9th Mar 2008, 19:00

Well I once had the misfortune of a Kia car as a hire car, and it soon became apparent other drivers were pulling in front of me and cutting me up. Other drivers on the road have no respect or time for Kia drivers, this much was apparent to me.

Kia specifications are never anything to write home about, they are not a technologically advanced or innovative company. And judging by american reports on Hyundia and Kia powertrain warranties, there is little actually covered by the "7 year warranty"

Kia, Hyundai and Proton cars have a built up an unenviable reputation for poor occupant safety in crash testing.

16th Mar 2008, 10:11

Well, I too I'm considering a KIA.

I live in Cyprus and the car here has too many going for it (5 stars Euro-ncap, 7 years warranty, 4 disc brakes, multilink suspension and a very powerful 1.4 engine to name a few) compared with all other cars in the category. And the price? 12000 Euros.

To get the next cheapest car after this with all the above, you need at least 16000 Euros.

And none of the other manufacturers offer 7 years warranty; 5 years is tops.

The other car I am considering is a Mazda 2; it has almost all the above but it's one category smaller...

31st Mar 2008, 14:14

I like your thinking. I too was torn between the Mazda 2 and the Cee'd. (I like the Mazda 2 a great deal and it's a nice all round car), but the Cee'd won for being a larger car, which suits my needs of extra space for passengers. Also, just to make note on previous comments about poor safety. The safety rating on the Cee'd is indeed a 5 star euro ncap rated car (which I'm sure is the highest score awarded for passenger vehicles).

31st Mar 2008, 17:44

I don't know how anybody can consider a Mazda against a Kia. The two manufacturers are at opposite ends of the spectrum. I feel certain 95% of people would go for a Mazda in the blink of an eye.

Kia's track record of safety in cars is abysmal, take a look at the results of Kia Rio, Cerato, Picanto, Magentis, Shuma. Practically every other car in their range. They range between 1- 3 stars, mainly 2 stars (some of these results are US tests).

I would not trust my safety or that of my family to a Kia car.

7th Apr 2008, 12:16

I "studied" all 1400cc cars.

Kia Cee'd and Hyundai i30 : 109 HP (others cars less)

Kia Cee'd gives 7 year guarantee (this is impressive)

Kia Cee'd was given 5 of 5 stars on safety crash

Kia Cee'd has the best price-equipment ratio

Kia Cee'd is the best car at 1400cc for the moment.

Simple as that. second best is Toyota Auris.

I would like to see 1400cc automatic transmission.

I like Pro-Cee'd (3door) design better than Cee'd (5door).

I wait to see Eco-Cee'd with lower fuel consumption, and ex-Cee'd (but I would like it with hard roof, not cloth).

I also liked new Mazda2, but the Cee'd is bigger and has better quality. The Mazda2 seems like a smaller category, but is also a very good car.

Greetings from greece (Kia Cee'd was voted "Car of the year 2008" here in Greece)

7th Apr 2008, 14:15

I don't think its fair to judge a car simply on the brand. The Cee'd can't be that bad or Kia wouldn't be able to afford to give 7 year warranties or to sell them so cheap. I don't own one and probably never will, but certainly wouldn't write them off as rubbish without having ever looked or driven in one. Similarly it is not right to assume Mazda cars are all reliable, they may be - I don't know, but unless you have driven all the models in the range and heard customer feedback its not possible to judge.

It surprises me how many people on this site complain about Volkswagens being unreliable. Just an example of a company with an excellent name with disgruntled customers.

8th Apr 2008, 12:44


Informed decisions on the reliabilty of cars can be made on the basis of JD Power surveys. Have you heard of these? If not, read them and read up on KIA over the last 10 years. Read up on Mazda. Compare and contrast the two.

12th May 2008, 05:17

To Mr/Mrs 8th Apr 2008, 12:44.

I am well aware of these surveys, but you haven't really understood the point being made. Each model is different and you are not being fair to judge the Cee'd purely on the back of its badge, informed decision or not. Otherwise car reviewers wouldn't even bother testing cars, they would just give reviews of makes of cars.

It would be totally unfair for example to compare the Mazda RX8 to the Cee'd; one is a sports car the other isn't, but if we did it wouldn't make Mazda seem the more reliable manufacturer, just take a look at the sort of complaints that car receives for poor reliability DESPITE THE MAZDA BADGE.

If you know you would never even look at one of these cars, let alone have tested one, then please don't fill reviews like this one with Kia slurs. If somebody is reading to buy one of these cars, then they already know that Kia's have stigma attached to them. They want actual opinions, not 'informed opinions' which roughly equate to "it's a Kia so don't expect a lot"

18th Jun 2008, 21:15

No car can meet the criteria and expectations of every individual. "Bang for buck", the Kia Ceed takes some beating. As for its realiability, the test of time will tell, but with a five/seven year warranty, it's a good bet. I am waiting to take delivery of one.

I remember the remarks made about "Dasun Cogs" and "Honda Dream... ons" when the cars and bikes first came to our roads. So what has changed???

11th Jul 2008, 11:38

18/6/08 update. Took delivery of KIA Cee'd Diesel SW LS. Unlike my previous problematic Renault Megane delivery, the process was superb with minor reservations.

Where is the "Telescopic Steering Wheel" specified under Comfort?? The sales guy said he didn't know and the service guy said there was none!! Which Cee'd is it on I wondered??? The poor guy was also embarrassed, when I told him that the fuel filler was on the passenger side whilst the brochure showed it on the drivers side.

Lovely car to drive, albeit grandson quote "bumpy car grandpa". Take note KIA, of this innocent unbiased comment.

As for the Car Manual,... a readers maze.

Your vehicles are value for money KIA, but customer user comfort levels and your attention to details are important if you want returns.

12th Jul 2008, 05:51

Yes, fair enough, but find a better car for the money!

14th Jul 2008, 03:31


First things first, Kia has great financial plan (future investments). What you pay is for design these days in new cars, and I hate that; people are falling for design not road quality test to sell as much cars with that 7 year warranty (7 years in service).

I have 2 friends who bought the Cee'd, and for about 2 months he said everything is shaking in it.

The Kia Cee'd is great looking car, it almost deceived me to buy it, but I had second thoughts, and I was right, the Cee'd is roomy car, with lot of gear, but one thing that is terrible with this car are the gears and shifting, it is a disaster for new car.

Second thing; the suspensions is crap, the Cee'd and Pro Cee'd are good on nice roads, but when on some bumpy roads it is crap. My volvo 1995 drives better, and has greater gears and shifting...

So the Mazda 2 is great car, great build, great smooth shifting, superb engine and it won 2005/2008 best quality brand for their cars.

Small is better, and new Seat Ibiza, which I drove, is a great car with great suspension, and a brilliant precise steering wheel, which is by far the best in its class in my opinion.

Best small car for me as far as build quality, price is Mazda 2, second the new Seat Ibiza, third the Skoda Fabia.

This is my opinion.