Thanks! Glad you’re in agreement. And I can totally see why a Kia makes so much more sense than some of the rivals.

If youre looking at the usual suspects then yes, but if you actually want to see where your money is going then as was suggested, look at a H6.

Right On!

Good one mate. Great pick. And yep they did have a heap of diesel Tucsons arrive this year.

Love that spec!

It even in Dawning Red, the same as your test car. The GT line is a great spec, blind spot screen on dash is great for me , having problems with my neck.

If you’re only going short trips you might find a petrol to be better. The diesel has a particulate filter and will require some high speed driving occasionally.

Thanks for that! The base petrol Sportage is a bit lethargic but it’s not like the Forester is fast…! I think unless you’re actually going to need the AWD of the Forester, then go for the Sportage as you like its interior more, and that’s where you spend your time after all! Hope that helps. Thanks Matt

I'm sure you'll find something out there with a more detailed run-through. Or ask the dealership. I simply have too much to cover in a review to dedicate 10 mins to dash content (you're not the first to ask, though!) Thanks

Diesel

@@hinan187 thank you!

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/rLVoYM9yrLatdZ8.htmlsi=Bl_0vPmAGpWCt1oQ The link to manual hybrid Tucson. Btw I am still driving a manual Hyundai SUV right now.

Yep, a manual hybrid would be awesome. But zero chance for Aus - shame!!

Great mate. Happy you’re getting a diesel GT-Line. It’ll be a lovely car to live with, I’m sure.

Youre seriously waiting a year on a car? You know theres a new one coming out next year right? Because Kia believes people change cars like smartphones.

@@mindfreeze0838 By the time I get it, it will hopefully be the new model.

@@spudboy1328 while that maybe so they will probably charge you for it as the new model costs more.

@@mindfreeze0838 Yep. Am expecting that. Basically I'm just buying a place in a queue...

i shopped both, you will hate the hyundai infotainment, looks good new, 5 minutes down he road its full of dust and fingerprints (lots of gloss black too), you cant read the screen and you have to constantly wipe it with a cloth. terrible design. go the kia.,

Hey Greg. I’d probably choose the Tucson, because I like the look of it (with the N Line pack). I also like the driving manners in it just a bit more. However, the extra two years of warranty and the slightly lower price point seems very convincing in favour of the Kia.

@therightcar Thx Matt, I really appreciate your reply. 👍 I like Tuscon but the wife likes Sportage. Could get interesting 😊

@@gregy1194 - I was in the same position recently, looking at the Tuscon Elite N-Line AWD with turbo petrol / DCT and the equiv Kia Sportage SX+ turbo petrol / DCT AWD, both were on a wait list around 6 to 8 months (or longer) and both could not be lock in pricing. Again buy on "needs" not "wants", the 1.6L turbo petrol i4 actually is very good shame its connected to a an absolute dog of a transmission, what the heck are Hyundai and KIA thinking still using this awful DCT junk, hell it makes the CVT that Toyota, Nissan and Mitsubishi use seem so much more refined and almost "torque converter like". I ended up spending a bit more than I really needed to but did end up with the X-Trail Ti AWD 2.5L i4 NA petrol with CVT, Matt is not a fan of the ride, but for me coming from the Escape ST-Line with its much firmer stiffer suspension and heavier steering the X-Trail even on 19 by 7.5 wide allows (235/55/19) is so much better SAVE for the too light steering at parking speeds, that said the steering does firm up at motorway and highway speeds which is nice even if feel is at a minimum (again compared to what I was used to in the Escape ST-LIne AWD I previously owned).

Haha I think I know which way this decision is heading!

You bet your backside. As soon as I can! But they haven’t done an official launch event yet. If I can get there, I’ll be doing a detailed review as soon as it’s possible.

Great !! Confused between Corolla Cross GXL and CRV VTi X. The US version looks great. But couldn't find any good comprehensive review. Your say will play a role.

@@therightcar OMG yes! Waiting eagerly for the review!

No pressure…! Haha. I think you’re likely to be able to get a CR-V sooner than a Corolla Cross. And if you need a bigger boot and back seat, then the Honda has it from the get go. But let’s see what it’s like…!

Thanks Mark. Yeah, good points mate. Wish they’d sort out a better auto for the base car or just put the old 2.4 back in!

My man, I don’t think I’ll be doing an Ignis review. My understanding is it’s not long for this world in Australia. But let me see.

​@@therightcarthats a shame but I can see why, the Ignis is like the red headed stepchild of the Suzuki lineup right now globally. This model has had no substantial updates since it was revived in 2016. Just about every model(short of the Carry and APV of course) have had work done since that period and there are no plans to faacelift it.

Not for a while mate. The launch event is late next week and the review won’t go live until after that!

Nice! Good choice.

@@therightcar Is Rav 4 Edge better ?

Absolutely! I wish both Tucson and Sportage had a 2.5 NA engine . I had to make do with the 2.0 NA for Tucson because I do not do a lot of highway miles for the diesel and DCT is trash. RAV4 is just out of stock everywhere and CX-5 just looks dated at this point.

A 2.5 and 8 speed is available in the US…. I’d love that choice here

The diesel is not a DCT.

@@alastairwright2929 I know, I want a petrol 2.5 or 1.6T with the 8 speed torque converter auto, front drive.

Nice one! That’s a good buy, I reckon, so well done to you. I just drove the Karoq last week - and annoyingly the version I drove had more than $10,000 of options, which pushed it up to Audi Q2 or VW Tiguan pricing. The Karoq is a very practical thing if you plan to move those seats around and consider it is so much smaller than the Sportage.

@@therightcar I'll be looking forward to your review of the Karoq in a few weeks then mate!

Lots of it!

There are so many of them around these days I feel like the look has become more understandable. But I can see why people aren’t sold on it.

Fair call

Go for a long drive!

What is DFP ? I went with Diesel though

@@LawlessRaafay diesel particle filter

@@therightcar dpf save the earth, then drive far to save dpf, sounds counteractive

I wouldn’t offer alternatives if they weren’t realistic, mate. Where are you based?

Well, if it changes your mind, the KZfaq ad feed helps me make a living - and I have no control over ads that you see. But if you really hate ads you can go KZfaq Premium!

Or a better gearbox. Or both.

Ha!

both only have 2L weak sissy engines. no turbos or diesel.

2.5L actually. And not that weak. Stronger than the base engines in the Hyundai and Kia.

Yeah I can see why!

@@mrz1281 - bzzzzt wrong, as a T33 MY23 X-Trail Ti owner I can 100% say it has a 2.5L NA petrol i4 which all the current tech like DOHC DVCT Direct Injection (would actually prefer MPEFI but what can you do) with a heavily revised CVT which now features "phantom shift" so it feels like a torque converter. The Outlander in MY22/3 spec has the same petrol/CVT combo, spend a bit more to go AWD which also offers more "drive modes" but the advantage is superior traction in all conditions.

​@@351tgvPhantom Shift sounds entirely stupid, its either you have a CVT or you dont, trying to be both just increases the price for the consumer with not real tangible benefit.

what do you base your response on?

@@rcairflr Hyundai and Kia are kind of the same company, I watched lots of reviews, Hyundai mostly cheaper service $. Base on using same engines

No where did you say your post was Hyunda vs Kia service cost. What is service cost vs every onther manufacturer? BTW, here is what I found on Kia vs Hundai service cost" So your post is based on a couple dollars: Kia has an average repair and maintenance cost of $474. This is higher than Hyundai, which has an average annual repair and maintenance cost of $468. The differences are not much, as you might tend to incur high charges from different dealers.

Here is somehting else I found: As an accessible brand with high-reliability ratings, Kias tend to be significantly cheaper to maintain than the average automobile, with an annual repair cost of around $474-far less than the average vehicle maintenance cost of $652.

@@rimloch3919 Still waiting for you to respond to my post, which clearly debunks your post

Soon mate, calm down. It’ll be here by June 2024.

Are you speaking from personal experience? What Kia did you own that blew an engine?

I bought a 2014 Hyundai i30 with the 1.8 litre petrol engine. It had a faulty timing chain tensioner at 38,000km. It was going to be an $1,800 job to strip down the engine to replace the tensioner, chain and chain guides. The car was already six years old when I bought it privately, so I had no comeback with Hyundai. Ended up trading it in for a Toyota. This is one of the infamous Hyundai engines (the "NU" series - same series as the 2.0 petrol engine that's still used in many Kias and Hyundais) that was subject to a class action lawsuit in the USA.

yeah Kia/Hyundai o their NA petrol engines have switched from direct injection back to good ol MPEFL (in sequential format), it still gives them euro 5 but at the same time allows for better engine reliability which using 91 RON. Granted the engines have lost torque and top end power but the trade off is less fires and brake down down the line.

@@351tgvThe "NU" engine never had direct injection and that's the series that had bottom end issues (piston slap, etc.). The direct injection engines had their own set of issues. I simply wouldn't risk buying a Korean car again with an internal combustion engine, as the Hyundai/Kia engine saga has shown they're prepared to sweep a problem under the rug for years and years and then deny responsibility when the problems come to light.

@@corkeymonster - well I know the previous gen Tucson and Sportage did have NA direct injected engines, so not sure which "family line" they were but their HQ decided to go back to NA MPEFI, I did write something about the turbo petrol engines but that is another story.

To their credit it looks better than the last one.

Depends on what you prefer - five seat and big boot? Sportage. Option of seven seats and a more lively base engine? Outlander.

what trim grade? since you did not specify I will go with base / fleet special for both: Outlander has 2.5L Direct Injected i4 NA petrol with CVT (with 8 step ratios) FWD Sportage has a 2.0L MPEFI i4 NA petrol with 6-speed torque converter FWD Off the bat styling is subjective for exterior and interior, so leave that to you for that. Both offer nearly everything in terms of passive and active safety Outlander offers 5+2 seat option also the middle row seats slide to extend or shorten space as needed, Sportage is 5 seater only fixed middle row, Sportage passenger seat is taller than the driver seat (which is frustrating for the passenger who wants to sit lower in the vehicle. In ride and steering both are pretty much same setup in that both are independent strut front with anti-roll bar and multi-link IRS with anti-sway links (similar to anti-roll bar but independent linked), what it comes down to is how you like the steering weight to be, the Outlander is more heavy at highway speed which is great for that driving but for metro it means more input, the Sportage is the other way round, light in the city and at highway speeds it felt nervous to cross winds as the steering weight does not firm up at highway speeds. Engines and transmission are where the biggest difference is at base trim, the Sportage puny engine is dangerous, no other way to say it but it stinks for a vehicle that will have a kerb weight (that is full tank (54L) and driver) of potentially 1,620kg, sorry but 110kW and 198Nm is bad, and bad for fuel economy as the transmission is geared short to compensate which means the engine will be pushed into the 4,000+rpm range to get anything decent from it, whereas the Outlander with its larger 2.5L with 135kW/244Nm (at a decent for NA 3,600rpm) has taller gearing from the CVT so its more settled and does not need to be pushed, that said it also has a potential kerb weight of around 1,620kg so keep that in mind once you load it up with more people and cargo, that said its better than the Sportage in that respect. The other other is brakes, Mitsubishi did not skimp out on rotor size, they are a large 14" from front and 13" for rear with 14mm thickness, single single piston callipers all round, in other words for this market segment Mitsubishi offers great brakes, KIA? not as good, 12" front and 11" rear with 10mm thickness with single piston callipers all round, KIA does have bigger breaks for turbo petrol and turbos diesel trims, more reviewers should let people know about brake performance. Anything else? I highly rate the seats in the Outlander, spend a bit more and get the LS Black Edition which comes with the seats from the Aspire which are microsuede with artificial leather bolsters front and rear but that is a personal choice on my end.