I was going to say the reason the Nero doesn't equal the Prius is due to aerodynamics. 1st off the Niro sits higher and is taller. 2nd off, the Prius has been engineered with no regards to the styling to be extremely aerodynamic. I think it has the lowest coefficient of drag of any new car on sale right now.

Also Niro is kind of a weird name. How do you pronounce it?

Is it like the evil Roman emperor, Nero?

Or is it more like NI-RO, emphasis on the I??

Just reading it in text, I always think Nero, like the psychopath emperor.

 

From what understand, the name is pronounced like Nero.

You bring up a good point about the aerodynamics possibly being involved. However, IMO, the Niro is so much better looking, so much more space-efficient inside (I did a static-review yesterday), and so much easier to see out of, that I'd take it in a heartbeat over the Prius's slightly more efficient EPA numbers. I've got a lot more to say about this, but will include it in my upcoming full-review.

 

It's the wheels, 18" on Touring vs 16" Aero focused wheels on the lower trims, with wider tires 225s vs 205s. Combined with other additional equipment this adds ~170 pounds over the FE.

 

Agreed at partially on the tires...but I don't see how only 170 lbs on the equipment can make a 6 MPG difference. Even combined with the larger tires, it would probably take more weight than that. I suspect there are some drivetrain tweaks as well.


Anyhow, for those interested, my full-review of an EX model is now ready and posted in Car Chat.

 

it will be a combination of things. first off, the 18" wider WHEELS are likely heavier, and greater unsprung weight will reduce fuel economy (and performance). then the wider tires are also heavier and provide a lot more rolling resistance. and finally the whole vehicle (touring) is heavier with more standard equipment. all of those will definitely take a toll on fuel economy. likely nothing to do with 'drivetrain tweaks', although with all that weight, it's possible they tweaked the touring to be more responsive (or as responsive) than lower trims at the expense of fuel economy.

 

Car & Driver in their review says that Kia confirmed that this is the reason.

 

looking at alex on auto's review of the niro, i don't know why anyone would get a prius over this...

 

There are a number of buyers who won't touch a Kia simply because it IS a Kia. (Trust me on that one.....I've spoken with them more than once)

IMO, this is the most apt description for them..........

 

Also, I consider Alex Dykes to be the Cream of the Crop of automotive reviewers. He has my great respect. If he can't convince a non-believer that Kia does credible products today, then it's unlikely that I would...at least for that same person.

 

that's unacceptable IMO.... (they did lower the MPG down to 43mpg a couple years ago)

 

I feel that way about basically every Kia vs Toyota lol

 

I've seen a few on the road now, and I've hastened to parts of the body shape, which I thought looked great in photos. The rear is supremely flat-faced and chopped off.

 

Agreed. Some folks don't want to admit it, but Hyundai and Kia are basically taking over from where Toyota and Honda reigned for decades. And, with lower residual rates, that also makes them relative bargains as used vehicles.

Granted, the Genesis division is off to a slow start, but, with time, that will probably change, too.

 

Genesis is actually doing well! The G80 is doing great, G90 is right there with the 7 Series...

 

Genesis will be sitting pretty when their 3-Series fighter and CUV/s debut.