Last post on Jul 24, 2013 at 6:48 AM
You are in the Kia Forte / Forte Koup
What is this discussion about?
Kia Forte, Kia Forte Koup, Sedan
#47 of 66 Re: Kia Forte 5 door - poor mileage [bluepig]
Dec 05, 2012 (1:19 pm)
you will find that your son will get a VISA debit card for the amount from Hyundai not a cheque.
#48 of 66 kiampginfo.com REFUSES to help
Dec 08, 2012 (6:49 am)
Over a period of one month, I have been trying to speak with representatives at Kia's MPG Reimbursement program about the serious mpg problems of the 2013 (and i assume the 2012 also) Kia Forte 5-Door EX. It took me one month to finally reach someone who apparently had the power to adjudicate my situation. These are the facts I gave that person:
-Over four gas fillups the car averaged 21mpg.
-My driving route on a weekly basis is composed of about 80% highway, 20% city.
-I use the same two gas stations every time.
-My mileage (when I finally reached the right person from KIA) was 2648 miles.
-The "Instant MPG" ratings on the trip computer in the gauge cluster NEVER has read more than 26mpg, despite going 65mph with no traffic for 20 miles on a consistant basis (and yes, I took this reading over the same course of road over 10 times through summer, fall and now winter weather)
-The 2013 KIA Forte 5-Door EX seemingly has the same 2.0L engine and transmission as a similarly equipped 2013 KIA Soul. The 2013 KIA Soul even had the EXACT SAME mpg estimates (before the announcement of the mpg mistakes). The 2013 KIA Soul HAS BEEN INCLUDED in the mpg reimbursement program plan.
-The Forte and Soul are within 100 lbs. of each other (the Forte does weigh more than the Soul which does affect mpg, but the forte has a better air drag coefficient)
-Any driver of the same car or even 2012 model complains of the same exact issue.
I may not be an engineer, and I do realize that there are factors that affect mpg outside the control of the mpg ratings, but prior to having this Forte, I drove probably more than 15 different cars via rental agencies over the past year. Since they were rentals, my primary concern was mpg and not paying more money than necessary. I can say that most of those cars that I drove were pretty accurate in their MPG ratings. NONE of them were even close to being as far off the mark as my Forte.
After presenting all of this information to the one person who supposedly is able to pull the trigger on a decision, I received the same policy book responses that I got from every other representative I spoke with.
The person never once said that any of my points may be valid. The only thing she kept on saying was that there are factors that most people don't take into account and that I should read fuelconsumption.gov to identify these factors. That is it. Over a period of 1 hour of talking. I told her how I took estimates of my mpg over a 4-fillup period (using the method suggested on fuelconsumption.gov) and she said that KIA only recognizes mpg estimates figured individually after a single tank of gas.
Here's the most telling aspect of this situation: None of the representatives I spoke with EVER suggested I take the car to the dealer and have it looked at. No one. To me, this says that they know they have a problem. An informed consumer calls and complains of a serious discrepancy between official MPG estimates and real-world mpg and never once does a single representative suggest that the car be looked at. That is a clear indicator that KIA knows they have a problem with the Forte.
I encourage all of you who read this post to call the KIA MPG Reimbursement department and complain. This is the only way they might (independently) change their policy. When you call, please ask for Tammy. That is the person I spoke with who is at the top of the department (or so I've been told). If everyone calls, this will fill her time with nothing but Forte complaints.
The number is (855) 912-5648 and ask for Tammy.
The other avenues to pursue are media exposure (which I will be following up with Edmunds.com) and also State lemon laws or State Consumer Protection agencies. I am doing both of these and encourage every one who is sick of being lied to or ignored to do the same.
If anyone has better luck than me, please write back and tell us how you succeeded.
#49 of 66 Re: kiampginfo.com REFUSES to help [anowellindc]
Dec 08, 2012 (7:39 am)
have had the specs checked by the dealer? that's not the site to use for your problem anyway, they are just there to answer questions with regards the rebate program, you should be posing your complaint to the Kia Motors US website
The 2.0L Forte engine and the Soul 2.0L engine are not the same. The Forte has used the same Theta II series engine since its introduction in 2010.
The 2.0L Nu series engine in the Soul was new for 2012.
this is the EPA tests, note the times/distance and the average speed for the highway and city ratings. Also test vehicles have many thousands of miles too. They are not tested new and also use 100% gasoline at sea-level.
this is worth a read too:
http://www.edmunds.com/fuel-economy/heres-why-real-world-mpg-doesnt-match-epa-ra- - tings.html
#50 of 66 Re: kiampginfo.com REFUSES to help [conwelpic]
Dec 08, 2012 (8:45 am)
Thanks for the info and links, especially about the engine. That is definitely good to know. It helps no one to present a false argument. I tried finding that info myself (should have just called the dealer) but wasn't able to confirm (hence the "seemingly the same"). I will be dropping that argument from here on out.
Here's the funny thing though. After speaking with KIA reps for one month and using the same information, that is the first time that anyone has corrected me on the engine data. Originally, I tried going through the Consumer Assistance department at KIA, but they always sent my case back to the MPG Reimbursement department.
And trust me, I didn't buy this car expecting a combined fuel cycle of 29 mpg (advertised). I assumed that it would be a little less. But we're talking about 8mpg below what is advertised which could be a difference of hundreds of dollars come year end based on continued driving cycle (which is by necessity very steady).
Also, while my scrutiny hasn't been as focused at other times, I have always taken note of the mpg figures for other cars I have driven (not a small sum) in the recent past. This includes being able to post a real-world mpg of 26 (combined) for a 2013 ford mustang V6 (what I was doing renting a mustang and then driving it like a 1st gen toyota prius is a completely different story) over the course of two fillups.
The numbers are always different than what is advertised and I understand why. It is a complicated issue that does require a lot of technical knowledge. But at least a part of the problem comes with KIA's refusal to even consider the issue, despite the fact that the EPA has forced them to correct the numbers for a large portion of their lineup. And parent company Hyundai has had to do the same.
It's not like I'm a bandwagon complainer/opportunist just trying to get some free money. I wrote my first post about this issue before the announcement was made by the EPA and KIA. To tell the truth, I really like the Forte overall. Unfortunately, budget is a very serious concern of mine and every dollar has to be watched and accounted for. Spending $40-70 more than was budgeted (when I bought the car the budgeted for a combined mpg of only 26, the posted city cycle for mpg) every month makes a difference for me.
If anyone else has data or info that they think is helpful for understanding this situation, I would appreciate it greatly. Thanks!
#51 of 66 Re: kiampginfo.com REFUSES to help [anowellindc]
Dec 08, 2012 (10:12 am)
just a bit more trivia - the 2010 and 2011 Soul used the Beta II series 2.0L engine.
The new upcoming 2014 Forte will be using different series engines too.
I would try and narrow down your specific area of excessive fuel consumption by resetting the AVERAGE on your computer gauge for short test sections, which could give you a better guide as to where it might be occurring, even though you claim its not reading right, it would still help you. I find on my Soul (2012 2.0L model) that is sometimes optimistic by .2L/100 km (I'm in Canada) and sometimes pessimistic by approximately the same, so overall its pretty close to actual manual calculations so for all intents and purposes its reasonable accurate to go off it.
E.G. set it for the highway driving only, you said 65 mph, then try it again at 55 mph and see what you get. Also reset it for city traffic say for 5-10 miles or whatever that section of driving that you do on a daily basis. It will give you a rough idea when the fuel is being used the most and under what conditions its happening.
On my 2.0L Soul over 21 fill-ups my average is 8.3L/100 km or 28.3 to the US gallon, worse was 9.1 (25.8) and best was 7.3 (32.2). But my driving conditions could be totally different to yours. On short checks I've seen it get as low as 5.3 (44.4) but that soon changes as your driving speed increases.
#52 of 66 Re: press request [kirstie_h]
Feb 24, 2013 (3:57 pm)
mave 2010 kia forte 4 door i was told i would get 35-42mpg and i have never gotten that much 30 mpg would have to be the most ever what can be done about this i was lied to and basically raped on this deal i thin kia should be held reliable
Feb 24, 2013 (5:03 pm)
The suggestion to reset my mileage would have been a good one, if in fact that digital indicator reflected anything close to actual. The only way to determine actual is to fill you tank at the same station, using the same pump (if possible), and lock the fill handle so that it auto shuts off when full: Don't add more fuel, because that will distort your actual mileage. When your car is full reset your trip indicator (I always do both, time traveled, and average mpg). Drive until near full, note the miles, and fill up again. When you have the total gallons, divide that into your miles traveled, and then you will have the actual. If I relied on my trip indicator, I would drive this piece of crap off a cliff, as the trip says I'm getting between 22 and 24.8 on any given tank.
In Utah another serious consideration is tire inflation. Any location where temperatures vary wildly, your tire pressure can vary as much as 8-10 psi.
Since my last post my averages are between 25.8 and 26.7, no better, no worse, and it does not matter if I'm on the highway all the time, or mixed driving.
I am now at 13k miles and am starting to notice other potential problems. Both of my headlights are collecting moisture internal to the sealed housing. There is a weep tube at the bottom of the headlamp enclosure, but it is not supposed to allow moisture in, rather it's a one way leak tube for condensation. The engine is now starting to make valve noise, as in it either needs the valves adjusted, or its wearing poorly. My first two oil services were at the dealer at recommended intervals (3 & 6k miles), my last two were me doing the oil with a full synthetic per the manual, and Bosch filters. I do not read anything anywhere on the KIA site that suggests anything other than synthetic, aside from the break-in oil.
I have two friends that are attorneys, both of which were willing to take this on as a class action filling and on contingency. If we are able to get a filling I will post that disposition on this site.
Unfortunately I have decided to look into selling my KIA Forte 5 and getting a Honda or Toyota where the actual mileages posted are closer to real world, as per both users groups. The new Dodge Dart also looks like it might be a candidate, but I want to hear actual mileage results prior to moving that direction.
If I were a leftist socialist democrat, I would sit out in front of the dealer with a sign indicating actual mileage as compared to advertised. Fortunately I have a brain and a full time job, so doing so would be nearly impossible. Someone has to pay the tab for the worthless illegals that are infecting this nation.
#54 of 66 Kia Forte Mileage
Mar 24, 2013 (3:12 pm)
Mileage ratings attract customers, bottom line. For EPA ratings cars are tested at optimal settings including, but not limited to, over-inflated tires and software adjustments then driven very conservatively. They can do these things because power, handling and durability are not factors in these tests. They give two numbers on the sticker, the higher attracts business, the lower covers their "liabilities."
That being said, my 2013 FORTE came with 26/36 on the sticker. I drive about 90% on interstate highways. At first it was getting mileage in the mid-30s, but the handling was a bit squirrely. The tires were inflated to 40psi though the door sticker specifies 32psi. I reduced pressure to 32. The car now handles like it's on rails but, the mileage now averages 32MPG with me usually running about 80 MPH. Routinely driven at 65-70 it averaged as high as 39.
So, this car is doing exactly what I expect it to do, and more. The 6-speed automatic requires no attention, manual mode is fun while protecting the engine from overreving. Cruise Control maintains EXACT speed set. This FORTE reasonably quick, steady, stable and predictable at all speeds yet goes over washboard clay roads with little notice.
Fit and finish, not to mention styling, are impeccable. I may have the best one they've ever built.
#55 of 66 INCREDIBLE MILEAGE IS POSSIBLE
Mar 28, 2013 (10:05 pm)
The key to high fuel mileage is limiting speed. My car is a 2013 Kia Forte EX 2.0, 6-speed auto. Took delivery 12/14/12 and already driven 8400 miles. My commute to work is a 70 mile loop, 99% Interstate and I've been using that to experiment with this car, resetting the MPG computer and using this wonderfully accurate cruise control. Running 80 MPH the car averaged 27-28 MPG, I wasn't any happier than some others who have posted here. Dropped down to 75-70 for an entire week and averages and MPG went up to 32. This week I dropped the maximum to 65 MPH and achieved between 35 and 36 MPG. Then, tonight I made the entire 35 mile trip at 55 and reached 44 MPG!
#56 of 66 Re: INCREDIBLE MILEAGE IS POSSIBLE [blacktiger]
Mar 29, 2013 (10:31 pm)
Today I filled up, reset and drove the commute to work at the posted limits of 70MPH for 20 miles and 65MPH for 15 miles. Resulted in an average of 37MPG. Returned home at 55MPH and average remains 37MPG.
Am not resetting until the next fill-up and at that time will do the math and compare the computer's average with the math, miles divided by gallons purchased. Appears that driving some distance at a low speed may re-calibrate the fuel delivery ratios. Will keep you posted.