Elantra MD 1.6 recorded 11.5s. Current Forte 0-100km/h in 11.5s. New Forte that is 40kg lighter sharing same platform as Elantra MD, it should be around 11.5s. Considered good already for C-segment 1.6L. Before this, C-segment 1.6L usually takes 12.5s in 0-100km/h.

Inspira 1.8 and Cruze 1.8 0-100km/h takes 11.5s too. Only lighter Civic 1.8 FD2 gets 10.2s but the Elantra 1.8 already beaten that record with 8.8s. Since there's Forte 2.0L expect better result.

Big event is close, if there's major change on management and policy, we should have the chance to get all 3 variants for Forte 1.6L, 1.8L and 2.0L like Altis 1.6L, 1.8L and 2.0L. If no change on management after big event, they'll bring in only 1 type of engine for Forte like Optima, Sportage and Sorento. If they intended to bring in Rio 1.6 sedan, then the Forte will be either 1.8L or 2.0L, most likely 1.8L so that it won't clash with Rio 1.6L and Optima 2.0L.

NASA waiting for money to fall from sky attitude actually killed the Forte 2.0 due to no test unit at all. Then they jumped to conclusion Forte 2.0 can't sell and from what I know, they employ young ciku that turned deaf ears on their sales people and us. Only makan gaji buta, so this is what happen.

Sorry typo error. Edmunds said they could achieved in 9.8s with premium fuel, not sure that's Elantra 1.8 auto or manual. Their review car is auto. Ours here 10.2s, SD staff mentioned due to RON95, it got slower.

Elantra 1.8 and Forte 1.8, that means more choice for us to choose from if dislike Japanese C-segment. It's not that Elantra and Forte only fighting each other. Honda, Toyota and Mazda are all Japanese brands but they are fighting each other as they are not under same company. Who's not giving us what we want will lose, that's all.

Sportage 2.0 is sold at same price range as Tucson 2.0 high spec, both are still selling targeting different taste buyers. Same goes to Optima and Sonata YF. SD placed more effort in selling and after sales, so their cars are selling better.

Rumored that Korean carmakers Hyundai-Kia, conti carmakers Ford, VW, Pug-Citroen, and Japanese carmaker Mazda, Nissan (not N-brand) are considering setting up their big scale plants here after big event especially under new management & favourable new automotive policy (follow appropriate tax rate) introduced. We'll be fighting Thailand for automotive hub title especially we are more strategically located, able to provide more skilled workers and less communication barrier (we are more willing to lean their language & culture).

At the meantime, all car companies are holding back their plans due to big event, we'll know what car bring in after new policy introduced. If no change on management after big event, they'll bring in Forte 1.8 and we can forget about 2.0L. 1 engine variant only under NASA policy. Check the bunch in their marketing team and you'll know why. >> Don't know how to market cars with 2 different engine sizes and their turned deaf ears on customers and their very own salesmen feedback attitude. Totally don't know about cars yet don't want to know. Gaji buta yes please.

Some carmakers already have assembly plants in Thai but several segments missing due to less demand for certain segment in Thailand. Their focus there mostly on pickup trucks, less pleasure cars with simple maintenance. That explains why S-Max, C-Max, Mondeo don't have CKD in Thai. Same goes to Mazda, no Mazda6 at all. Thai carbuyers mentality is basic, simple, cheap, affordable. Camry yes, other D-segments not so. Conti, not at all. Pickup trucks, vans and special for 3rd nation alternative sub-standard model, yes. Same goes to Indonesia, Philippines & indo-China. Carmakers still looking for hub for wider scope covering both ASEAN & Down Under leaving us as the only option should car price follow global value.

>> Management could lose the RM7billion tax revenue from us but in return could get Multiplied times much more billions from expanding business and investment from locals & foreign - total win-win solution.

This post has been edited by jayraptor: May 3 2013, 10:23 PM

You've been to motorshow in overseas? K3 is based on Elantra MD platform, interior size should be somewhere around there. Like Sonata vs Optima, difference is the interior space allocation, material and insulation while on outside Optima sits slightly lower than Sonata & both on different suspension. Also, Optima seems quieter than Sonata

This post has been edited by jayraptor: May 4 2013, 08:06 AM

You're in Russia, that's how you get to view the K3. Under same old management, expect the K3 pricing under Japanese price range.

Recall the current Forte, worldwide launched in end Q3 or early Q4 2009, we got ours in Dec 2009. Since it's Korean made with direct CBU from Korea (only to get CKD status by refitting doors here), we should get them not long after Singapore. Won't be long.

If NASA could only bring in 1 variant, which engine do you guys think should bring in? Bring in K3 1.6L if priced at Elantra pricing might not have Rio sedan 1.6. If bring in 1.8L or 2.0L K3, then we can have Rio 1.6 at RM90k high spec and RM85k for low spec.

Nice bodykit. Best part I like is the custom grill, would paint it black and replace the standard grille if I bought new K3. Hope NASA bring in 1.8L only if they wanted only 1 engine variant. Then we'll get to see new RIo 1.6L sedan.

If both sold under Kia badge:

Rio 1.6L sedan RM85k low spec and RM90k high spec.

K3 1.8 at RM112k low spec and RM120k high spec.

Under NASA marketing, if bring in K3 1.6L lowest spec at RM99k and 1.8L RM112-120k, the K3 1.8L first year depreciation will drop to cheaper than 1.6L to RM90k. It'll be another Forte 2.0 first year RV as there is Forte 1.6L. Please note, under NASA if got 2 engine variants, they'll prepare only K3 1.6L test unit and no 1.8L test unit available. This is how Forte 2.0L end up didn't sell well due to no test unit at all. Would you guys prefer to have 2 different engines or just 1 engine?

This post has been edited by jayraptor: May 10 2013, 10:54 PM

Forget it. P1 protection range has been increased since introduction of Inspira & Preve. Non-local quality built C-segment must be priced higher than these 2 with RM10k difference. Elantra 1.6 without rebaged to Inokom would be priced at RM102k low spec to RM109k hi-spec. Almera get to sell cheaper only because it is classed as substandard cheaper Japanese made alternative believed to be inferior to Preve at the meantime. If P1 Preve sales felt threatened by Almera sales, they might be forced to increase price.

Whether K3 could be priced similar to Elantra is a question mark. Also, NASA will only introduce 1 variant if the same marketing staff still in charge. They are still thinking whether to bring in Rio 1.6 and reserve the 1.8L spot for K3. Or no Rio 1.6 sedan at all, leaving only K3 1.6.

Public listed or not, P1 requires protection to survive. Its survival is crucial to ensure that non-national makes have to sell above the minimum range, as excuse to sell cars tO us at cut throat price while minimising cost to lowest. We are buying lowest spec cars at twice the price of the same car highest spec in AU, US, EU.

Even UK that charged highest tax and expenses on cars are beaten by our local car price.

This post has been edited by jayraptor: May 21 2013, 10:27 PM

1. Due to new P1 protection policy, all non-local car price forced to increase. Since Korean cars are perceived as quality car, they no longer get to enjoy cheaper lower level alternative they entitled previously where Korean makes are labelled lower than Japanese and posed less threat to P1.

2. Torsion beam comprised of cheap low level, mid level and premium high level. The cheap torsion beam found in Sylphy is just 1 plain beam looks like construction steel beam structure. The Elantra/K3 are fitted with higher end coupled torsion beam that could improve handling. Best torsion beam suspension setup, it could beat lower level Multi-link (Teana) and could barely challenge mid-level Multi-Link. In terms of ride, Multi-link, if left side going through uneven roads, it will not affect the suspension on right side. Also, when cornering take right, if left side is pulling left, the right side is less affected. Given the best torsion beam, it loses in this point. Torsion beam is only suited for light cars (less than 1300kg still acceptable )

3. GDI worry is on injector. As long as they downgrade the injector, it could feed on RON95 without problem. Sulphur has nothing to do with damaging injector nor engine block. Reason why they give MPI is that it allows to pump RON91 fuel. I will be happy to see GDI 1.6L and GDi 2.0L in K3.

Most important when bringing in 2 engine variants 1.6L and 2.0L:
- Must have big significant visible difference between the 2. Example, bigger rim in 2.0L at least with logo 2.0L behind and extra item. Else, it'll end up like Forte 2.0 where there is no difference at all other than engine. Only later they put in the 2.0L emblem and LCD monitor but too late. Old Forte 2.0 could do better if SX trim only available in 2.0 whereas 1.6 limited to EX. Check visible difference between Elantra 1.8 and 1.6.

For me, focus is on practicality:
I want the ABS+EBD+BA+VSC+TC. I want the key and keyholes at both front sides and on the boot hinge. Also, I wanted mechanical lever beside driver seat that can be operated without battery. Alarm open boot is ok too as it is convenient. 15" or 16" rim fine with me. Also I want the chrome and nice nappa leather. Reverse/front sensor I need, reverse camera is fine.

I don't want sunroof, too big rim (no money to change tyre), autolights, pushstart button, keyless entry, no lever boot, daytime lights, too much button on steering, etc gadgets that are not even necessary.

They perceived the K3 1.6 a dangerous threat to Inspira 2.0L RM93k. If they let K3 1.6 priced at RM94k-RM96k, do you think people will want to buy Inspira? Though based on Lancer, both the Inspira & Lancer are beginning to feel dated. Today, people are coming up with dual VVT, 6AT conventional gearbox that is more responsive and thanks to lockup convertor & dual clutch, shifting gears no longer jerky. FC wise, Inspira 2.0L at 8.8km/L to 9km/L is not better than Forte 2.0 in city & highway.

Forte 1.6L with 6AT 0-100km/h in 11.5s
Forte 2.0L with 6AT 0-100km/h in 9.8s
Inspira 1.8 with CVT 0-100km/h in 11.5s
Inspira 2.0 with CVT 0-100km/h in 10.5s

Forte handling with VSC allowing it to turn at higher speed. Only weakness in its torsion beam is when going over uneven roads, if left side uneven and shaky, it'll affect the right. Multi-link only left side while the right will not be affected.

Cerato with more aerodynamic design and more conti-feel is posing higher threat than the old Forte introduced here before Inspira exist. Elantra 1.6 is proven a threat to Inspira, they will not want Cerato K3 to get more slice out of Inspira sales pie chart. Both Elantra MD and Cerato K3 have dual CVVT and they get 1km/L better than Forte.

Mitsu Mirage is powerd by low performance weaker than Myvi engine. That is how it passed the protection pricing. The same goes to Almera, P1 finds it an inferior goods and don't think it could affect Preve sales. Quality B-segment too are forced to set pricing no cheaper than Inspira lowest spec. That explains why Sonic and Rio 1.6 if introduced here will be forced to price at RM90k.

You can check the size of the Multi-link in Mazda 6, its a quality one comparable to conti makes. K5 multi-link, the bone size is smaller and at the same time, they build their cars like in between Japanese and conti therefore they don't get close to conti. The K3 Cerato and Elantra, if they are fitted with Multi-link instead of torsion beam, it might get you somewhere nearer to conti. Also, depends on how willing are they to give you the more expensive, bigger and heavier multi-link bone. Doing so could end up getting less interior space.

Comparing Lancer '07 and Forte '09 that are sharing the same platform. The Forte has slightly more space inside due to torsion beam and it has 2650mm wheelbase compared to 2635mm in Lancer. The weight difference is evident too. Kerb weight Lancer 2.0GT 1380kg, Lancer 2.0GL 1330k while Forte 2.0L at 1293kg, that explains where the Lancer gets the additional kerb weight. That is in the rear to give it better handling by increasing more weight to the rear to counter the front.

You are not envy of Korean makes. More like having eyesore over Korean makes success.

If you don't know, Toyota look at Hyundai-Kia more of a threat than Honda because Hyundai-Kia are proven reliable and durable on hot harsh weather and road condition. Today you can find Toyota and also Hyundai-Kia on Arabs, African, West Asia soil because only these cars could sustain the harsh condition with minimal maintenance. There are always the less gadget LX and EX grade models available that could serve you well over 10 years. However, locals here mostly wanted as much gadgets as possible therefore they bring in only the high and ultra high specs in.

Toyota nowadays don't even bother Nissan and Honda as they are considered inferior. Mazda is another new threat that have superior tech. Wonder what you mean on weak legs? Tie rod and lower arm of suspension?

Since new K3 is priced higher, Forte RV is safe and will become stronger than ever. In US, EU, AU, the price range is set for A, B, C, D segments. New models will sell under that range, won't increase unless there's inflation. Over here, new FaceLift auto increase RM2k. New model add RM5k to RM10k more. If priced too close to P1 under protection policy, penalty increase another RM10k. Ofcourse, when price being forced to increase, car company get to share some too.

Hi weakmeal69,

Glad to meet some1 from engineering field. Is your thesis done on local shipping companies fleet or worldwide? If it is local, I am surprised to know that they already started using Hyundai diesel engine & genset? I am more used to CAT anyway. Thanks for the info.

In terms of automotive lines, the Koreans do posses some diesel technology that are better than its Japanese counterpart nowadays. Problem with Japan, they are not encouraged to go further into diesel, therefore their tech is dated compared to conti diesel engine and even Korean.

Your reply only fill in the blanks with foul language initial and there is entirely nothing. Today, you can find Forte in hot Arab desert where their regulation is breakdown must never happen. However, there is no Civic, no Teana, no Sylphy in hot Arab desert nowadays. However, you can still find old Accord in Arab large city but not selling well. They used to have N-brand but now fading and took over by Korean makes. Toyota, it will be there. Mazda, it is making its way there too.

Fact is, cars that are reliable, durable and practical only could make it into Arabs market. You could not even pinpoint technically what leg is weak? Do you mean the tie rod, lower arms, suspension, frame?

All I can say about my old Forte 1.6EX 4AT is that I could keep driving this car for over 10 years without problem as long as I keep it service. Korean makes, its engines & gearbox carried Japanese + American DNA whereas the design is german DNA.

If Kia willing to go further to provide conti handling, they'll have to fork out extra cost to give higher end suspension (upper part soft but lower part very stiff) that gives comfort and handling. If they were to do so, they'll end up having to sell more expensive than Japanese makes. In Australia, Mazda 6 costs more expensive than other Japanese D-segments despite same tax rate for all. Reason being, more ingredients being included.

Noted, that explains.

CAT is indeed inferior compared to SCANIA, MAN, Volvo, etc. People still use it probably because it's American, cheap and could be easily fixed despite a nightmare. You can flame it anyway, always stick to truth. Diesel technology, the Germans & Scandinavian are best. Japanese made is weakest but people use them due to easy & cheap maintenance. Korean, they got tech from MMC earlier but later Germans & Italians (rumored from Germans MTB that build tanks engines).

Car wise, Toyota is still king because they always stick to reliability & durability first with easy and cheap maintenance. Tech wise, they still have VVT though its GDi tech is overtaken by Mazda and Koreans. Honda is easier to take down as it lacks the reliability, durability and up to date technology. Honda is relying heavily on marketing, copypaste design and rumors making people believe it is powerful and great.

Korean made, at least they place the initiative to push further where Japanese made didn't attempt to do (except Mazda). Japanese made beaten conti back then (1970's to 1990's) not by being a better car but rely on cheaper price, cheaper maintenance, focus on reliability/durability, lighter chassis to get better FC. Handling, tech, FC (given the same size & weight) and build quality were no match against conti.

The new K3 Cerato shares platform with Elantra MD.

The old Forte is based on Lancer '07 platform. The same goes to old phased out Elantra/Avante '07. I mean the heavier multi-link suspension contributed to additional weight and used up some of the space in Lancer.

The more eyesore comment (without any facts or issues being addressed) bashing Korean makes means Koreans makes is more successful. What these eyesores bashed Korean back then. Compared to Korean makes today:
- reliability/durability proven
- due to healthy sales volume, spare part suppliers bring in bulk spare parts.
- there are many Korean spare parts yet cheaper today
- practicality proven
- RV proven beating N-brand and the newer 1 is trying to get closer to T & H brand RV king

Only thing missing is Korean B-segment >> Rio & Accent sedan to sell at RM80k.

Civic and Accord only limited to inside city use you mean? I am talking about Arabs interstate use where breakdown must never happen. Cut out the trucks as I am talking about cars here. Back then there are only Toyota and Nissan, today there are Hyundai and Kia. Libya war, you can see Korean makes around driven by freedom fighters. In Syria, you can see Forte around. In Arabs, there are more Hyundai-Kia nowadays. Yes, there are many American cars too as they could take the heat.

Unlike you bunch, I am genuine car owner like the rest. Cars that are good, reliable and durable, people tend to keep them longer. Unlike N16 Sentra without ABS (thanks to you bunch), narrow Sylphy with poor FC 8.9km/L yet high maintenance, my colleagues and I can't wait to dispose before RV drops further and replaced with Altis and Forte.

You talk like buying car is free, yes you bunch can drive company products out easily. If you are manager level, they give you Latio, Sylphy or Teana depend on rank, can get driver too & petrol allowance free. That explains why you bunch don't care about FC and narrow width & failed practicality, etc because you didn't buy them with own money.

There are facts that could not be found on Internet. Some details on cars, you can only obtain if you work in that company. Like you IC, address, full name, as long as you didn't post them on public Google search, the only way I could get them is through you directly.

Message to NASA marketing bunch:
- If wanted to bring in K3 Cerato 1.6L and 2.0L, make sure prepare test unit for both, 1.6L and 2.0L with license plate.
- If they do it like Forte back then, only prepare 1.6L test unit and no 2.0L test unit at all, except very few who got to curi2 drive already sold some1's car out to test drive. This will end up killing the 2.0L
- Stock up bulk spare parts including parts that people seldom change, at least prepare few each.

Price cut on all cars, can dream on. They won't be so generous.

You talk like there is everything including P&C on the Internet for free. Mind give me the URL website where I can find your full name, IC together with credit card number, expiry date and security code? Also, can you give me the link where I can find the gearbox model number for Latio? You lost your common sense in this one. Those feedback for NASA staff scouting here to read. Definitely not for you.

Back to facts talk about car price, manufacturer don't get to set selling price at will. You forgot the excise duty, sales tax, manufacturing cost, break even point, revenue, etc. What? You think your father owns the car pricing policy here? Google won't find you more details that are P&C, even actual tax rate on cars not available, you only get the general public info.

Old Forte rebadged under NASA get tax reduction for national car status exemption. That is why they get to sell 10% less than actual price. Else, under Kia badge, the old Forte 1.6EX 78k will be priced at RM90k, 1.6SX RM85k at RM97k while Forte 2.0 RM97k will become RM110k under earlier P1 protection policy with best negotiated tax rate. Now that there's Inspira & Preve, P1, tax rates on new K3 Cerato increased pushing the new car price further up, not to forget the K3 is CBU from Korea, only to get partial CKD status by assembling doors, seats and windscreens here.

Cost of producing a K3 Cerato costs more expensive than producing 1 Civic and Altis. The high tensile strength material, the 6AT gearbox, the dual VVT DOHC engine, VIS all required material and money to build. Rough breakdown example only, not accurate actual data for K3 Cerato 1.6L:
- the car cost RM15k to produce + Kia Korea revenue markup RM15k placing the car sales to NASA at RM30k.
- Shipping cost RM2k
- Tax Excise 90% RM28.8k (after adding shipping cost RM2k +30k = 32k)
- Sales tax another 30% RM18.24k
- This brings up to RM79.04k already, minus selling price RM100k, there is RM20.96k left for other expenses : transporting the car, royalty fees for Kia manufacturer and to feed salesman commission RM1500, staff, etc.

If tax rate follows global, the K3 Cerato 1.6 should be priced around RM60k under max tax rate. US tax rate on car is lowest while UK is highest in Europe.

Unlike you bunch, substandard products that you assemble here, you can throw CRA2Y discount like mad until ruining the RV of earlier buyers. Don't have to talk about others. How come X-Trail T31 you can sell at RM130 but the new X-Trail CBU from Indonesia sold at RM145k? Easy, because CKD here, you get more tax exemption and also, you can slash price as long as it is not against P1 protection policy and you can still cover royalty sales to N-brand Japan boss.

Your empty narrow Sylphy cost cutting to maximum is priced officially at RM120k that is higher than Focus at RM115k. What say you? Only rely on CRA2Y discount that do not declare officially, you get to sell it at RM107k yet can accept trade in old Sephia at RM10k. Hyundai-Kia, Toyota, Mazda, Ford, etc, they aren't going to give such CRA2Y discount due to higher cost & tax rate.

1 more thing, Focus is CBU from Thailand, therefore can reduce price further.