Hyundai Kona Rolls Out of the Gate With a Less-than-ideal Lease

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

As we told you earlier this month, Hyundai’s newest offering, the B-segment Kona crossover, arrived with a base price below that of its subcompact competition. At $20,450 after delivery for a base, front-drive SE, the Kona slots below the entry MSRPs of the Honda HR-V, Toyota C-HR, Chevrolet Trax, and Mazda CX-3.

Value, the Kona trumpets, has arrived.

Well, not if you’re leasing the Kona’s volume trim: the SEL model.

As exposed by CarsDirect, a national lease introduced by Hyundai on Friday serves up a pretty unappealing deal for the Kona most lessees will want.

The offer sees a Kona SEL going for $269 a month (for 36 months), with $2,399 due at signing. That works out to $336 a month for a vehicle selling for $22,100 after delivery. While the SEL adds niceties like driver assistance features, the interior stays pretty much stock. No leatherette in sight. Power comes by way of a 2.0-liter four-cylinder making 147 hp and 132 lb-ft of torque, paired with a six-speed automatic. (Going up a rung on the trim ladder brings a 1.6-liter turbo into the equation.)

The lease really starts to smell when you contrast it with the mid-level Kona’s competition.

Less money gets you into an HR-V EX-L with navigation. Honda’s currently offering that model for $239 a month for 36 months, with $2,999 due at signing; or, an effective cost of $322 per month. And that’s for a model costing nearly four grand more.

Even elsewhere in the Hyundai range, there’s deals capable of swaying a would-be Kona lessee into a larger vehicle. Despite an MSRP $3,800 higher than the Kona’s, the Santa Fe Sport can be had for $249 a month for 36 months, with $2,799 due at signing. This works out to $327 a month.

This offer might not be around for long, as current lease deals run out at the end of the month. Still, it’s food for thought for those eager to drive the newest B-segment on the block. Besides this odd lease, the Kona’s pricing, plus its list of standard or available content, does amount to a serious challenge to rivals in the subcompact field.

Only the model’s avant-garde appearance stands in the way of value-minded buyers, though who knows — it could be a help, not a hindrance.

[Images: Hyundai]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 28 comments
  • Bd2 Bd2 on Feb 21, 2018

    The biggest problem for Kona (aside from the lease deal) is that it's smaller than many of its competitors. While this may not matter in Europe and similar markets, here size/interior space matters. Still, recently launched in Australia, the Kona has already made to the #3 spot - behind the CX-3 and Subie XV and ahead of the CH-R and HR-V.

  • 28-Cars-Later 28-Cars-Later on Feb 21, 2018

    A face only a mother could love.

  • ToolGuy First picture: I realize that opinions vary on the height of modern trucks, but that entry door on the building is 80 inches tall and hits just below the headlights. Does anyone really believe this is reasonable?Second picture: I do not believe that is a good parking spot to be able to access the bed storage. More specifically, how do you plan to unload topsoil with the truck parked like that? Maybe you kids are taller than me.
  • ToolGuy The other day I attempted to check the engine oil in one of my old embarrassing vehicles and I guess the red shop towel I used wasn't genuine Snap-on (lots of counterfeits floating around) plus my driveway isn't completely level and long story short, the engine seized 3 minutes later.No more used cars for me, and nothing but dealer service from here on in (the journalists were right).
  • Doughboy Wow, Merc knocks it out of the park with their naming convention… again. /s
  • Doughboy I’ve seen car bras before, but never car beards. ZZ Top would be proud.
  • Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
Next