. The engine was a smooth, silent dream. Plus the seats were comfortable, and the only vehicle I've been able to drive in recent years that did not aggravate my Sciatica (during the entire trip). I had checked out 2013 Sportage (in showrooms) with leather seats, and found them far too uncomfortable for me. But, it seems Kia has come a long ways in the last year or so - with a car that is quiet, smooth, and comfortable. Also, my 2013 Kia Optima turbo was rated 22/34; I got 33 on the first trip to LA (240mi), and usually averaged 24 in mixed driving. Looking at history, my 2003 Kia Sedona was rated 15/20, but I could easily get 23 hwy and 18 in mixed driving. The CX9 could never come close to that. Pretty much all manufacturers have been well off in these EPA estimates - EXCEPT for Toyota and Honda (in my experience). This may be a long narative, but with my history, I have much to say about vehicles. Here are the 9 I've owned this century: 2000 Odyssey, 2002 Galant, 2003 Sedona, 2005 Galant, 2007 CX9, 2007 Accord 4cyl, 2010 Venza, 2013 Optima, 2013 Crosstour. I never buy a car without taking it home overnight, and giving it a fair test run.