You know, I've always wondered why people like the things that they like. There always seems to be a general consensus on what's considered cool and what's not. But why is that? Is it inherently cool and good looking, or is this some sort of a herd reaction based on marketing, or is it something else?
For instance, flared jeans made a comeback a few years ago (what people used to call bellbottoms back in the '70s) and everyone (for women, at least) who didn't wear flares suddenly looked out of date. Now, skinny-legged jeans are back in style and flares are a fashion faux pas. So how did flared jeans suddenly become unattractive to women? How did "Oh, those are so cool" suddenly become "Oh, those are so awful"?
If something were inherently cool and attractive, you would think that it would always be so, but that rarely seems to be the case. So what, exactly, is driving the popular taste? Is something popular because a lot of people like it, or do a lot of people like it because it is "popular" (as defined, perhaps, by clever and persuasive marketing)? Are you really choosing what is attractive to you, or is it being chosen for you? And why do you feel apologetic whenever you go against what is cool when it isn't inherent or permanent in the first place?
BTW, the questions are rhetorical, so only answer them if you guys are as crazy as I am. Anyway, sorry for the extremely off-topic, self-indulgent, psychological BS (hope I didn't just break another forum rule), but you guys ought to be used to that coming from me by now.
This is an interesting topic, however, it sounds like you're asking in a general sense of likes/dislikes and not strictly about the Kia Rondo, Mazda5, or any auto for that matter. SO, I'm going to suggest that you start this as a separate discussion in the Off Topic Chatter forum. I have a feeling you'll get a lot of response from other members there.
KarenS, there always has to be somebody who writes in to agree after you go to the work of suggesting people go elsewhere with a topic, huh?
Actually, medicineman brings up some good points about what appears to be in style or what is not.
I have noticed that with cars some people will only buy what they feel will be "safe". An example of this you may ask? In May of 1999 I bought a Kia Sephia. It looked better to me than either of it's competitors at that time, the Honda Civic and the Toyota Corolla. I liked it's looks better and I felt that Kia could build a competent car since they had been at it since 1944 and I liked a successful micro-car Kia built called the Ford Festiva.
Now, did other people want the Sephia for it's different looks at that time? Most people want good resale value, hence, they'd get the Civic or Corolla. What was popular at that time? The Civic or Corolla were more popular, the Sephia had only been in America since 1995 and most people didn't know much about Kia and/or their Sephia.
What pulled me in to want to comment was the notion that the thing that drives popularity often isn't even thought about. Civic or Corolla shoppers were told that the resale value of the Corolla and Civic was really good and that the cars were fairly reliable. The Civic and Corolla would cost you more then, yes. But to most of those buyers of Honda and Toyota the extra cost was well worth it. What are we really looking for in a rig, though?
Did they do their research before buying? Don't think so with a lot of them. I'm just going by what I've read in publications and on the net.
But those people's perception of the Japanese brands brought them to decide to buy the Civic or Corolla. Kia put out commercials at the time that were intended to start to change the perception about durability(example, the one where the college people took the Sephia and drive it 100,000 miles without problems, and attempted to beat up the car constantly).
If someone liked the Sephia's looks more they might have decided against buying it then because Kia wasn't "proven." Things are much different and Kia has done well recently in quality tests and awards.
The comment about "someone else choosing your car for you" has a lot of merit to it because I think that is what happens a lot in America. Thankfully there are car magazines and car web sites like this one where we can edumacate ourselves fully-completely about a potential car purchase and read early reviews on the car we like and know a lot more than we used to going in, eh? Excellent topic, medicineman!
Thanks for the kudos, iluvmysephia1. Our generous host KarenS is right, though--if I were a mod, even I would have given myself a gentle kick in the pants to keep things more relevant. After all, I'm the Cliff Clavin (anybody remember Cheers?) of the forums set and I tend to go off on tangents.
I think the unspoken subtext to all of this is that the Rondo doesn't have that "wow" factor and the Mazda5 does. Sure, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but that's probably what the general consensus is. So the point of my last post, really, was to suggest that I don't think the Mazda5 is inherently any more dandy and purty, but that it conforms more than the Rondo to what is the fashion of the day--which is very fickle and driven largely by marketing (as per my jeans example, which I got from my nieces because I'm a real man and I wouldn't know about that stuff on my own).
Of course, I'm only saying this because I own a Rondo; otherwise, why would I bother?
my lead at Boeing used to refer to me as the King of Segway's, so...I'm very similar to you as far as that goes.
Back to Rondo vs. Mazda5...I really am not in this market to buy but I do know how each of these vehicles looks. And after reviewing each of their looks I am once again in the Kia camp, liking the Rondo more. It has that "unique" look to it that Kia seems to have the talent to make. I mean that in a positive way! I won't start asking questions about each rig...I could go back and read up right here in this thread and learn a lot...but your post just struck a familiar vein in me and I wanted to participate in the thread to say "Hey, I know what he means there!"
Enjoy your Rondo or your Mazda5, they both have way more merits than faults, huh?
Undeterred, Honda will relaunch an updated version of the Stream in the US for ‘09 , says our source, but only a two-row version will be coming
Honda means a serious contender. It also means more chances to keep the MAV market alive (Mazda and KIA alike) plus more options for us the consumers in the future .
Now, a 2 row seat version only? Based on all the buzz generated by the Mazda5 and the Rondo, it is clear that many people like the 3rd row availability in the US and Canada for these type of cars :confuse:
Interesting way of seeing seating options . The Stream 3-row seat config follows the 2-3-2 concept, same as the Rondo I believe (see pic)
But if the 3rd row model is not coming to NA, the 2 row configuration will then be an enlarged 5 people station wagon IMO. For that, I prefer my Mazda5, thank you.
The Stream 3-row seat config follows the 2-3-2 concept, same as the Rondo I believe ------------------------------------
I loathe 3 across seating. The Mazda5 has it right with 2+2+2 seating. Even the Element's 2+2 seating is good for those who don't carry a lot of passengers.
When my wife and I needed to replace our 1998 Legacy wagon, we looked at a number of vehicles. The two that stood out most were the Mazda5 and the Kia Rondo. Personally, I liked the Mazda5 for it's sportiness, 5-speed manual and lower price. However, we bought a Rondo EX V6 7-seater since the Mazda5 is not rated to tow at all. The Legacy, with 16 fewer hp, could tow 2000 lbs (with trailer brakes, according to the car's manual) so this lack of towing capability is perplexing to me. The Rondo V6 can tow 2,500 lbs with trailer brakes (according to our car's manual) plus the V6 is buttery smooth. Also, the Mazda5 has slightly less cargo carrying capacity than the Legacy, and we did not want to take a step backward in terms of practicality. The Rondo has about 5 cu ft more capacity than the Legacy with the seats folded, not a lot but still it is an increase. However, if I was choosing just for me, it would have been the Mazda5, but since I was choosing for my family and our needs as a whole, the Rondo was a much better fit. Too bad though that neither is AWD. But the dealer threw into the deal a set of winter rims with winter tires, studded/balanced/mounted, so wintertime should not be a problem, what with all the Rondo's electronic nannies! (I am in Newfoundland, so there is lots of snow and ice to contend with).
A reporter seeks to talk with owners and serious shoppers of the 2007 or 2008 Mazda5 OR the 2007 or 2008 Kia Rondo who are also parents. If you are interested in commenting on your experience, please reply to jfallon@edmunds.com no later than Thursday, November 15, 2007 and include your city and state of residence as well as the age of your child/ren.
Thanks for your consideration, Jeannine Fallon Corporate Communications Edmunds Inc.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
Some of the Mazda5 missing features that have been discussed in this comparison thread are now available in the 2008 model.
This is not an exhaustive list, but some of the ones I recall are: - 2nd row A/C vents and a new cloth/leather interior choice (mentioned in an earlier reply already) - Needed more Armrests (front passenger seat and door-side 2nd row seats have now been added) - Aux MP3 Input is now standard - Bluetooth Wireless Data Link for Hands-Free Phone (Grand Touring Model only) - 5AT replaces 4AT
Anyone with any experience of having passengers in the 3rd row of the Rondo on a hot day? I'm just wondering how any AC gets back there. There are vents for the 2nd row, but they're too low to reach the 3rd row. Unless you have the fan set to the highest speed and pointed up, I can't imagine how any cool air would get back there.
On the new Mazda5 they now have the AC vents behind the front center console like in the Rondo; however, since there is no 2nd row bench to block the flow of air, I can see how the 2nd row AC vents pointed straight back would get to the 3rd row passengers, but even with these it seems like your upper body would get pretty warm, especially if the sun was on you.
Recommended: Ford Fusion Hyundai Sonata Kia Optima Mazda5 Mercury Milan Nissan Altima Saturn Aura Toyota Camry
In the December 2007 issue of Consumer Reports, there is finally a review of the Rondo (sorry, no link). The Rondo got a score of 76 out of 100 (thanks, viking79, for that info). The Mazda5 got a score of 86 in CR's 2007 annual auto issue, topping the "Wagons and Hatchbacks" category. If the Rondo were included in that category, it would have been tied for fourth out of 22 vehicles.
So there you go for studies with "Consumer" in the title.
It's hard to do any comparisons with cars like the Rondo or Mazda5 because they're pretty unique vehicles with their small size, 3 rows, and they're not trying to be small SUVs.
I agree, there are no other cars like them in NA really. Next car comparison is going to have the Mazda5 and/or Rondo vs. school buses, horse carriages or even car rental/airport shuttles. Hey, as long as both haul people :P
As a Rondo owner, I'm continually amazed with the amount of good reviews and recommendations that the Rondo has been getting. For the Mazda5 to get similar praise seems to be a given, but we're talking about a Kia here. I keep half expecting the curtain to be pulled back and the little old man to be exposed using smoke and mirrors. Alas, the continual good news about the Rondo just verifies that I made the right choice for myself. You would think my real world experience with the Rondo should be good enough proof. Nope. I guess I'm not a secure enough person and need the positive reinforcement.
Like I've said in the past, I don't think you can go wrong with either vehicle. The generally positive evaluations that both vehicles have been getting is proof of that. I don't think either vehicle has a major weakness, but they do have relative strengths and weaknesses when compared to each other (which is the point of this thread). All you can do is point out those relative strengths and weaknesses according to your own point of view and let others agree or disagree with you.
BTW, I'm not trying to sound "fair and balanced" just for the benefit of Mazda5 owners. I'm not toning it down here and letting out my true feelings at an external Rondo forum (and those Rondo owners at that external forum will back me up on this if needed, hopefully). This is indeed what I truly think. Make no mistake--I obviously prefer the Rondo and I've pointed out why I prefer it. But I really am impressed with the Mazda5, too. About the worst thing I've ever said about the 5, here or at that external forum, is that it looks like a minivan. In fact, from what I've witnessed, Rondo owners in general seem to be a humble bunch. They don't obsess much over which vehicle is "better." I can't even remember the last time a Rondo owner made what can be construed as a mocking remark about the "competition" (the old "mock others to build yourself up" trick--I'm not talking about informative criticism here).
Okay, I need to say this, so bear with me. All forum discussions seem to suffer from this kind of misunderstanding: if one were to say, "I like dogs," someone will inevitably ask, "Why do you hate cats?" The point is, don't read too much into it. So when I say Rondo owners are generally humble, I'm not implying that Mazda5 owners are not. When I say Rondo owners don't obsess much over which vehicle is better, I'm not implying that Mazda5 owners do obsess over it. How the heck would I know what Mazda5 owners are like, anyway? Sure, I've hung out at Mazda forums before I purchased the Rondo, but I don't have any lasting impression to make a generalized comment about Mazda5 owners. And when I say that I see merit in both vehicles, I'm not implying that everyone should see things the same way. Etc., etc., blah, blah, blah.
Anyway, I hope you all enjoyed that. What, you're still awake?
Looks like the Mazda 5 is not doing too well in the US with October sales of 558 units (Oct 2006 928 units), the Rondo had sales of 2751 for the same month (Oct 2006, 3 units - where did they come from :confuse: ) Wonder when the US is going to start getting 2008 models?
North of the border in Canada (you know that place where the dollar is worth more than the US greenback ) they sold 828 Rondo's (one of them was my EX 2.4L model), however, I don't have the sales for the Mazda 5 for October, but generally it outsells the Rondo.
I have been trying to decide between the Rondo and the Mazda5. I want a replacement for my 1999 Toyota Sienna and the new minivans have just gotten too big for my tastes and garage. I'd like something small that still has the option of third row seating.
I test drove both the V4 and V6 Rondo and liked the V6 a lot more than I thought I would. I like the concept of the Mazda5. My favorite feature is the sliding doors, which would protect me from door dings in my garage. But I have yet to test drive the Mazda5 for one major reason. I can't understand why a car model that has been out since 2006 has not been crash tested? Is Mazda trying to hide something? I think this is inexcusable. I would also like to see ECS on the Mazda5, which seems to be standard equipment on most of its competitors.
BTW, I also looked at the Mitsubishi Outlander which I liked the best of the three for its exterior appearance. But I did not like its very dark interior and its clamshell third seat was a joke.
Not to nitpick but the 4 cylinder in the Rondo is an inline 4, written as I4 or L4. No cars sold in North America have V4's. I have a V6 Rondo but also looked at the Mazda5, which I liked tremendously. I decided against it since it is not rated to tow at all, whereas the Rondo can tow 2000 lbs.
I just purchase a week ago a 2008 Rondo EX 5-seater with the 2.4L 4-cylinder (Canadian model). The performance of this engine is outstanding and for my purpose I could see no reason to purchase a V6. It out-performs my previous vehicle, which was a '86 Old Cutlass Ciera with a 2.8L V6! I also considered the Mazda 5, but in my case I did not like the sliding rear door and also had no reason for requiring the rear 3rd seats, I also didn't like the black interior on the Mazda 5, prefer the lighter grey version on my Rondo. I found the Rondo offered more features for the dollar and a longer warranty. Having driven it for a week now (only have 440km on it) I find the stereo outstanding, and enjoying those heated seats and heated outside mirrors. Had the opportunity to check it out very closely yesterday and found the fit and finish hard to fault - very well put together. Only time will tell if this continues. Not put any gas in it yet, so hard to tell how the mileage will work out.
That seems to be true about the US tests, but the Mazda5 has been crash tested in Europe and the results were excellent. Some of those tests are very rough.
Agree, there may not be (yet) NHTSA American centric crash test results, but if the Mazda5 passed the Japanese NCAP and EuroNCAP crash tests with the highest ratings, then there should not be anything to hide in my opinion (BMW, Volvo, Honda or even Renault in Europe and Japan would be a good comparison point).
Quoting myself here: In the December 2007 issue of Consumer Reports, there is finally a review of the Rondo (sorry, no link). The Rondo got a score of 76 out of 100 (thanks, viking79, for that info). The Mazda5 got a score of 86 in CR's 2007 annual auto issue, topping the "Wagons and Hatchbacks" category. If the Rondo were included in that category, it would have been tied for fourth out of 22 vehicles.
I went to the Tampa Auto Show yesterday and checked out the Rondo (no Mazda5's there.....don't think the 2008's are out yet....but, I own a 2007 to compare it to). I really liked the Rondo. If I did not require sliding rear doors, I would have selected the Rondo over the Mazda5.
Finally got the figures through for vehicle sales in Canada for October 2007, and a real surprise, for the first time the Rondo has outsold the Mazda 5:
Rondo - 828 Mazda 5 - 823
Couldn't get much closer than that! However, on a year-to-date basis the Mazda 5 is nearly 4000 units ahead of the Rondo.
Given the availability time for the 2008 mazda5 in NA (US and Canada) reality seems that the Mazda5 is not a Mazda business priority (marketing-production-sales) for these 2 markets (i.e. cash cow like the Mazda3)
Take a look of the numbers for Mazda in general, a different story. Also, my theory is that there may not be more significant sales of 2007 Mazda5s during this past month because potential owners are waiting for the 2008 (with all the new improvements/enhancements) to come.
Also, in other markets Mazda5 is a big seller and award winner, so if I were Mazda I would ship my production to those markets instead (which I think they are doing anyway :mad: ):
The Mazda5 gets the edge over the Rondo. I mostly agree with everything that was said in this review, although I would come to a different conclusion (I bought the Rondo over the Mazda5, after all). This review was of the 2007 Mazda5, not the more feature-rich 2008 version. Plus, the review never mentions looks, which I think the Mazda5 wins by default due to the Rondo's unconventional aesthetics--some think it's butt ugly; others like the looks; I just think it's bland or odd (I'm not sure if I stated that before, but that's what I think now).
I've been reading this thread with some interest cuz I'm looking at buying either the Mazda5 or Rondo or maybe Matrix (Vibe). Some really good info here. There's no rush since I'm not planning on buying until next year. Medicine Man, I'm wondering why you decidedd on the Rondo, cuz you don't sound too excited about it, especially about its outside style? Hope you don't take that the wrong way. I'm just curious, that's all. thanx.
Didn't I explain why I bought the Rondo in some of my previous posts? I suppose due to my rambling nature, there wasn't one particular post where I summarized my thoughts on this in a neat and tidy manner (and don't expect this post to be any different). If it seems like I lack enthusiasm for Little Ronnie, it's because, well, I lack enthusiasm, period. That's just the way I am. As for the exterior aesthetics, isn't that the first thing people mention whenever they talk about the Rondo? It seems strange that a comparative review would neglect to mention it, since ordinary folks seem to care about this. So let's start there.
Hey, I have two eyes. I know the Rondo doesn't conform to how "cool" vehicles look these days. I know it won't win many beauty contests. Having said that, I would have never purchased the Rondo if I had truly thought that it were ugly. To me, the Rondo is bland more than anything else. My wife and sisters, though, think that it's cute. What's that? Did I just hear a collective gasp from every male car enthusiast on the planet?
BTW, I'm not suggesting that all women will have the same opinion. I'm just saying that women don't see cars the same way as guys do. A guy tends to see his vehicle as an extension of himself, thus the more sleek or muscular it is, the better. I don't see too many women giving a rat's butt about this or caring that much if others like their ride.
When I was shopping for a vehicle earlier this year, I was looking for a mini people hauler primarily for utilitarian reasons. This is actually a redundant statement, because why else would anyone consider vehicles like these? If it also happened to look way cool, that would have been a bonus rather than a necessity. Naturally, I cross-shopped the Rondo with the Mazda5, which I admit is more of a head turner than the Rondo.
Utility, however, was the trump card. To me, the Rondo seemed more useful than the Mazda5. What sold me on the Rondo is that it can seat up to seven people (the Mazda5 can hold six) and it has a greater variety of possible passenger/cargo combinations due to its 2-3-2 seating scheme (the Mazda5 is 2-2-2). I think it's more useful having bench seats in the second row rather than two bucket seats. When seating four to six people, the Rondo has more useful cargo space than the Mazda5 due to the amount of unused seating that can be folded away.
Do I need seven seats? If I needed seven (or six) seats, I would've purchased a minivan. But I knew that I would occasionally find the up-to-seven seating useful, which has proven to be true. Granted, I wouldn't want tall adults sitting in the third row (isn't that the usual disclaimer for third row seating in non-humongous vehicles?), but my two 13-year-old nieces didn't complain at all while sitting back there and happily listened to their iPods. In a pinch, the third row is useful; if you need that capacity all of the time, look elsewhere.
The Rondo is all about versatility and value, with no pretensions at being hot or sporty. To some, this is its greatest weakness; to others, this is its greatest strength. My personal view is, no one demands hottie looks or exceptional performance from practical vehicles like a minivan, so why would one expect this from the Rondo? To knock the Rondo for this seems to somehow miss the point. Functionality is the Rondo's raison de être and this has been achieved in the Rondo with a remarkable deftness.
Make no mistake, I'm not saying that looks or performance are never important--but what would be the point of buying a vehicle like this if it didn't first and foremost fulfill your utilitarian requirements? For potential buyers, if you can't get over the Rondo's looks and you find the Mazda5's utility to be sufficient, I would suggest the Mazda5 for its relative hot looks and relative sportiness.
I've owned 2 Mazdas in my time (1991 Protege and 1996 and 2007 MX-5 Miatas). Have also owned a Honda (2006 Civic), a Toyota (2001 Camry), and two Subarus (1997 Forester and 1993 Impreza). My new 2007 Kia Ronda is as impressive, if not more so, than any of those cars when it comes to perceived quality, fit and finish, and thoughtful design. It's much too early (1600 miles) to say anything about Rondo durability, trouble-freeness, etc. But with a 100,000 drivetrain warranty, I don't lose sleep.
Anyone who makes blanket statements putting a Kia down vs. other Asian car products is a clown. The Pacific Rimmers all make very good automobiles.
Well done laying out your reasoning for the Rondo. My wife and I have recently purchased a Mazda 5 and I can pretty much concur with your reasoning. I thought I would offer my reasoning behind the Mazda5 purchase. I must mention that I did not get to do an in-depth look at the Rondo as you will see.
My wife originally wanted to get a minivan for our soon-to-be family and we set out to do some research and looking. She was very much wanting a Honda Oddesy, but I had concerns over the price, gas mileage, and the fact that it would barely fit our garage. Our next step down would be the Mazda MPV and then a step down from that was the Rondo and Mazda5. I had briefly looked at the 5 and Rondo, and we went to look at all 3. Out first stop was the Mazda dealer where my wife found an MPV that she really loved. Long story short, I hated the ride and size, so we drove the Mazda5. She really enjoyes how the 5 drove and took the entire test drive.
That test drive basically sealed the deal. And I think it's a reminder of the fact that we all have different priorities. I tried to get her to also drive the Rondo to cross shop, but the large rear doors of the Rondo and it's looks were not for her. She also was concerned about the Kia reputation, though I have done the research and driven several newer Hyundai/Kia vehicles and did not see any quality concerns.
I know my story is a bit one-sided, but that's sometimes how it goes. Do I think that the Mazda5 is that much better than the Kia? No. I think it's nice to have have such contrasting choices in the market. I am glad for the 5 as I really enjoy tha handling and the sliding doors are already extremely handy.
As far as versatility, I think that on paper, the Kia shows more seating configurations, but I am not sure how big the difference is in reality. The biggest plus I saw for the Rondo was the ability to have 5 people and all the cargo space. In my case, more than 4 people is rare, and we have found that 2+2+1 in the MZ5 is more comfortable than 2+3 in a mid-sized sedan (my family has a 2001 Nissan Maxima). In our case the relative comfort of 2+2+1 trumps the extra cargo room of 2+3.
Honestly, the biggest selling point for us on the MZ5 for the driving dynamics. It's still not quite int he league of say the Mazda3 or perhaps a sports sedan like a BMW, but it drives on par with my parent's 2001 Maxima (with a much better ride). One of our first distance trips was through the winding back roads on the Washington Palouse, and the bolstered seats were very nice and supportive as my wife's smile and confidence in cornering grew along the trip. My short impression of the Kia was that the handling was not nearly as sharp, but that the ride was smoother. this is an important trade-off for people, as roads are seldom smooth (especially in this area).
Overall, you have to find the vehicle that fits you and your needs. I have no qualms recommending the Mazda5 to anyone looking for an efficient sport tourer. That said, if family or friends asked for a recommendation, I would say to look at the competition before settling. In basic terms, the MZ5 and the Rondo are both comfortable 4-seaters with some extra room for 2 or 3 more on occasion.
There are a few things that one offers over the other as well. The big difference is the available V6 in the Rondo. It may be nice for some, that we wanted a 4. Also, the Rondo offers stability control and it is not available on the MZ5. Again, not a big deal for me, but worth noting. The MZ5 provides LATCH points for the 4 rear seats and I believe the Rondo only offers them in the middle row. Probably not a huge deal, but a bit of an oddity. Another small, but notable difference is that the Rondo 2nd row headrests need to be removed to fold flat, where the MZ5's do not. Also, the MZ5 has very hand storage cubbies under the 2nd row seats. We use these frequently and find them very useful.
One thing I did not get to check and would offer as a question to the Rondo owners: How are the headlights? The Mazda5 headlights (Standard, not HID) are some of the best I have ever seen. Most headlights are good, but there is a rare model (the late 90s Toyota Camry comes tome mind) that have poor headlight performance.
Now, If you read the whole text on the replies you get 0% APR from KIA or Mazda
Anyone who makes blanket statements putting a Kia down vs. other Asian car products is a clown
Keep on mind that KIA quality was not born overnight so the stigma of poor quality and poor design still exists (please note I said stigma). Just see KIA and its models some years back and you will note that the "clowns" still have a reason to be "clowns".
OK, not pinpointing to Korean cars, Remember Datsun? or even Toyota during their early times? Japanese quality? not really (my dad owned a 1969 Datsun and that thing broke down at least once a week)
Now, talking about Asian cars, would you buy a Chinese car today? :surprise:
mrbwa1, thanks for your post. Very informative and you've certainly done your research. I always value people's opinions a little more when they've actually kicked the tires of the vehicles that they're talking about.
Everything that you've said makes sense to me. I just wanted to add a small comment to something that you've said: "In our case the relative comfort of 2+2+1 trumps the extra cargo room of 2+3." For the Rondo, you can choose either option--people can sit 2+2+1 or 2+3. It's exactly this kind of available choice, this kind of configurability, that enamours me to the Rondo. But if we're just talking about comfort, it's probably somewhat more comfortable for two people to sit on bucket seats in the second row rather than on bench seats.
Like you've implied in your post, the perceived advantages that one vehicle may have over the other are not as great as the enthusiasts on either side would like you to believe. And quite honestly, if I had chosen the Mazda5, I would be content with that, too.
About the headlights in the Rondo, I'm not sure what to say about it. It gives off light and I can see. A handful of people have stated that the low beams don't seem to extend out far enough and have a sharp cut-off. I think one guy has noticed that the headlights dim or flicker on some occasions.
My wife and I have an 07 EX V6 Luxury. We find that the headlights are fantastic, easily the best of any vehicle we have ever owned (American and Japanese). The low-beams DO extend out far, it just appears that they have a sharp cut-off since they are so intense (the fog lamps are unnecessary in anything but foggy conditions). And they are quite wide too, allowing a clear view to the sides of the road (necessary where I live for spotting moose in the ditches). The high-beams are nothing short of amazing - I have been able to light up road signs just over a mile in the distance (according to my odo) and they shine an even wider beam. I like the slightly blue tint of the lights as well, not as overtly blue as some other cars (like Land Rover). We also shopped the MZ5, but the Rondo won since the MZ5 is not rated to tow anything. At all. Zip. Brian Newfoundland
Thanks for the comments! I really think that the Kias have come a long ways in even just a couple years and it's nice to have that competition. I appreciate the headlights comments, and it sounds like they are about the same as the MZ5. Broad lighting pattern with a sharp cutoff as well. I did also forget to mention that the Kia was rated for toeing. This is definitely a big deal (though not in my case).
We just got the 1st snowfall this week and more is expected tonight, and first reports from the wife are that the Dunlop Wintersport 3ds are holding their own. Hopefully I'll get a change to test them out tonight, as we have our Soon To Be Parents class. I must admit that it's a bit depressing to see the black steelies on the MZ5 after only having it about a month, so summer will be a welcom change with the mags back on!
Comments
It's not a hideous looking car at all. Way too many cars you have to look at the name plate to tell what they are now.
I agree ramblin, it is difficult to tell what cars are now nowadays but, depending on how it looks, usually the first reaction is different:
a) Wow, nice, What is it?
b) Oh, geez, What the heck is that?
This, of course, as other members have said earlier, it depends of the eyes of the beholder :surprise:
For instance, flared jeans made a comeback a few years ago (what people used to call bellbottoms back in the '70s) and everyone (for women, at least) who didn't wear flares suddenly looked out of date. Now, skinny-legged jeans are back in style and flares are a fashion faux pas. So how did flared jeans suddenly become unattractive to women? How did "Oh, those are so cool" suddenly become "Oh, those are so awful"?
If something were inherently cool and attractive, you would think that it would always be so, but that rarely seems to be the case. So what, exactly, is driving the popular taste? Is something popular because a lot of people like it, or do a lot of people like it because it is "popular" (as defined, perhaps, by clever and persuasive marketing)? Are you really choosing what is attractive to you, or is it being chosen for you? And why do you feel apologetic whenever you go against what is cool when it isn't inherent or permanent in the first place?
BTW, the questions are rhetorical, so only answer them if you guys are as crazy as I am. Anyway, sorry for the extremely off-topic, self-indulgent, psychological BS (hope I didn't just break another forum rule), but you guys ought to be used to that coming from me by now.
Actually, medicineman brings up some good points about what appears to be in style or what is not.
I have noticed that with cars some people will only buy what they feel will be "safe". An example of this you may ask? In May of 1999 I bought a Kia Sephia. It looked better to me than either of it's competitors at that time, the Honda Civic and the Toyota Corolla. I liked it's looks better and I felt that Kia could build a competent car since they had been at it since 1944 and I liked a successful micro-car Kia built called the Ford Festiva.
Now, did other people want the Sephia for it's different looks at that time? Most people want good resale value, hence, they'd get the Civic or Corolla. What was popular at that time? The Civic or Corolla were more popular, the Sephia had only been in America since 1995 and most people didn't know much about Kia and/or their Sephia.
What pulled me in to want to comment was the notion that the thing that drives popularity often isn't even thought about. Civic or Corolla shoppers were told that the resale value of the Corolla and Civic was really good and that the cars were fairly reliable. The Civic and Corolla would cost you more then, yes. But to most of those buyers of Honda and Toyota the extra cost was well worth it. What are we really looking for in a rig, though?
Did they do their research before buying? Don't think so with a lot of them. I'm just going by what I've read in publications and on the net.
But those people's perception of the Japanese brands brought them to decide to buy the Civic or Corolla. Kia put out commercials at the time that were intended to start to change the perception about durability(example, the one where the college people took the Sephia and drive it 100,000 miles without problems, and attempted to beat up the car constantly).
If someone liked the Sephia's looks more they might have decided against buying it then because Kia wasn't "proven." Things are much different and Kia has done well recently in quality tests and awards.
The comment about "someone else choosing your car for you" has a lot of merit to it because I think that is what happens a lot in America. Thankfully there are car magazines and car web sites like this one where we can edumacate ourselves fully-completely about a potential car purchase and read early reviews on the car we like and know a lot more than we used to going in, eh? Excellent topic, medicineman!
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
I think the unspoken subtext to all of this is that the Rondo doesn't have that "wow" factor and the Mazda5 does. Sure, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but that's probably what the general consensus is. So the point of my last post, really, was to suggest that I don't think the Mazda5 is inherently any more dandy and purty, but that it conforms more than the Rondo to what is the fashion of the day--which is very fickle and driven largely by marketing (as per my jeans example, which I got from my nieces because I'm a real man and I wouldn't know about that stuff on my own).
Of course, I'm only saying this because I own a Rondo; otherwise, why would I bother?
Back to Rondo vs. Mazda5...I really am not in this market to buy but I do know how each of these vehicles looks. And after reviewing each of their looks I am once again in the Kia camp, liking the Rondo more. It has that "unique" look to it that Kia seems to have the talent to make. I mean that in a positive way! I won't start asking questions about each rig...I could go back and read up right here in this thread and learn a lot...but your post just struck a familiar vein in me and I wanted to participate in the thread to say "Hey, I know what he means there!"
Enjoy your Rondo or your Mazda5, they both have way more merits than faults, huh?
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
http://news.windingroad.com/countriesmarkets/japan/japan-report-honda-stream-hea- - ded-to-us-in-2009/
Honda means a serious contender. It also means more chances to keep the MAV market alive (Mazda and KIA alike) plus more options for us the consumers in the future .
Now, a 2 row seat version only? Based on all the buzz generated by the Mazda5 and the Rondo, it is clear that many people like the 3rd row availability in the US and Canada for these type of cars :confuse:
Thanks!
But if the 3rd row model is not coming to NA, the 2 row configuration will then be an enlarged 5 people station wagon IMO. For that, I prefer my Mazda5, thank you.
-------------------------------------------
I don't need a 3rd row either but I like the sliding doors and the 3rd row can be folded down to make a large cargo area.
------------------------------------
I loathe 3 across seating. The Mazda5 has it right with 2+2+2 seating. Even the Element's 2+2 seating is good for those who don't carry a lot of passengers.
Highway 27
Source
eilros, "Mazda5" #1206, 16 Oct 2007 7:03 pm
- 2nd row seat A/C vents
- Updated Central Console
- Very distinctive exterior new color
Personally, I liked the Mazda5 for it's sportiness, 5-speed manual and lower price. However, we bought a Rondo EX V6 7-seater since the Mazda5 is not rated to tow at all. The Legacy, with 16 fewer hp, could tow 2000 lbs (with trailer brakes, according to the car's manual) so this lack of towing capability is perplexing to me. The Rondo V6 can tow 2,500 lbs with trailer brakes (according to our car's manual) plus the V6 is buttery smooth.
Also, the Mazda5 has slightly less cargo carrying capacity than the Legacy, and we did not want to take a step backward in terms of practicality. The Rondo has about 5 cu ft more capacity than the Legacy with the seats folded, not a lot but still it is an increase.
However, if I was choosing just for me, it would have been the Mazda5, but since I was choosing for my family and our needs as a whole, the Rondo was a much better fit.
Too bad though that neither is AWD. But the dealer threw into the deal a set of winter rims with winter tires, studded/balanced/mounted, so wintertime should not be a problem, what with all the Rondo's electronic nannies!
(I am in Newfoundland, so there is lots of snow and ice to contend with).
Thanks for your consideration,
Jeannine Fallon
Corporate Communications
Edmunds Inc.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
For another comparison from the media, look back at post #186.
BTW, I own a Rondo, if you want to know what my slant is.
This is not an exhaustive list, but some of the ones I recall are:
- 2nd row A/C vents and a new cloth/leather interior choice (mentioned in an earlier reply already)
- Needed more Armrests (front passenger seat and door-side 2nd row seats have now been added)
- Aux MP3 Input is now standard
- Bluetooth Wireless Data Link for Hands-Free Phone (Grand Touring Model only)
- 5AT replaces 4AT
Here are the features in more detail:
Sport:
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2008/mazda/mazda5/100948233/standard.html
Touring:
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2008/mazda/mazda5/100948267/standard.html
Grand Touring:
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2008/mazda/mazda5/100948268/standard.html
On the new Mazda5 they now have the AC vents behind the front center console like in the Rondo; however, since there is no 2nd row bench to block the flow of air, I can see how the 2nd row AC vents pointed straight back would get to the 3rd row passengers, but even with these it seems like your upper body would get pretty warm, especially if the sun was on you.
So anyone with 3rd row hot day experience?
Best Buys:
Honda Accord
Kia Rondo
Recommended:
Ford Fusion
Hyundai Sonata
Kia Optima
Mazda5
Mercury Milan
Nissan Altima
Saturn Aura
Toyota Camry
In the December 2007 issue of Consumer Reports, there is finally a review of the Rondo (sorry, no link). The Rondo got a score of 76 out of 100 (thanks, viking79, for that info). The Mazda5 got a score of 86 in CR's 2007 annual auto issue, topping the "Wagons and Hatchbacks" category. If the Rondo were included in that category, it would have been tied for fourth out of 22 vehicles.
So there you go for studies with "Consumer" in the title.
Like I've said in the past, I don't think you can go wrong with either vehicle. The generally positive evaluations that both vehicles have been getting is proof of that. I don't think either vehicle has a major weakness, but they do have relative strengths and weaknesses when compared to each other (which is the point of this thread). All you can do is point out those relative strengths and weaknesses according to your own point of view and let others agree or disagree with you.
BTW, I'm not trying to sound "fair and balanced" just for the benefit of Mazda5 owners. I'm not toning it down here and letting out my true feelings at an external Rondo forum (and those Rondo owners at that external forum will back me up on this if needed, hopefully). This is indeed what I truly think. Make no mistake--I obviously prefer the Rondo and I've pointed out why I prefer it. But I really am impressed with the Mazda5, too. About the worst thing I've ever said about the 5, here or at that external forum, is that it looks like a minivan. In fact, from what I've witnessed, Rondo owners in general seem to be a humble bunch. They don't obsess much over which vehicle is "better." I can't even remember the last time a Rondo owner made what can be construed as a mocking remark about the "competition" (the old "mock others to build yourself up" trick--I'm not talking about informative criticism here).
Okay, I need to say this, so bear with me. All forum discussions seem to suffer from this kind of misunderstanding: if one were to say, "I like dogs," someone will inevitably ask, "Why do you hate cats?" The point is, don't read too much into it. So when I say Rondo owners are generally humble, I'm not implying that Mazda5 owners are not. When I say Rondo owners don't obsess much over which vehicle is better, I'm not implying that Mazda5 owners do obsess over it. How the heck would I know what Mazda5 owners are like, anyway? Sure, I've hung out at Mazda forums before I purchased the Rondo, but I don't have any lasting impression to make a generalized comment about Mazda5 owners. And when I say that I see merit in both vehicles, I'm not implying that everyone should see things the same way. Etc., etc., blah, blah, blah.
Anyway, I hope you all enjoyed that. What, you're still awake?
The Mazda Club Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
Please remember this forum is global, not Amero-centred.
Wonder when the US is going to start getting 2008 models?
North of the border in Canada (you know that place where the dollar is worth more than the US greenback ) they sold 828 Rondo's (one of them was my EX 2.4L model), however, I don't have the sales for the Mazda 5 for October, but generally it outsells the Rondo.
The latest on the Mazda5:
eilros, "Rondo vs Outlander/Rav4/Santa Fe/Mazda5" #218, 24 Oct 2007 2:20 pm
I test drove both the V4 and V6 Rondo and liked the V6 a lot more than I thought I would. I like the concept of the Mazda5. My favorite feature is the sliding doors, which would protect me from door dings in my garage. But I have yet to test drive the Mazda5 for one major reason. I can't understand why a car model that has been out since 2006 has not been crash tested? Is Mazda trying to hide something? I think this is inexcusable. I would also like to see ECS on the Mazda5, which seems to be standard equipment on most of its competitors.
BTW, I also looked at the Mitsubishi Outlander which I liked the best of the three for its exterior appearance. But I did not like its very dark interior and its clamshell third seat was a joke.
I have a V6 Rondo but also looked at the Mazda5, which I liked tremendously. I decided against it since it is not rated to tow at all, whereas the Rondo can tow 2000 lbs.
I also considered the Mazda 5, but in my case I did not like the sliding rear door and also had no reason for requiring the rear 3rd seats, I also didn't like the black interior on the Mazda 5, prefer the lighter grey version on my Rondo.
I found the Rondo offered more features for the dollar and a longer warranty. Having driven it for a week now (only have 440km on it) I find the stereo outstanding, and enjoying those heated seats and heated outside mirrors. Had the opportunity to check it out very closely yesterday and found the fit and finish hard to fault - very well put together. Only time will tell if this continues. Not put any gas in it yet, so hard to tell how the mileage will work out.
Mazda5 Wins Highest Crash Safety Rating from EU and Japanese New Car Testing Agencies
http://www.japancorp.net/Article.asp?Art_ID=12380
In the December 2007 issue of Consumer Reports, there is finally a review of the Rondo (sorry, no link). The Rondo got a score of 76 out of 100 (thanks, viking79, for that info). The Mazda5 got a score of 86 in CR's 2007 annual auto issue, topping the "Wagons and Hatchbacks" category. If the Rondo were included in that category, it would have been tied for fourth out of 22 vehicles.
Watch a video of CR's evaluation of the Rondo. It's short and sweet and incomplete.
Rondo - 828
Mazda 5 - 823
Couldn't get much closer than that! However, on a year-to-date basis the Mazda 5 is nearly 4000 units ahead of the Rondo.
Given the availability time for the 2008 mazda5 in NA (US and Canada) reality seems that the Mazda5 is not a Mazda business priority (marketing-production-sales) for these 2 markets (i.e. cash cow like the Mazda3)
Take a look of the numbers for Mazda in general, a different story. Also, my theory is that there may not be more significant sales of 2007 Mazda5s during this past month because potential owners are waiting for the 2008 (with all the new improvements/enhancements) to come.
MAZDA reports double digit sales increase for third straight month
http://media.ford.com/mazda/article_display.cfm?article_id=27150&make_id=227
Also, in other markets Mazda5 is a big seller and award winner, so if I were Mazda I would ship my production to those markets instead (which I think they are doing anyway :mad: ):
Mazda5 Awards Worldwide
http://www.mazda.co.za/servlet/ContentServer?cid=1163398491496&pagename=Page&sit- - - - - e=MSA&c=DFYPage
The Mazda5 gets the edge over the Rondo. I mostly agree with everything that was said in this review, although I would come to a different conclusion (I bought the Rondo over the Mazda5, after all). This review was of the 2007 Mazda5, not the more feature-rich 2008 version. Plus, the review never mentions looks, which I think the Mazda5 wins by default due to the Rondo's unconventional aesthetics--some think it's butt ugly; others like the looks; I just think it's bland or odd (I'm not sure if I stated that before, but that's what I think now).
Hey, I have two eyes. I know the Rondo doesn't conform to how "cool" vehicles look these days. I know it won't win many beauty contests. Having said that, I would have never purchased the Rondo if I had truly thought that it were ugly. To me, the Rondo is bland more than anything else. My wife and sisters, though, think that it's cute. What's that? Did I just hear a collective gasp from every male car enthusiast on the planet?
BTW, I'm not suggesting that all women will have the same opinion. I'm just saying that women don't see cars the same way as guys do. A guy tends to see his vehicle as an extension of himself, thus the more sleek or muscular it is, the better. I don't see too many women giving a rat's butt about this or caring that much if others like their ride.
When I was shopping for a vehicle earlier this year, I was looking for a mini people hauler primarily for utilitarian reasons. This is actually a redundant statement, because why else would anyone consider vehicles like these? If it also happened to look way cool, that would have been a bonus rather than a necessity. Naturally, I cross-shopped the Rondo with the Mazda5, which I admit is more of a head turner than the Rondo.
Utility, however, was the trump card. To me, the Rondo seemed more useful than the Mazda5. What sold me on the Rondo is that it can seat up to seven people (the Mazda5 can hold six) and it has a greater variety of possible passenger/cargo combinations due to its 2-3-2 seating scheme (the Mazda5 is 2-2-2). I think it's more useful having bench seats in the second row rather than two bucket seats. When seating four to six people, the Rondo has more useful cargo space than the Mazda5 due to the amount of unused seating that can be folded away.
Do I need seven seats? If I needed seven (or six) seats, I would've purchased a minivan. But I knew that I would occasionally find the up-to-seven seating useful, which has proven to be true. Granted, I wouldn't want tall adults sitting in the third row (isn't that the usual disclaimer for third row seating in non-humongous vehicles?), but my two 13-year-old nieces didn't complain at all while sitting back there and happily listened to their iPods. In a pinch, the third row is useful; if you need that capacity all of the time, look elsewhere.
The Rondo is all about versatility and value, with no pretensions at being hot or sporty. To some, this is its greatest weakness; to others, this is its greatest strength. My personal view is, no one demands hottie looks or exceptional performance from practical vehicles like a minivan, so why would one expect this from the Rondo? To knock the Rondo for this seems to somehow miss the point. Functionality is the Rondo's raison de être and this has been achieved in the Rondo with a remarkable deftness.
Make no mistake, I'm not saying that looks or performance are never important--but what would be the point of buying a vehicle like this if it didn't first and foremost fulfill your utilitarian requirements? For potential buyers, if you can't get over the Rondo's looks and you find the Mazda5's utility to be sufficient, I would suggest the Mazda5 for its relative hot looks and relative sportiness.
Anyone who makes blanket statements putting a Kia down vs. other Asian car products is a clown. The Pacific Rimmers all make very good automobiles.
Well done laying out your reasoning for the Rondo. My wife and I have recently purchased a Mazda 5 and I can pretty much concur with your reasoning. I thought I would offer my reasoning behind the Mazda5 purchase. I must mention that I did not get to do an in-depth look at the Rondo as you will see.
My wife originally wanted to get a minivan for our soon-to-be family and we set out to do some research and looking. She was very much wanting a Honda Oddesy, but I had concerns over the price, gas mileage, and the fact that it would barely fit our garage. Our next step down would be the Mazda MPV and then a step down from that was the Rondo and Mazda5. I had briefly looked at the 5 and Rondo, and we went to look at all 3. Out first stop was the Mazda dealer where my wife found an MPV that she really loved. Long story short, I hated the ride and size, so we drove the Mazda5. She really enjoyes how the 5 drove and took the entire test drive.
That test drive basically sealed the deal. And I think it's a reminder of the fact that we all have different priorities. I tried to get her to also drive the Rondo to cross shop, but the large rear doors of the Rondo and it's looks were not for her. She also was concerned about the Kia reputation, though I have done the research and driven several newer Hyundai/Kia vehicles and did not see any quality concerns.
I know my story is a bit one-sided, but that's sometimes how it goes. Do I think that the Mazda5 is that much better than the Kia? No. I think it's nice to have have such contrasting choices in the market. I am glad for the 5 as I really enjoy tha handling and the sliding doors are already extremely handy.
As far as versatility, I think that on paper, the Kia shows more seating configurations, but I am not sure how big the difference is in reality. The biggest plus I saw for the Rondo was the ability to have 5 people and all the cargo space. In my case, more than 4 people is rare, and we have found that 2+2+1 in the MZ5 is more comfortable than 2+3 in a mid-sized sedan (my family has a 2001 Nissan Maxima). In our case the relative comfort of 2+2+1 trumps the extra cargo room of 2+3.
Honestly, the biggest selling point for us on the MZ5 for the driving dynamics. It's still not quite int he league of say the Mazda3 or perhaps a sports sedan like a BMW, but it drives on par with my parent's 2001 Maxima (with a much better ride). One of our first distance trips was through the winding back roads on the Washington Palouse, and the bolstered seats were very nice and supportive as my wife's smile and confidence in cornering grew along the trip. My short impression of the Kia was that the handling was not nearly as sharp, but that the ride was smoother. this is an important trade-off for people, as roads are seldom smooth (especially in this area).
Overall, you have to find the vehicle that fits you and your needs. I have no qualms recommending the Mazda5 to anyone looking for an efficient sport tourer. That said, if family or friends asked for a recommendation, I would say to look at the competition before settling. In basic terms, the MZ5 and the Rondo are both comfortable 4-seaters with some extra room for 2 or 3 more on occasion.
There are a few things that one offers over the other as well. The big difference is the available V6 in the Rondo. It may be nice for some, that we wanted a 4. Also, the Rondo offers stability control and it is not available on the MZ5. Again, not a big deal for me, but worth noting. The MZ5 provides LATCH points for the 4 rear seats and I believe the Rondo only offers them in the middle row. Probably not a huge deal, but a bit of an oddity. Another small, but notable difference is that the Rondo 2nd row headrests need to be removed to fold flat, where the MZ5's do not. Also, the MZ5 has very hand storage cubbies under the 2nd row seats. We use these frequently and find them very useful.
One thing I did not get to check and would offer as a question to the Rondo owners: How are the headlights? The Mazda5 headlights (Standard, not HID) are some of the best I have ever seen. Most headlights are good, but there is a rare model (the late 90s Toyota Camry comes tome mind) that have poor headlight performance.
Anyone who makes blanket statements putting a Kia down vs. other Asian car products is a clown
Keep on mind that KIA quality was not born overnight so the stigma of poor quality and poor design still exists (please note I said stigma). Just see KIA and its models some years back and you will note that the "clowns" still have a reason to be "clowns".
OK, not pinpointing to Korean cars, Remember Datsun? or even Toyota during their early times? Japanese quality? not really (my dad owned a 1969 Datsun and that thing broke down at least once a week)
Now, talking about Asian cars, would you buy a Chinese car today? :surprise:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F06LjugtIUo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZWy_fASSiQ
Everything that you've said makes sense to me. I just wanted to add a small comment to something that you've said: "In our case the relative comfort of 2+2+1 trumps the extra cargo room of 2+3." For the Rondo, you can choose either option--people can sit 2+2+1 or 2+3. It's exactly this kind of available choice, this kind of configurability, that enamours me to the Rondo. But if we're just talking about comfort, it's probably somewhat more comfortable for two people to sit on bucket seats in the second row rather than on bench seats.
Like you've implied in your post, the perceived advantages that one vehicle may have over the other are not as great as the enthusiasts on either side would like you to believe. And quite honestly, if I had chosen the Mazda5, I would be content with that, too.
About the headlights in the Rondo, I'm not sure what to say about it. It gives off light and I can see. A handful of people have stated that the low beams don't seem to extend out far enough and have a sharp cut-off. I think one guy has noticed that the headlights dim or flicker on some occasions.
The low-beams DO extend out far, it just appears that they have a sharp cut-off since they are so intense (the fog lamps are unnecessary in anything but foggy conditions). And they are quite wide too, allowing a clear view to the sides of the road (necessary where I live for spotting moose in the ditches).
The high-beams are nothing short of amazing - I have been able to light up road signs just over a mile in the distance (according to my odo) and they shine an even wider beam. I like the slightly blue tint of the lights as well, not as overtly blue as some other cars (like Land Rover).
We also shopped the MZ5, but the Rondo won since the MZ5 is not rated to tow anything. At all. Zip.
Brian
Newfoundland
Thanks for the comments! I really think that the Kias have come a long ways in even just a couple years and it's nice to have that competition. I appreciate the headlights comments, and it sounds like they are about the same as the MZ5. Broad lighting pattern with a sharp cutoff as well. I did also forget to mention that the Kia was rated for toeing. This is definitely a big deal (though not in my case).
We just got the 1st snowfall this week and more is expected tonight, and first reports from the wife are that the Dunlop Wintersport 3ds are holding their own. Hopefully I'll get a change to test them out tonight, as we have our Soon To Be Parents class. I must admit that it's a bit depressing to see the black steelies on the MZ5 after only having it about a month, so summer will be a welcom change with the mags back on!