advertisement


Which Fiat 500?

richardg said:
As a 6'2" bloke, having had a 595 in the house for 3 years, this comment about loads of headroom baffles me. I hated going in it because my head was already skimming the lining at standstill. As soon as we moved I either had to tip my head to the side or enjoy a dose of roof head-panning!
Click to expand...
Weird.. did you have a sunroof in the 595? I'm 6'3" and have never had headroom problems in a 500.

Of course, overall height doesn't tell the whole story: i might have a shorter torso than you.

(I have had problems with headroom in other cars, notably every Mazda MX5, the Alfa Romeo Brera and 4C, the Mk1 BMW 1 Series, and the current Volvo S90)
 
KrisW said:
Weird.. did you have a sunroof in the 595? I'm 6'3" and have never had headroom problems in a 500.

Of course, overall height doesn't tell the whole story: i might have a shorter torso than you.

(I have had problems with headroom in other cars, notably every Mazda MX5, the Alfa Romeo Brera and 4C, the Mk1 BMW 1 Series, and the current Volvo S90)
Click to expand...
Certainly my top half is slightly longer than 'normal'....there could be 2" in that if yours is slightly shorter than 'normal'.

I'm also wondering if in 3 years I failed to find the seat height adjuster?

The 595 was just regular tin topped. I hired a sunroof 500 in January, hoping it would provide a bit more space but my head still hit it.

Edit: aha I am not going senile. This reviewer also reports headroom limitations after seat is lowered

https://www.carthrottle.com/post/fiat-500-sport-5mt-review/
 
richardg said:
Edit: aha I am not going senile. This reviewer also reports headroom limitations after seat is lowered
Click to expand...
The usual trick in this case is to get the spanners out and fit spacers to tip the seat back marginally so your knees are further from the pedals and your shoulders further from the wheel. I've known men up to 6 ft 5 who can cram themselves into Caterham 7s using this approach. Whether you'd want to take this approach just to fit in a normal tintop is debatable.
 
KrisW said:
My own experiences, as a frequent borrower of the petrol 500 and owner of a 500e is that these are great cars, especially if you need to park on town streets - you can use spaces that nobody else can fit in!

0.9 SGE "TwinAir" 2 cylinder turbo: 85 and 105 bhp. Discontinued in 2018.

.
Click to expand...

I was a bit suspicious of the 'Multi-Air's' apparent sophistication back in 2011 when we bought the 1.2 with the 'fire' engine, I am shocked to hear that they discontinued it in 2018. I loved the clever valve operation, but worried that it might cause me issues as a home mech.

btw I had to check that the 'fire' engine was the same one they brought in during the 70's, it was the one "made by robots" wasn't it? Or was it Roberts? :0)
 
Roog said:
I was a bit suspicious of the 'Multi-Air's' apparent sophistication back in 2011 when we bought the 1.2 with the 'fire' engine, I am shocked to hear that they discontinued it in 2018. I loved the clever valve operation, but worried that it might cause me issues as a home mech.

btw I had to check that the 'fire' engine was the same one they brought in during the 70's, it was the one "made by robots" wasn't it? Or was it Roberts? :0)
Click to expand...

Fiat are still fitting that engine or were up to 2022, our new car (registered March 2023) is a TA 0.9 two cylinder engine @ 85HP, think I read somewhere recently that that engine was/is a direct copy of the engine Fiat fitted to the original Fiat 500 back in 1957 or something.
 
Seems I'm wrong. They must have built up a stockpile, because the factory that made the TA engines switched over to building the new three- and four- cylinder 1.0 and 1.3 "FireFly" engines in late 2018. But the MultiAir technology is still used across the FIAT petrol engine family - the 2.0 litre petrol in the Alfa Romeo Giulia and Stelvio is a MultiAir engine, as are the 1.0 and 1.3 turbos used in Jeep and FIAT small SUVs. Its big advantage is that it lets you get high performance out of an engine without making it undriveable or grossly inefficient at low speeds. For the 500 and Panda, the performance of the new 1.0 engine is perfectly fine, especially with a bit of mild-hybrid assistance off the line, so there's no need for MultiAir.

It's not a direct copy of the original 500 engine, but it is, like that one, a twin-cylinder. It was developed as a demonstration of the MultiAir system, and also with a future hybrid car designs in mind. In the end, for other reasons (FIAT taking on Chrysler in 2009) those plans were mothballed.

Yes.. FIRE stands for "Fully Integrated Robotized Engine", and is indeed a descendant of the original 1985 model - the first car engine to be fully assembled by robots. It's later than the FIAT Ritmo (Strada in UK), which was the car advertised as "handbuilt by robots", a really big deal in 1978. Fiat Strada - "Handbuilt by Robots" - YouTube

FIAT was a pioneer of automated assembly - some of the other futuristic ideas in that factory included the automatically-guided vehicles that bring bodies and components between stations (you can see them in the ad); the technology of the time meant that it turned out to be less reliable than conveyors and guys with carts, but the idea itself was sound, and in the most modern car factories you see AGVs with adjustable height platforms on them bringing cars from station to station - this time they're guided by radio-location, not optical tracks.

The FIRE engine family was finally retired in 2020 - it's been replaced by the 1.0 and 1.3 litre versions of the new "FireFly" engine family, with or without MultiAir and/or turbocharger.
 
Thanks Chris, according to the manager at the Arnold Clark branch where I 'bought' the 1.0 city touch Panda, Fiat are about 18 months behind in terms of production and delivery of orders so a 2023 registered car was actually built in the factory in 2021 and has the spec from that model run.

The car that we've actually bought is a Wild variant and three models down from the top of the range Fiat Panda Hatchback 0.9 TwinAir [85] Cross 4x4 [Touchscreen] 5dr which was probably built back in 2021.

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/fiat/panda/4x4/prices-specs

 
twotone said:
Fiat are still fitting that engine or were up to 2022, our new car (registered March 2023) is a TA 0.9 two cylinder engine @ 85HP, think I read somewhere recently that that engine was/is a direct copy of the engine Fiat fitted to the original Fiat 500 back in 1957 or something.
Click to expand...
I'm very sure that it can't be, other than sharing a layout. The original 500 was an aircooled twin developing all of about 25bhp. The new one I'm sure will be water cooled, twice the size, 4x the power, etc.

KrisW said:
the performance of the new 1.0 engine is perfectly fine, especially with a bit of mild-hybrid assistance off the line, so there's no need for MultiAir.
.
Click to expand...
I can confirm that the addition of the mild hybrid transforms the performance of the car, especially at low engine speeds. I recently joined my parents on holiday in Italy, my Dad had a hired 1.0 Panda. He normally drives an auto and he grew up driving knackered Ford Pops and A35s where if you exceeded 3000rpm they blew up, so he changes up at 1500 rpm, 2000 if he's "thrashing it". As a result these poor little cars are forced to struggle up Italian mountain roads, labouring at 1500 rpm. We all know that the normal IC motor will produce no power at all at that speed and won't run, but the hybrid kept it rolling. I marvelled at its tractability, I couldn't have driven my 3L turbodiesel car up those slopes at 1500 rpm, but the Fiat did. It only failed to do so once, grinding up a long climb, I suspect because the mild hybrid had run out of battery and there wasn't enough power from the engine at 1500 rpm to recharge it. Predictably enough, at that point it noticeably ran out of power, it needed first gear and (finally!) enough revs to generate the power to drive it up the hill.

If this is the future of motoring, I'm a fan. It makes even a badly driven car work, and without anyone noticing.
 
miktec said:
2012 1.2 Pop 3dr [Start Stop]
Click to expand...

I've owned a 2013 version of this since new. It's now done nearly 130,000 fault free (that's blown it !) miles. I'm 6' 3" and find it has equally as much headroom as our VW T-ROC and is more fun to drive. Fold down the rear seats (very easy to do) and there is ample space for most things.

A solid recommendation from me.
 
stevec67 said:
The usual trick in this case is to get the spanners out and fit spacers to tip the seat back marginally so your knees are further from the pedals and your shoulders further from the wheel. I've known men up to 6 ft 5 who can cram themselves into Caterham 7s using this approach. Whether you'd want to take this approach just to fit in a normal tintop is debatable.
Click to expand...
I had someone file 2.5cm off the bolt mount points on the seat frame on my MR2 last year! It is frustrating to prefer small cars and be tall and like an upright position.
 
TheMJ said:
I've owned a 2013 version of this since new. It's now done nearly 130,000 fault free (that's blown it !) miles. I'm 6' 3" and find it has equally as much headroom as our VW T-ROC and is more fun to drive. Fold down the rear seats (very easy to do) and there is ample space for most things.

A solid recommendation from me.
Click to expand...

I must have read every single review ever written about Pandas but one sticks out in my mind and that was regarding the seats in the Mk1 Panda which apparently you could remove them to wash them or fold them down into a double bed:cool:
 
twotone said:
I must have read every single review ever written about Pandas but one sticks out in my mind and that was regarding the seats in the Mk1 Panda which apparently you could remove them to wash them or fold them down into a double bed:cool:
Click to expand...
Rather like the 2CV where you could remove the seats and use them as picnic chairs. Very practical.
 
twotone said:
I must have read every single review ever written about Pandas but one sticks out in my mind and that was regarding the seats in the Mk1 Panda which apparently you could remove them to wash them or fold them down into a double bed:cool:
Click to expand...

The rear seat was a hammock, wasn't it?
 
Yank said:
The rear seat was a hammock, wasn't it?
Click to expand...
A former colleague had one. The rear seat was padded material stretched over a frame, so hammock-like. The great thing was how versatile this made it. You could adjust the lay of the frame from, say the 'L' shape that defined the seat, to a 'V' shape which made a sort of hopper which you could put shopping into, for example. Or lay flat to form a bed, or (IIRC) remove entirely. It was a clever bit of design.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
A former colleague had one. The rear seat was padded material stretched over a frame, so hammock-like. The great thing was how versatile this made it. You could adjust the lay of the frame from, say the 'L' shape that defined the seat, to a 'V' shape which made a sort of hopper which you could put shopping into, for example. Or lay flat to form a bed, or (IIRC) remove entirely. It was a clever bit of design.
Click to expand...
It's a marvellous bit of design, the video above shows just how clever it is. Not especially comfortable and it wouldn't meet the safety standards that apply 40 years on, but it's a great design. One thing that is apparent is how they manage it with so little material, which helps keep the car weight down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top