Hyundai Ioniq 9 (2026)

Where reviewers disagree

• ±Range · 4 positive, 3 negative, 1 mixed
  Which sources said this

  • Electrek — positive: Says reaching the 311-mile EPA rating is doable in warm weather.
  • Motor1 — negative: In an unusually cold week the 311-mile EPA rating fell closer to 280 miles.
  • Consumer Reports — positive: Measured 315 miles at 70 mph in a purchased SEL AWD, five miles short of its 320-mile EPA rating.
  • ArenaEV — neutral: EPA range for the Performance AWD is 311 miles, while independent highway measurements range from 262 to 315 miles.
  • What Car? — positive: Quotes UK WLTP range of 385 miles for the rear-drive car and 372 miles for the Long Range AWD and Performance versions.
  • Auto Express — negative: Measured 287 real miles in the Calligraphy Performance at 2.6 mi/kWh and 2.7 mi/kWh in the RWD, described as close to 300 miles against a 372-mile WLTP claim.
  • Automotive Addicts — neutral: Performance AWD versions, including the tested car, carry a 311-mile EPA rating from the shared 110.3 kWh battery.
  • Car and Driver — negative: Recorded 62 MPGe observed against the 85 MPGe EPA combined rating, about 27 percent worse; no full range test in miles was completed.
  • OneShift by Carousell — neutral: UK and European WLTP figures for the all-wheel-drive versions are 372 miles; US EPA figures for the Performance AWD are 311 miles.
  • The Drive — positive: Projected about 297 miles from 2.7 mi/kWh over 287 miles, which the review calls darn close to the 311-mile EPA figure.
  • Top Gear — mixed: After about 5,000 miles the range predictor indicated more than 330 miles in warm conditions, against a UK WLTP rating of 372 miles for the 314 kW car.
  • The Auto Channel — neutral: Performance AWD versions carry a 311-mile EPA rating from the shared 110.3 kWh battery.

• ±Charging · 1 positive, 2 negative, 4 mixed
  Which sources said this

  • Electrek — negative: Measured a peak of about 215 kW and up to roughly 237 kW on a native 800-volt station; on a 400-volt Supercharger the car is limited to about 126 kW and 10 to 80 percent takes about 40 minutes.
  • InsideEVs — negative: Measured a peak of about 235 kW, but on a Tesla Supercharger the car held 126 kW from 20 to 75 percent in 25 minutes, and a V4 road-trip session from 30 to 80 percent also took 25 minutes.
  • Consumer Reports — positive: States it is the first non-Tesla EV it has tested that comes standard with a NACS port, so Tesla Superchargers can be used without an adapter.
  • ArenaEV — neutral: The factory NACS port arrives with a 350 kW claim, while measured peaks in the corpus run from about 215 to 235 kW.
  • Auto Express — mixed: Quotes a maximum of 233 kW and 10 to 80 percent in 24 minutes, but measured a peak of 231 kW from 28 to 82 percent and saw only 157 kW in an earlier test.
  • Automotive Addicts — neutral: The tested US car ships with a factory NACS port; the CCS-to-NACS adapter was listed at $235.
  • Car and Driver — mixed: The 24-minute 10 to 80 percent claim needs a 350-kW charger; on a NACS V3 stall the same test took 41 minutes, and the CCS-to-NACS adapter was a $235 option.
  • OneShift by Carousell — neutral: Charging is quoted at up to 233 kW in the UK and 350 kW by Hyundai, with 10 to 80 percent in 24 minutes on a native 800-volt charger.
  • The Drive — mixed: Explains the 24-minute 10 to 80 percent figure as 24 minutes on a 350-kW charger using the CCS adapter, a best case rather than the everyday result.
  • Top Gear — mixed: Quotes a maximum charging rate of 233 kW from the 800-volt architecture, on UK cars that use CCS2 rather than the NACS port fitted in the United States.
  • The Auto Channel — neutral: Hyundai claims 350 kW and 10 to 80 percent in 24 minutes, a figure conditional on a native 800-volt charger.

• ±Efficiency · 1 positive, 4 negative, 1 mixed
  Which sources said this

  • Electrek — mixed: Logged 23.0 kWh/100 km at 8 degrees Celsius and 18.1 kWh/100 km in traffic without climate control, showing how much conditions change the result.
  • InsideEVs — positive: Logged 3.3 to 3.5 mi/kWh in a New York summer, the most favourable efficiency figure recorded in the corpus.
  • Autocar — negative: Lists disappointing efficiency as a central weakness and describes the dual-motor performance version as inefficient.
  • Auto Express — negative: Calls efficiency underwhelming at 2.6 to 2.7 mi/kWh, offset only by the size of the battery.
  • Top Gear — negative: A long-term average of 2.2 mi/kWh at a constant 80 mph, the worst figure in the corpus, while the range predictor showed over 330 miles in warm weather.
  • WIRED — negative: Recorded 2.85 mi/kWh in sub-zero temperatures, a winter figure well below the summer results other outlets logged.

• ±Ride and comfort · 3 positive, 2 negative, 1 mixed
  Which sources said this

  • Consumer Reports — mixed: Reports the suspension absorbs bumps fairly well while stopping short of plush, with noticeable body roll in corners.
  • Autocar — negative: Says the chassis lacks a bit of sophistication for a GBP 65,000 car and notes the absence of adaptive or air suspension and four-wheel steering.
  • Auto Express — negative: The 21-inch wheels on the Calligraphy introduce a fidget and leave the car quite unsettled; the 19-inch entry versions ride better.
  • Car and Driver — positive: Found none of the rear-suspension bobble the same team noted on the Kia EV9, and logged 66 dB at a steady 70 mph.
  • The Drive — positive: Says the ride shames the Lexus TX and matches the Cadillac Lyriq, with one reservation about the rear self-levelling system jiggling on a driveway.
  • WIRED — positive: Calls the car possibly the most comfortable in the world and the seats fabulous.