Kia Cadenza Forum banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
2014 Kia Cadenza
Joined
·
1 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hey everyone, sorry if this is a stupid question but I don't know what to order when it comes to modding my car. If there are any recommendations for anything yinz think I should do please let me know. I have a 2014 limited that has literally had no modifications. Anything and everything that's suggested is welcome. Thank you
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
316 Posts
Welcome Spoons.

There aren't a whole of mods out there for this car so happy hunting. Most mods are pretty common ones like adding a sub or a sound system makeover, lowering kits, under hood stiffeners, wheels, etc. I did just see a new member that has added a big wing on the trunk and plasti dipped wheels that look pretty nice. He also has some sort of underbody kit. I have no idea where he found that.

As far as performance there isn't anything out there for these cars except for handling items like the stiffeners mentioned above and wheels and such, but no engine performance stuff. I know someone did a muffler delete for a different sound but there's not much out there. No turbos or blowers, etc unless completely custom like the one video I saw on YouTube but not sure which foreign country he was in and it was totally custom with no explanation, just a drive video.

Good luck
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spoons

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
A cold air intake should give you a slight performance bump and better response. An exhaust will give you nicer sound.
There isn't much out there for the Cadenza because they sold in low volumes. Aftermarket parts makers hardly noticed it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
803 Posts
Asking people to tell you what mods you need is pretty corny. If you don't know what to do, don't know what you want, don't solicit random Internet forums for this advise. Because I could tell you to get square wheels and tires for a smoother ride.

Get to know your car, sit back and read various posts on the forum, dig in, do the research yourself and you'll find all you wanted. Or just drive it stock.
 

·
Registered
2015 Kia Cadenza - Snow White Pearl
Joined
·
19 Posts
The Ultra Racing Front Strut Bar is what I would recommend to anyone with a ‘14 ‘15 ‘16 Cadenza. It was a night and day difference for me. The car feels much more stable in turns, corners, and roundabouts and all you need for the install is a deep socket wrench, a flat surface, and 10 minutes. Also, you can add an amp and sub if you’re into that. A good 12in sub is infinity times better than the factory. (pun intended)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
I just posted this in another thread, but I've been running 93 octane premium in my Cadenza and there's a noticeable performance boost and slightly better mpg. I'm sticking with premium. It just drives better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
803 Posts
I just posted this in another thread, but I've been running 93 octane premium in my Cadenza and there's a noticeable performance boost and slightly better mpg. I'm sticking with premium. It just drives better.

Dude, yer joking right??? What you might have is more detergent in the gas that keeps things clean and feels smoother, but performance boost is NOT happening. The car isn't tuned to detonate differently. High octane is designed for higher compression motors. Low octane when over-compressed has a tendency to ignite before TDC (top dead center) or essentially misfire or knock will occur. So on older cars with high octane tune, you put in the lower grade it would run like ****. New cars tuned for high octane can run both, but the onboard computer is designed to alter the tune for the lower grade. You're wasting your money, period.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
879 Posts
I just posted this in another thread, but I've been running 93 octane premium in my Cadenza and there's a noticeable performance boost and slightly better mpg. I'm sticking with premium. It just drives better.
Dude, yer joking right??? What you might have is more detergent in the gas that keeps things clean and feels smoother, but performance boost is NOT happening. The car isn't tuned to detonate differently. High octane is designed for higher compression motors. Low octane when over-compressed has a tendency to ignite before TDC (top dead center) or essentially misfire or knock will occur. So on older cars with high octane tune, you put in the lower grade it would run like ****. New cars tuned for high octane can run both, but the onboard computer is designed to alter the tune for the lower grade. You're wasting your money, period.
This x 1000. You're wasting money putting in premium. But it's your money, go crazy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Okay, you guys don't seem too excited about my running 93 octane gas, so here's some data:

I have a relatively flat stretch of road on my way home. Speed limit is 45, traffic usually goes between 40-50.
When running regular unleaded, I can usually average 27-28mpg, occasionally hitting 30 or 31 if I'm careful.
When running premium unleaded, I can usually average 30-31, occasionally hitting 33 or 34 if I'm careful.

After running a few tanks of premium, I filled up with regular yesterday. That same stretch of road I was averaging 28. I got it up to 29 at the stop sign at the end of that stretch.

So, anecdotal evidence for my car is that premium makes a difference.

Some history: I previously owned a 2007 Subaru Tribeca 3.0L flat-6. It was rated for 91 octane (recommended, not required). If I ran 93 (no 91 here, just 87, 89, 93), I could average 24-25 mpg on the highway. If I ran regular (87) I would average 21-22.

The differences I'm seeing in my Cadenza mirror what I saw in my Tribeca, so it seems that, even though our official rating is for 87, putting 93 in the tank makes a difference.

Some deets:
Subaru Tribeca 3.0, 91-octane: Compression ratio: 10.7:1 - 250 hp, 215 lb-ft torque, Bore/Stroke: 89.2/80.0
Subaru Tribeca 3.6, 87-octane: Compression ratio: 10.5:1 - 258 hp, 250 lb-ft torque, Bore/Stroke: 92.0/91.0

My Kia Sedona 3.3, 87-octane: Compression ratio: 11.5:1 - 276 hp, 248 lb-ft torque, Bore/Stroke: 92.0/83.8
My Kia Cadenza 3.3 87-octane: Compression ratio: 12.0:1 - 293 hp, 255 lb-ft torque, Bore/Stroke: 92.0/83.9

You'll notice that the Sedona & Cadenza have the same engine. The Cadenza's has a slightly longer stroke (and probably different pistons) giving a 0.5 higher compression ratio (while still rated for 87-octane)
The two Subaru engines are only 0.2 difference in compression ratio, while one is rated for 87 and the other is recommended 91.

In my experience with the Tribeca, even though it's recommended 91 (and runs fine on 87, though with reduced power and mpg), it made a significant difference when running 93, so I ran 93.

My experience with my Cadenza tells me that timing is retarded when running 87, and running 93 allows more advanced timing.

What I don't know is whether or not the previous owner did any tuning or tweaking, as I bought it with 48K miles on it. So, I don't know if bone-stock Cadenza will mirror my experience, but my experience clearly shows I get a bit better mpg (and slightly more power) running 93.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
879 Posts
Okay, you guys don't seem too excited about my running 93 octane gas, so here's some data:

I have a relatively flat stretch of road on my way home. Speed limit is 45, traffic usually goes between 40-50.
When running regular unleaded, I can usually average 27-28mpg, occasionally hitting 30 or 31 if I'm careful.
When running premium unleaded, I can usually average 30-31, occasionally hitting 33 or 34 if I'm careful.

After running a few tanks of premium, I filled up with regular yesterday. That same stretch of road I was averaging 28. I got it up to 29 at the stop sign at the end of that stretch.

So, anecdotal evidence for my car is that premium makes a difference.

Some history: I previously owned a 2007 Subaru Tribeca 3.0L flat-6. It was rated for 91 octane (recommended, not required). If I ran 93 (no 91 here, just 87, 89, 93), I could average 24-25 mpg on the highway. If I ran regular (87) I would average 21-22.

The differences I'm seeing in my Cadenza mirror what I saw in my Tribeca, so it seems that, even though our official rating is for 87, putting 93 in the tank makes a difference.

Some deets:
Subaru Tribeca 3.0, 91-octane: Compression ratio: 10.7:1 - 250 hp, 215 lb-ft torque, Bore/Stroke: 89.2/80.0
Subaru Tribeca 3.6, 87-octane: Compression ratio: 10.5:1 - 258 hp, 250 lb-ft torque, Bore/Stroke: 92.0/91.0

My Kia Sedona 3.3, 87-octane: Compression ratio: 11.5:1 - 276 hp, 248 lb-ft torque, Bore/Stroke: 92.0/83.8
My Kia Cadenza 3.3 87-octane: Compression ratio: 12.0:1 - 293 hp, 255 lb-ft torque, Bore/Stroke: 92.0/83.9

You'll notice that the Sedona & Cadenza have the same engine. The Cadenza's has a slightly longer stroke (and probably different pistons) giving a 0.5 higher compression ratio (while still rated for 87-octane)
The two Subaru engines are only 0.2 difference in compression ratio, while one is rated for 87 and the other is recommended 91.

In my experience with the Tribeca, even though it's recommended 91 (and runs fine on 87, though with reduced power and mpg), it made a significant difference when running 93, so I ran 93.

My experience with my Cadenza tells me that timing is retarded when running 87, and running 93 allows more advanced timing.

What I don't know is whether or not the previous owner did any tuning or tweaking, as I bought it with 48K miles on it. So, I don't know if bone-stock Cadenza will mirror my experience, but my experience clearly shows I get a bit better mpg (and slightly more power) running 93.
How are you calculating your MPG, from the trip computer? Not a good way if so.

Based on your MPG numbers you provided, you are still losing money with the increased MPG premuim is providing you.

Using the following numbers:
Regular unleaded: $3.26 per gallon
Premium unleaded: $3.915 per gallon
Cadenza Gas Tank = 18.5 Gallons
Regular Fill up price = 18.5 gallons x 3.26 = $60.31
Premium Fill up price = 18.5 gallons x 3.915 = $72.42
Regular Range - 18.5 gallons x 28 MPG = 518 miles
Premium Range = 18.5 gallons x 31 mpg = 573.5 miles

Regular cost per mile = 60.31/518 = $.116 per mile
Premium cost per mile = 72.42/573.5 = $.126 per mile
Difference in fill up cost between regular/premium = (.126 - .116)*18.5 = $.185

So, using regular saves you 18.5 cents per tank. Pretty negligible. Curious to know how you are calculating MPG?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Yes, I was just watching the trip computer. Gas prices by me are a bit different for premium.
Regular is 3.19, Premium is 3.59 (I'll have to double check. I thought I remembered 3.59 but also thought it was 50 cents more than regular, so it could have been 3.69).
18.5 x 3.59 = $64.62
64.62 / 573.5 = $.1127/mile
.1127 on Premium is better than .116 on Regular

Yes I know relying on the trip computer is iffy, but I figured even if it's off by a bit, comparing Reg & Prem on the same device would at least give a ballpark figure.

In most locations around me, Premium is usually 50 cents more per gallon. It can vary a little, but it's pretty consistent.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top