Mazda5 vs KIA Rondo comparisons and articles (merged)

KIA = Killed In Action.

My friend bought a KIA rio (i know, diff car, but it's still a KIA). and it had so many electrical problems that she got rid of it after 2 years. She bought a Mazda3 afterwards.
 
Why does the Rondo weight 300-400 pounds more than the Mazda5? Even the (old) MPV weighed only about 100 pounds more than the Rondo. Think mileage penalty, driveability penalty, etc. It's not quite clear to me why MT thinks it's better than the 5, except for the possibility of having a 7th seat.

That's not to say the 5 is better, either; it has shortcomings, and I've never driven a Rondo. But more mass is not exactly what this class of vehicle needs.

BTW, I'm amused at all the Kia naysayers here. Seems the majority of them are based on Kias from at least five years ago when they truly could be considered junk. I think we should at least give Kia a chance.
 
chuyler1 said:
You are basing compact minivan decisions on 0-60 speeds? How often are you going to be drag racing this thing with two kids in the back seat?

The 5 is already slow.... getting a full second slower would put that, IMO into the dangerous to get on the highway slow. I'm assuming your the type of person that believe the ONLY way to avoid ANY accident is with the brake pedal. Not to mention you don't have to be in a drag race for the car to be fun to drive. The 5 has enough grunt that when combined with its freaking awesome handling (relative to what it is), its really fun to drive. That and from time to time I do goto the track to play around. No kids then. I want to bring the 5 bracket racing... slow auto FTW, lol.
 
ChopstickHero said:
KIA = Killed In Action.

My friend bought a KIA rio (i know, diff car, but it's still a KIA). and it had so many electrical problems that she got rid of it after 2 years. She bought a Mazda3 afterwards.

Ok, so 90% of MSP owners should never buy another Mazda? Things go wrong in all kinds of cars from all kinds of different manufacturers, that isn't to say that every car model (or even every car of the same year/model) from said manufacturer is going to be junk.

I'm off to go make a website: "My Mazdaspeed Protege clunked, it hesistated, the CD Player went out, the sub brokeded, my hubs rusted...don't buy a Mazda they are obviously all junk!!"

:rolleyes:

I know nothing of either of the two specific vehicles, just some about their manufacturers. I offer no specifc advice on which to pick, just research, pick the one that meets your priorities...and don't let the bandwagon "omg Kia/Hyundai teh crap I heard one broke once and no one likes them so I don't" people make the decision for you.
 
(mswerd)

Consumer Reports and long-term road test reports from well known magazines are priceless compared to individual opinions on a forum. Numbers and statistics are ways to narrow things down but once you are on the road who cares. You're never going to pull up to the other van/car at a traffic light and drag race them. So choose the car that best matches your lifestyle.

If you are going to be strapping kids into car seats twice a day it might help to have the sliding doors. If your kids are older and you will be hauling them and their friends to soccer practice it might be better to have 7-seat capacity.

Then there is your wallet. An extra 1-3K could mean the difference of going out to dinner once a month instead of putting that money into the car payment. If you drive alot you may want to look at the cost of scheduled maintenance, the cost of replacement tires, fuel efficiency, etc.

All of this stuff we can mention on a forum, but it is up to you to do the final research and decide what best fits your lifestyle.
 
ChopstickHero said:
KIA = Killed In Action.

My friend bought a KIA rio (i know, diff car, but it's still a KIA). and it had so many electrical problems that she got rid of it after 2 years. She bought a Mazda3 afterwards.
Hmm thats funny My rio is so reliable at 112k miles. I went to the Kia dealer for an oil change today and they just got a 2001 rio in there with 250k miles on the odometer original drivetrain. Your friend must have had a lemon.
 
Rio Racer said:
Hmm thats funny My rio is so reliable at 112k miles. I went to the Kia dealer for an oil change today and they just got a 2001 rio in there with 250k miles on the odometer original drivetrain. Your friend must have had a lemon.

No one is saying they ALL suck. Even a broken clock is right twice.

It's just that most people will not be able to put 250k with no problems on there Kia.
 
I agree with you II-Savy but my comment is about as valid as the "don't get a kia my friend had one and it had all kinds of electrical problems" It's a single case. Just puttin that out there.
 
I got a co-worker that has one and he likes it. I think people get the ideal theses things should get great mpg's but for get they are still an SUV. Keep that in mind and it'll be ok.
 
BTW did the guy that started this thread ever respond ever? I haven't seen a single post from him after. Maybe he just wanted to get the people on the boards here into a heated debate. lol
 
Zoom5Zoom said:
KIA is a easy way to spell cheap.........

KI KI KI KIA should only grow grass from it...

Haha...and I thought my family was the only one saying that. I wonder how many out there do the same.
 
Wytchdctr said:
The 5 is already slow.... getting a full second slower would put that, IMO into the dangerous to get on the highway slow.


I dunno about you guys but my 5 is pretty damn quick. Dont be afraid to let those RPM's climb and you will see what i mean. This car will get up to speed as fast as any other (in the price range). If you're 5 is slow then your right foot needs to be examined. If you havent driven a 5 and are saying it's slow then let your biases go, then drive one and lay it down.

Back on topic

good luck on your decision though. IMO i dont think you can really go bad with either car. Dont listen to these guys trashing KIA, they've come a long way in the past few years. When we buy cars we arent looking only at 0-60 times, or basing our decisions srictly on HP or MPG. It's based on the look and the feel you get once behind the steering wheel.
 
ok check this out. the dealer is going too give you a low amount for your $20,000 dollar mazda 5. and what ever the difrence that you owe then that gets added to the price of the kia. and there you have it one giant monthly car payment.
 
Wytchdctr said:
The 5 is already slow.... getting a full second slower would put that, IMO into the dangerous to get on the highway slow. I'm assuming your the type of person that believe the ONLY way to avoid ANY accident is with the brake pedal. Not to mention you don't have to be in a drag race for the car to be fun to drive. The 5 has enough grunt that when combined with its freaking awesome handling (relative to what it is), its really fun to drive. That and from time to time I do goto the track to play around. No kids then. I want to bring the 5 bracket racing... slow auto FTW, lol.

Slow as compared to what? I have a GT with the 5 speed MT and not much gets in my way when I'm in a hurry. I even embarrassed a Mustang GT the other day when he tried to zip past me using the curb lane.
 
The 5 has some ballz to it for a 2.3L, period. If you're afraid to rev it, buy another car. All the fun is ready and waiting from 5500 to 7000 RPM. :)

Every time I see this topic title asking to convince him to NOT buy a KIA, I just think to myself, is somebody seriously asking this? lol Furthermore, even after 5 pages worth of convincing, I get the feeling in a few days the OP will pop back up and post a picture of his Kia, doh!
 
I have no issue with putting my foot down and letting the engine rev up. See some of my other posts about doing just that. The 2.3 is a nice engine but its pulling to much weight. My elantra will walk away from my 5, no problem. That and I have the auto (in the mazda), so that doesn't help. Id put the 5 in the lower 17 sec range in the 1/4. Maybe upper 16s on a really good day. Thats what my 1.6 DOHC accent ran. Not painfully slow but not fast either.

BTW you guys are funny. In one thread I get messed with for saying the mazda5 is a full second faster than the kia... then get messed with (same post) for not thinking my microvanthing is not a performance machine. (poke) ..
 
Last edited:
Well I guess I should admit, my perspective on the 5's "fastness" is coming from previously owning a 115hp 3AT Sunfire (lol2)
 
Original Post-er Thanks & Signing Off

Wow!

What a flurry of posts...some very thoughtful and helpful, and others...well, lets just say that some people should get their facts straight before spouting off about something...case in point...the Canadian Kia Rondo 4 cyl EX weighs 1,541kg...the Canadian Mazda 5 GT Leather weighs 1,523kg. Thats a 18kg (39.683207193277966 lbs) penalty...(the average weight of a 4 year old boy is 39 3/4 lbs)...not a 300-400 lb penalty as somone suggested. There were a few other errors...but who'se countin'?

BTW The Mazda 5 GT must haul around 10kg for every horsepower, whereas the Kia Rondo 4 cyl EX must haul 9.5kg/hp...the V6 Rondo is 8.75kg/hp. (the Ferrari F430 is 2.96kg/hp).

I have thouroughly enjoyed reading all you comments, it is obvious to me that there are some very well educated and knowledgeable car nuts residing here.

For many reasons posted here and various others...we, more than likely will be buying a Rondo, however, give me towing capability and 2-3-2 seven seat capability...my driveway would be filled with zoom zoom!

It is obvious to me that many of you love Mazda (duh...check the url...) and all of you that own a Mazda, love the car and the way it makes you feel...I understand that. I also know that I will not have that same "love the way it makes me feel" with a Rondo...not right away, at least.

So unless Mazda, or Ferrari build the 2-3-2 seater...it'll be the Rondo.

Now will that be 4 cylinders or 6...........? =)
 
Back