[RacingRedN]

The only other vehicle I believe that is a direct competition to the Kona N in the US is the Mazda CX-30 turbo. It produces 250 hp and 320lbs of torque using premium fuel. It has AWD and is basically a Mazda3 AWD turbo raised to get the SUV height. Some may state that the AMG 45 GLA is also competition but it is another 20K more and only slightly faster than the Kona N. To me at that price point I rather get a true sports car and not a SUV/CUV.

The Kona is nothing more than a raised Hyundai Accent. Though in 2018 Hyundai stopped the Accent hatchback and released the Kona. Like the CX30 it is a car that has been raised off the ground. Unlike the CX it only got raised up by 1" vs 1.5+" inches. This provides the Kona a lower center of gravity and makes it easier to get back to car like performance simply by swapping to springs that lower the car almost by an inch. This makes the Kona N a possible real hot hatch if one simply adds lowering springs which are available and lowers the car by .7". Making the ride height a bit over 5.5" which is what the Elantra N and Veloster N roughly sit at.

I personally won't be changing my ride height. I like sitting a bit higher for the added visibility, and only sitting 1" higher doesn't impact the car fun factor for me, I think it adds to it. If the Kona sat say 8"+ off the ground I would have waited for an Elantra N to come to a local dealer.

 

[jimv2K13]

I don’t even think the CX-30 turbo is direct competition to be honest. It may have similar power figures but it’s a totally different driving experience. It and the Mazda 3 turbo are going for more of an upmarket feel. Mazda has decided that their niche for the next several years is basically going to be beating entry level luxury cars at their own game…they give you the high end features and materials you’d expect out of the German and Japanese luxury brands but at a lower price.

In that way, their cars are great and they’re pretty universally liked by automotive journalists. But when it comes to enthusiast offerings it’s basically just the Miata at this point. If you compare their turbo hatch offerings to the competition they’re much less engaging to drive and are calibrated more for comfort than performance. If that’s what you want then they’re a great choice, but if you want driving engagement Mazda isn’t what they used to be anymore.

I honestly don’t think the Kona N has any direct competition in the US market, although it does internationally with cars like the VW T Roc R and the Ford Puma ST, Audi SQ2, etc. I personally see the Kona N mainly as competition for the traditional hot hatch/affordable performance segment…cars like the GTI/Golf R, Civic SI/Type R, the WRX, BRZ/GR86, Jetta GLI, et cetera. But it offers something none of the others do, which is the ride height advantage and additional ground clearance in addition to the great stuff a hatch adds.

I wound up with one because I initially wanted an Elantra N but absolutely couldn’t stand the seats in the thing and thought the interior felt worse overall (it felt like it was trying too hard to be something it wasn’t IMHO), not to mention my soon to be wife was more keen on a relatively incognito CUV than a boy racer sedan. I think that specific situation is what will sell the Kona N most to be honest. It’s a great compromise car because it offers the performance and driving engagement of the other cars (and then some) but wraps it all up in a super usable package. It’s a perfect fit for the “I’m an enthusiast but my partner isn’t and if I’m going to have a fast car I need them to get on board with it” demographic haha.

Really the only similar competition I can think of would be the Mercedes you mentioned or the X2 M35i (which I’ve actually driven-it beats the Kona as far as comfort and interior go but can’t touch the driving experience). You can find used ones in the high 30s if you’re patient. Or maybe even an older Macan, although the Kona N will annihilate a base Macan performance wise and should be able to go tit for tat with an older gen Macan S.

Those cars are all wheel drive as well, which is an advantage that the Kona N doesn’t enjoy. But even used ones will cost more than a brand new Kona N, which comes with an amazing warranty too. To make a long story short there really is nothing that the Kona N competes directly with in the US. The way I see it is it’s an interesting and unique car, which is one of the reasons why I love mine so much, and like I’ve said in other threads…people find it really intriguing, even (curiously enough) non car enthusiasts. I’ve had coworkers ask me what the deal with it is a few times, basically being like “I can tell this is way cooler than a normal Kona, can you explain why?”. No one ever said a **** word about my GTI lol.

I think it will either succeed in establishing an entirely new niche or be a sales flop because of how weird it is. Either way, us owners are in good shape, because if it turns into a big deal we got in on the ground floor and were early adapters…and if it flops and we’re patient, the car will come back up in value in a few years as a curiosity and enthusiasts will recognize it as a cult classic. We’ll see what happens!

 

[Mainia1]

I don’t even think the CX-30 turbo is direct competition to be honest. It may have similar power figures but it’s a totally different driving experience. It and the Mazda 3 turbo are going for more of an upmarket feel. Mazda has decided that their niche for the next several years is basically going to be beating entry level luxury cars at their own game…they give you the high end features and materials you’d expect out of the German and Japanese luxury brands but at a lower price.

In that way, their cars are great and they’re pretty universally liked by automotive journalists. But when it comes to enthusiast offerings it’s basically just the Miata at this point. If you compare their turbo hatch offerings to the competition they’re much less engaging to drive and are calibrated more for comfort than performance. If that’s what you want then they’re a great choice, but if you want driving engagement Mazda isn’t what they used to be anymore.

I honestly don’t think the Kona N has any direct competition in the US market, although it does internationally with cars like the VW T Roc R and the Ford Puma ST, Audi SQ2, etc. I personally see the Kona N mainly as competition for the traditional hot hatch/affordable performance segment…cars like the GTI/Golf R, Civic SI/Type R, the WRX, BRZ/GR86, Jetta GLI, et cetera. But it offers something none of the others do, which is the ride height advantage and additional ground clearance in addition to the great stuff a hatch adds.

I wound up with one because I initially wanted an Elantra N but absolutely couldn’t stand the seats in the thing and thought the interior felt worse overall (it felt like it was trying too hard to be something it wasn’t IMHO), not to mention my soon to be wife was more keen on a relatively incognito CUV than a boy racer sedan. I think that specific situation is what will sell the Kona N most to be honest. It’s a great compromise car because it offers the performance and driving engagement of the other cars (and then some) but wraps it all up in a super usable package. It’s a perfect fit for the “I’m an enthusiast but my partner isn’t and if I’m going to have a fast car I need them to get on board with it” demographic haha.

Really the only similar competition I can think of would be the Mercedes you mentioned or the X2 M35i (which I’ve actually driven-it beats the Kona as far as comfort and interior go but can’t touch the driving experience). You can find used ones in the high 30s if you’re patient. Or maybe even an older Macan, although the Kona N will annihilate a base Macan performance wise and should be able to go tit for tat with an older gen Macan S.

Those cars are all wheel drive as well, which is an advantage that the Kona N doesn’t enjoy. But even used ones will cost more than a brand new Kona N, which comes with an amazing warranty too. To make a long story short there really is nothing that the Kona N competes directly with in the US. The way I see it is it’s an interesting and unique car, which is one of the reasons why I love mine so much, and like I’ve said in other threads…people find it really intriguing, even (curiously enough) non car enthusiasts. I’ve had coworkers ask me what the deal with it is a few times, basically being like “I can tell this is way cooler than a normal Kona, can you explain why?”. No one ever said a **** word about my GTI lol.

I think it will either succeed in establishing an entirely new niche or be a sales flop because of how weird it is. Either way, us owners are in good shape, because if it turns into a big deal we got in on the ground floor and were early adapters…and if it flops and we’re patient, the car will come back up in value in a few years as a curiosity and enthusiasts will recognize it as a cult classic. We’ll see what happens!

I agree with your assessment of the Kona N. In no way is the the Mazda CX 30 ANY form of competition to the Kona N. It is a entry level luxury car with a larger turbo motor, tall subframes, and ok suspension for "commoner" daily driving.

North American based Kona N competition would be the slower and more softly setup set up GTI. The Golf R has the HP but the suspension is not up to task. It is too homogenized as is their looks. If they still made the Ford Focus ST/Fiesta ST ( RS , I would want the RS for it's AWD ) in NA around that would be in the mix, with the Fiesta ST at least being in the handling game and not competing in the hp/tq game. Old hot hatch's Mazda Speed 3. Then of course the Honda Type R, but that is in a league by itself with it's advanced suspension. It would be nice to see the i20 N here in North America.

I consider the Kona a hatchback. Well at least mine is, as it is 2.25 inches lower and actually looks like a hatchback. I just don't follow the logic that taller subframes pulls the car out of hatchback category. All the taller subframes do is make it handle worse. It is still a hatchback. All you did is cripple it's handling with height. There is no competition for the Kona N. Not unless you compete with a modified car, like a Golf GTI with modified suspension and a tune. Then that car would be the closest to the Kona N.

 

[Kona Joe]

I consider the Kona a hatchback.

That's been my sentiment about them since I bought one, nothing wrong with it, but it can't really be considered a crossover. My '07 Versa has more leg room and usable space, it just lacked a bit of ride height (minimal difference) and AWD to make it a great car.

 

[RacingRedN]

Having spent time behind the wheel of a CX30 and Mazda 3; they do drive really good through back roads with twisty. The turbo engine is needed for those cars as it greatly improve the car performance otherwise it felt slower than the standard Kona with the 2.0 non-turbo engine. Overall Kona vs CX30 the Kona, even the base model, the Kona has overall better handling due to its lower stance and for being slightly smaller.

The CX 30 Turbo is competition to the Kona N and the CX30 Turbo highest level package has similar options to the Kona N. As for fit and finish on the interior the Mazda is a bit better but not to the level of a BMW, Infinity, Lexus, etc... It is a in between for the fit and finish between Hyundai and true luxury brands. Where I found Hyunda Limited and Kona N was superior for inside the cabin was the seating material. Hyundai material felt of higher quality vs. the Mazda. Mazda should improve its material for the seats and IMO it would be closer to luxury but until that has happened it is only slightly above the quality of the Kona.

The classification of being a Crossover/SUV and a car is the ride height. An example is the Subaru Crosstrek vs. the Imperza Wagon. Both are the same car with the Crosstrek having 8" of ground clearance vs. the Impreza having 5.5". When a vehicle ride height is above 6" it is considered a crossover/SUV and a car when the ride height is under 6". The normal Kona has a 6.5" ride height and the Kona N has 6.7". I don't know why but Hyundai actually made the N model have a higher ride height than the standard Kona.

There are options out there to lower the Kona by 1"+. Doing this simply puts the Kona from a SUV/Crossover down to car for its ride height. Same can be done to the Crosstrek or any other SUV. I had a 1996 Jeep Cherokee that I dropped to about 4.5" off the ground. Would you all consider my lower Jeep Cherokee a hot hatchback or a SUV still? Even with the Jeep lowered I still considered it a SUV. Even with the Kona dropped I still considered it a CUV as that was the vehicle design by the manufacture. To each their own.

I like the ride height of the Kona. It's height doesn't really ruin its ride as it is a bit higher to provide additional visibility which I find useful. Yeah dropping it would help its performance out and even make it look a bit cooler. But than it just bring about more attention to a car that already is getting attention in its current setup because of its styling and exhaust notes.

 

[N Sync]

The only other vehicle I believe that is a direct competition to the Kona N in the US is the Mazda CX-30 turbo. It produces 250 hp and 320lbs of torque using premium fuel. It has AWD and is basically a Mazda3 AWD turbo raised to get the SUV height. Some may state that the AMG 45 GLA is also competition but it is another 20K more and only slightly faster than the Kona N. To me at that price point I rather get a true sports car and not a SUV/CUV.

The Kona is nothing more than a raised Hyundai Accent. Though in 2018 Hyundai stopped the Accent hatchback and released the Kona. Like the CX30 it is a car that has been raised off the ground. Unlike the CX it only got raised up by 1" vs 1.5+" inches. This provides the Kona a lower center of gravity and makes it easier to get back to car like performance simply by swapping to springs that lower the car almost by an inch. This makes the Kona N a possible real hot hatch if one simply adds lowering springs which are available and lowers the car by .7". Making the ride height a bit over 5.5" which is what the Elantra N and Veloster N roughly sit at.

I personally won't be changing my ride height. I like sitting a bit higher for the added visibility, and only sitting 1" higher doesn't impact the car fun factor for me, I think it adds to it. If the Kona sat say 8"+ off the ground I would have waited for an Elantra N to come to a local dealer.

The GLA 45 goes 0-60 in 4.1 seconds. That is not slighly faster than the Kona N, that is significantly faster. They're not really competition except for similar driving pleasure, but the GLA 45 cost at least $25k to $35k more than the KN.

The GTI is a fair competitor to the KN, but in order to get the adaptive suspension you'd have to go Autobahn which is over $40k. An SE still costs around $36-$38k, and still no where near as fun or engaging as the KN.

My feeling is that the truest competitor to the KN could be the new Civic Type R. That would only be valid if Honda decides to offer an automatic and dealer markups don't push it over $45k.

The Golf R and Civic Type R are both legendary nameplates in the automotive industry. Maybe one day Hyundai N will ascend to that level as well...

 

[RacingRedN]

The GLA 45 goes 0-60 in 4.1 seconds. That is not slighly faster than the Kona N, that is significantly faster. They're not really competition except for similar driving pleasure, but the GLA 45 cost at least $25k to $35k more than the KN.

The GTI is a fair competitor to the KN, but in order to get the adaptive suspension you'd have to go Autobahn which is over $40k. An SE still costs around $36-$38k, and still no where near as fun or engaging as the KN.

My feeling is that the truest competitor to the KN could be the new Civic Type R. That would only be valid if Honda decides to offer an automatic and dealer markups don't push it over $45k.

The Golf R and Civic Type R are both legendary nameplates in the automotive industry. Maybe one day Hyundai N will ascend to that level as well...

I meant the AMG GLA 35 that is closer to the N for performance. I believe that does 0-60 are similar to the Kona and the price of the AMG GLA 35 is $15-20K more.

As many reviewers have stated though the Kona N is in a class by itself because no one other than Mercedes and BMW has made a true performance CUV in the states. The CUV by Mercedes and BMW also cost significantly more, have more refinement, and the downside is they don't seem to offer the same level of fun as the Kona N does.

I do have to state though that driving the CX30 turbo it is the closest competitor to the Kona N based on my experience. The Mazda CX30 lacks the driving thrills and smiles per a mile that one gets from driving the Kona N. However, given its price and performance it really is the closest competitor to the Kona N.

 

[jimv2K13]

The GLA 45 goes 0-60 in 4.1 seconds. That is not slighly faster than the Kona N, that is significantly faster. They're not really competition except for similar driving pleasure, but the GLA 45 cost at least $25k to $35k more than the KN.

The GTI is a fair competitor to the KN, but in order to get the adaptive suspension you'd have to go Autobahn which is over $40k. An SE still costs around $36-$38k, and still no where near as fun or engaging as the KN.

My feeling is that the truest competitor to the KN could be the new Civic Type R. That would only be valid if Honda decides to offer an automatic and dealer markups don't push it over $45k.

The Golf R and Civic Type R are both legendary nameplates in the automotive industry. Maybe one day Hyundai N will ascend to that level as well...

They’re not going to offer an automatic in the new CTR. Japanese manufacturers are consistently 5-10 years behind the Germans when it comes to performance, driving, and technology (however they absolutely wipe the floor with them reliability and resale wise, so I’d never say they make worse cars, just different cars). They:

1). Don’t have the technology to offer a true performance automatic in the first place without a serious R&D commitment, which they won’t put in for a niche car.

And

2). They wouldn’t want to anyway. Manuals remain the go to when it comes to Japanese performance cars. Stick is just a way, way bigger part of the driving culture in Japan (and really anywhere else lol) than it is in the States…and Japanese manufacturers are more of the “you’ll get the car the way we make it” mentality than, say, the Germans, who will let you customize a bunch.

Plus, they’ve already been teasing laps with the CTR and in every video they’re using a manual car. If they had a performance auto ready to go they’d have lapped in it, as it would be a failure if it didn’t improve the overall performance. The GR Corolla is the same way…if you want an auto, too bad. They aren’t making one. And Honda/Subaru pull the same shenanigans with the Integra and WRX, where the auto they put in the car is so bad (CVT) that it literally forces you to buy the stick car.

To be honest, their loss is our gain. I can drive stick personally, and enjoy driving stick. But I am absolutely not going to live with one everyday in the city. I live in DC and commute through terrible traffic. Living with a stick every day would drive me up walls, plus no one I know around here can drive stick other than some older relatives. I don’t want my car to be a headache when someone else drives it.

Also, fun fact: I was on the allocation list for a GR Corolla and backed out to buy my Kona N. I made a point to drive more stick to prepare for it and concluded that it was a dealbreaker for me personally. I also drove the N cars in an attempt to rule them out and wound up loving them so much that I was comfortable leaving the GR Corolla dream behind.

Don’t get me wrong, I know it’s going to be an amazing car. But for my needs the Kona N is way better, and the Japanese manufacturers not offering DCTs or other slick automatics is a big missed opportunity on their end. Lots of people are going to gravitate towards the Golf variants and N cars because of the DCTs…which are like 85% as fun as a manual anyway.

 

[N Sync]

They’re not going to offer an automatic in the new CTR. Japanese manufacturers are consistently 5-10 years behind the Germans when it comes to performance, driving, and technology (however they absolutely wipe the floor with them reliability and resale wise, so I’d never say they make worse cars, just different cars). They:

1). Don’t have the technology to offer a true performance automatic in the first place without a serious R&D commitment, which they won’t put in for a niche car.

And

2). They wouldn’t want to anyway. Manuals remain the go to when it comes to Japanese performance cars. Stick is just a way, way bigger part of the driving culture in Japan (and really anywhere else lol) than it is in the States…and Japanese manufacturers are more of the “you’ll get the car the way we make it” mentality than, say, the Germans, who will let you customize a bunch.

Plus, they’ve already been teasing laps with the CTR and in every video they’re using a manual car. If they had a performance auto ready to go they’d have lapped in it, as it would be a failure if it didn’t improve the overall performance. The GR Corolla is the same way…if you want an auto, too bad. They aren’t making one. And Honda/Subaru pull the same shenanigans with the Integra and WRX, where the auto they put in the car is so bad (CVT) that it literally forces you to buy the stick car.

To be honest, their loss is our gain. I can drive stick personally, and enjoy driving stick. But I am absolutely not going to live with one everyday in the city. I live in DC and commute through terrible traffic. Living with a stick every day would drive me up walls, plus no one I know around here can drive stick other than some older relatives. I don’t want my car to be a headache when someone else drives it.

Also, fun fact: I was on the allocation list for a GR Corolla and backed out to buy my Kona N. I made a point to drive more stick to prepare for it and concluded that it was a dealbreaker for me personally. I also drove the N cars in an attempt to rule them out and wound up loving them so much that I was comfortable leaving the GR Corolla dream behind.

Don’t get me wrong, I know it’s going to be an amazing car. But for my needs the Kona N is way better, and the Japanese manufacturers not offering DCTs or other slick automatics is a big missed opportunity on their end. Lots of people are going to gravitate towards the Golf variants and N cars because of the DCTs…which are like 85% as fun as a manual anyway.

The new Civic Type R is reported to come with an optional automatic to better compete with the Golf R and Hyundai N. We’ll know for sure after the unveil next month. My feeling is that the auto won’t be available until after a year or two, much like the Veloster N.

 

[jimv2K13]

The new Civic Type R is reported to come with an optional automatic to better compete with the Golf R and Hyundai N. We’ll know for sure after the unveil next month. My feeling is that the auto won’t be available until after a year or two, much like the Veloster N.

We’ll see! Even if they wind up offering one down the road I doubt it’ll be as good as Hyundai’s 8 speed wet DCT, but who knows.

 

[RacingRedN]

We’ll see! Even if they wind up offering one down the road I doubt it’ll be as good as Hyundai’s 8 speed wet DCT, but who knows.

WRX has a CVT performance tranny; it is actually quite good. But here is my issue with Subaru CVT; had a Outback with the CVT and that had issues and got a lifetime warranty on the CVT because of all the issues that the CVT has had. Right now my wife's Ascent is waiting on a recall for the CVT that has been an on going issue since we bought it back in 2018. For me the WRX with its automatic performance tranny was a no go because of the issues I have already dealt with from owning other Subaru CVT cars.

Hyundai has had some issues with the 7 speed DCT because some people are trying to put some HP into their cars with this tranny and simply run into issues. The 7 speed can handle around 300 hp. Go read the specs on the 7 speed DCT; it was designed as an economy auto tranny to get great MPG and not as a performance DCT. It does shift way better than a torque converter tranny providing better acceleration but the design of it was for economy usage not track day usage. The 8 speed DCT is a wet DCT and was designed for Genesis models and the Stinger GT; more of a performance DCT. With fine tuning for the N models the 8 speed wet DCT is definitely steps above the 7 speed for performance. No hesitation in 1st or 2nd gear. The cars with the 8 speed just goes. The speed DCT can also handle if I remember correctly up to 450 hp. That's quite a jump from the 7 speed DCT.

Honda will probably use a CVT to get better MPG on the Type R. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if that is what they do.

My guess is by 2025 more EV with performance models will be available with 500+ mileage range when driven calmly or under 300 miles when driven hard.

I believe within 5-7 years we won't be seeing many ICE cars any more.

 

[jimv2K13]

WRX has a CVT performance tranny; it is actually quite good. But here is my issue with Subaru CVT; had a Outback with the CVT and that had issues and got a lifetime warranty on the CVT because of all the issues that the CVT has had. Right now my wife's Ascent is waiting on a recall for the CVT that has been an on going issue since we bought it back in 2018. For me the WRX with its automatic performance tranny was a no go because of the issues I have already dealt with from owning other Subaru CVT cars.

Hyundai has had some issues with the 7 speed DCT because some people are trying to put some HP into their cars with this tranny and simply run into issues. The 7 speed can handle around 300 hp. Go read the specs on the 7 speed DCT; it was designed as an economy auto tranny to get great MPG and not as a performance DCT. It does shift way better than a torque converter tranny providing better acceleration but the design of it was for economy usage not track day usage. The 8 speed DCT is a wet DCT and was designed for Genesis models and the Stinger GT; more of a performance DCT. With fine tuning for the N models the 8 speed wet DCT is definitely steps above the 7 speed for performance. No hesitation in 1st or 2nd gear. The cars with the 8 speed just goes. The speed DCT can also handle if I remember correctly up to 450 hp. That's quite a jump from the 7 speed DCT.

Honda will probably use a CVT to get better MPG on the Type R. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if that is what they do.

My guess is by 2025 more EV with performance models will be available with 500+ mileage range when driven calmly or under 300 miles when driven hard.

I believe within 5-7 years we won't be seeing many ICE cars any more.

I don’t trust CVTs. I’ve had nothing but bad experiences with them. My fiancée’s CRV has a CVT and getting that thing up to highway speeds is a chore. I know it’s an appliance car but it’s so slow off the line that it borders on dangerous. Frankly I think the technology should have been abandoned years ago.

But Subaru sticks with it because it improves fuel economy, and as a fleet their cars are shockingly bad on gas. Subaru developing a reputation as a green company is one of the greatest marketing feats of this century lol. Their cars absolutely suck when it comes to fuel economy and they’ve been very, very slow to develop BEVs, PHEVs, and normal hybrids.

BUT…they’re still good cars. Really good cars. My fiancée’s next ride is probably going to be a Forester. I find that Subarus are slightly more engaging to drive than most other affordable cars out there and their AWD system speaks for itself. I also have always liked their styling…their cars look rugged but cheerful.

I’m sure the performance CVT they’ve developed is fine, but I still wouldn’t trust it personally. Have you driven one or are you going off of reviews? To me it seems like the consensus online is that it’s much better than the unit in the last WRX but won’t fool anyone into thinking it’s a regular autobox or DCT.

 

[RacingRedN]

I don’t trust CVTs. I’ve had nothing but bad experiences with them. My fiancée’s CRV has a CVT and getting that thing up to highway speeds is a chore. I know it’s an appliance car but it’s so slow off the line that it borders on dangerous. Frankly I think the technology should have been abandoned years ago.

But Subaru sticks with it because it improves fuel economy, and as a fleet their cars are shockingly bad on gas. Subaru developing a reputation as a green company is one of the greatest marketing feats of this century lol. Their cars absolutely suck when it comes to fuel economy and they’ve been very, very slow to develop BEVs, PHEVs, and normal hybrids.

BUT…they’re still good cars. Really good cars. My fiancée’s next ride is probably going to be a Forester. I find that Subarus are slightly more engaging to drive than most other affordable cars out there and their AWD system speaks for itself. I also have always liked their styling…their cars look rugged but cheerful.

I’m sure the performance CVT they’ve developed is fine, but I still wouldn’t trust it personally. Have you driven one or are you going off of reviews? To me it seems like the consensus online is that it’s much better than the unit in the last WRX but won’t fool anyone into thinking it’s a regular autobox or DCT.

I've driven one. I live very close to a dealership. They had a GT WRX in late May. I took it out for a drive and it was fun. The GT model has adaptive suspension like the Kona. I went full on for the drive it was soft. CVT handled things well surprisingly and similar to the wet DCT. I just don't trust Subaru CVT given my experience. I mean Subaru has screwed its Ascent customers by not fixing their CVT but used CVT parts to release the WRX GT and other CVT WRX models. I'm a bit pissed with Subaru because they should have fixed the Ascent issue as it can result in a serious accident because the CVT slips and can result in the car either not moving or revving the engine to really high RPMS. This issue has been present since I bought the Ascent four years ago.