Imagine, you’re an auto executive in a product planning meeting at any point in the last five years. You open your mouth. “Why don’t we do a sedan?” Say that at Ford and they’d probably laugh you out of the room. Kia, though? It’s still digging the classic car body style, the default. Enter the 2025 Kia K4.
Some automakers have abandoned traditional cars almost entirely. Not so at Kia. The Korean automaker has stuck it out with sedans and hatchbacks while building out a potent line of SUVs, hybrids, and EVs to boot. It’s taking on all comers these days, and it’s had the Forte in the four-door fight for some time now. Now it gets to tap out, with the Kia K4 set to take over for the 2025 model year.
Kia has given the world an early look at the K4, with its full launch a week away. If it’s to match the six-figure sales of its predecessor, the K4 will have to do a lot. It’ll need to drive well, run cheap, and be affordable to buy in the first place. Looking good wouldn’t hurt a bit, either. Has the K4 got what it takes? Let’s dive in.
A Look For Tomorrow
Right away, the first thing you’ll spot about the K4 is its looks. I want to open by giving Kia credit for not delivering a humble workaday sedan. Instead, it wears a hypermodern look with cutting-edge lighting and no shortage of bold lines. Most striking are the squared haunches at the rear, seemingly matched by the bulky front fenders. They give the K4 a mean, purposeful look, perhaps not matched by its ride height and fairly high-profile tires. Its predecessor, the Forte, was a good-looking car for the money. The K4, however, looks much cooler than its price would have you expect. That’s a good thing.
At the same time, there are some polarizing details. The overarching roofline almost makes it look like it’s supposed to be a fastback or hatch, rather than a sedan. It’s not a standard three-box design by any interpretation. There’s also the strange detail of the C-pillar (D-pillar?). It appears disconnected from the roof because of a clash in color and trim. It makes it look like someone’s tacked the back of a different car on \to the K4.
It’s an odd detail and one that conservative minds would have asked the designers to correct earlier in development. And yet, it’s strangely fitting given the design philosophy is known as ‘Opposites United.’ The public rarely responds well to bold moves like these, but we’ll get back to that in a minute.
It’s still early days and the K4 hasn’t been fully launched yet, so we’re light on exact details. In any case, inside, the K4 is very much on trend with other modern vehicles. It has a pair of large screens on the dash, one as a cluster, the other for infotainment purposes. You’d expect the usual complement of Android Auto and Apple CarPlay connectivity, assuming controversy around the latter proves overblown. Materials and colors are tasteful and hip, and Kia has planned a number of different colors and patterns to give the K4’s interior a luxurious feel. Bottom line? It looks pretty damn nice.
A key part of the interior design is based on the ‘Opposites United’ design philosophy. Kia wanted a driver-focused interior, something it says is expected of the segment, but it wanted to do so in an unexpected way. Thus, the K4 eschews the traditional method of just pointing all the controls at the driver. Instead, we’re told the cockpit uses a “bold graphic split” to delineate the driver and passenger areas of the vehicle. In practice, it just looks like a pretty typical dashboard to me. Still, Kia really feels like they’ve done something here, so power to them.
Touchscreen haters will not appreciate Kia’s statement that “physical buttons and controls are deliberately kept to a minimum.” With that said, the “Home,” “Map,” and “Search” functions all get buttons, while four more buttons are provisioned for the HVAC controls. It’s impossible to say at this stage how easy or hard it is to use the K4’s interface. Traditionally, Kia does a pretty good job of this. It would, however, be well considered to tread carefully in this area. A lot of buyers will flee from a car that proves too hard to figure out on a test drive.
Brass Tacks
The global premiere for the K4 is slated for March 27 at the New York International Auto Show. At that point, we’re going to learn full details about powertrains, features, and pricing. The latter is perhaps the most important.
Why? It’s because the compact market is a huge winner for Kia. The brand sold 782,468 vehicles in the US last year. 123,953 of those were Kia Fortes. That’s roughly 15.8%. Not only that, but the Forte has been consistent, almost incredibly so. Sales have stuck around the 80,000-120,000 level every year back to 2016. It hasn’t sold less than 66,000 vehicles a year since its US launch, barring 2009 when it entered the market mid-year.
Automakers love models like this. They’re good consistent money that can be relied upon, they make production planning easy, and they make customers happy.
The K4 will need to do the same. The question is whether it’s the right vehicle to do so.
The Forte is aggressively priced. The base model starts at just $20,915 including destination charges. In 2024, that’s pretty cheap. It’s going toe to toe with all kinds of cheap models from Toyota, Nissan, Chevy, and the rest, and it’s holding its own. If the K4 jumped the base price up by $3000, $5000, though, it could suddenly be a tougher proposition.
If the K4 can look this modern at a similar price point, though, it could be a winner. People love to leave the dealership in something that looks brand-new and on-trend. The styling of the K4 hits those points to a bullseye. The one thing holding it back is that strange pillar design.
Automakers have tried to take odd to market before, with mixed results. Think of the Fiat Multipla, or the Pontiac Aztec. For a new model in a niche segment, it can be worth taking a risk. For a key volume seller? Well, then you’re putting a lot at stake.
Bold styling has to be a difficult target. If Clarkson can land a pithy one-liner about your car’s looks in ten seconds, you’re in trouble. The Renault Megane with that weird butt is a prime example. Nobody wants to bring their brand new car to work only to have their coworkers taking the mickey all day. That can quickly turn new car joy into sadness.
The K4 probably treads the right line. It’s future-forward, and it’s one strange feature is too difficult to describe for water-cooler jokers to poke fun. Plus it’ll look newer than the the vast majority of your office’s parking lot.
I think I’d be bold enough to try a K4, myself. I’ve got a feeling those broad haunches and sleek modern lines would look great in the flesh. Even more so with a slight suspension drop and a nice set of wheels. Perhaps I could even learn to love the kinky rear pillar.
I just hope for Kia’s sake that hundreds of thousands out there agree with me. This is a very cool car. It’s also a brave one. Let’s see what happens.
Image credits: Kia
I love modern Kia design language and definitely considered them when I was shopping last but I still have concerns about their longevity and the dealer experience here remains… rough. Hopefully they’re still putting out interesting looking vehicles next time I’m shopping.
Same, but the engine machining issues at Hyundai/Kia scared me away from those brands long ago.
It doesn’t look crazy, it just looks kinda dull. Weird angles for no reason, strange hips, odd roof. The end result is it looks like about 4 cars were cut up and melded together in this completely uninspired design. The interior looks about like you would expect for your Uber ride back to the hotel.
Dull? Are you seeing it right?
“about 4 cars were cut up and melded together” definitely doesn’t describe “dull”.
Maybe it just needs harlequining.
I will not forgive Kia for killing the 5-door Rio, and Americans for not buying what is a super fun “Korean Golf GTI”. The Kia sales people push the Forte all day long, but I snuck away at the tail end of COVID with a sub $20K “sporty blue” Rio and couldn’t be happier.
This is sexy, but Kia has been making sexy cars for while so it’s no surprise.
Tell me it’s not me, but all I see is modern take on the 6000 SUX… it’s just me, isn’t it?
I didn’t see your comment from earlier today until now and made a post stating the same thing. First thing that hit my mind when I seen the K4’s rear 3/4 view was cyber punk 6000SX. Glad to know I’m not the only person that got the SUX vibe from the K4
That and the undersized wheels and massive overhangs…
I think my biggest hesitation regarding the exterior is this:
It’s been covered in studies that taller hoods encourage an impacted pedestrian to be pulled under (more dangerous) rather than go up onto the hood (less dangerous).
But have they addressed differences in the angle of the hood, independently of the height? That’s still a pretty stark right angle that mildly concerns me, irrespective of it looking cool.
That’s a good question, and I don’t know. What I do know is that a sloped hood with a rounded front edge looks terrible, and a flatter, longer hood with a more upright grille looks much better. And I am excited that we are finally getting back to flatter hoods and squarer grilles after a 25 year tradition of fwd cars looking like suppositories.
As a Prius v driver, I resemble that remark
Ok, the drawings look great, but the car leaves me unsure. I don’t generally like the taillights running down the side of the car like that.
Once the weird detail on the rear pillar was pointed out, my big question is “WHY?!?” Maybe Adrian could explain it from a design perspective, but to me it looks like “I’m going to put a detail here rhat adds nothing, except some credit to me for adding a wholly unnecessary detail.”
And what would I call that detail? It seems too brutalist to call it design frippery. I am at a loss for words (I know, and I’m scared too).
I was wondering: how come no walk on (drive by?) for Adrian on that one? I guarantee whatever he thinks, it’s not “oh, I hadn’t noticed that at all, I was busy making some tea…”
I am sure he has an opinion on it. For all we know, he may love it. Generally, Luc Donckerwolke’s work is very nice, and even if he only signed off on this, I think there must be a reason for it.
Personally, the points I mentioned are like sore thumbs in that they are unpleasant and they stick out. Time will tell if they heal into a thumbs up, or get worse and begin to stick out like a compound fracture.
That weird design detail is probably justified by Kia designers claiming it lowers coefficient of drag by .0000001, or its because disjointed design is what eventually happens when the KDM market demands its vehicles must appear drastically different with each generation.
Why do all new head/taillights have tears streaming down?
To make Jason sad?
They’re obsessed with the giant robo anime which is fair, it’s pretty awesome
oooo a green interior 😀
C/D pillar is weird and disjointed, but somehow still kind of works overall. Love the squared fenders. Love the interior. Totally dig the steering wheel. Like, a LOT.
Nice work, Kia. I’m looking forward to renting one someday!
Front good. But exactly what Lewin highlighted with the C/D pillar… egads.
They shouda just aped the awesome-looking “Infiniti J” ass from the corporate-cousin Ionic 6.
The interior is real, and it’s spectacular. Green? HELL YEAH.
Well for what it’s worth, my almost 7 year old son looked over my shoulder as I was reading this article and informed me he thought the K4 looked super awesome.
If I see this car not knowing anything about it, I would think right away its an EV. The design and the way everything looks (specially on the interior) screams I am ready to get electrified. Hopefully they have a PHEV version and Hybrid at least.
“Kia’s design sketches have us jonesing for a high-performance sports model”
Yes, it needs absurd box flares. I don’t know of there’s a touring car series it can compete in, but I want to see that happen.
I’m also sure its styling shouldn’t hurt its prospects – rental car companies, Uber drivers, and any civilian buying a small sedan in 2024 is probably going to consider the Forte one way or another. I don’t know if this is enough to get people out of crossovers though (K4 hatch/wagon to replace the Forte5 when?).
I kinda like it… but… man… they really need to fix that KN logo.
You mean it’s not KVI?
Yeah, Kia Vehicles, Inc 😛
I’ll never be able to see anything but the Nine Inch Nails logo when I look at it.
Is that not better?
“Head like a hole, black as your Soul…”
I had never realized Trent was talking about a Korean automaker.
The only thing black about my Soul is it’s interior
If you put the logo right above itself, and then flip the bottom one on both axes, you get something suspiciously swastika-adjacent.
I like it, but yeah, that C pillar is a bit weird. Maybe it would look better in another color? A bright color? C’mon Kia, give us some color!
Maybe you could buy something colorful that clips onto that black strip, like the yellow bumper guard protectors on Challengers and Chargers that were supposed to be taken off after shipping.
I do hope this will evolve into a trend to move to a useful liftback as standard for cars. Hatches are so useful, I don’t know why they’re so deeply unpopular in America.
What direction do you think we have been going for the last 30 years? Sedans are at an all time low, fastbacks, hatchbacks, and crossovers are at an all time high.
Arguably, crossovers/SUVs are just high-riding hatchbacks.
But I don’t necessarily agree that liftbacks have seen a rise to replace 3-box with a mailslot on the back.
I guess you haven’t heard of Tesla, or Mustangs?
Ah, you mean the Model3 which doesn’t have a proper hatch.
Or the Model Y & X which are labeled CUV/SUVs?
No, I mean the Model 3 and Model S that are exactly the kind of liftback replacing a trunklid on a sedan that you’re talking about.
I think you’re mistaken; the Model 3 does not have a liftback, it’s a traditional trunk/boot despite its rakish shape. The same car built as an SUV, as the Model Y, did receive a hatch.
Wow… they really are on a roll nowadays. Just realize that 2nd gen Optima went out of production just 14 years ago. Look that one up in case you forgot. From zero to hero, well done Kia!
I still prefer a sporty sedan and I think that Kia/Hyundai/Genesis have been knocking it out of the park on aesthetic designs, both inside and out, for a number of years now. Even the ones I’m not real fond of are at least pretty bold rather than some bland, afterthought blob of a vehicle. I was car shopping recently and much of my shortlist was Kias, Hyundais and Genesis vehicles (including the SUVs). These cars come packed with features and a ridiculous warranty. I stumbled upon a ’21 BMW M235i that I fell for and bought (it makes me giggle all the time) but I could just as easily have bought a G70, G80, Stinger or K5. Those are all nice looking, loaded, sporty sedans that I’m sure I would enjoy too.
Just like the rest of their lineup, this K4 looks pretty great too. I really think the majority of the newest “non luxury” sedans look pretty striking. I like the new Camrys and Accords. I even think the latest Sentra looks pretty sharp and so does the Forte.
I think Kia/Hyundai have the most interesting looking lineup of vehicles, and by a significant margin.
I appreciate them not making an anodyne box and then lamenting that no one buys sedans. That being said, the K4 looks like someone drew a Polestar 2 from memory.
That back gives me Tatra vibes.
Yes. I looked at the C-pillar and a part of my brain said “Air vents? Rear engine?” The rest of my brain knows better.
Re: death of sedans, I think they were a default because everyone were buying them long past anyone knew why anymore, until people realized that there’s no need to have the roofline limit the cargo room. It’s not that I don’t like sedans, but we don’t build sloping rooflines inside our rooms for a reason.
Unfortunately, that realization was coupled with the rise of the ducking SUV, but hopefully people will eventually realize that all the extra heft and cladding is useless, and will arrive naturally at the most enlightened bodystyle of them all, the glorious Minivan/MPV.
And yeah, “ducking” was the work of autocorrect, but I’m rolling with that.
I’ll offer the counterpoint: it’s not the cargo space, never was. Very few people are actually hauling around so much stuff in a single go. Sure, there are occasions (and available vehicles) that proof the rule, but on a regular basis, nope. Trunks were plenty large enough for most people.
People wanted big vehicles; but b/c “conspicuous consumption” became a buzzword in the ’80s, they had to rationalize to themselves that that wasn’t it. So “cargo space”, “better visibility”, etc. eventually led to the ducking situation we have now.
You do have a point, and this might very well be the case. However, every once in a while you need to haul around a box of something that wouldn’t fit the trunk, and you think in secret “damn, I wish I had an estate”. Problem was, estates/shooting brakes/station wagoms were never cool, certain ly not as cool as sedans, and they had to resort to steroids and radical sports to be taken seriously – so here we are at the Age of the S/CUV.
Do you really believe this? I drive a long bed pickup and frequently use the entire bed. I frequently fill up my station wagons. My Crown Vic never runs out of trunk space, but it’s really easy to overflow the trunk of my buddy’s Civic.
I most certainly do haul around that much stuff in a single go, and I don’t really understand how people get by without a station wagon at least.
This post reminds me, when I was a kid my dad once loaded a fully dressed corsair motor in to the trunk of a foor door 1978 Oldsmobile 98 Regency with a cherry picker (i.e. engine hoist) and was able to close the trunk.
We thought it would fit but it still was funny when it actually latched closed, still makes me smile thinking about that now
https://www.facebook.com/share/r/AWPipAcdKuBbRuFo/?mibextid=oFDknk
I’ll save that for later use 🙂
“we don’t build sloping rooflines inside our rooms for a reason.
See I thought that was because aerodynamics aren’t an issue with houses.
OTOH dome houses were once a thing.
Domed cars were what the 50’s expected us to be driving now 🙂
Pretty sure they were supposed to fly using nuclear power too.
Not before they become self driving!
Form should follow function, with modifications to decrease aerodynamic drag.
The last decade or so has brought unnecessary lines, creases and crap like that which serve no purpose other than making body shop work more difficult in an attempt to look unique and new.
Kia should look at Volkswagen as a modern example of clean, easy-on-the-eyes styling. And while they’re at it, brush up a bit on what the letters in the alphabet look like.
Am I getting old if I think the style of an early 90’s Honda Accord was the epitome of sedan design?
Was with you until this.
This was true maybe ten years ago. But the new Jetta looks like an old Corolla that melted in the sun, and all of the I.D. line looks like Little Tikes cars with their contrasting roof rails and curvy sheetmetal.
Agree. Every time I see a late model Camry or Civic, I think of how poorly those designs will age. Nobody will be calling them “classic” in 30 years, much like how few people now use that term to describe the jellybeans of the ’90s.
I dunno. I prefer the styling of a jellybean Tarus to a ’57 Chevy.
It’s a good point that I later thought about too – the Taurus is beautiful and iconic to me too, perhaps for being the originator, rather than a copy of a copy?
The Jellybean Taurus yes (seems like an original design)
The 1st gen Taurus exterior design was pretty highly inspired (to put it politely) by the Audi 100/5000 (depending on where you live)
True, or the Euro Ford Sierra. But the Taurus really did bring the look to the mass market here in the states.
Yeah that’s fair
The Audi 100/5000 seems to get forgotten or still a bad rap bc of audi’s own ‘unintended acceleration’ fiasco from what 86′-87′?
When I was in high school, a friend’s dad had one, and I always liked it for the sleek understated-ness of it, at a time when plenty of domestic iron was still boxy and be-chromed.
And IIRC correctly, Ferris’ dad drove one even. 😉
“Ferris’ dad drove one even. ????”
Oh my gosh that’s right!
last gen Civic yes, current Civic model cleaned up its act admirably!
I saw what appeared to be a late model 5 door civic si the other day in traffic and said to my son that it looked like an angry Japanese decepticon to which he laughed and ageed
Doing an image search looks like it must have been a 2024 model that someone added an aftermarket body kit bc it was much more exaggerated than the stock 2024 Civic SI images…
Its function is to carry passengers safely and comfortably. Nothing on the exterior is stopping that.
If your styling objective is “easy on the eyes”, you’ll only get plain, smooth, boring designs. Many of the most iconic and excellent car designs of all time are conspicuously NOT easy on the eyes.
But yes, I do think the 4th gen 1990-1993 Accord is one of the best looking sedans ever. It’s an even better wagon, which is why I own two.
I mean, the Hyundai Elantra is also pretty bold looking for a sedan.
I think this will be fine.
I’m digging the outside, but the inside just looks ho-hum and rushed the way they haphazardly slapped screens on the dash.
As much as I bemoaned the death of the sedan, I’m starting to realize that maybe it’s a good thing. We’ve weeded out the companies who just phone it in, and the sedans that are left are generally at the top of their game. Even the Camry, a car I’d never have considered in the past, is looking pretty interesting these days.
Hmm. I’ve been a sucker for what’s been coming out of K/H/G under Donckerwolcke, but this doesn’t do it for me. It feels a bit like a volvo sedan that got stepped on.