[Shubunkin]

And... I spoke too soon. Our error message came back on today. Kind of bored with this game 🤪

 

[magnus0322]

And... I spoke too soon. Our error message came back on today. Kind of bored with this game

Oh no. Even after replacement parts the issue came back? That doesn't sound good.

So far I've ran 4 tanks of gas in my 2020 Niro LXS and I'm averaging 41.7 mpg vs 47.5 mpg lifetime in my 2017 Niro LX. I was hoping the difference was due to engine break in or maybe related to the AAF issues. It really sucks that the 2020 models are having these issues. I didn't have any issues with my 2017. If I can't get this car near the same fuel economy as the 2017 I'm gonna start a lemon law claim. It's BS that a newer car is worse than the first generation

Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk

 

[LJC33437]

I’m in the same boat. Took my 2020 Niro back in for the fourth or fifth time (losing track) with this same issue. This time they gave me a rental and they’re keeping it in hopes of figuring it out. I wonder how long that’ll take? This is my 2nd Niro & I had zero issues with my 2018.

 

[magnus0322]

Your car is now a lemon. I'd consider pursuing it. I still haven't heard back from my dealer. It will be two weeks next week since the part was supposed to arrive. I'm really not happy. I had no issues with my previous Niro. I'm gonna take it in again since the warning is back on to document a second repair attempt. Number 3 and I can lemon law it

Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk

 

[LJC33437]

It’s been more than a week since the last repair. So far so good, if it happens again, I will look into the the lemon law for it. I’m hoping I don’t have to, I Ike the car!

 

[magnus0322]

I'm pretty livid with Kia at the moment. The dealer gave me my car back after resetting the MIL because apparently there's a new update to fix the flaps and they will no longer replace the part under warranty. Drove the car about 15 miles afterwards at all sorts of speeds to try to get the message to come up and it didn't. I will be doing a 400 mile trip starting Monday so hopefully if it isn't truly fixed I get the message so I can bring it back a third time and start a lemon claim. I'm pretty disappointed in my 2020 LXS HEV to be honest. I'm still averaging 43.7 mpg vs 47.5 with my 2017 LX HEV. Hopefully if the flaps are truly fixed I'll get better fuel economy

Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk

 

[yticolev]

I don't think air entry to the radiator can create enough drag to drop mpg by almost 10%. Remember also, these flaps are not closed all the time (when they work properly).

 

[deltasmith]

I'm pretty livid with Kia at the moment. The dealer gave me my car back after resetting the MIL because apparently there's a new update to fix the flaps and they will no longer replace the part under warranty. Drove the car about 15 miles afterwards at all sorts of speeds to try to get the message to come up and it didn't. I will be doing a 400 mile trip starting Monday so hopefully if it isn't truly fixed I get the message so I can bring it back a third time and start a lemon claim. I'm pretty disappointed in my 2020 LXS HEV to be honest. I'm still averaging 43.7 mpg vs 47.5 with my 2017 LX HEV. Hopefully if the flaps are truly fixed I'll get better fuel economy

Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk

Umm - I kind of think that they have to fix it under warranty if it's defective. But perhaps the software update fixed it? If so, I'm not sure why you would be livid about that.

As for the MPG difference: tire pressure might account for all of that. Do you recall what the pressure was in your 2017? If you happened to take it into the dealer for something as a simple as an oil change, they might have noted that they adjusted the tire pressure on your work order, either on your 2017 or on your 2020 (they adjusted mine down to the factory recommendation when I brought it in for an oil change). Many people have reported that when they picked up their new car from the dealer, the tires were about 10 pounds over-inflated. That's likely to help gas mileage, but maybe hurt braking ability (and the Niro's braking ability isn't especially great to begin with).

On the other hand, 44 MPG seems a tad low even with factory air pressure, based on my experience, but I guess that also depends on your driving habits and your route, so maybe it's not low for your habits/route.

 

[magnus0322]

Umm - I kind of think that they have to fix it under warranty if it's defective. But perhaps the software update fixed it? If so, I'm not sure why you would be livid about that.

As for the MPG difference: tire pressure might account for all of that. Do you recall what the pressure was in your 2017? If you happened to take it into the dealer for something as a simple as an oil change, they might have noted that they adjusted the tire pressure on your work order, either on your 2017 or on your 2020 (they adjusted mine down to the factory recommendation when I brought it in for an oil change). Many people have reported that when they picked up their new car from the dealer, the tires were about 10 pounds over-inflated. That's likely to help gas mileage, but maybe hurt braking ability (and the Niro's braking ability isn't especially great to begin with).

On the other hand, 44 MPG seems a tad low even with factory air pressure, based on my experience, but I guess that also depends on your driving habits and your route, so maybe it's not low for your habits/route.

I'm just upset they reset it and sent me on my way. I hope the update isn't hot air. They already updated the car one time when I purchased it but apparently this is another update.

As far as tire pressure I have my own machine at home that I use for my cars and bikes. I'm actually pretty careful about tire pressures since my Lexus has a staggered set up and if you don't maintain proper alignment and pressure you'll get uneven tire wear. Because of the staggered setup there's no way to rotate tires. I got 35k miles out of my last set of tires with the Lexus and that's quite a bit considering people usually get like 20 to 25k. I usually check my tire pressures in the morning before the heat of the day gives me inaccurate readings.

As far as the 2017 Niro when I first got it I experimented a bit. I settled on 39 PSI cold verified via my gauge and also the cars tpms page which would give me 43 PSI all around after driving. My route is pretty consistent as I generally only use that car to drive to work. I drive the same speeds in the 2020. I also keep the tire pressures the same. My gauge shows I do 95% economical and 5% normal. I would say that's pretty average. My commute to work is 38 miles each way so the car has plenty of time to run at optimum temps etc. I only put gas at Costco on all my vehicles with 87 octane in the Niro. I also use Fuelio to keep track of my gas mileage. I live in South FL and the weather is consistent year round. I use AC at 68F with driver's side only. Really there shouldn't be such a large difference. I actually like driving the Niro more than my other cars because it's so cheap to operate and I try to always get the best efficiency. Sure I go a little slower but it defeats the purpose to go fast. I'm hopeful things will improve.

I'm actually thinking I'll do an oil change at 3k instead of 7.5k and get Mobil 1 0w20 with the OEM Kia/Hyundai filter to see if it makes a difference. One thing I will say is the 2020 Niro is a lot smoother than the 2017. It's also quieter. Perhaps this accounts for the difference but on Fuelly it seems the 2020 models are more efficient than the 2017 models. Hopefully things get better if not I'll be asking Kia to look into it but from my initial research it appears they tend to blame the driver as to why the car is inefficient. This Niro is making me regret I didn't just spend the extra $13k and buy the Tesla Model 3. I was so happy with the 2017 though that I said I'll just get a 2020 and wait and see how the world recovers before going EV

Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk

 

[yticolev]

Couple of thoughts:

Agree with setting pressure by actual driving. However, I think 43 PSI is too high. My daily temperatures are likely more variable that yours, but on the hottest summer days with cool nights, setting my cold temperature (in the AM before driving) results in an absolute max of 42 PSI on black roads with direct sun. For summer, I use the cold temperature setting of 36 PSI as gospel manufacturer knows best. In winter, I aim for a maximum operating pressure of 40 which usually means a cold fill of 38.

The car comes stock with 0W-20 oil. Changing the brand will not result in a measurable difference in mpg. Arguments about engine life and health with different brands stokes really long threads online, but most independent tests I read show Mobil 1 with a slight edge on performance (which would include a slight but unmeasurable mpg gain). I've been using the almost as good oil at a third the price. However, considering my long oil change intervals (25K - post change oil test was fine), considering Mobil 1 for next change as not really much more annual cost. 0W-15 would result in measurable mpg gains, but the car is not certified for that. Tempting but risky.

 

[magnus0322]

Couple of thoughts:

Agree with setting pressure by actual driving. However, I think 43 PSI is too high. My daily temperatures are likely more variable that yours, but on the hottest summer days with cool nights, setting my cold temperature (in the AM before driving) results in an absolute max of 42 PSI on black roads with direct sun. For summer, I use the cold temperature setting of 36 PSI as gospel manufacturer knows best. In winter, I aim for a maximum operating pressure of 40 which usually means a cold fill of 38.

The car comes stock with 0W-20 oil. Changing the brand will not result in a measurable difference in mpg. Arguments about engine life and health with different brands stokes really long threads online, but most independent tests I read show Mobil 1 with a slight edge on performance (which would include a slight but unmeasurable mpg gain). I've been using the almost as good oil at a third the price. However, considering my long oil change intervals (25K - post change oil test was fine), considering Mobil 1 for next change as not really much more annual cost. 0W-15 would result in measurable mpg gains, but the car is not certified for that. Tempting but risky.

Well mine are 38-39 PSI cold and get to 42-43 PSI when operating. I'll try 36 PSI cold to see if it does anything. I didn't notice any adverse wear in my 2017 with rotations every 5k miles by running 2-3 PSI higher than recommended. I do my own basic maintenance. I agree about the oil. I usually get Mobil 1 with the promo from Walmart for $13 which is cheap enough for me. I'm just not sure what to make of the difference between my 2017 and 2020 considering everything is literally the same except the cars. Kia also doesn't seem to pay attention to owners and chooses to blame them instead for the car not meeting EPA mpg estimates

Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk

 

[yticolev]

I think it is possible to get 90K out of a set of OEM tires. Not sure what pressure BGilly runs, but if I recall, he doesn't rotate and gets about 70K (possibly using them too long). My tires appear to be on track for 90 but early days. Less than half worn at 40K. Also not sure about Florida versus 4 season climates like mine. Did you wear out OEM tires on your 2017?

Based on my own experience, I believe the engineers think 42 PSI to be the max operating pressure to maximize the balance between wear, handling, and comfort (not that I notice any comfort difference between 38 and 42). At least in my climate. Eastern California, SW Texas, Phoenix, and of course the Mideast at 110 degrees might be different. I wonder if they are best going lower than 36 cold.

 

[magnus0322]

I think it is possible to get 90K out of a set of OEM tires. Not sure what pressure BGilly runs, but if I recall, he doesn't rotate and gets about 70K (possibly using them too long). My tires appear to be on track for 90 but early days. Less than half worn at 40K. Also not sure about Florida versus 4 season climates like mine. Did you wear out OEM tires on your 2017?

Based on my own experience, I believe the engineers think 42 PSI to be the max operating pressure to maximize the balance between wear, handling, and comfort (not that I notice any comfort difference between 38 and 42). At least in my climate. Eastern California, SW Texas, Phoenix, and of course the Mideast at 110 degrees might be different. I wonder if they are best going lower than 36 cold.

I'm sure that's true. I put 31k miles in my 2017 and the tires were still in great shape. However the stock Michelin tires aren't the best in the rain and in South FL we get a ton of rain. I probably would've replaced them around 60k just because it's not fun to drive in the rain with worn tires

Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk

 

[yticolev]

They are not the best in the rain, true enough. But not horrible either. Might be slightly better at a lower pressure (wink).

 

[magnus0322]

Well the light and warning came back on today. Took the car back to the dealer again and this time Kia told them to replace the air flap system. It took them about 2 hours to do. I got the car back. No light so far. Hopefully this is the end of this saga

Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk

 

[brogers821]

Not quite 4 weeks and 550 miles into my lease and the check engine light comes on with a "Check active air flap system" message. On top of that my Kia Access app reports a P059F - possible condition with the TPMS. I've been loving the car up to this point, but am concerned I'm already having issues with it.

I've had my 2020 for two weeks..... 700 miles and this just popped up as well. I wonder if it's also affecting my MPG as well..... because it's been horrible. Two tanks so far and only averaging 37MPG. My old one NEVER even went into the 30's. I always averaged 43-46 MPG on that one. This one is struggling to stay around 36-37

 

[magnus0322]

Filler

 

[magnus0322]

I've had my 2020 for two weeks..... 700 miles and this just popped up as well. I wonder if it's also affecting my MPG as well..... because it's been horrible. Two tanks so far and only averaging 37MPG. My old one NEVER even went into the 30's. I always averaged 43-46 MPG on that one. This one is struggling to stay around 36-37

After replacement of the Air Flaps my mpg on this last tank was 45.7mpg when the car was barely averaging 42mpg before. I don't think it's placebo. I'm hopeful it will continue to improve. I've had my car for 2 months today and have driven 2500 miles

Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk

 

[brogers821]

After replacement of the Air Flaps my mpg on this last tank was 45.7mpg when the car was barely averaging 42mpg before. I don't think it's placebo. I'm hopeful it will continue to improve. I've had my car for 2 months today and have driven 2500 miles

Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk

my dealer took my car today to look at for this.... and now they want to keep it until tomorrow. How is it possible they have no idea what the issue is,.. especially with all of you saying your dealers just ordered a new part? WTF... LOL

 

[brogers821]

Oh no. Even after replacement parts the issue came back? That doesn't sound good.

So far I've ran 4 tanks of gas in my 2020 Niro LXS and I'm averaging 41.7 mpg vs 47.5 mpg lifetime in my 2017 Niro LX. I was hoping the difference was due to engine break in or maybe related to the AAF issues. It really sucks that the 2020 models are having these issues. I didn't have any issues with my 2017. If I can't get this car near the same fuel economy as the 2017 I'm gonna start a lemon law claim. It's BS that a newer car is worse than the first generation

Sent from my GM1917 using Tapatalk

my 2020 is struggling to get 37-38 MPG on the same trips that my 2018 was getting 43-46MPG. Now I have this air flap issue and the dealer is keeping my car for another day because they can't figure out the issue. WTF....?