Drive Notes: 2024 Kia EV9 GT-Line

Tim Healey
by Tim Healey

Before decamping to California, I parted ways with a 2024 Kia EV9 GT-Line.

The experience was illuminating.

The GT-Line packs a 99.8-kWh battery pack. Listed range is 270 miles, but it was at 280 when dropped at my home -- and it wasn't at 100 percent. That's a good start.

Here are some pros and cons I picked up on over the past week.


  • For such a big boy, the EV9 drives with ease. It's well put together and well-mannered on road, though there are some imperfections, as you'll see below.
  • There's plenty of thrust when the accelerator is depressed.
  • The seating materials are damn nice.
  • I like the clean dash design. Using the haptic-touch controls are another manner.
  • There's a lot of storage space upfront, and the third row isn't a penalty box.
  • Wind and road noise are well damped.
  • Moving certain controls to the door is smart, though it takes some getting used to.
  • Kia's infotainment remains pretty good.
  • This is a comfortable, mostly well-executed package.


  • There was some slow-speed creakiness from the driveline, most noticeable when entering and exiting a car wash. It was so bad I was worried I scraped a wheel.
  • I don't understand why, if you have regeneration set to max for one-pedal driving, changing drive modes resets it. Annoying.
  • There are some "buttons" of text on the center of the dash. Press those for climate, audio, et cetera. Unfortunately, the latency was a little slow.
  • Sometimes, I selected "drive" when I wanted "reverse" and vice-versa. This is a bit of a "me" problem, since the Bimmer I'd just tested had a shifter set up just the opposite, but it's still jarring.
  • Getting into the third row is easy. Getting out is not. Not for a large adult.
  • There's not really a "frunk" though there is some storage space for the charging cable.
  • Sometimes I wanted to access the a passenger door or the tailgate while the car was on, and I had to walk around and manually unlock it. Made loading things a pain.
  • With the third-row seats up, the rear cargo area is narrow -- though still wide enough to accommodate a rollaboard -- and not totally flat.

If you're wondering about charging, I hit up a ChargePoint with 89 miles of range remaining. A little over three hours and $6.12 later, I had 132 miles. The screen showed 15 hours of charging time when I plugged in, and, predictably, 12 when I disconnected.

I mostly enjoyed driving the EV9 -- and I think it's usefulness as a large three-row SUV with decent range will help move EVs forward. That said, some minor details annoy.

Still, this is a strong effort from Kia.

[Images © 2024 Tim Healey/]

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.

Tim Healey
Tim Healey

Tim Healey grew up around the auto-parts business and has always had a love for cars — his parents joke his first word was “‘Vette”. Despite this, he wanted to pursue a career in sports writing but he ended up falling semi-accidentally into the automotive-journalism industry, first at Consumer Guide Automotive and later at He also worked as an industry analyst at Mintel Group and freelanced for, CarFax,, High Gear Media, Torque News,,, among others, and of course Vertical Scope sites such as,, and He’s an urbanite and as such, doesn’t need a daily driver, but if he had one, it would be compact, sporty, and have a manual transmission.

More by Tim Healey

Join the conversation
2 of 56 comments
  • 3-On-The-Tree 3-On-The-Tree 6 days ago

    Good luck with that.

  • 3-On-The-Tree 3-On-The-Tree 5 days ago

    its a simple questIon. As an educated “ADULT” I don't resort to name calling which is very childish. If a question is asked and the response is name calling that just means the argument has no basis or truth. I know because I used to teach critical thinking which is severely lacking today.

  • Wolfwagen I expect Renault to be less popular than Fiat
  • ToolGuy Helium-3, baby!
  • Roman Our 1999 Pontiac Sunfire Gt is still running without any issues. 25 years and counting.
  • 28-Cars-Later I thought today's young people weren't even getting licenses to drive, so which is it?
  • 28-Cars-Later Either last year or the year before I was discussing how The Dytopia™'s BEV schemes do not scale simply because the existing grid cannot generate enough power to replace ICE and the gigantic investment necessary in the grid was not forthcoming (Zelensky needed another house in Miami Beach after all you b!gots). So it struck me the only path to sort of do it is natural gas which became abundantly cheap 15 years ago because of fracking. Fast forward to more recently and surprise surprise we're attacking civilian use of natural gas out of nowhere for very little benefit. I couldn't find any good data to break down natural gas consumption between industrial use and civilian use, but spitballing I'd say the two largest chunks would be power generation and heating followed by small slices for other industrial use and home appliances- the latter probably being 5% or less (on my own gas bill its about 3-10% for the non furnace gas use depending on laundry loads). Some argued The Dystopia wanted to take away any energy freedom the proles have outside of electricity which they control on their whims, but I'm thinking that small number is optimal for them to take back because it doesn't force any additional infrastructure cost to gain (i.e. the low hanging fruit). As more power plants are spun up I expect a slow consolidation away from civilian nat gas because ManBearPig or whatever other fairy tale, but its really to power the gilded electronic cage they are constructing out of this once great nation. Seriously, break this down:Self lubricating Diesel engine with conventional OTS components, built for more than a ten year lifespan and 1m or more miles of use which can quickly be refueled at hundreds of locations (or fuel be brought to them). Pure BEV with some large amount of rare earths with a ten (?) year lifespan and perhaps 1m miles use but which has an avg daily downtime of 2 hours (?) to refuel and must be powered by a limited number of natural gas stations at static points (theoretically you could put a diesel fuel depot anywhere must faster and refill it with trucks). Other than ManBearPig fiction, your only savings in emissions is whatever the DEF isn't catching now (which is up to 90% in civilian diesel use per JLR) minus whatever emissions sins the nat gas burning creates. Think about how ridiculous all of this is to save 10-20% of emissions of only heavy trucks (BEV ships aren't ever going to be a thing) and you still have to frack like mad to have the natural gas to do it which would create the diesel in the first place. What is the nonsense?