Having read virtually every review written on the 500L, I'm rather taken aback by the number of cruel comments about the car's looks. Top Gear's Richard Hammond, for example, describes it as ‘hideous’. Mind you, this comes from a man who thinks that a shark’s tooth necklace is the height of style.

I realise that by badging the car a 500 it invites inevitable comparisons with its cuter, smaller sibling. But it's an MPV. An exact scaled-up version would never have worked. Fiat would have done better to call it the 600 or Multipla Nuovo.

But hideous? Really? I'm just staring at my 500L parked in the drive; shiny bright red paintwork with a white roof, matching wing mirrors and white diamond alloys, and I think that for what it is — a people/luggage/dog carrier — it's actually a pretty good looking, well designed car (though why they couldn't have made the cubbyhole by the USB socket big enough to rest a mobile phone is beyond me. But that's another matter).

Ok, so it's not a Porsche 911. But neither is it one of those bland, lookie likey boxes that have taken over our roads. It has a style all of its own.

I guess I'm preaching to the converted here, but what do you think?

Andmakeitsnappy said:

Fiat would have done better to call it the 600 or Multipla Nuovo.

Click to expand...

If it wasn't called a 500, people would be less inclined to compare the two. In my opinion, it looks more like a Panda and ought to have been labelled a Grande Panda to fit with the Grande Punto naming, but there ya go.

As a cynical ploy to cash in on the 500's popularity it was a massive fail in this country as, as you rightly pointed out, people compare the two looks wise and the 500L comes up short.

Personally I hate it outside, although once inside it's a nice place to be with plenty of room for a family.

Would I buy one? Probably not as the days of me needing a people mover are fast becoming a memory.

Reading peoples reviews on here of real life usage it seems to be a competent vehicle but sales may suffer from the fall out of the euro6 500 1.2 debacle (even though I don't think the 1.2 is and engine available in the 500L) by association.

Andmakeitsnappy said:

Having read virtually every review written on the 500L, I'm rather taken aback by the number of cruel comments about the car's looks. Top Gear's Richard Hammond, for example, describes it as ‘hideous’. Mind you, this comes from a man who thinks that a shark’s tooth necklace is the height of style.

I realise that by badging the car a 500 it invites inevitable comparisons with its cuter, smaller sibling. But it's an MPV. An exact scaled-up version would never have worked. Fiat would have done better to call it the 600 or Multipla Nuovo.

But hideous? Really? I'm just staring at my 500L parked in the drive; shiny bright red paintwork with a white roof, matching wing mirrors and white diamond alloys, and I think that for what it is — a people/luggage/dog carrier — it's actually a pretty good looking, well designed car (though why they couldn't have made the cubbyhole by the USB socket big enough to rest a mobile phone is beyond me. But that's another matter).

Ok, so it's not a Porsche 911. But neither is it one of those bland, lookie likey boxes that have taken over our roads. It has a style all of its own.

I guess I'm preaching to the converted here, but what do you think?

Click to expand...

I think it's like most things regarding aesthetics TBH and its a matter of opinion. It is not the best looking mini MPV I would go with the that, the Citroen equivalents are much better and 'sharper' looking in my opinion. It is definitely a car that looks better in different colours, although we have a white one I think it looks much better in a darker colour.

As for it being a 500? well it isn't really and I agree with the comments about it just being a cynical attempt at cashing in on the success of the 500, they are doing the same with the X as well. It could have had an identity of its own but it was easy for FIAT to pretend it was a 'grown up' version of the 500 when really it is nothing of the sort. They even lost that 'snappy' little gear change in the process.

Would I have another? well until somebody can match the spec. at the same price then definitely, though I could be tempted by some of the recent Korean offerings, in doing that of course you lose a bit of the Italian 'flair' (evem though it's made in Serbia of course)

I love my 500L because of its personality and style. I simply can't have a Korean car parked in front of my house ;-) Personally I would have preferred if it was named 600, but on the other hand I don't think it is really important. I don't think that naming it 600 would have brought or cost Fiat any customer.
For me, whether I will stay with Fiat will largely depend on how well my Luigi will perform in terms of reliability in the coming years. This was the main issue that I left Citroen after many years.

Brandy

MJG said:

I think it's like most things regarding aesthetics TBH and its a matter of opinion. It is not the best looking mini MPV I would go with the that, the Citroen equivalents are much better and 'sharper' looking in my opinion. It is definitely a car that looks better in different colours, although we have a white one I think it looks much better in a darker colour.

As for it being a 500? well it isn't really and I agree with the comments about it just being a cynical attempt at cashing in on the success of the 500, they are doing the same with the X as well. It could have had an identity of its own but it was easy for FIAT to pretend it was a 'grown up' version of the 500 when really it is nothing of the sort. They even lost that 'snappy' little gear change in the process.

Would I have another? well until somebody can match the spec. at the same price then definitely, though I could be tempted by some of the recent Korean offerings, in doing that of course you lose a bit of the Italian 'flair' (evem though it's made in Serbia of course)

Click to expand...

I agree with most of what you say here. I really liked the 500L when we test drove one last year, but it just lacks its own identity. I know individual models will share parts, but there are IMO too many bits from the new Panda in the 500L (like the handbrake, squircle seat covers etc).

To Fiat's credit, I do think they have done a much better job with the 500X. It does seem to fit in much better with the 500 "brand" and looks more similar too. Really interested to see how it sells and fares against the Juke and Qashqai which are, by all accounts, extremely popular in the UK.

I really like the looks of the 500L a lot, in and out, IMO it looks really smart.

I can not complain one bit about the build quality I don't think.

What lets it down, again imo, is the primarily the engine line up. IMO the engine line up is epic fail. FIATs engines were good (good performance and economy) but other manufacturers with bigger budgets have really pushed on in the last few years and have much better engines.

Nitpicking.. the seat squab for the driver is too short.

Other fails that you ALWAYS get with FIAT are the roof loading limit and max tow ball weight (think big bike carrier..) etc.

The gear change is as bad as the Bravo, i.e. very agricultural / crap.

My climate control sounds like crickets, that's a build QC issue I suppose so maybe I can nitpick about build quality if I try.

I have another week or 2 with her

500L said:

What lets it down, again imo, is the primarily the engine line up. IMO the engine line up is epic fail. FIATs engines were good (good performance and economy) but other manufacturers with bigger budgets have really pushed on in the last few years and have much better engines.

Nitpicking.. the seat squab for the driver is too short.


I have another week or 2 with her

Click to expand...

The diesel engines are more or less all they have to offer save for the 2.0, but the 1.6 is too noisy compared to most rivals. I fully agree about the petrols - 1.4 16v fair enough, but I'm sure they've lost sales due to the next engine being the TwinAir 105bhp. It makes sense in a little car like the 500/Panda, but in a people carrier, people want more. The 1.4 Turbo 120 was added later, but there are none on AutoTrader, and I don't think anyone here has one either. It's a good engine, but I think it came too late and at too much money for a 500L. Nearly all the 500Ls I've seen have been 1.3 Multijet's, with a lot of them being Dualogic.

Agreed re the seat squabs. Seems a bit of a Fiat Group faux pas of late, as the 500L isn't the first car in the range to get less than perfect seats.

Where is your one going though?!

Fleet car going back to the dealer i would imagine

Maybe it isn't a thing a beauty (not like the 500) but I think it looks smart and it does have some flair to it typical Fiat quirkiness perhaps ?) therefore in a way ,I am glad that its' style polarises opinion .
I hope it does not get too popular as it is more interesting to drive something that is a bit different and rarer (we did consider a C3 Picasso as well )
We also have a 500 and when we got it there were only a few on the road but now they are everywhere .

I wonder what reaction it would get if it had a BMW badge ?

I don't take any notice of Top Gear as they are only interested in super cars ,although they might like it if they blew one up ,dropped one out of a plane or added a jet engine

If it wore a BMW badge? Have you seen the new BMW 2 Series 7 seater?? Very ugly.

The C4 Picasso is one of the best looking in the segment. The 500l looks a bit ungainly.

I spent a week driving an Opel Meriva 1.4 120 turbo last year on holiday. It didn't sparkle with performance it was simply adequate. I can not imagine what some of the smaller engines in the 500l would be like at all.

JimbbobW1977 said:

If it wore a BMW badge? Have you seen the new BMW 2 Series 7 seater?? Very ugly.

The C4 Picasso is one of the best looking in the segment. The 500l looks a bit ungainly.

I spent a week driving an Opel Meriva 1.4 120 turbo last year on holiday. It didn't sparkle with performance it was simply adequate. I can not imagine what some of the smaller engines in the 500l would be like at all.

Click to expand...

It is good to see Citroen getting their quirkiness back.

JTD_Liam said:

The diesel engines are more or less all they have to offer save for the 2.0, but the 1.6 is too noisy compared to most rivals. I fully agree about the petrols - 1.4 16v fair enough, but I'm sure they've lost sales due to the next engine being the TwinAir 105bhp. It makes sense in a little car like the 500/Panda, but in a people carrier, people want more. The 1.4 Turbo 120 was added later, but there are none on AutoTrader, and I don't think anyone here has one either. It's a good engine, but I think it came too late and at too much money for a 500L. Nearly all the 500Ls I've seen have been 1.3 Multijet's, with a lot of them being Dualogic.

Agreed re the seat squabs. Seems a bit of a Fiat Group faux pas of late, as the 500L isn't the first car in the range to get less than perfect seats.

Where is your one going though?!

Click to expand...

The main problem with the TA is economy... many have a problem with the engine's economy even with the 500? So I'm not sure that it's worse in the 500L than in the other cars.

Having said that the 500L doesn't get good MPG with any of its engines, look at what Suzuki can achieve with the FIAT diesels.

The TA under no strain (flat terrain, extra-urban) and at a steady pace returns really good economy for a petrol. For any other situation it drinks fuel. For all round driving the economy crap especially for a new "efficient" engine. They wasted their money developing it. The emissions / tax is a joke, if it's getting < 40 MPG how can it only be £30 PA tax? More fuel in more emissions out of the exhaust surely?

Mine has a quirk where the software cuts the idle revs back so sharply immediately after cold starting (presumably to save fuel when idling) that the car stalls itself on cold mornings a couple of times a week I can also get it to choke a little by immediately asking for ~50A? (heated windscreen). Insufficient cold weather testing.

Front visibility is great, as is the Beats stereo and the voice control for the phone also works very well. I can even fill the fuel tank now (I forgot that one when saying the build quality was excellent..). The auto wipers are much better than on the Bravo and work perfectly.

"Multipla Nuovo" Hideous name

Looks are difficult to rationalise, my wife loves our 500L Trek and I've had a few compliments (mainly from women), I don't think one can worry about looks when buying an MPV type car, I like it as it's funky and nothing like the newish Mercs and Porsches I manage at work, but I must admit to liking the new Citroen Cactus.
I'd have loved the option of a 1.6 diesel auto, or at least a 6 speed auto on my 1.3 Diesel MTA.

I really do not agree on the diesel engines on the 500L being noisy. I had a (1st gen) c4 Picasso before, and my impression is that my new 120 bhp diesel 500L is quieter than the Citroen. The engine is powerful enough to keep it in the 1500-1800 rpm range where it virtually cannot be heard from inside the car, as soon as it is warm. After a cold start, it sounds like a trecker from outside ))

Just look at the shape, with that boxy profile and the extra rear 3/4 window, and the answer's clear: they should have called it the Giant Panda. End of.

gar074 said:

Just look at the shape, with that boxy profile and the extra rear 3/4 window, and the answer's clear: they should have called it the Giant Panda. End of.

Click to expand...

As clear as mud, the point was to cash in on the 500's sales success, on that basis they should, as has been already said, have called it the 600, which at least has an historical reference to FIAT.

Eklipze3k said:

If it wasn't called a 500, people would be less inclined to compare the two. In my opinion, it looks more like a Panda and ought to have been labelled a Grande Panda to fit with the Grande Punto naming, but there ya go.

Click to expand...

It has been my problem with the car ever since the launch too.

I HATE the fact it is called the 500L. It is a clear attempt at cashing in on the "cool" 500 name and in doing so, totally ignoring the tradition of Fiat, which is ridiculously hypocritical considering the 500 itself harks back to the original.

In my opinion, it should have been called the 600 multipla. (and from some angles, it does kinda have hints of the original 600 multipla), Though i guess the name Multipla is now associated with the bug eyed 6 seater now and they wanted to avoid that comparison too, but 600-M could have covered that.

As for how it looks, i think it's very colour dependent.In the right colour it looks fairly funky. In the wrong colour it looks like a horrid fat blimp.

I vote for 600 too. Maybe we could have "600" badges made and fit them on our cars

LOL ....my registration number is 600L (since the 500L was taken)...so yes,I vote for renaming 500 to 600!