Potential "Smaht Pahk" Problem Leads Kia To Recall the New EV9

Chris Teague
by Chris Teague

Hyundai and Kia’s Remote Smart Parking Assist (AKA “Smaht Pahk” or RSPA) helps drivers remotely park their vehicles in tight spaces, but a recent recall shows that it might not work perfectly all the time. Kia is recalling the EV9 over concerns that a software glitch could lead to a malfunction in the parking assistance feature and cause a fender-bender.


The recall involves 12,400 2024 EV9 SUVs, with Kia noting that the software glitch could prevent the vehicle from stopping while the RSPA system is active. RSPA’s sensors guide steering inputs, throttle, and braking to remotely move the vehicle into and out of parking spots, but the glitch causes errors in the integrated electronic braking system (IEB), leading to a failure of brake application at speeds less than two mph. While the resulting collision would likely be minor at those speeds, there’s no such thing as a “good” crash.


Kia’s first recorded incident related to the error came earlier this month from Korea, where an EV9’s RSPA system failed to stop the vehicle, causing a collision with a nearby parked vehicle.

The automaker will notify owners by mail by October 18. Luckily, the fix is a simple one, only requiring a software update with “improved logic.” If you own a 2024 Kia EV9 and have questions, Kia’s customer service center can be reached at 1-800-333-4542. Reference recall number SC324 when calling.


[Images: Kia]


Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

Chris Teague
Chris Teague

Chris grew up in, under, and around cars, but took the long way around to becoming an automotive writer. After a career in technology consulting and a trip through business school, Chris began writing about the automotive industry as a way to reconnect with his passion and get behind the wheel of a new car every week. He focuses on taking complex industry stories and making them digestible by any reader. Just don’t expect him to stay away from high-mileage Porsches.

More by Chris Teague

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 13 comments
  • Redapple2 Redapple2 on Sep 25, 2024
    Resident HK hater here. Man they make good looking stuff. Compare a random HK to the -gm- style leader; the Lyricmedusa. HK has cohesive style - each model different yet handsome, compared with a jarring jumble of shocking discordant triangles, slashes and rhombi.
    • Ash78 Ash78 on Sep 25, 2024
      At least they're cohesive now...for almost a decade there was no single design language, it was just a mess. But glad to hear I'm not the only Lyriq hater. Man, that thing is fugly -- and they're keeping that design going with future models. Sad because their ICE cars are all really well designed.
  • ToolGuy ToolGuy on Sep 25, 2024
    Learn to park, people.
  • KOKing I owned a Paul Bracq-penned BMW E24 some time ago, and I recently started considering getting Sacco's contemporary, the W124 coupe.
  • Bob The answer is partially that stupid manufacturers stopped producing desirable PHEVs.I bought my older kid a beautiful 2011 Volt, #584 off the assembly line and #000007 for HOV exemption in MD. We love the car. It was clearly an old guy's car, and his kids took away his license.It's a perfect car for a high school kid, really. 35 miles battery range gets her to high school, job, practice, and all her friend's houses with a trickle charge from the 120V outlet. In one year (~7k miles), I have put about 10 gallons of gas in her car, and most of that was for the required VA emissions check minimum engine runtime.But -- most importantly -- that gas tank will let her make the 300-mile trip to college in one shot so that when she is allowed to bring her car on campus, she will actually get there!I'm so impressed with the drivetrain that I have active price alerts for the Cadillac CT6 2.0e PHEV on about 12 different marketplaces to replace my BMW. Would I actually trade in my 3GT for a CT6? Well, it depends on what broke in German that week....
  • ToolGuy Different vehicle of mine: A truck. 'Example' driving pattern: 3/3/4 miles. 9/12/12/9 miles. 1/1/3/3 miles. 5/5 miles. Call that a 'typical' week. Would I ever replace the ICE powertrain in that truck? No, not now. Would I ever convert that truck to EV? Yes, very possibly. Would I ever convert it to a hybrid or PHEV? No, that would be goofy and pointless. 🙂
  • ChristianWimmer Took my ‘89 500SL R129 out for a spin in his honor (not a recent photo).Other great Mercedes’ designers were Friedrich Geiger, who styled the 1930s 500K/540K Roadsters and my favorite S-Class - the W116 - among others. Paul Bracq is also a legend.RIP, Bruno.
  • ToolGuy Currently my drives tend to be either extra short or fairly long. (We'll pick that vehicle over there and figure in the last month, 5 miles round trip 3 times a week, plus 1,000 miles round trip once.) The short trips are torture for the internal combustion powertrain, the long trips are (relative) torture for my wallet. There is no possible way that the math works to justify an 'upgrade' to a more efficient ICE, or an EV, or a hybrid, or a PHEV. Plus my long trips tend to include (very) out of the way places. One day the math will work and the range will work and the infrastructure will work (if the range works) and it will work in favor of a straight EV (purchased used). At that point the short trips won't be torture for the EV components and the long trips shouldn't hurt my wallet. What we will have at that point is the steady drip-drip-drip of long-term battery degradation. (I always pictured myself buying generic modular replacement cells at Harbor Freight or its future equivalent, but who knows if that will be possible). The other option that would almost possibly work math-wise would be to lease a new EV at some future point (but the payment would need to be really right). TL;DR: ICE now, EV later, Hybrid maybe, PHEV probably never.
Next