Ford Ecosport vs Kia Stonic

What's the difference?

So, should you buy a base-model Ford EcoSport Ambiente? 

For the money it’s a great little daily commuter with an odd mix of dated trim and a great multimedia, but it’s definitely worth making room in your budget to investigate the Trend or Titanium grades.

Plus, it’s worth keeping in mind that many competitors now offer more comprehensive safety or more powerful drivetrains for not much more money.

Once over the little thrill of driving a car we weren't supposed to get (okay, it wasn't that thrilling), a few things became clear. You can now buy a compact SUV with a good long warranty, a bit of Kia flair and a roomy cabin, at least for its size.

It drives really well even if the transmission was a bit reluctant to do what I wanted. It's easy to park and will live very happily in the city while carrying reasonable numbers of people and their things. It may not be as bang up to date as some of its competitors, and the GT-Line's value is borderline, but it delivers plenty in its small package to a rapacious SUV market.

The EcoSport has had a second refresh this year, simply removing the spare wheel from the back. According to Ford, this was due to consumers not liking the extra 12kg it added to the rear hatch. Fair enough. 

Personally though, I think it detracts from the EcoSport’s look, the rear spare was a cheeky stab at small soft-roaders of the ‘90s. 

The lack of a spare also makes the side-swinging door a bit pointless now (it also swings the wrong way, toward the kerb instead of away from it, due to its European design origins) and just gives the rear three-quarter another anonymous SUV look.

Aside from that the EcoSport has come a long way styling-wise. 

It has ditched the weird hatchback grille it used to have, instead employing a tough-looking single plastic grille insert, bringing it stylistically in line with larger Ford SUVs like the Everest and Escape. Plus, the plastic guards on the underside give it a fun off-roader look.

Importantly, it strays far enough from its Fiesta underpinnings to look like something new entirely, unlike the Holden Trax, which simply looks like a Holden Cruze on stilts…

Inside, it maintains a little too much of that last-generation Fiesta look. The dash juts too far into the cabin, feeling as though it reduces space, and there is an abundance of terrible plastics and hardly aesthetic textures across the entire cockpit.

The seat trim is some el-cheapo nylon material, but at least it will be easy to clean.

A saving grace is the slick-looking multimedia interface, but it looks so much newer than its surroundings its obvious Ford has simply tacked this on as part of a facelift. Thankfully, unlike some other current Fords, the volume, fan-speed and temperature controls are all dials instead of buttons.

The touchscreen itself, as with most new Ford products, is a pleasure to use and not difficult to navigate. The Apple CarPlay connectivity didn’t throw me any lag or problems.

In terms of interior trim, the Honda HR-V is still the target to beat in this segment, but the EcoSport shapes up pretty well compared to the Trax and ASX with their tiny media screens and equally average interior materials.

The Stonic clearly looks like it is related to the Rio, but also bears a strong resemblance to the Seltos. Underneath is the very familiar small hatch Rio but Kia says every panel is different. 

The panels might be, but have a look at the rear door and the way the glass meets the C-pillar and you can tell it's a Rio. 

Which is fine, of course, because I think the Stonic looks really good in GT-Line form, with the bigger wheels, some well-judged cladding and some nice sculpting on the body. 

If you plump for the two-tone paint job (which I think looks great), you will go without the sunroof. Also the sun-safe option, but I know some are fans of a hole in the roof.

The cabin is by-the-numbers Kia, which is to say it's well laid-out and looks good, but won't be troubling a beret-sporting art critic for superlatives. 

Unlike the exterior, it's straight out of the Rio, which does have its downsides, which we'll discuss further.

Despite being based on a car as compact as the Fiesta (complete with aforementioned dash design that feels like it detracts from space), the EcoSport has a good amount of head and legroom in both seating rows.

In terms of storage, there’s a little trench under the air conditioning controls, two decently-sized cupholders in the centre console and what has to be one of the smallest storage boxes I’ve ever used under the armrest.

Rear passengers get… um… not much. There are no storage areas in the doors, no drop-down centre armrest and no air vents in the back of the centre console. They do get two ISOFIX points on the outer seats, though. At least in terms of dimensions, space is decent back there.

The EcoSport’s boot is large. As Ford provides measurements in SAE rather than VDA, it’s hard to compare number for number, but the boot is deep and tall with the seats up, and with them down there’s a nifty variable boot floor so you can level it out or take advantage of the extra depth.

CarsGuide colleague Matt Campbell points out in his latest range review, that one of the EcoSport's main selling points in other markets is that it can fit a whole washing machine in the boot.

The HR-V still aces this segment in terms of flexibility, but the EcoSport possesses one of the most useful boots in its class.

Oh, and the missing full-size spare wheel on the back? That's now gone entirely, replaced with an inflation kit under the boot floor. Don't blame Ford, blame the consumers.

For a car this size, it's reasonably roomy. I can sit behind my driving position in the rear seat and while violin playing is off the agenda, it's not claustrophobic.

Front seat passengers have plenty of storage to play with, including a split storage box underneath the console for phone and wallet-chucking. 

You also get two cupholders, even with the space-robbing conventional handbrake (I like a standard handbrake, though, so I didn't mind too much).

Each front door has a pocket for a decent-sized bottle, but not so rears. And your back seat passengers won't have an armrest or cupholders, either.

Boot space is an impressive 352 litres (VDA) with the seats up and 1155 litres with the seats down, although you don't get a flat floor with the seats folded and you do have a drop to the boot floor over the loading lip. Nothing terrifying, but the more you know...

The GT-Line tops a three-spec range, starting with the base model S manual at $22,990 drive-away (add another grand for the auto).

Then it's $24,990 drive-away for the Sport (plus $1000 for the auto) and $29,990 drive-away for the GT-Line, which is auto-only and has a turbo engine. 

That's some pretty fancy footwork with the spreadsheets (which I know isn't a thing, imagine how dirty the keyboard would be).

If you've bought a GT-Line, your kebab short of thirty grand gets you 17-inch alloys, a six-speaker stereo, climate control, a reversing camera, keyless entry and start, rear parking sensors, cruise control, sat nav, auto LED headlights with auto high beam, auto wipers, fake leather bits and pieces, powered and heated folding mirrors, a sunroof and a space-saver spare.

The larger 8.0-inch media screen hosts Kia's updated and very excellent software, with its cool and subtle graphics, fast hardware and, as expected, Apple CarPlay and Android Auto.

The speakers are a bit tinny, but as long as you don't turn them up too much, you'll be fine. Handily, CarPlay is wireless and you can have two phones connected at once to the Bluetooth system. Try that in a Ferrari.

The EcoSport Ambiente is the only EcoSport in the range powered by a 1.5-litre non-turbo three-cylinder engine.

The Trend and Titanium levels get a more advanced 1.0-litre three-cylinder turbo engine bearing Ford’s 'EcoBoost' branding.

On paper the 1.5-litre in our car is underpowered. It produces just 90kW/150Nm, comparing poorly to four-cylinder competitors like the Holden Trax with its 1.4-litre turbo (103kW/200Nm), the Mitsubishi ASX with its 2.0-litre non-turbo (110kW/197Nm) and Honda HR-V with its 1.8-litre non-turbo (105kW/172Nm).

In practice though, it’s not too bad. Quite a bit of the available torque arrives early, letting the EcoSport zip around city surroundings with ease. It’s only really out on open roads where you’ll feel the power fade away at higher revs.

All EcoSports have a six-speed torque converter automatic transmission and are front-wheel drive only in Australia.

The GT-Line is the only one of the three in the range to score Kia's rorty 1.0-litre, three-cylinder turbo, good for 74kW and 172Nm to haul its 1200kg weight. 

A seven-speed dual-clutch transmission drives the front wheels and you'll hit 100km/h in about 10 seconds.

The bad news for the 1.5-litre three-cylinder is clearly in this department. 

Ford claims a not-great combined figure of 6.9L/100km, and after my mixed drive (freeways on the weekend, traffic during the week) I managed to add another 2.1 litres to that total, bringing my final number to 9.0L/100km.

An average score, considering you can extract better fuel figures from much bigger and more engaging engines. For comparison, I recently scored 8.0L/100km in the 1.4-litre four-cylinder turbo Suzuki Vitara.

All EcoSports have a 52-litre fuel tank, and happily drink base-grade 91 RON petrol.

Kia's government-mandated fuel economy testing yielded an official combined-cycle figure of 5.4L/100km. 

As I have found over the years with this engine, that's a fairly optimistic number, my week with the Stonic delivering 8.4L/100km in an almost even mix of highway and suburban running.

The Stonic has that rarest of things in a Korean car - stop-start, which helps rein in fuel usage around town. Happily, you'll be filling the 45 litre tank with standard unleaded.

The EcoSport is a great city companion. With long suspension travel that’s comfortable and compliant, neglected infrastructure didn’t bother the ride much at all, and it was surprisingly quiet during our week.

Prodding the accelerator too far will only lead to disappointment, the engine starts to make a bit more noise, but doesn’t propel the car with an equal amount of gusto. It’s hardly the most entertaining car to drive, even in the small SUV segment.

The steering is great, if a little light and the transmission makes itself largely unknown. Ford’s choice to stick with a torque converter rather than a CVT has probably saved this little engine from being a major let down.

All those features combine with a high seating position and great visibility for a little SUV that’s simply easy to pilot in urban surroundings. 

More can be had from competitors like the HR-V with its excellent ride, and the Suzuki Vitara with its fun-packed engine, but Ford has nailed the experience for daily commuters.

I must admit to being slightly puzzled by the Stonic. I've already driven the Rio GT-Line and there is one thing that is the same between the two cars and that's the seven-speed dual clutch's awkward behaviour in traffic. 

The car I had was not at all keen to respond to the movement of my right foot on the accelerator, with my wife and I developing an in-joke about having to make a verbal suggestion about which gear to choose. 

It also rolled back more than I'd like on slopes when starting from a standstill.

The other things I didn't like were the front seats. Straight out of the Rio, they are wide but not very supportive on longer trips, such as the one we took up into the Blue Mountains (a roughly 250km round trip from our home in Sydney). 

Complaints about the seats are certainly mine, but I checked in with colleague Richard Berry, who didn't have the same hesitant transmission struggle, so it could just have been a drama with the car I drove. 

The rest of the Stonic experience is really good. The 1.0-litre turbo is definitely the one to go for if you can stretch to it. The numbers don't seem big, but it's got decent punch in the gears and cheerfully climbed the Blue Mountains quietly and without hunting up and down the gears. 

Around the city it also means it's easy to thread through the traffic, with good response from low revs when the transmission is playing well.

The steering is really nice, too, with just the right weight and speed to make city-wrangling easy. The extra ride height and softer suspension also make for a very comfortable ride around town without taking away from the body control. In fact, it's quite a bit of fun.

In a typical ANCAP quirk, the GT-Line does not (yet) have a safety rating where the S and Sport carry the Rio's five star assessment from 2017. When the rules weren't as tough as they are today.

The GT-Line, as with the rest of the range, scores six airbags, ABS, stability and traction controls and a reversing camera. 

The forward AEB works with other cars between five and 180km/h while pedestrians and cyclist detection works between five and 85km/h. You also get lane keep assist and lane following assist.

The kids are looked after with three top-tether anchors and two ISOFIX points.

Just like Mazda, Honda and Holden, Ford has updated its warranty recently to five-years/unlimited km coverage. Kia doesn’t operate in the small SUV segment (unless you count the quirky Soul) so five years is the bar to beat.

The 1.5-litre non-turbo three-cylinder engine option was not available in Ford’s service calculator tool at the time of writing but expect it to cost between $230-270 per regular service, jumping to somewhere just under $500 every four years (assuming it keeps a similar pricing structure to the previous engine options).

Ford offers a free loan car while your car is down for servicing, which needs to happen once a year or every 15,000km.

Kia offers a seven-year/unlimited kilometre warranty, which is only shaded by Mitsubishi's caveat-filled, 10-year/200,000km warranty. 

The Stonic demands a return to the dealer ever 12 months or 10,000km, which is kind of irritating as the non-turbo models are 12 months/15,000km. 

As ever, Kia offers a capped-price servicing regime but the numbers aren't yet available on the website (yet).

Lucky for you, we've got them. Prices bounce around a bit and are as low as $283 and as high as $704 with the first seven years/seven services costing $3299, averaging out at $471 per visit. 

Over the five years, it's $260 more than the 1.4-litre but you're servicing more often if you drive more than 10,000km per year.