Why is the KIA Sorento the answer?

[converted lurker]

OK.

This comes as a surprise to me as well but I'm finding the Kia Sorento is something that until recently I have been ignorant of but which is actually a thing which has been preparing itself tirelessly to be of use to me.

This is spooky.


I might want a very cheap third tow car that has to be reliable and I looked at 19 year old Shoguns for £2000 and 16 year old Jeeps for £3000. I even looked at a 2001 TD5 Disco in rust for £3500.

Autotrader is packed with £2500 12 year old 3.5 ton towers like this:

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...


Seems a no brainer.


Then I consider upping a budget to about £14k to run one car but it must have 7 seats if thats the case. Strike a light look what they did in 2010:

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...


Leather Cruise, still in Warranty, seven seats, can still tow 2.5 ton. Built by orientals.


At this point I look at all the spectrum between those two and wonder who the f@uk is buying old Discovery 2's or 3's when there is something capable as they need but a third less in price and twice less likely to need a new transfer box on the market.

Its the badge isn't it? It has to be.


Sod that. My Kia is going to be parked next to my Porsche inside my stable block on my lower paddock.


God I love the free market. Its always anticipating what you want and making people fight to deliver it as cheaply as possible.


CL

[richs2891]

Possibly the badge,

I bought one 2 years ago for just under £3k as a cheap run around for my Dad, its been totally faultless, still worth the same now. Its been used and abused, towed, great in winter. Its got full leather heated seats etc, comfy ride, easy to drive. 06 to 09 auto will tow 3.5 tonnes. Will probably get another one if the current one dies.
Indicator on the wrong side drives me mad though !

But a lot of people are totally ignorant of the Kia range - especially the Sorento MY03 to 09.

One of the reason I think that is not as popular as the Disco 2 /3 is that off road accessories are few and far between for them, and as standard sit a little too low for serious off roading, (not too hard to lift though) and a lot of people dont know it has got a low range gear box.

[bitchstewie]

There's quite a lot of choice at that kind of money - I have a Freelander 2 from 2011 and whilst I've not got to seriously talking numbers yet, any dealers I've spoken to for cost to change figures have been coming back with around £14K p/x.

2.2 SD4, pan roof, auto, full leather, cruise, DAB, just about every option and arguably a "better" badge/brand image than the Kia if stuff like that matters - though tbh a bit like yourself I'd be wary of 3-4 year old Land Rovers as well (as indeed I am when considering stuff like Range Rover Sports etc).

[Kawasicki]

I think that the badge matters, not because of snobbery. When you buy from a company with more experience, and pay more for that product, you get a better product. By better I don't mean more reliable, I mean it steers a bit better, it is a bit more refined, it has better finish (soft touch plastics), it looks better (subjective), it crashes a bit better, it uses a little less fuel, etc.

Now if you are happy to accept that, and you just need a good reliable car, to get you round then you should definitely try other brands. You might get 80% of the performance, for 60% of the cost...not bad is it.

[IroningMan]

Why did you buy a Porsche instead of a Toyota?

Same argument applies to all market segments, more or less.

[converted lurker]

As far as I can determine though the KIA is the better engineered car than the Landrover which is why when old and second hand they cost a lot less to maintain and keep serviceable. They certainly go less rusty.

[TooMany2cvs]

If the Kia Sorento is the answer, I don't think I want to know what the question was.

[bitchstewie]

converted lurker said:

As far as I can determine though the KIA is the better engineered car than the Landrover which is why when old and second hand they cost a lot less to maintain and keep serviceable. They certainly go less rusty.

The Kia will probably be cheaper to run. I've been surprised at my Freelander - it'll probably die now but in 4 years it's never set a foot wrong or been to the dealers beyond being serviced.

[scrwright]

I don't think I would spend over £4k of my cash on a Kia, maybe a good vehicle but depreciation will be high

[converted lurker]

The depreciation on the KIA Sorento is not notably worse than the equivalent Land Rover on the used market. The maintenance costs of a used Landrover is the key reason why I can't bring myself to buy one. Also no Freelander has 7 seats where the Sorento does.

[TooMany2cvs]

converted lurker said:

Also no Freelander has 7 seats

Not yet, but the Disco Sport (Freelunch replacement) will.

[scrwright]

converted lurker said:

The depreciation on the KIA Sorento is not notably worse than the equivalent Land Rover on the used market.

I wouldn't spend more than £4000 on an LR either LOL

[MaisiesDad]

TooMany2cvs said:

If the Kia Sorento is the answer, I don't think I want to know what the question was.

Very good! Probably "What's the most horrendously cheaply built expensive 4x4 money can buy?"

[HarryW]

As already said certain era Sorento's come with low range boxes, they also come with a full ladder chassis too. I understand they are sought after within certain towing circles, with 2800kgs capacity.
It might not have the ground clearance of the a Disco, but it is relaible, not rusty and quite capable.

[MaisiesDad]

HarryW said:

As already said certain era Sorento's come with low range boxes, they also come with a full ladder chassis too. I understand they are sought after within certain towing circles, with 2800kgs capacity.
It might not have the ground clearance of the a Disco, but it is relaible, not rusty and quite capable.

The older style are better, the post 2010 are awful. Don't buy one if you tow, also don't buy one if you don't want to be towed!

[HarryW]

MaisiesDad said:

HarryW said:

As already said certain era Sorento's come with low range boxes, they also come with a full ladder chassis too. I understand they are sought after within certain towing circles, with 2800kgs capacity.
It might not have the ground clearance of the a Disco, but it is relaible, not rusty and quite capable.

The older style are better, the post 2010 are awful. Don't buy one if you tow, also don't buy one if you don't want to be towed!

As already said, 2006 - 2009 2.5 diesels seem to be the sweet spot for them. I don't own one, nor am I likely too, just have a caravanning buddy at work that swears by his, apparently won the tow car of the year for three years running if that means anything....

[Rum Runner]

The Sorento is very good and used a number when my wife worked at the Kia main dealers....however have a look how good value the Dodge Nitro is basically a Jeep Cherokee and the it has the 2.8 CRD ...VM engine which is later version of the similar 2.5 in the Sorento. The the more base model is not a blingy and better tyre size. Comfy yet also beam axle so good for towing. I also have LWB Shogun and just sold the Disco over a year which was replaced by the dodge. Read the owners reviews on the autotrader for a real impression.

[converted lurker]

Thanks for the tip.

[HarryW]

If you are towing, look at the 85% 'rule' on weights, the sorento of the era stated is higher than the nitro if that's important.

[Emeye]

I just bought a 2003 XS for £2k off a mate - Kia have a reputation for tinny cars, but the Kia Sorento couldn't be any different - the leather is decent quality as is the rest of the interior - even with 135k miles on the clock it isn't rattling.

Some of the replies on this thread demonstrate peoples' ignorance and prejudices - I'm more than happy for them to be like that if it means I can save money.