Impromptu Face-off: Kia Rio versus Toyota Vios

**basti08** · September 25th, 2006 04:45 PM

price for price, the Vios J is the one to be compared to the Rio 1.4L. in which the Rio is certainly better.

btw, wala palang rear foglights ang production Rios dito. pero Ok parin ang content nya. also, Nice review Niky and the pack.

**squala** · September 25th, 2006 04:47 PM

I think that most people perceive the Vios as an older, more common car compared to the Rio, which is why the Kia tends to look 'better,' entailing a fresh, new design. If these cars came out at the same time, I'm pretty sure many will have a different opinion on appearance.

In choosing between the two, the Rio is more sensible because it offers just about the same goodies as the Vios but at a hefty discount. I can practically buy a B13 Sentra ECCS with the change and forget about coding woes.

**userfriendly** · September 25th, 2006 04:55 PM

It might be hard to accept that Kia may be a decent choice nowadays, but one look at the Picanto thread, with tons of happy users, should ease your mind with regards to the quality of at least some of their cars.

All in all - the quality of Korean & Japanese vehicles are at par with each other.

Thanks for the replies. Its really good to hear that Kia is doing their homework and getting better. Value for money.

To Hyundai and Kia, keep up the good work.

**niky** · September 25th, 2006 05:01 PM

*Woulfe27: thanks for the heads up on airbags... I'm editing the original article.

RE: looks...

True about that... the Vios's looks have only suffered because of familiarity. The Vios's tail is a sight slimmer and ***ier than the stubby on the Rio from the tail-lights down, if you're looking at both cars for the first time, but setting familiarity issues aside, the Rio's better greenhouse, more pronounced body lines, fender flares and side mouldings make it look much better from other angles.

Then again, it was designed more recently, and by a good design group... the Hyundai Accent, also a new car, doesn't look much newer than the Vios, and isn't as distinctive looking as either the Rio or the Vios.

Again, I question the market direction of Kia-Hyundai... which one is suppsed to be entry-level and which one is supposed to be upmarket?

**mazdamazda** · September 25th, 2006 05:07 PM

With the recent offerings of Kia & Hyundai - I don't think that we can categorically state that one brand is the enty-level or upmarket. At least Kia & Hyundai did over all the bases from P500K to P1.6M.

**niky** · September 25th, 2006 06:00 PM

I often wonder... are they competitors stealing sales from each other? Or are they part of a two-pronged attack, attempting to take out the smaller Japanese manufacturers?

**oldblue** · September 26th, 2006 04:07 AM

Originally Posted by niky

I often wonder... are they competitors stealing sales from each other? Or are they part of a two-pronged attack, attempting to take out the smaller Japanese manufacturers?

Korean stealth attack

**niky** · September 26th, 2006 12:17 PM

One two punch... pow!... oops where did Nissan and Mitsubishi go?....

It really hurts seeing how neither manufacturer has an answer for the clobbering in sales they're getting for not having a proper subcompact in the market... despite the fact that the Colt has been out for a long time now elsewhere, and the Versa has come to fill the niche left behind by the older, smaller early-generation Sentras.

Nissan, hello? Half a dozen new models, and only the X-Trail comes here? The new Teana platform is halfway to retirement already and we still haven't seen head or tail of it.

**orly_andico** · September 26th, 2006 02:32 PM

here's a good comparison:

rio5 hatch (low 600k price) or honda city 1.3S cvt (620k)

granted the city looks like an ipis, you could go for the jazz 1.3s cvt (650k). the 1.3 honda's probably have better driveability (higher torque dual-spark engine) and the CVT tranny which is a huge plus. plus the ULT seats.

**niky** · September 26th, 2006 03:32 PM

620k -City and 650k -Jazz are MT only, I believe... the AT versions are 650k and 690k.

The CVT would be a BIG plus versus a traditional automatic, but in the Jazz versus the Rio, it's a judgement call whether it's worth an additional 90k. But I would likely go for the Jazz anyway.

I've heard conflicting reports on the AT of the hatch. Some say it's right peppy, others complain it's too sluggish. For me, the Rio is probably best savored with the MT. It's not punishing in traffic, it's very entertaining (yes, VERY) and the Euro-style reverse is a good conversation piece... just don't let the valet murder it...

The 1.4 is in no way lacking in torque. I purposely tried to get it to "kabayo" or shudder when driving at low speeds by letting the revs fall very low, then stepping on the gas. Mission failed. In fact, there were times in reverse where I got it so close to stalling that I actually stalled it... it's so smooth that you have no warning of an impending stall. This engine could probably idle at 100 rpm only and not complain.

Rio versus City?: depends on your needs. The City has a huge trunk, and it's a very practical car, but despite its facelift, it still isn't pretty... though it's okay by me. The Rio is still a nicer college car... just cool enough and "impractical" enough for your friends not to accuse you of being a fuddy-duddy, yet definitely practical in terms of commuting, maintenance and ownership. I'd pick the Rio.

Rio versus Jazz? I still believe that despite the price premium for the Jazz, it's worth every penny more it costs than any other subcompact out there. It's got everything you could ever possibly want in a "forever" car. It doesn't look like an entry-level or budget anything, it's fun to play with, drive, set-up, dress-up, bling-out, road-trip, race, econo-run... hell, it's fun to do anything with.

It deserves its cult status, IMHO, and with a hybrid version rumored to be coming, its life-cycle looks like it's going to be very long indeed.