User talk:104.205.17.178

Kia 0-60
For the sake of consistency in this article, it probably makes sense to stick with manafacturer estimates of 0-60 times in those tables, along with other official manufacturer specs (horsepower, etc). That said, Motor Trend and Car and Driver are perfectly good sources; I'd suggest mentioning their reviews in the body of the article along with their 0-60 testing results. [[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNoitsJamie ]] Talk


 * Regarding CarAndDriver, Motortrend etc, yes they are both very reliable sources, but their acceleration testing is not a proper zero to x test, when testing acceleration they both don't start the time counter until the car already travelled one foot, by the time that happens the car is already doing 3-4 mph (and even as high as 8 mph in some high grip cars like the Corvette C8) therefore making their testing 3-60 or 4-60 mph in reality. They both admit that in their testing methodology explanation pages, MotorTrend, CarAndDriver.
 * The above, combined with testing 0-60 and not 0-62 and testing on a drag strip (where grip levels are higher than normal) is why their times are always lower than official times provided by manufacturers.
 * All of the above doesn't matter much anyway, since their times are not official and therefore cannot be put on that table, putting their testing in the body of the article works for me and is in line with other articles as well. Alawadhi3000 (talk) 23:20, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Those previously stated numbers are from a very early preproduction model from an article from 2019. Kia hasn't actually listed anything official for the production model. How about we use the times stated here since it seems to be the only actual time with a Kia stamp on it.
 * Let's take the discussion to Talk:Kia_K5. That source might be OK, though it's 0-60, whereas the chart is 0-62 (or 100 kmh). OhNo itsJamie  Talk 21:12, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

I would love to but I am blocked for some reason. Look, if you want to have his outdated, clearly incorrect article(There is no such car as a 2020 K5 GT with a 2.5T engine) then you go ahead. This is why people don't take wikipedia seriously. Have a good one.


 * Early preproduction model? The car started produced ~November 2019 and went on sale early December 2019, the press release from Kia about the 2.5 T-GDi 0-100 performance were published late December 2019, around half a month after it went on sale. Alawadhi3000 (talk) 23:20, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

Find me a single article reviewing that car from the first half of 2020. You can't. The first K5 GTs with the 2.5T weren't released until end 2020/start 2021. There is no 2020 K5 GT with the 2.5T. They don't exist. Hell the article you sourced still calls them "Optima". We have more up to date information. I legit have listed the only time ANYONE from Kia has posted online. Please find me Kia's 6.6 claim and not from some obscure website like autoblog. They didn't even know the name of the car yet, you really don't question any of the other information on the site? Its out dated information. You're wrong.


 * There is no block on this IP. OhNo itsJamie Talk 15:49, 5 March 2022 (UTC)


 * 1) We use production year in the article, not model year, there is 2020 (and even 2019) production year 5th gen K5, it started selling as a 2021 model in North America, thats why you don't see 2020 K5 in your region, production year =/= model year.
 * 2) Your source does not list an official time by Kia Motors, its a Canadian Kia dealer, it was probably copy-pasted from somewhere else since it lists the 1/4 mile as well, not to mention its 0-60 mph anyway.
 * 3) Autoblog is obscure? No problem, here are a few others:- 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9/ CarAndDriver, enough sources? All of them say the same thing, 6.6s is the official time advertised by Kia. Alawadhi3000 (talk) 08:26, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

Its funny that you use car and driver when their actual review of the car when they physically drove it said this https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a35569252/2021-kia-k5-gt-by-the-numbers/ Even if it is 0-60 basic physics wouldn't over an extra second for the 0-100. Thats not how that works. The car doesn't get to 60 miles and all of a sudden stop. All those articles were released literally a year before the car even made it to the dealer. It is outdated information. Things changed. Its best nothing is put there even though you are wrong and can't accept the fact that new information has come up that conflicts with those claims.


 * A year before the car made it to the dealer? Sure, because Canada is the center of the world, so a Korean company should always release their new cars there before even their own domestic market, just to keep you happy.


 * If you just read your own talk page you'll know why usually CarAndDriver and others get a lower time than manufacturer published official times, go and read their testing methodology linked above, the true 0-60 time they got isn't 5.2s, its 0-60 with the first foot subtracted. FYI, almost all Korean cars with official 0-100 time of 6.x get a 5.x time when tested by C&D, MotorTrend ...etc.


 * The table is for official time only, I told you this many times, so unless Kia issues a press release updating the time for the 2.5T Kia K5 the 6.6s time will stay. I suggest that you contact Kia Motors and tell them that you think that they are wrong and update the time. Alawadhi3000 (talk) 11:19, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

The 2.5T isn't available in South Kore for the K5, its only available in the North American Market as of now( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEH-Um0v-gg ). The first K5 GTs didn't hit the road until end December 2020, a year after your articles came out. Also, that dealer website is in California, not Canada. Canada has provinces, we just don't say the country and a street address, pull your head out. Plus can you actually show me anyone from Kia saying it themselves? Those links are just a series of copy pasted from other articles. And not that I think they are wrong, its that you are wrong. Here, straight from Kia's mouth, it will do 0-60 in 5.8 seconds https://www.kiamedia.com/us/en/media/pressreleases/16347/all-new-2021-kia-k5-set-to-disrupt-and-inspire-the-mid-size-sedan-market I'm so glad you could be wrong. There is no official 0-100 time on their website, just an official 0-60 time. This makes total sense because the Kia K5 GT with the 2.5T is marketed towards North America where people will use 0-60 over a metric 0-100. No point in listing a timing that most of the people buying the car don't use. Everything in that news release legit shoots your entire argument to crap. Put your 6.6 second BS back up there and I'm going to report you. This conversation is now over, you have a good day.


 * When the car was released in North America = irrelevant.
 * Whether the dealer in Canadian or American or whatever = irrelevant.
 * Whether the 2.5T available in S.Korea or not = irrelevant.
 * All those sources I listed are legit and reliable.
 * Now, for the first time, you finally made a meaningful contribution on the this discussion, that official 0-60 time of 5.8s should usually translate to a 0-100 time of 6.2s if there is no transmission shift between 60 and 62 mph, but that 5.8s time can't be put on the table because its not 0-100 (or 0-62) and we cannot convert the time to 6.2s like that.
 * So the 6.6s 0-100 time stays because it is the only official 0-100 time by Kia. Ciao. Alawadhi3000 (talk) 17:42, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Is it officially listed on its own Media? No its not. Otherwise its hearsay at this point. Kia lists no where on their own sources a 0-100. The car being only in North America is relevant due to the fact they would never market an official 0-100 here. 0-60 is the king here, yes even in metric Canada. I am not putting the 5.8 time up, I am simply removing your 6.6 as basic physics puts that 6.6 number into a major confliction as well as the myriad of car reviews that would put it no where near the 6.6. Its clear real world testing and Kia's own testing, that 6.6 was an estimate because the car, like I said, was still in preproduction. You were getting numbers from a preproduction model, which in the auto industry seldom ever performs the same as production models. Which would make sense because at the time they would have still been working on the thing in South Korea, so thats your 0-100 times. However production of the K5 GT takes place in Georgia, which at the time of your articles hadn't happened yet or else we would have had 0-60 test times in Georgia, not 0-100 estimates from a preproduction model.


 * LOL, of course its listed in its own media. https://www.kianewscenter.com/news/all/introducing-the-all-new-kia-k5-fastback-sedan/s/d067d594-9de2-4ada-8ff3-c6c91c962d0f
 * Enjoy. Alawadhi3000 (talk) 18:05, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

LOL "Around 6.6". That makes that an ESTIMATE not an official time. There is no official 0-100 time for the car, just that estimate because it was still in preproduction. Your own source beat you. Kia has now put out proper timing tested by an outside agency, that being AMCI, in proper test conditions. Your "around" doesn't cut it. Go ahead and put "Around 6.6" on the article. See how long that lasts for. It will remain blank.

Final warning for edit-warring
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 19:51, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Did you not read his source? Its wrong, it doesn't say 6.6 seconds it says "around 6.6 seconds". You're legit why universities don't allow wikipedia as source material. Get car sick.  You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has been revoked. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. OhNo itsJamie Talk 20:03, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

June 2022
Hello, I'm Yeeno. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Amarjeet Sohi, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Yee no  (talk) 06:03, 17 June 2022 (UTC)