Future of 500/Panda???

[elpig]

Wondering what people's thoughts or advice would be...

I had a 2014 Fiat 500 1.2 = Great car
2019 Abarth 595 1.4T = Fantastic but thirsty
2023 Fiat Panda Hybrid 0.9 = No words

The Panda is severely underpowered to the point it's dangerous at roundabouts and joining fast A roads. Overtaking isn't always possible either.

It's useless in 1st and 2nd gear and only becomes ok after reaching 55mph in 6th gear. Getting there is a slow struggle.

I've renamed my car the Fiat Tortoise.

I stupidly took out a 3yr service/MOT plan with the car which tempts me to hold onto it for economics but it's dire to drive. I'd like another 500 or Abarth but the only option seems to be going for a used car to avoid the 500 Hybrid and cost of a new Abarth.

I have no interest in another Hybrid or an electric car currently. Any thoughts appreciated

 

[SB1500]

The 500 / Current Panda (but with the 1.2) is slow, but not dangerously so. I mean, if you're used to driving even a slightly bigger car with a 1.6+ engine (petrol or diesel, turbo'd) then yes, if you try to join roads, pull out etc fast, you'll be sorely disappointed and potentially risking your life! But that's a driver error to not understand their cars comfort zone or stick within it. I don't think owners of these cars are seeking high speed or fast cornering, but of course, Abarth exists for those who want handling, power without giving up style or re-mortgaging the house. Abarth, as you reference, not so good on fuel, especially for such little cars but this is Fiat's default formula of 'engine isn't broke, don't fix it', then you look across at Peugeot... Vauxhall... Ford and VW who, in the same time, produced A & B segment cars with more modern engines than the FIRE 1.2 with all sorts of issues, plus being slow, and never really keeping them (or the cars they are put in) around long enough to get them reliable.

Now, the 1.0 (is it 0.9? Thought 1.0) current engine... I have not driven. Personally I'd prefer a 1.2 but now that we're a few years past the 1.2's last year on sale, anybody buying a new or nearly new 500 / Panda (of the outgoing models) now definitely has a tough decision to make.

From my understanding, it's not really a Hybrid system like Toyota / Hyundai use. It's a 'mild hybrid' so it's got a very (useless?) alternator like boost. This is not because Fiat wanted to try and change the world with its version of a Hybrid, but rather to comply with EU laws. You know, 'so many of your sales by 20XX must be 'electrified'', and 'by the year 2050... 2035... 2030... nope, 2035... nope 2030... only new EV / Hybrid sales' laws.

Fiat can built some amazing engines at all levels of the spectrum, and the Italians in general are unmatched be it a little Fiat 500, a LaFerrari or some of the ships they build, they know their engineering and they tend to stick to older, proven, 'still works' techniques. Arguably, that's all that makes some of the legendary reliable Toyota's special, the fact that they don't reinvent the wheel every 5 years like most European brands do, right down to switch gear inside the car so that it makes for more favourable car reviews and test drive demos.. They only seem to pull out the R&D when they must.

Around 2010, the TwinAir... mixed bag, some avoided it like the plague, some had a terrible experience, others on this forum currently approaching 150k miles and counting on them. Tiny little two cylinder, big turbo. The trend of the 2010s (outside of diesel, prior to 2015 and the VW scandal). Why? EU laws on emissions getting too strict, too fast. Silly solutions like this led to these tiny engines and big turbos from all the car makers - total waste as now all that R&D went to nothing. Arguably, all the work on DPFs on the diesel front - also all for nothing now, but brought about by the same EU laws.

Blame the emissions laws for this new need for Hybrids. Over-regulation, whilst made with the best of intentions, often hinders innovation and real breakthroughs by specifying narrow hoops manufacturers must comply with. And it's not like there's any real, significant eco bonus to the mild hybrid, but for owners, as you've found, it seems like there is an everyday penalty for owners who are finding it hard to live with.

Now, as for advice....
Is the warranty / MOT plan transferrable? Make a call and find out. If so, selling point to mention when selling it on.
If not... can you not sell it privately, and agree with the owner you'll meet up and take the car to its MOT / service saving them the cash - but you charge accordingly in your selling price. The right buyer might appreciate that even just to keep the dealer service history?

Otherwise.. perhaps weigh up.. how much of what you paid for that extra is 'unspent'? Is the depreciation loss of holding on to the car another year more than the loss of not getting your service / MOT?

Also... maybe the garage would agree, to keep your custom, that if you buy / source your next 500 / Abarth via them, you can get the remaining service / MOT on that Fiat / Abarth instead?

Worth a shot. If they say no... ring up or go in and ask somebody else. One salesman / workshop person's targets might be met for the month, another's might not.. maybe a senior person will pull the strings to make it work. I've found persistence to be effective in dealerships. Been buying my Toyota oil / filter at my local dealer for two years now... ~£150 ish ... just the other week, emailed and asked the current price.. same. Sent the the link to a specialist online selling for £100 + £17 delivery to NI... dealer agreed to do £120, same day pick up... shocked but happy I chanced my arm. You'd be surprised!

I really want to drive the 1.0 Panda now... to see if I agree!

Keep us updated on what you do.

 

[The Pretender]

Wondering what people's thoughts or advice would be...

I had a 2014 Fiat 500 1.2 = Great car
2019 Abarth 595 1.4T = Fantastic but thirsty
2023 Fiat Panda Hybrid 0.9 = No words

The Panda is severely underpowered to the point it's dangerous at roundabouts and joining fast A roads. Overtaking isn't always possible either.

It's useless in 1st and 2nd gear and only becomes ok after reaching 55mph in 6th gear. Getting there is a slow struggle.

I've renamed my car the Fiat Tortoise.

I stupidly took out a 3yr service/MOT plan with the car which tempts me to hold onto it for economics but it's dire to drive. I'd like another 500 or Abarth but the only option seems to be going for a used car to avoid the 500 Hybrid and cost of a new Abarth.

I have no interest in another Hybrid or an electric car currently. Any thoughts appreciated

The 500 Hybrid is just like the Panda , dramatically slow, with that terrible 0.9ltr 3 cilinder Mild Hybrid engine.
Production of the Abarth 595/695 has stopt, you just have the electric FIAT 500e and Abarth 500e.
There will be a new 500 Mild Hybrid in the near future (2026), with a Peugeot/Stellantis 1.2ltr 3 cylinder 48v Mild Hybrid engine with around 128-136 hp.

 

[StevenRB45]

There will be a new 500 Mild Hybrid in the near future (2026), with a Peugeot/Stellantis 1.2ltr 3 cylinder 48v Mild Hybrid engine with around 128-136 hp.

It's likely to be the lower powered version so 100bhp engine and 12bhp motor although with the 500 being "premium" maybe it will get the high power version as well (136 engine and something like 30bhp motor).

The good news is they never add the 2 figures together..so both the 136 and 100 that figure doesn't include the electric motor so it'll be a bit faster than it sounds if you just look at the headline figure. So with "just" 100bhp it manages 0-60 in 9.8 seconds in the 208 which is likely heavier so a full 3.5 seconds (in fact nearly 4) faster to 60 than the Panda hybrid and faster than the twin-air.

 

[The Pretender]

It's likely to be the lower powered version so 100bhp engine and 12bhp motor although with the 500 being "premium" maybe it will get the high power version as well (136 engine and something like 30bhp motor).

The good news is they never add the 2 figures together..so both the 136 and 100 that figure doesn't include the electric motor so it'll be a bit faster than it sounds if you just look at the headline figure. So with "just" 100bhp it manages 0-60 in 9.8 seconds in the 208 which is likely heavier so a full 3.5 seconds (in fact nearly 4) faster to 60 than the Panda hybrid and faster than the twin-air.

The Grande Panda will get 128 hp as a Mild Hybrid.

 

[StevenRB45]

The Grande Panda will get 128 hp as a Mild Hybrid.

Not seen this confirmed anywhere, maybe the bigger versions i.e. the SUV and pickup?

It would be cool although at that point you're likely looking at Panda with a 0-60 in the 7s which just seems improbable .

Not that I'm complaining but back in "the day" the 130bhp cactus on engine only was low 8 seconds to 60, with dual clutch, electric and a smaller car it's going to be the fastest panda ever made by a large margin.

 

[The Panda Nut]

A little more low down power and a cleaer pick up would be good. Trouble is, more power, more weight, more size, more expensive to buy, more to insure, service and maintain. Need bigger parking spaces, use more tyres and brakes WORSE for the environment and probably no more economical. Uses more resources to build and are not asd good to drive. Hopefully one day we will get a geniune replacement if and when battery technology improves and the weight issues are overcome. I will weaken and try a new Panda but Im not hopeful it will be of interest to me.

 

[StevenRB45]

A little more low down power and a cleaer pick up would be good. Trouble is, more power, more weight, more size, more expensive to buy, more to insure, service and maintain. Need bigger parking spaces, use more tyres and brakes WORSE for the environment and probaly no more economical. Uses more resources to build and are not asd good to drive. Hopefully one day we will get a geniune replacement if and when battery technology improves and the weight issues are overcome. I will weaken and try a new Panda but Im not hopeful it will be of interest to me.

Not really in this case.. I'd imagine if it's the higher powered system the motor and battery may weigh a bit more (though the battery is only about 1kw if not less) otherwise on ours the only difference between a 110 and 130 was the map on the engine.

Hence the 130 cactus being surprisingly rapid it still weighed less than a Panda 4x4 despite 130bhp.

 

[The Panda Nut]

Not really in this case.. I'd imagine if it's the higher powered system the motor and battery may weigh a bit more (though the battery is only about 1kw if not less) otherwise on ours the only difference between a 110 and 130 was the map on the engine.

Hence the 130 cactus being surprisingly rapid it still weighed less than a Panda 4x4 despite 130bhp.

Im sure the difference between the power outputs is exactly as you say. Its the overall concept of athe growing car I dont like. There has been no gain in driver enjoyment with all this new tech. Road feel is no longer an item at all, let alone a thing that can be discussed between one car and another. EV's just seem to move us further away from driving joy and make it just an efficient way of getting from A to B. There has been a vast jump forward in terms of power and speed, but its all pretty well un-usable on the road. My 83 HP is as much as its really possiblle to use these days. I know you dont need to use all fo the horses all of the time, and there will always be an occasion where its adds safety being able to accelerate out of trouble. I reckon however that the TA has as much usable overtaking power as most of my previous vehicles. It hardly ever feels short. ANything that goes past me on a long run is breaking the law. The biggest problem of all, and particularly with FIAT is their propensity to claim power outputs that are puely random values. You can say its got 85hp whe it has 83 and you can say its got 90 when its still has 83 as with the Panda Waze. I used to have a Golf 2.0 GTD 130 DSG, a very nice machine. I tried the 140, 150, and 170 versions and while the 170 clearly had a bit more go, the others left me in doubt that they were much, if any different to the 130. The $64,000 is do you believe the claims. If I were to buy a new car again claiming a higher output I would take it to a dynamometer on its first trip and verify it was what it claims to be. I can see the saleman turning white now! I have thought about getting my TA tuned and remapped. There are plenty of places that will do it and give a substantial power boost for a reasonable wedge. I would at leas tbe able to see it on the dyno. I keep coming back to the same place thouigh which is where would I use the power and do I want to pay the price at the pumps for increasing the speed which you can only use between the speed cameras. Maybe its me getting old but it doesnt seem like progress.

 

[StevenRB45]

Given the engines have been around for years, people have run them stock and mapped on rolling roads..or at least the older version.

Something that always set my teeth on edge a bit is they always quote exactly the same figures for every car the engine is in in terms of power and torque. This is incredibly implausible given the different exhaust and induction systems on every model especially after they added a GPF.

Someone stuck a stock one of ours on a rolling road.. apparently on 98 rather than E10 it gained about 5bhp over claimed and 20lbft of torque. I'm currently looking at Seat estates...the torque figure of VWs 1.4 is significantly lower.

Citroen C3 1.2 Puretech 110hp MY2018 – Stage1 98RON – eTuners

www.etuners.gr

The 170lbft of torque would make it exactly the same ball park as 130 version which you'd expect given identical hardware..it seems at higher rpm the waste gate is used to stop it having 130bhp but at low rpm before it bleeds off both engines do the same numbers. Cheeky map takes it to nearly 150 for both engines.

But as you point out I'd not bother as standard it has more than enough for the size of car to take on anything you'd do with a car like this. To keep up with traffic rarely needs more than half throttle unless you've got 4 people and luggage.

The 100bhp as fitted to the Panda still quotes 151lb/ft of torque which is absolutely implausible given it has an electric motor for torque fill and is a different engine design with a different head..

 

[The Panda Nut]

Given the engines have been around for years, people have run them stock and mapped on rolling roads..or at least the older version.

Something that always set my teeth on edge a bit is they always quote exactly the same figures for every car the engine is in in terms of power and torque. This is incredibly implausible given the different exhaust and induction systems on every model especially after they added a GPF.

Someone stuck a stock one of ours on a rolling road.. apparently on 98 rather than E10 it gained about 5bhp over claimed and 20lbft of torque. I'm currently looking at Seat estates...the torque figure of VWs 1.4 is significantly lower.

Citroen C3 1.2 Puretech 110hp MY2018 – Stage1 98RON – eTuners

www.etuners.gr

The 170lbft of torque would make it exactly the same ball park as 130 version which you'd expect given identical hardware..it seems at higher rpm the waste gate is used to stop it having 130bhp but at low rpm before it bleeds off both engines do the same numbers. Cheeky map takes it to nearly 150 for both engines.

But as you point out I'd not bother as standard it has more than enough for the size of car to take on anything you'd do with a car like this. To keep up with traffic rarely needs more than half throttle unless you've got 4 people and luggage.

The 100bhp as fitted to the Panda still quotes 151lb/ft of torque which is absolutely implausible given it has an electric motor for torque fill and is a different engine design with a different head..

I read that in the 90's the PSA 1905cc diesesl rated at 65hp and 71hp were known to be actually producing nearer 90hp in standard trim. Turbos rated at 90 were nearer 110. From the way they went I can belive it. Then electronci control came along and spoiled things. I had at least 6 BXs and they did vary, ditto the tubo's I certainly had one that was way better than the others. My TA is definitely an 83hp engine but its vastly better than the first one and also much more fuel efficient. Setup must have something to do with it. Im pretty sure manufacturers muck about with engines as production goes along and chnages are made and tied , then announced later so to some extent what you get is pot luck

 

[StevenRB45]

I think in this case the quoted figure is your "minimum" i.e. stick it on some 95 octane E10 that's what you'll get.

But with it being a Turbo and one that does a lot of work at low RPM where pre-ignition can be a problem at high throttle opening and low engine speed it could absolutely use the additional octane rating at low rpm to do a bit more.

In fact here is the 100bhp version of the engine on 95 fuel, you'll note on 95 it's bob on 100bhp but the torque although lower is still nearly 170 not the 151 claimed..almost like they want you to pay more for the 130 so exaggerate the difference.

Peugeot 208 1.2Puretech100 GT-line – Stage1 95RON – eTuners

www.etuners.gr

And here's a Mokka 130 on 95...making 128 which is what is claimed (130 is PS) and a 130 in a 308 generating 5bhp more on 98.

Although looking at it both are also over book torque as well

Opel Mokka 1.2T 130hp EAT8 – Stage1 95RON – eTuners

www.etuners.gr

Peugeot 308 1.2 Puretech130 MY2019 – Stage1 98RON – eTuners

www.etuners.gr

If it wasn't for being infamous...it's actually decent engine and very tuneable.

 

[SB1500]

I'm quite happy to be rid of a turbo altogether with the absolute headache they tend to be after the ten year mark (or before if you drive a TDI). If I didn't drive a hybrid (the Toyota style system) I'd go back to a naturally aspirated engine in the form of a petrol Fiat or a 1.6 petrol Mazda with no turbo. My experiences of modern PSA petrol engines hasn't been nice on a small, non turbo 1.0 manual nor a turbocharged, automatic 'Grandland' petrol. The thing has a severe drinking problem, I'm not even convinced driving it carefully would return decent MPG because of the size and weight of the thing... I'd call it 'Avensis N47 syndrome', where the engine is too small for the car and the over reliance on the turbo to make it move is unavoidable. It's a party trick of PSA across Peugeot, Citroen and Vauxhall and I (sadly) suspect new Fiats might be the same.

If Stellantis / Fiat built a proper self charging hybrid system that was lightweight, reliable and practical for small cars I'd be all over that. They've been out long enough now that they're nothing special and that they can be done much more affordably than BEVs with none of the drawbacks.

 

[StevenRB45]

I'm slightly confused by the term "over reliance on the turbo" in the context of a Panda/500.

The new Panda is going to be the same size as the current C3 the 500 smaller. Without any hybrid gear and with moar boost because I have the older none GPF car with more BHP, the average of the last 3 months is nearly 46mpg and the last month 47..

I understand something like the twinair being over reliant on a turbo as without it's too low powered to move the car. But the 1.2 generates as much power as a turbo twin air without a turbo and turbo is used to generate more torque.

Obviously if you're moving 1600kg of lardy VX with an autobox that's a different thing but we're talking about about 1050-1100kg of small car for which full throttle will get you up to instaban surprisingly quickly so in general you're just tickling it to keep up with traffic at low rpm unless you're joining the motorway etc.

However as discussed at the time...the power train from the grandland is dead due to being terrible and has been replaced by a "proper" self charging hybrid system or full electric in both Panda and 500 (and the grandland indeed where it achieves mid 40s).