By on November 18, 2017

2018 Kia Stinger GT

When I was in California this week to drive the all-new Kia Stinger, there was one key specification question that went unanswered – fuel economy. That’s because the numbers were being finalized as we sat in the press briefing.

Now we know the numbers, at least by the American standard.

For the 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder, the numbers are 22 mpg city/29 mpg highway/25 mpg combined for rear-wheel-drive models and 21/29/24 with all-wheel drive. For the 3.3-liter twin-turbocharged V6, the numbers come in at 19/25/21 for both layouts. Both engines mate to an eight-speed automatic transmission.

I ran a quick search for Canadian numbers, both via government sources and Kia’s Canadian consumer site, and it doesn’t appear the Canadian numbers are confirmed yet.

The final numbers seem about right, considering the turbo four-cylinder makes 255 horsepower and the twin-turbo V6 makes 365 hp. The four looks like a good choice for highway commuting while the V6 doesn’t pay too high a price for having a greater level of performance.

There’s still one more piece of the specs puzzle to fall into place, and that’s the model’s crash-test ratings. The Stinger hasn’t yet been tested.

[Image ©2017 Tim Healey/The Truth About Cars]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

39 Comments on “How Many Gas Pumps Can a Stinger Pass? Kia Releases EPA Info...”


  • avatar
    alfaromeo

    think about mustang v8 gets 18/25 rating at 420hp, stinger really should do better.

    • 0 avatar
      brn

      Bit of a weight difference.

      • 0 avatar
        ahintofpepperjack

        The 4,000lb Charger/300/Challenger with a 3.6l V6 are rated for 30MPG highway. This really should get better highway MPG with a 2.0l I4.

        • 0 avatar
          bd2

          The Charger gets 23 mpg combined, which is the same as for the Kia Cadenza (which has the NA V6).

          As for the Mustang (’17MY) GT, got beat in the quarter mile by the Stinger GT despite being a 2-door with a V8.

          • 0 avatar
            Flipper35

            The Charger is also almost 50hp up on the turbo 4.

            The Charger Blacktop Edition is 31mpg highway. Don’t know about mixed.

            A V6 RWD Durango is 19/26/21 for Pete’s sake.

          • 0 avatar
            bd2

            Stared the Cadenza (not the Stinger) which only comes with a V6.

            The Genesis G90 with the same TTV6 is rated 17/24/20.

            The Lincoln Conti is rated 16/24/19 with its TTV6.

            In its testing of the G90, C&D observed 27 mpg for highway driving and considering that the Stinger is a good bit lighter than the G90, should be able to easily beat that.

            In its testing of the V6 Charger (curb weight of 4096 lb), C&D observed 21 mpg.

            In its testing of the TTV6 G90 (curb weight 4717 lb), C&D observed 23 mpg.

  • avatar
    Gene B

    I love the way this thing looks. If it had a stick shift, I would pounce. The Hyundai Genesis version of this will, so maybe there is a chance. But as I have mentioned before, no stick shift = no sale.

  • avatar
    DC Bruce

    Not particularly impressive. My 2002 Saab Aero wagon, with 250 hp and a 5-speed automatic was rated at 31 highway, if memory serves. And that engine did not have the more modern tricks of variable valve timing or direct injection.
    Then there’s my 2015 GMC pickup which, in the real world at 60-65 mph easily gets better than 22 mpg. And that’s with 6.2 liters of V-8 (420 hp) pushing a much heavier aerodynamic brick of a body. If you don’t believe me, ask JB; he owns the same truck.

    • 0 avatar
      brn

      2002 Saab Aero wagon is rated at 18/27/21 with premium fuel. It also weighed quite a bit less than the Stinger.

    • 0 avatar
      bd2

      Cars weigh more these days (unless having extensive use of lightweight materials) due to increased requirements for structural integrity and the weight of all the added tech (cameras, sensors, heating/cooling systems for seats, etc.).

      • 0 avatar
        Lorenzo

        Don’t forget the sound-deadening materials to produce those quiet interiors. In the late 1960s to mid-1970s, American cars had blown in foam that was lightweight. It would dry out and get hard, shrinking a bit, and causing rattles. Now they use heavier fiber materials that can add 200 pounds or more to a midsized car.

      • 0 avatar
        Lorenzo

        The increase in use of high strength steel for structural integrity added a lot of weight to the unibody, but don’t forget the added noise insulation. Those quiet interiors are due to up to 200 lb. of insulation.

        A 1970 Dodge Dart sedan with a straight six weighed just under 3,000 Lb., and the nearly identically sized Toyota Avalon weighs over 3,500 lb.

        My 1965 Chevrolet Impala V8 weighed 3,700 lb., but it was a much larger car, a foot and a half longer and eight inches wider than the Avalon. The modern RWD equivalent Chrysler 300C, halfway between the Avalon and Impala, weighs 4,200 lb.

        You would think a unibody design would weigh less than the old body on frame V8s, but they don’t.

    • 0 avatar
      NormSV650

      My 2004 Saab 9-5 Arc wagon weighed about 3,800-3,900 lbs and would only muster 38 mpg where the 2000 9-5 5-speed manual sedan would see 43 mpg. Old technology where the automatic and a heavier wagon hurt fuel economy.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    A decade ago the Pontiac G8 GT was 15/24 with a 6-speed and a V8.

    Color me unimpressed with that MPG coming from a DI turbo V6.

    • 0 avatar
      TonyJZX

      I think you are comparing it to an extraordinary engine in that regard.

      The LS1 and certain LSX family motors could get above 30mpg hwy with the Tremec six speed due to the very tall overdrive.

      And this is with low compression and PFI.

      My assumption is that the DI LT1 can do even better.

      This Kia? I beleive Hyundai Kia are not engine leaders.

      • 0 avatar
        Middle-Aged Miata Man

        FWIW, the 3.3L Lambda II GDi has been a heck of a motor in both of my Cadenzas. Good power, very quiet at highway speeds – and a surprisingly engaging exhaust note when you get into it – and extended highway trips yield a genuine 29-30 mpg when cruising at 82 mph.

  • avatar
    carguy

    While those MPG numbers are well below the European makers the real cost of the Stinger (vs the Europeans & Lexus) will most likely be in the depreciation. One can only guess what a $50K Kia will be worth in two years time.

    On the bright side, used car shoppers can look for some great off-lease bargains.

    • 0 avatar
      Dan

      The market has already shown us what a $60K Hyundai Equus is worth one lease period later, which is to say $26,000 dealer trade in.

      Rocket Man Pontiac makes Hyundai seem positively upmarket.

      • 0 avatar
        PrincipalDan

        Sedans depreciate like crazy period. If resale value is your primary concern than you shouldn’t be looking in the sedan class.

        Go look at KBB residual champs, consistently its the Wrangler, Tacoma, and other truck/traditional SUV beasts.

    • 0 avatar
      arach

      I think this is going to be the bargain of the century, which is why I’m so psyched to buy one. There will be no better car for the money.

      I ought my Hyundai Sonata as a Repo CPO with 7k miles on the clock, only 6 months old, for 41% under MSRP.

      I figure I can get one of these less than a year old with 10-15k on the clock for about $29k. Can you find me a better car with a 10 year powertrain warranty for under $30k? no way.

  • avatar
    dont.fit.in.cars

    Add twin turbo to Impala’s V6 with AWD & paddle shift.

    Yeah, I’d buy that over a Stinger

    • 0 avatar
      PrincipalDan

      It just occurred to me that the twin turbo 3.6 V6 AWD in the XTS-V is the only usage of that powertrain combo in a “east/west” engine mounting. Seems like a waste of development dollars that it hasn’t turned up anywhere else.

      OTOH if you don’t mind CPO cars those XTS depreciate like crazy and Cadillac’s CPO warranty is 7 years/100,000 miles.

      • 0 avatar
        NormSV650

        We just traded both my ATS and XTS Vsport in and the ATS was worth $100.000 morr than I owed and the Vsport I was $900.00 under. Even the salesman was shocked. Both car were purchased used and owned for 2.5 years and 3.5 years and I didn’t put a dime into them. :)

        • 0 avatar
          el scotto

          Norm, what happened to your Buicks? Did they get lost in your 128-car all-GM garage? The dealership knew how much you owed on both your cars and how much they’d offer you for your trade-ins. Your payoffs for both cars were cold hard numbers. The dealership had some four-square foreplay on the values of your trade-ins. However, the four-play had it’s high and low limits. No one, and let me repeat; NO ONE who works at your dealership was shocked. A great many of us are shocked that 1: You’re bragging about it; 2: We should be impressed in some way or respect you. I am shocked there’s gambling going on in this establishment.

      • 0 avatar
        el scotto

        @PrincipalDan Back in the day, the Saturn dealerships in Indy were owned by a Cadillac dealer. You could get a CPO Caddy for what a new Saturn cost.

      • 0 avatar
        arach

        Be careful on Cadillac’s CPO warranty. Its 6 years, not 7… and its 6 years from the original car date, not the current date. I was about to buy a CPO XTS-V until I realized:
        1. all the stuff not covered by it
        2. the fact that it only had 1 1/2 years remaining on the CPO warranty

        http://www.cadillac.com/certified-pre-owned-vehicles/warranty.html

        However, its still pretty good, don’t get me wrong. better than it used to be (It used to be 5 years/60k)

  • avatar
    CKNSLS Sierra SLT

    The Internet is the worst place to get accurate mpg numbers from owners. Some numbers are so out of this world the vehicle must be driven on Mars……

    • 0 avatar
      arach

      For sure. I had a Diesel F350. The interwebs was full of people talking about how with a tune and DPF removal, those things get like 25 MPG. I moved from 13 MPG to 14 MPG, which is significant, but is not 25 MPG.

      Then the funniest thing was when I sold it, I had people come look at it and say “Yeah with a tune these things get more than 30 MPG”… I would just roll my eyes. 30 MPG? yeah right.

      Keep on promising.

      Maybe rolling DOWN HILL in neutral.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      Not believing internet fuel economy claims is a good life strategy.

  • avatar
    bd2

    The Stinger definitely needs to lose weight, but that’s likely not going to happen until the next gen model – which should not only get the new (lighter weight) platform, but H/K’s more efficient powerplants.

    Kia really should have cut some weight by making the hood and lift-gate aluminum, but they probably didn’t want to raise the price higher than it already is (but if the Ioniq can get an aluminum hood and lift-gate, the Stinger, should have as well).

    There probably will be an incremental improvement in fuel economy when the Stinger gets the new 10 spd AT (probably for the MCE), but that’s likely it until the 2nd gen model, but there’s supposed to be a hybrid version for those looking for a more fuel efficient variant.

    • 0 avatar
      arach

      I don’t see why they should worry about losing weight. This is largely a replacement for the Cadenza, and isn’t competing with the true sports sedans. Its clearly oriented as a budget contender, and therefore Budget > Contender. Every dollar they raise the price of this thing, the more buyers they will lose. They aren’t trying to truly contend with the major players. They are trying to contend just enough to be in the conversation and win in price. Thats my opinion.

      • 0 avatar
        Tennessee_Speed

        The Stinger is not a replacement for the Cadenza which is FWD family sedan. The Stinger’s target competition is the Audi A5 Sportback, BMW 4 Series Grand Coupe, and other similar GT autos but at a $15,000 lower price point. Rather surprised to see the impressive first drive videos now coming out on the internet. Some of the veteran testers claim this is their next car.

      • 0 avatar
        bd2

        See Tenn_Speed re Cadenza.

        The Stinger (eventually) will have to lose weight in order to meet fuel economy requirements (whether or not they get diluted by the current admin).

        But yes, pricing is the very reason why Kia didn’t go the route of an aluminum hood, etc.

        But at the same time, if the Ioniq can get aluminum body-parts to cut weight and be priced at where it is, don’t see why Kia wouldn’t be able to do the same w/o raising the price too much.

  • avatar
    Lorenzo

    Can those EPA numbers be achieved by a person driving normally with that turbo? I’ve had to drive like an old lady to keep the turbo from kicking in and sucking gas on a couple rentals. Maybe I’m a leadfoot driver, but the city figure looks impossible with a small four.

    • 0 avatar
      arach

      From my personal experience with Hyundai? Is I get MUCH better fuel economy than they advertise. My experience with my Porsche? I get about what they advertise… and Cadillac? I got WORSE fuel economy than they advertise.

      In my Hyundai Sonata 2.0T (I LOVE THIS MOTOR), which should be similar to the one put in this car’s base version, I get around 32.7 fairly consistently driving to and from work. However, the “official fuel economy” is 24 mixed and 30 HWY. I know I’m just some guy on the internet though and therefore you don’t want to believe me, but I’m being totally honest here. Even driving around town and staying off the highways I’m right around the 29/30 mark.

      Doing the same drive with my Porsche Cayenne, I get 17 MPG pretty much on the button. Its rated for 16 MPG mixed and 20 MPG highway.

      So in short, I’m getting 6% better than mixed rating on the cayenne and 36% better than mixed on the Hyundai Sonata.

      One of the reasons I’m excited about the stinger is I fully expect to net around 31 MPG in my work commute on the 2.0T, which I’m totally happy with.

  • avatar
    Superdessucke

    What does the manual version get?

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    On Saturday, I signed up for a 3-day subscription on KGIS (Kia Global Information System), Kia’s online source of shop manuals, diags, etc., to try to figure out why the SRS light is on in my daughter’s 2012 Forte Koup. I’ll probably end up taking it to the dealer, to at find out what component is bad.

    Anyway, just for grins, I looked to see if the Stinger is on KGIS, and yes, it is. The expanded drawings of various things like the engine include color drawings. The turbos on the 3.3 look like they come integrated with the exhaust manifolds, rather than being separate parts.

  • avatar
    bumpy ii

    Yeah, that’s pretty common on new turbo cars, along with the exhaust manifold being cast with the head.

Read all comments

Recent Comments

  • DenverMike: It was a goofy concept. The extra GVWR was used up or needed just to haul the diesel and related...
  • 28-Cars-Later: “The sedans are a disaster zone but no one except rental companies and the credit-challenged...
  • 28-Cars-Later: Smoke and mirrors.
  • sgeffe: You CAN get an Accord with vented seats if you pop for a Touring, either 2.0T or Hybrid.
  • FormerFF: Ferrari knows exactly who they are.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber