Trunk comparison: Hyundai Kona vs Kia Sportage

Key Differences

The measurements show small differences in cargo length and opening: The Kia Sportage offers a trunk that is 1.2 in (2%) longer with the seats folded down and 1.6 in (5%) longer with the first row upright than the Hyundai Kona.

The width at the narrowest point is the same, and the width of the trunk opening on the Sportage is only 0.4 in (1%) larger. The trunk opening of the Kona is 2 in (7%) higher than that of the Sportage. The loading edge of the Sportage is 1.6 in (6%) higher above the ground than that of the Kona.

Most Significant Difference (>10%)

The depth of the trunk (distance from loading edge to trunk floor) is listed as 2 in greater in the Hyundai Kona — that is 400% more than in the Kia Sportage. This is the only difference with a significant percentage deviation and thus the most important practical difference between the vehicles.

Impact on Usability

The significantly greater depth in the Kona creates more usable space below the loading edge. Practically, this means bulky or taller items can be recessed further down, small parts can be stored more securely, and the cargo volume feels larger with irregularly shaped loads.

Combined with the lower loading edge in the Kona (the Sportage loading edge is 1.6 in higher), there are also ergonomic advantages when loading and unloading: less lifting effort and easier sliding of heavy items into the cargo area.

The slightly longer dimensions of the Sportage (3–1.6 in) can be minimally advantageous when transporting very long items but are minor and usually barely noticeable in practice.

The slightly wider opening width of the Sportage (+0.4 in) and the somewhat higher opening height of the Kona (+2 in / 7%) are other subtle differences: the Kona offers a bit more vertical clearance, the Sportage slightly better lateral accessibility.

Overall, the Kona is more practical for storing bulky or heavy cargo due to its significantly greater depth and lower loading edge; the Sportage offers only marginal advantages in length and opening width.