The Hyundai Kona and Kia Niro – both choices in the increasingly popular compact SUV segment – offer hybrid powertrains alongside conventional petrol engines. Both are also available as full EVs, but we are concentrating on the hybrids and petrol-powered models here. The second-generation Kona, launched in 2023, has evolved significantly from its predecessor with futuristic angular styling and notably better practicality, while the current Niro, introduced in 2022, builds on its hybrid heritage with a more eye-catching design and greater interior space. Both Korean manufacturers (which both come under the same corporate umbrella) have positioned these models as practical family cars that prioritise efficiency and equipment over outright driving thrills.
These platform-sharing siblings occupy similar territory in the market, competing against the likes of the Ford Puma, Toyota C-HR, and Volkswagen T-Roc. However, each has been tuned to appeal to slightly different priorities. The Kona offers a broader range of powertrains including a more powerful 1.6-litre turbo petrol option, while the Niro focuses more heavily on hybrid technology with both conventional and plug-in hybrid variants. Both cars promise generous equipment levels and strong ownership packages, making this comparison particularly relevant for buyers seeking an efficient, well-equipped family SUV.
Hyundai Kona vs Kia Niro
Practicality
The Hyundai Kona has made significant strides in addressing the practicality shortcomings of its predecessor, growing by 14 centimetres in overall length and 6cm in wheelbase. This supersizing effort has paid dividends, with the boot now offering a generous 466 litres of space regardless of powertrain choice - a substantial improvement that puts it ahead of many competitors. The cargo area is usefully square-shaped and features a moveable boot floor that allows you to either maximise capacity in its lower position or level off the small boot lip when raised. When the rear seats are folded down, this higher floor position also levels off the step to the rear seatbacks, though they do lie at a slight angle. The 40/20/40 split folding arrangement on all but entry-level Advance models offers more versatility than the typical 60/40 setup found in many rivals.
The Kia Niro also impresses with its practicality, though with some variation depending on your powertrain choice. The HEV hybrid model provides 451 litres of boot space, which is competitive with the Kona and notably more generous than alternatives like the Toyota C-HR's 388 litres. However, the PHEV plug-in hybrid variant sacrifices some practicality for its larger 11.1kWh battery, with boot capacity dropping to 348 litres due to the loss of underfloor storage. This reduction might make fitting a double buggy more challenging, but the space remains usable and the wide boot aperture aids loading. Both Niro variants feature seats that fold flat in a 60/40 split, though this isn't quite as versatile as the Kona's three-way arrangement.
In terms of passenger accommodation, both cars have made notable improvements over their predecessors. The Kona now offers generous headroom and legroom for rear passengers, though the seats don't slide backwards and forwards like some rivals. The Niro provides particularly impressive rear legroom – usefully more than most competitors – with good access aided by a slightly higher seat base and taller roofline. Up front, both cars offer well-designed environments with twin-screen setups, though the Kona's digital driver display is less configurable than many systems. The Niro's interior, taking design cues from the EV6, features durable materials with contrasting finishes and a clever touch-sensitive panel that can switch between air-conditioning controls and infotainment shortcuts.
The Kona just about has the edge in outright boot space and rear seat flexibility, but the Niro counters with superior rear passenger legroom and a more sophisticated interior design. Both represent significant improvements in family-friendly practicality compared to their predecessors.
Driving Impressions
The Hyundai Kona offers three distinct powertrain options, each with notably different characteristics. The entry-level turbocharged 1.0-litre three-cylinder petrol engine produces 118bhp and can be paired with either a six-speed manual or seven-speed DCT dual-clutch automatic. Despite its modest power output, this engine feels considerably perkier than you might expect, with willing pull from low revs and an eagerness to build speed. It proves adequate for both urban driving and motorway work, though throttle response can be somewhat lazy with noticeable delays when pressing or releasing the accelerator pedal. The range-topping 1.6-litre turbo petrol with 195bhp, available with the same gearbox choices, is less impressive, particularly when paired with the automatic transmission. The partnership feels dysfunctional, with the gearbox delivering either no power or all power at once with seemingly little predictability, whilst the engine sounds thrashy and rough under load without delivering the performance its 195bhp output suggests.
The Kia Niro focuses more heavily on hybrid technology, with both HEV and PHEV variants using a 1.6-litre four-cylinder petrol engine paired with a six-speed dual-clutch automatic gearbox. The HEV model features a 1.32kWh lithium-ion battery that provides occasional pure electric running at low speeds, whilst the PHEV's larger 11.1kWh battery delivers up to 37 miles of official electric range. In real-world testing, the PHEV achieved over 30 miles of electric running on mixed town and country roads. Both variants are most enjoyable in their electric modes, though the HEV spends considerable time with the engine running, and you notice the vibration and noise when the petrol engine kicks in. The six-speed automatic can feel rather slow with its shifts, making the powertrain seem busy at times.
From a dynamic perspective, both cars prioritise comfort and stability over driving excitement, which is appropriate for their family-focused remit. The Kona feels stable and secure but suffers from noticeable body roll, light and vague steering, and a ride quality that struggles with various surface imperfections, leaving it feeling fidgety and unsettled more often than ideal. The Niro proves more composed, with light, predictable steering that feels nicely responsive around town whilst remaining planted and unflustered at motorway speeds. Ride comfort is acceptable on the 18-inch wheels, though sharp potholes can be jarring at low speeds - the 16-inch wheels on entry-level models offer a smoother low-speed ride.
Performance figures reflect the different approaches: the Kona's 1.0-litre engine provides adequate but unremarkable acceleration, whilst the 1.6-litre turbo disappoints despite its higher output. The Niro HEV manages 0-62mph in 10.4 seconds, whilst the PHEV improves this to 9.6 seconds. Both cars are perfectly fit for purpose rather than thrilling, but the Niro's more composed demeanour and superior ride quality give it a slight edge in day-to-day driving comfort.
Technology and Equipment
The Hyundai Kona impresses with generous standard equipment across its four-trim lineup. Even entry-level Advance models get alloy wheels, dual-zone climate control, automatic lights and wipers, cruise control (adaptive with stop-and-go on automatic models), front and rear parking sensors, reversing camera, keyless entry and start, and the full twin-screen infotainment system with DAB radio, Bluetooth, built-in navigation, Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. The sporty N Line trim adds a bodykit, heated front and rear seats, heated steering wheel, privacy glass, powered tailgate, wireless phone charging and ambient lighting. N Line S builds on this with ventilated front seats, alcantara and leather upholstery, three-zone climate control, powered front seats, 360-degree cameras and BOSE premium audio. Range-topping Ultimate trim adds full leather upholstery and a sunroof, though the incremental improvements are modest.
The Kia Niro takes a different approach with its three-trim structure (2, 3, and 4), but even entry-level 2 models have dual-zone climate control, LED lights, adaptive cruise control, rear USB-C charging sockets, reversing camera and rear parking sensors. However, this base trim misses some important features including the impressive dual 12.3-inch screen setup, instead receiving a more basic 8.0-inch touchscreen and simpler driver display. It also lacks automatic wipers, rear air vents, and the ability to control regenerative braking via steering wheel paddles. The 3 trim – our choice – rectifies these omissions and adds heated and electrically adjustable seats with lumbar support, part-leatherette upholstery, keyless entry, wireless phone charging, front parking sensors, 17-inch alloy wheels, blind spot warning and semi-autonomous driving mode.
Both cars feature excellent infotainment systems when properly specified. The Kona's twin-screen setup works really well with logically laid-out menus, sharp graphics and quick responses, complemented by several handy shortcut buttons. Physical air conditioning controls are retained, which is preferable to having these functions buried in touchscreen menus. The Niro's dual 12.3-inch screens (on 3 and 4 trims) provide similarly impressive functionality with sharp graphics, quick responses and logical menu layouts. The system includes Apple CarPlay, Android Auto, satellite navigation with charger search function, Bluetooth and digital radio. The Niro's clever touch-sensitive panel that switches between air-conditioning controls and infotainment shortcuts is innovative, though slightly fiddly to operate whilst driving.
Safety equipment is comprehensive on both models, with the Niro featuring adaptive cruise control with stop-and-go, autonomous emergency braking that can detect bicycles, pedestrians and cars, two pairs of Isofix points and seven airbags including a driver's knee airbag. However, the Kona's safety systems prove somewhat intrusive with a relentless cacophony of warnings that can be turned off but reactivate every time you restart the car. The Niro's approach appears more measured, though both cars meet modern safety expectations. Overall, the Niro's more sophisticated interior design and better-judged equipment progression give it a slight advantage, particularly in the crucial mid-range 3 trim level.
Running Costs
The Hyundai Kona's running costs vary significantly depending on powertrain choice, with the hybrid variant delivering the best fuel economy figures above 60mpg according to WLTP testing, though precise figures vary by trim level. The 1.0-litre petrol engine achieves around 48mpg, dropping by a couple of mpg with the automatic gearbox, while the 1.6-litre turbo returns approximately 44mpg regardless of transmission choice. Insurance costs reflect the performance hierarchy, with the 1.0-litre and hybrid sitting in groups 22-23 for moderate premiums, whilst the 1.6-litre turbo occupies groups 30-33, resulting in considerably higher insurance costs. For company car drivers, the pure petrol versions attract Benefit-in-Kind tax on 31-34% of the car's value, making them expensive business choices, whilst the hybrid's lower emissions reduce this to 26%.
The Kia Niro's pricing structure sees the HEV hybrid starting from under £28,000 and rising to around £34,000, whilst the PHEV plug-in hybrid ranges from under £34,000 to £39,000. This positioning is competitive with rivals like the Toyota C-HR and Volkswagen T-Roc, though the Hyundai Kona Hybrid is notably cheaper, albeit less spacious. The Niro HEV achieves combined WLTP fuel economy of around 61mpg with CO2 emissions of approximately 105g/km, translating to real-world consumption of 45-50mpg without particular effort, rising above 50mpg when electric running is frequent. The PHEV's official combined figure of 353mpg is largely meaningless, as with all plug-in hybrids, but the key advantage lies in covering most journeys on electric power at roughly half the cost of petrol running.
Both cars offer reasonable value propositions, though the Niro's focus on hybrid technology may appeal more to efficiency-conscious buyers. The Kona's broader powertrain range provides more choice but potentially higher running costs for the non-hybrid variants. Service intervals for the Niro are 12 months or 10,000 miles, which is shorter than some competitors, though Kia typically offers fixed-price servicing deals. The Kona's hybrid variant represents the sweet spot for efficiency, whilst the Niro's plug-in hybrid option provides the ultimate in fuel economy for those who can charge regularly.
The choice between these models largely depends on your specific needs: the Kona offers more powertrain flexibility and slightly lower entry prices, whilst the Niro's hybrid-focused approach delivers superior efficiency and potentially lower long-term running costs. Both represent solid ownership propositions with comprehensive warranty coverage typical of Korean manufacturers.
Verdict
Both the Hyundai Kona and Kia Niro are solid choices in the competitive compact SUV segment, each with distinct strengths that will appeal to different types of buyers. Given how close they are across so many diffetent aspects of this comparison, our advice is to choose whichever is offered at the best deal - and don't forget that both models are also offered in fully electric form, too.