Kia Stonic vs Ford Ecosport

What's the difference?

All in all, the Stonic is a satisfactory daily driver, it’s just nowhere near ideal as a modern urban conveyance.

Sure, it’s reasonably priced in an increasingly expensive market, but it is very sluggish off the mark which is a solid negative against its overall rating. It also feels cheap inside and lacks contemporary driver-assist tech, such as adaptive cruise control.

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.

I spend the lion’s share of my time in large and upper large 4WDs, so spending quality time in something like this little hot hatchbac… er, small SUV, is a revelation and a lot of zippy fun. Like driving a go-kart without the fumes and the prangs.

The 2025 Kia Stonic Sport is 4140mm long (with a 2580mm wheelbase), 1760mm wide and 1520mm high. It has a listed kerb weight of 1227kg.

This is a slick-looking hatchbac… er, light SUV, and it looks suitably sporty. 

Though ground clearance is unlisted, it stands well clear of the road surface, giving this hatchbac… er, compact SUV, more presence than it otherwise might have.

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 Sport’s interior is a practical space but it feels a bit dated and underdone in a car market increasingly packed with well-equipped, cheaper and more contemporary SUVs.

The most obvious factors working against the Sport are its the 8.0-inch touchscreen multimedia (too small), the absence of wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto and wireless phone charging and multiple hard plastic surfaces.

Sure, the touchscreen is easy enough to operate, but it sometimes takes a few finger stabs to hit the sweet spot you’re after, and thankfully there are dials and buttons off-screen as alternatives for air con controls, etc.

There’s a satisfactory number of storage spaces in the front including two cupholders between the seats, a few little receptacles for your everyday carry gear, and bottle holders in each of the front doors.

The back seat is short on cupholders – there are none – but there are bottle holders in the doors, and the passengers back there get a USB-A port, a map pocket (in the back of the front passenger’s seat) and flip-down grab handles. There are no directional air vents.

Back-seat room is satisfactory for an adult without being spacious, but fine for kids. What do you expect in a small SUV?

In terms of packability, the cargo area (with the rear seat up and in use) yields a listed 352 litres of space. The rear seats are in a 60/40 split fold configuration and with them folded down there is a listed 1155 litres of useable room.

The rear cargo area has bag hooks, a storage space in the left-hand inner wall, and tie-down points at each corner of the floor.

A steel space-saver spare wheel is under the cargo area floor.

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.

We’ll start with one of the most appealing points of the EcoSport, and that’s price. Our Ambiente is the base-model and comes in at a total of $22,790 before on-roads.

That’s cheap. Especially when lined up against competitors, like the base automatic Holden Trax LS ($26,490), the automatic Mitsubishi ASX ES ($25,490), and the Honda HR-V VTi ($24,990).

It comes closest to the base-model Suzuki Vitara RT-S, which can be had in automatic form from $23,990.

Obviously cheapest doesn’t always mean best, and you’ll notice right off the bat items like the dorky 16-inch steel wheels with plastic hubcaps, cheap black plastic finishes on the door handles and wing-mirrors and bargain halogen headlamp fittings.

Better features for the price are the wing-mirror mounted indicators, new 6.5-inch multimedia touchscreen with DAB+, two USB ports, Apple CarPlay and Android Auto as well as a very welcome reversing camera and rear parking sensors.

Frustratingly, auto headlights are missing… a let down in any 2019 car.

The new touchscreen with Ford’s 'Sync 3' software is the most important value add for the base EcoSport, It’s way better than similar offerings in more expensive base-model competitors, although, unlike the Suzuki Vitara, does not offer sat-nav at this price.

One thing I’m not entirely sure of is why you wouldn’t simply stretch the extra $1700 to upgrade the EcoSport to the mid-spec Trend grade, as it scores a better turbocharged engine, alloy wheels, bigger 8.0-inch multimedia screen with sat-nav, ditches the dorky black plastic finish and adds a leather-trimmed steering wheel. Worth the money for sure.

The 2025 Kia Sonic Sport has a 1.0-litre three-cylinder turbo-petrol engine – producing 74kW at 4500-6000rpm and 172Nm at 1500-4000rpm – and that’s paired with a seven-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission. 

This pairing is a mostly punchy one, although definite lagginess is evident from a standing start often enough that it’s a disconcerting characteristic rather than a mildly annoying one.

This turbocharged engine used to only be offered in the top-spec GT-Line, so it’s a welcome addition to the other grades.

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.

Kia's official fuel consumption figure for the Stonic Sport is 5.4L/100km, on a combined (urban/extra-urban) cycle. And on this test I recorded 8.2L/100km.

The Stonic Sport has an 45-litre fuel tank so, going by my on-test fuel figure, you could reasonably expect a driving range of about 548km from a full tank. 

Fuel requirement is 91 RON 'standard' unleaded.

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.

The Stonic Sport is a handy urban conveyance, but it is far from perfect.

It’s a small, light vehicle so it’s nimble for navigating through car-packed streets and convenient for tricky parking manoeuvres.

Steering is well weighted and precise.

And the turbocharged petrol engine is a welcome addition to the Stonic package, introducing a handy amount of power and torque which is sensibly harnessed and delivered – most of the time anyway – via the mostly clever transmission.

However, in stop-start, inner-city traffic or even a busy suburban area, the Stonic Sport struggles to get off the mark from a standstill, so much so that this one characteristic threatens to spoil the rest of the driving experience. 

Once the Sport is out on the open road, it’s a pleasant cruiser as this compact SUV simply rolls along.

Ride is firm – 17-inch wheels and low-profile tyres are the culprits here – and handling is impressive.

In terms of refinement the Stonic is mostly, um, fine but there is some tyre noise, especially over rougher roads out of the city, but it’s not terrible.

Every Stonic has three drive modes – 'Normal', 'Sport' and 'Eco' – each of which tweaks throttle response, engine output and transmission settings to best suit the driver and conditions. 

The Stonic is generally a reasonable daily driver, but the absence of adaptive cruise control is a let-down when it comes to highway running.

Not that you’ll be buying a Stonic with the aim of skull-dragging a 3500kg caravan along the highway, but it’s handy to know this Kia SUV’s towing capacities are 450kg (unbraked trailer) and 900kg (braked).

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.

The EcoSport carries a maximum five-star ANCAP safety rating as of December 2017, although it has not been rated to the more stringent standards introduced in 2018 that place a higher importance on autonomous systems.

No EcoSport grade has auto emergency braking (AEB), Lane Keep Assist (LKAS) or active cruise, but Blind Spot Monitoring (BSM) does become available on the top Titanium grade.

It’s a letdown given most competitors are now at least offering low-speed AEB.

Our understanding is that Ford doesn’t even plan to add those more recent active safety features to the EcoSport for the foreseeable future, unlike the Suzuki Vitara which is set to get features like AEB soon.

The Ambiente still has seven airbags, the standard suite of stability systems and hill decent control, as well as the aforementioned reversing camera and rear parking sensors.

Kia’s seven-year/unlimited kilometre warranty applies to the Stonic and you have access to roadside assistance for up to eight years as long as you always get it serviced at an authorised Kia garage.

Servicing intervals are set at every 12 months or 10,000km, whichever comes soonest.

Service costs start at $290 (12 months/10,000km), peak at $727 (48 months/40,000km) and finish at $578 (84 months/70,000km) and the total over seven years is $3367; an average of $481 per workshop visit (correct at time of writing). That’s rather pricey for something in the small SUV market.

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.