General 2012 New Panda - all comments here please :)

Currently reading:
General 2012 New Panda - all comments here please :)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Good review. Why no 4x4 pics yet?? Also, the figures look good, but we all know the twin airs just don't get the mpg they state.
The estimated price for the twin air II says £9k. If this is right then that will be great. Somehow i think they are going to go over the top with prices though.
 
10.200 euro in Italy which is same price as outgoing Panda according to infomotori dot com
volkswagen.it shows that an Up! can be bought for 10,600 in Italy so that'd be under 10K for a Skoda or Seat.

At those prices I can see the Panda and the maturing 500 being slaughtered in the market by the VAG cars.

It's 60Kg heavier than the current car too.

The Pop spec appears to be as miserly as the old Active spec.

A lot has changed in 8 years; this has become a crowded little market between VAG, Toyota/PSA, Nissan/Suzuki and the Koreans.
If the current Panda stays in production and sells for 2K euro less than the new model I can see it outselling the new model.
 
The Autosprint magazine - equivalent of our Autosport - has just published a brief test.

Translation below:


We've driven the Multijet 1.3 litre version. More comfortable than the previous series, it's reliable and sprightly. The gearbox though is still the old style. Prices from 10,200 euros.

Strictly five doors and longer by 114 millimetres. This, in a brief summing up, is the business card of the new Panda which, after a good eight years, replaces the previous generation's model. With its 3650 mm overall, the Panda continues to be a city car.

The basic style has not changed, even if the lines have actually changed, beginning with the profiled bonnet and the faired-in headlights that contribute to a Cx reduced to 0.32. The floorpan is the same as that used by the American 500 and the Lancia Ypsilon, keeping a wheelbase of 2300 mm, even though this model is longer by 34 mm in front and 80 mm behind.

The internals have been designed with care for ergonomics and functionality. New front seats make their debut with reduced thickness, that allow more adjustment and add to the space of those seated behind. The plastics of the interior are pleasing to the eye, but are actually slightly more rigid to the touch. There are many optional accessories, including stability control and a Cargo Box system to give a horizontal load platform one the rear seat squabs have been folded.

Over 25 km with one litre of fuel (about 70mpg b_u)

On the road we were able to try first the 1.3 Multijet version equipped with the four cylinder 75 horsepower turbodiesel that allowed us to reach 168 kph (105 mph b_u) and to accelerate from 0-100 kph in 12.8 seconds. The engine is flexible enough and also mean in consumption, we saw 25.6 km with one litre (72 mpg b_u) in average conditions, but it was a little noisy under acceleration.

The new Panda's behaviour on the road is trustworthy, with a progressive and controllable understeer on the limit. In particular we were pleased by the precision of the steering while the gearbox, unfortunately, has old-style gear engagement and rather long lever movements.

The range of engines comprises the twin cylinder 0.9 litre petrol TwinAir Turbo of 85 horsepower, the four cylinder 1.2 petrol FIRE with 69 hp and the 1.3 Multijet turbo diese with 75 hp. There are three equipment levels - Pop, Easy and Lounge - with 10 body colours and 9 internal styles.

The prices of the new Panda start at 10,200 euros. There is the forecast of an original payment scheme to suit the crisis, that is 100 payments each of 100 euros, which includes unemployment insurance.
 
People looking for VWs or BMWs won't go near last years model. The case for last years model is stronger with Panda clientele.
 
http://www.inautonews.com/fiat-to-keep-selling-current-generation-panda-alongside-new-model
1700 euro difference between old and new in Italy.
The new one is slower, fatter and drinks more than the old one.
With about 2 million of them sold it means that cheap parts are only a motor factor or scrapyard away.

I think it's a good idea for Fiat to keep selling the current model.

There are going to be a fair few Panda owners (as we have seen on here) who won't like the new model and just want a proper basic car.

Re fuel consumption - the TwinAir versions may not be fantastic, but I see no reason why the 1.2 and 1.3 MJ will be much worse than the current offerings? Yes, the new car is bigger and heavier, but not by much.
 
Current 69bhp car 113g/km
New Car with 69bhp 120g/km
That's 6% less fuel consumption and have they strangled the engine to creep in at 120g/km.

Reports as to weight increase are somewhere between 60kg and 80kg; that's the weight of a full grown adult that get's carried around everywhere.
The wheelbase didn't increase and the front seat backs in the current Panda aren't exactly fat so exactly how much space can they have liberated.
When I was in the back seat of the new car my knees still rubbed up against the back of the front seat.
throw in the lottery that is the Italian production line and the case for the current model is very strong.
 
Last edited:
Depends how you define progress. In my book, progress would have been a car that's no bigger, is lighter, is more economical for the same rate of progress/as economical but performs better, has better roadholding and handling (not the same things), is more comfortable, and is more aerodynamic. So far the first three have definitely not been achieved and it looks as though the last three probably have, with better Cx possibly improving actual mpg achieved, especially on long runs. To sum up, it seems to me that Fiat has had to make the new model sufficiently different from the previous one to justify calling it a new model, but there wasn't enough money available or potential for profit from future sales to pay for a satisfactory redesign, which would have involved a move forward from the current Panda/500/Ka floorpan, and the result is a compromise that I'm negative about on balance, particularly on the size and weight fronts. Unless the hot(ter) version of the Panda 3, when it appears, is more appealing I'll stick to the 100HP and spend some money on the suspension.
 
Your issue is with FIAT, not with me. Instead of wasting their money on Chrysler and placating Italian unions they should be spending their money on new platforms. Instead we see a platform from 2003 which is being reworked again and again rather than seeing proper innovation.
 
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

That's completely wrong (and Nitrogen's right) - and the type of thinking that resulted in disasters like British Leyland. The motor industry is in the technology field and the way to succeed is to innovate, combining technical superiority with product appeal. The best example is Apple.

If it ain't broke, use the profits and the expertise to generate a culture of technical and commercial success, to develop something better, and better than the competition. Computer-aided engineering offers enormous opportunities to change designs and production lines very cost-effectively. Making the rear of the passenger compartment a bit longer, tweaking the suspension slightly and fairing in the headlamps is nothing like enough.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way to succeed is to keep the panda as a budget car. Sure let's get a new chassis and redesign the whole thing, but who's going to pay for that? The punters, another few grand will be ok though and keep it a budget car won't it?

So what's wrong with the chassis? Hell the new KA which only came out 2 years ago uses it, and will for years to come I suspect.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the way to succeed is to keep the panda as a budget car. Sure let's get a new chassis and redesign the whole thing, but who's going to pay for that? The punters, another few grand will be ok though and keep it a budget car won't it?

So what's wrong with the chassis? Hell the new KA which only came out 2 years ago uses it, and will for years to come I suspect.

That was what I was getting it, the chassis is already good - why spend extra remaking something that works perfectly well, to just pass that extra cost back to the consumer on what should be a budget car. FIAT already innovate quite well with their engine range, and in a budget car I'd rather they didn't spend too much money on things which don't need to be changed. If it makes you happier, lets call it a Panda Mk3b rather than Mk4 as that shows that it's not an all new model.
 
Last edited:
That was what I was getting it, the chassis is already good - why spend extra remaking something that works perfectly well, to just pass that extra cost back to the consumer on what should be a budget car. FIAT already innovate quite well with their engine range, and in a budget car I'd rather they didn't spend too much money on things which don't need to be changed. If it makes you happier, lets call it a Panda Mk3b rather than Mk4 as that shows that it's not an all new model.

The chassis on the Riley Nine "worked perfectly well" in 1926 so why don't we still have flexible chassis and rigid semi-elliptic springs with solid axles? Everything spent on development since must have been wasted.

No-one has more liking for Fiat's smallest cars than I have - we've owned three Topolinos, 3 Nuova 500s, a Cinquecento, a Seicento, four original Pandas, and are on our second and third current Pandas (apart from numerous other Italian cars) - but you fall behind if you stand still. Fiat is always struggling to be profitable and the folly is illustrated by the current 500 - despite the appeal of its cutesy styling, Fiat can't charge Mini/VW prices because it's built on a Panda platform, restricting profits from what should be a non-price-sensitive sector. The same problems afflict the Lancia range.

Fiat has been at its most successful precisely when it has innovated - Topolino, 600, Nuova 500, 128.

The weight issue is particularly pertinent. I forget the precise numbers but something like 80% of the cost of making a mass-production car is in the cost of materials, and this can only go up as natural resources become more expensive. Losing weight brings all sorts of benefits - costs, performance, economy, handling - adding weight is just wrong. Fiat is spending huge amounts on R&D, though not as much as it should, and it's allowing itself to be crippled by low productivity and marginal profitability. It needs to to solve its labour problems and have the courage to innovate.

It's not Fiat's duty to make cars as cheaply as it can - Europe needs to leave that to the Far East - might mean your next Panda is slightly more expensive but it wouldn't be outclassed as the new one will be within a few years.

Would you rather be in Fiat's shoes or VW's?
 
That was what I was getting it, the chassis is already good - why spend extra remaking something that works perfectly well, to just pass that extra cost back to the consumer on what should be a budget car. FIAT already innovate quite well with their engine range, and in a budget car I'd rather they didn't spend too much money on things which don't need to be changed. If it makes you happier, lets call it a Panda Mk3b rather than Mk4 as that shows that it's not an all new model.

Well being a purest the mk1&2 share the same basic floor pan, so really it should be called a mk4 :p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top