
Edmunds three-row hybrid SUV test: Kia Sorento vs Toyota Highlander
If any or all of that sounds like what you're looking for, the Sorento and Highlander hybrids should fit the bill. But which one should you buy? Edmunds' car experts have tested both to find out.
Interior space
We've already indicated that the Sorento and Highlander have less third-row legroom than bigger three-row SUVs. They also have less cargo space when you raise their third-row seats. Of these two vehicles, the Highlander is bigger on the outside, although that doesn't entirely translate to a bigger interior. It's wider and comes standard with seating for six people. You can get a Highlander Hybrid with an optional second-row bench seat that increases capacity to seven.
The Sorento Hybrid only comes with second-row captain's chairs and, as a result, it has a maximum six-passenger capacity. The Highlander can also fit slightly more stuff behind its third row — think an extra duffel or big grocery bag — and its advantage increases with each row lowered.
On the other hand, the Sorento has slightly more third-row legroom and headroom. That's relative since only small people can fit in the way back of each. Indeed, the Highlander's advantage isn't that significant, and the Sorento's smaller exterior size is a benefit in terms of parking and maneuverability — two reasons one can contemplate this smaller three-row subset to begin with.
Advantage: Toyota Highlander Hybrid
Fuel economy and performance
The Sorento Hybrid gets an EPA-estimated 36 mpg in combined city/highway driving in its standard front-wheel-drive configuration. Opting for all-wheel drive drops that slightly to 34 mpg combined. Every Highlander Hybrid has all-wheel drive and gets an EPA-estimated 35 mpg combined. You can pretty much consider this a tie.
Performance differs, however. At the Edmunds test track, an all-wheel-drive Sorento Hybrid accelerated from zero to 60 mph in 7.6 seconds, which is a respectable time for a three-row hybrid SUV. It feels quick, too, thanks to the ample torque provided by the turbocharged engine and electric motor. It also has a six-speed automatic transmission that shifts quickly and smoothly. Having front-wheel drive standard is also nice as it lowers the cost of entry for those who don't need the winter-ready traction of all-wheel drive.
The Highlander Hybrid went from zero to 60 mph in 8.2 seconds, which is slower than non-hybrid SUVs by about a second. Power is readily available and smoothly delivered, but Toyota's more typical hybrid powertrain features a continuously variable automatic transmission that makes the engine drone under hard acceleration. That engine is also not turbocharged.
Advantage: Kia Sorento Hybrid
Value and Technology
The Kia Sorento Hybrid starts at $40,105, or about $8,000 less than the $48,315 Highlander Hybrid — adding all-wheel drive to the Kia only reduces the gap by $1,800. The Highlander does come with a few extra standard features to partially offset its higher price, but we don't think they fully justify the price premium. Moreover, the Highlander continues to be similarly more expensive when you compare each vehicle's more well-equipped trim levels.
The Sorento also has a better infotainment system as standard, with a 10.25-inch touchscreen packing integrated navigation. The Highlander's standard unit is only 8 inches and lacks navigation. You can, however, add the 12.3-inch touchscreen that's standard on upper trims to the base trim as a stand-alone option. Feature content within the infotainment systems is comparable, but the Kia has multiple USB ports in each row whereas the Highlander has none in the third row. In terms of functionality, we score both the Toyota and Kia tech interfaces similarly strong in terms of usability.
Safety technology content is similarly robust in both SUVs, but the Sorento's are superior in terms of performance, especially the adaptive cruise control system.
Advantage: Kia
Edmunds says
The Sorento and Highlander hybrids are similar in concept, but our testing team ultimately scores the Kia higher. Moreover, the Toyota is so much more expensive regardless of trim level that it makes the Kia look like that much stronger of a choice.
_____
This story was provided to The Associated Press by the automotive website Edmunds. James Riswick is a contributor at Edmunds.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


BBC News
42 minutes ago
- BBC News
Tesla found partly to blame for fatal Autopilot crash
A jury in Florida has found Tesla partly liable for a 2019 crash in which a Model S sedan using self-driving software killed a pedestrian and severely injured had argued the assistance software, called Autopilot, should have alerted the driver and activated the brakes before the had maintained the driver, George McGee, was at fault and called the verdict "wrong" in a statement to the BBC, while vowing to appeal. The result means the company will have to pay as much as $243m (£189) in punitive and compensatory verdicts marks a setback for Tesla and CEO Elon Musk, who has touted self-driving technology as critical to the company's future. Shares of Tesla dipped following the news and was nearly 2% lower when US markets the verdict, plaintiff's attorneys said Mr Musk had misrepresented the capabilities of the company's Autopilot driver assistance software."Tesla designed Autopilot only for controlled-access highways yet deliberately chose not to restrict drivers from using it elsewhere, alongside Elon Musk telling the world Autopilot drove better than humans," said attorney Brett Schreiber in a statement to the BBC. Mr Schreiber said Tesla and Mr Musk had long propped up the company's valuation with "self-driving hype at the expense of human lives.""Tesla's lies turned our roads into test tracks for their fundamentally flawed technology," he added. The company was sued by the family of Naibel Benavides Leon, 22, who was killed when she was struck by the Model S at a T-intersection in Florida Keys in 2019. Her boyfriend Dillon Angulo suffered life-long injuries and was also involved in the court heard the driver, George McGee, lost sight of the road when he dropped his phone as he was approaching the intersection, causing his car to continue through it and crash into an SUV parked on the other side. The two victims were standing Mr McGee, nor the Autopilot software, hit the brakes in time to prevent the crash. After a three-week trial, the jury awarded $329m in total damages, including $129m in compensatory damages and $200m in punitive damages aimed at deterring Tesla from harmful behaviour in the will be responsible for paying one-third of compensatory damages - $42.5m - and the entirety of the $200m in punitive damages, but according to the company, punitive damages are likely to be capped at a lesser amount."Today's verdict is wrong and only works to set back automotive safety and jeopardize Tesla's and the entire industry's efforts to develop and implement life-saving technology," Tesla said in a said evidence at the trial showed the driver was solely at fault because he was speeding with his foot on the accelerator, which overrode Autopilot, while looking for his phone and not at the road."To be clear, no car in 2019, and none today, would have prevented this crash," Tesla said. "This was never about Autopilot; it was a fiction concocted by plaintiffs' lawyers blaming the car when the driver – from day one – admitted and accepted responsibility."While there have been other federal lawsuits involving Autopilot during fatal crashes, Tesla has settled prior year, it settled a lawsuit over a 2018 crash that killed an Apple engineer after his Model X collided with a highway barrier while operating the company's Autopilot Florida case which culminated on Friday was the first to go to a trial, Mr McGee said his concept of Tesla's Autopilot was that "it would assist me should I have a failure" or "make a mistake," and that he felt the software had failed McGee has settled a separate lawsuit with the plaintiffs for an undisclosed has long faced scrutiny over its Autopilot and self-driving technology, and critics hailed the jury's decision."Tesla is finally being held accountable for its defective designs and grossly negligent engineering practices," said Missy Cummings, a robotics professor at George Mason verdict comes as Tesla is battling weakening sales stemming in part from Mr Musk's political activities. Sign up for our Tech Decoded newsletter to follow the world's top tech stories and trends. Outside the UK? Sign up here.


The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Five Great Reads: Jamie Lee Curtis v plastic surgery, Elon Musk's Hollywood diner, and the rise of the X-rated novel
Top of the weekend to you all. If you need a side order of silly in your life, here's something to add to your calendar before tucking into this week's main course. Elon Musk last week opened a Tesla-themed diner in Hollywood. What could possibly go wrong? As many things as you'd expect from a master of 'move fast and break things'. Lois Beckett braved the lengthy queues, encountering tech glitches, unavailable menu items and a small flotilla of tricked-up Cybertrucks. Sales pitch: The Tesla boss said on an earnings call his diner was 'a shiny beacon of hope in an otherwise sort-of bleak urban landscape'. It is located on Santa Monica Boulevard, in a neighbourhood full of high-end art galleries. How long will it take to read: Four minutes. If you're not already furious about having microplastics in your semen/breast milk/unborn baby's placenta, may I present to you a potential tipping point. This interactive tells the story of how plastic contaminates entire ecosystems – and even the food we eat. Fun fact: A single washing machine cycle can shed up to 700,000 tiny plastic fragments and threads. A single thread could voyage around the natural world for centuries. How long will it take to read: Three minutes. Further reading: How petrostates and well-funded lobbyists are derailing a deal to cut plastic production. Jamie Lee Curtis's energy fair bursts out of the screen in this interview with Emma Brockes. The conversation is a wild ride highlighted by the 66-year-old's distaste for plastic surgery and Hollywood's rejection of her movie-star parents, Tony Curtis and Janet Leigh, once they'd reached 'a certain age'. 'I've been very vocal about the genocide of a generation of women by the cosmeceutical industrial complex, who've disfigured themselves. The wax lips really sends it home.' – Curtis on why she brought a prop to the Guardian photoshoot. How long will it take to read: Nine minutes. Sign up to Five Great Reads Each week our editors select five of the most interesting, entertaining and thoughtful reads published by Guardian Australia and our international colleagues. Sign up to receive it in your inbox every Saturday morning after newsletter promotion Yes, the news cycle is unrelentingly grim, but John D Boswell is here to preach you some optimism. He reckons humans seem 'largely blind to the many profound reasons for hope' – mostly because they are accumulating gradually and quietly. Medical miracles incoming: Says Barney Graham, an immunologist who played a pivotal role in developing mRNA vaccines: 'You cannot imagine what you're going to see over the next 30 years.' How long will it take to read: Four minutes. 'Sex remains at the centre of much of the best fiction,' writes the author Lara Feigel, 'and we need powerful fictions to show us what sex is or can become.' From Miranda July's All Fours to the 'romantasy' of Sarah J Maas, modern readers cannot get enough of sexually explicit novels – and Fiegel has some theories as to why. Sally Rooney says: 'The erotic is a huge engine in the stories of all my books.' How long will it take to read: Five minutes. In case you missed it: Our interviews with Sally Rooney and Miranda July are worth revisiting. If you would like to receive these Five Great Reads to your email inbox every weekend, sign up here. And check out out the full list of our local and international newsletters.


The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Tesla must pay $329 million for a deadly crash involving Autopilot, jury says
A Miami jury has ordered Elon Musk's car manufacturer, Tesla, to pay $329 million to victims of a fatal crash involving its Autopilot driver-assist technology. The ruling, delivered on Friday, could open the door to further costly lawsuits and deals a significant blow to the company's reputation for safety. The federal jury found Tesla bore substantial responsibility, citing a failure in its technology. This determination means that not all blame could be attributed to the reckless driver, who admitted being distracted by his mobile phone before hitting a young couple who were stargazing. The conclusion of this four-year case is remarkable, not just for its outcome, but because it even reached trial. Many similar cases against Tesla have previously been dismissed or settled by the company to avoid public scrutiny. This decision comes as Mr Musk seeks to convince the public of his vehicles' safety, particularly as he plans to roll out a driverless taxi service in several cities in the coming months. Mr Musk's Tesla company doesn't have the permits required to run any autonomous service, even with a safety driver, and they're unable to charge for it. Tesla has been in discussions with Golden State regulators about expanding the service to California but it would be with significant restrictions to Elon Musk's promises for his Robotaxi service, Politico reported. at least five times since the start of last year, documents reviewed by the outlet show.