2003 Kia Rio Reviews - Page 6 of 16

2003 Kia Rio 1.6 from North America

Model year2003
Year of manufacture2003
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission 1.6 Automatic
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 5 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 4 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.2 / 10
Distance when acquired800 miles
Most recent distance39800 miles
Previous carSubaru Outback

Summary:

Totally Neutral

Faults:

Brake fluid governor failed at 37,000 miles. It leaked brake fluid like a sieve.

Brakes replaced completely at 34,000 miles.

The car has been aligned 5 times since new.

Rough start in hot weather.

Engine falters during low-speed cornering with the accelerator depressed.

It is now eating head and tail lamp bulbs left and right.

General Comments:

I really, really wanted to be totally positive about this car. Instead, I find myself rather leaning toward neutral.

Overall, the car is very decent basic transportation. If I were rating the car on sheer point A to point B, it would score pretty highly. After all, it does have some nifty conveniences like the sunglass holder, the map lamps, the decent cd player, and the height adjustable driver seat which I've really come to appreciate.

It also still looks good, despite its penchant for attracting dings and scrapes. I know that many people view Kia owners as those who must not care what their car looks like. As a result, mine has some pretty big nicks in it, mostly because the car is disrespected in SUV-filled parking lots all over the USA.

Mechanically, the car is confusing. While it seems to run well, the engine makes me nervous due to its tendency to run rough occasionally for no good reason, and the rough start in wet and hot weather which the dealer claims is my imagination.

The handling concerns me, as well. I have never driven a car with such weak brakes. Be careful at high speeds in wet or snowy weather... this car will shoot out of control like a speed skater on meth.

Dealer service is a strange experience, too. They act like they are your friend, rolling their eyes right along with you that your car is giving you trouble. That said, they have never found anything truly wrong with it. They simply shrug and say "come back when you can demonstrate what its doing".

Now that the car is out of warranty on the bumper-to-bumper coverage, Kia can state that my car is yet another example of a trouble-free vehicle, and that isn't always the case.

If you are looking for something safe and economical that you can strap Mom and the Kids into, I guess I'm completely neutral with the car. There is part of me that says you get what you pay for, and at $12,000 what did you expect? The other part says that if you were an upstart company trying to prove yourself, even if your cars were total crap you could save yourself with customer service. And yet they don't.

I understand that the new Hyundai based Rio is a better bet, as is the Accent it is a twin of.

Hopefully, the improvements in the new car will cancel out the years of poor service quality and very decent, serviceable products that they seem unwilling to stand behind.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 2nd January, 2007

2003 Kia Rio 1.6 from North America

Model year2003
Year of manufacture2002
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 1.6 Automatic
Distance when acquired17000 miles
Most recent distance78000 miles
Previous carFord Tempo

Summary:

Big piece of junk

Faults:

Rear shocks went at 25000, brakes and rotors 28000, timing belt at 78000 front bumper coming loose 32000 tail light came loose at 43000.

General Comments:

Was cheap on gas and warranty was good for second owner.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 28th December, 2006

2003 Kia Rio from North America

Model year2003
Year of manufacture2002
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission Automatic
Performance marks 3 / 10
Reliability marks 2 / 10
Comfort marks 2 / 10
Dealer Service marks 1 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 1 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
1.8 / 10
Distance when acquired5 miles
Most recent distance72400 miles

Summary:

Very cheap car, which is a good and bad thing

Faults:

Two days after I got the car, the stereo ate my CD. I had it replaced with a new factory stereo, and it did the same thing.

At about 500 miles, the engine started making a knocking noise.

At about 500 miles, the engine wouldn't always turn over (meaning it wouldn't start every time I turned the key).

At about 40,000 miles, the window doesn't roll down properly (they say it's off track, but that's how the window is made).

At 70,000 miles, the car hesitates at take off and won't drive properly with the Air Conditioner on.

General Comments:

The car was cheap and has the potential to be a cute car, but nothing is cute about the amount of money you'll spend in repairs and servicing.

The car is really plain on the inside, with not too many features.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 10th July, 2006

6th Dec 2009, 20:00

Count your lucky stars that your car lasted to 79K miles. Any moderate or major failure is not worth fixing at this point.

9th Dec 2010, 11:08

So. What the previous person is saying, because it is an economy car, I should not use any of the features that come with the car? That makes no sense. I can understand if it was an after marker product, but it came with A/C from the factory. I guess people should not expect the engine or anything else that comes with this car to work either then, as it is an economy car and we shouldn't expect too much.

Average review marks: 6.6 / 10, based on 53 reviews