Jon106 said:

I'm going to be up for a new car before that long and the 100HP is top of my list. I've had a brief test drive and it was all good, but as usual the drive was too short and too urban to know much.

So I'd be interested to hear comparisons and views from anyone who's had a 106 Rallye or Ignis Sport (my last two cars). My main priority - in fact almost my only priority - is a fun. Responsive, interactive, back-road driving fun.

Cheers

Click to expand...

I had fun thrashing a boy racer in a chavvy Corsa this morning and I only drive a 1.2 Eleganza - even in this guise it's fun to drive, I can only imagine how brilliant the 100HP is! Try a Twingo GT and then you'll rrealise for the money their is no car comparadle to the 100HP

Jon106 username looks familiar... off RR im guessing?

Buy one...you won't be disappointed

Buy one! It's an absolute hoot of a drive! :slayer:

Welcome dude, i can help you out a little here, former RR member and had a stripped s1 rallye 16v before my 100hp, the panda doesn't come close on straight line performance but i definately think it has a more engaging chassis than the rallye (which was bloody good anyway!) the back ends really adjustable and it has a good neutral balance. Most of the driving i do to and from work is country lane stuff and i have to say i wouldnt change it for the world!

I used to have an Ignis sport and can say it is just as much fun if not a bit better.

dmc2008 said:

I used to have an Ignis sport and can say it is just as much fun if not a bit better.

Click to expand...

And what do you drive now then?

Stu DemonD said:

And what do you drive now then?

Click to expand...

I drive a panda 100hp now.

I've owned both a MK1 106 Rallye and an Ignis Sport, not owned a Panda 100hp, but have been in one and Emma's dad has the new 500 1.4 Sport, effectively the same car.

I would say that the Panda is a great fun car, looks good too but it is slower than both, and IMHO the chassis on both is much better, more pointed, less safe understeer if a little more nervous as a consequence. But then both of those cars were homologation specials made in small numbers to meet requirements of JWRC, less than 1000 MK1 106 Rallye's in UK, only 1200 Ignis Sport's, the Panda is not its made in much larger numbers to meet the masses requirements so is not made to meet fine details as laid down by sports laws. The Panda is without doubt built better than both, more refined and quieter, though it is a more modern design you expect it.

Straight line performance is down a bit. Fiat say its under 10secs to 60, the 500 is listed as over 10secs and both EVO mag this month, and Performance Tuner mag last year with proper timing gear at Bruntingthorpe & Rockingham respectively have failed to crack under 10.5secs in a Panda so I think the quoted figs are not realistic, but the 500 figs are, makes sense same engine same box, near enough same weight. Also 0-100mph is something chronic EVO mag timed there long termer at 47secs, PT slightly quicker at 41.5secs the MK1 106rallye 1.3L and Ignis will do it in 30ish, that's a big differance.

Though as your main criteria is fun, then you can't really go wrong with a 100HP, see how happy the owners are, that's testament to the car.

I posted a bit of the article here from PT mag, though didn't add that in the slalom and handling test the Panda was let down by far too much understeer and was slower than the Ignis. You can probably get a back issue to read it in full. https://www.fiatforum.com/lets-talk-fiat/106642-performance-tuner-mag-panda-100hp-v-s.html

its a shame they didn't tune the panda in that article, seemed a little unfair IMO

The Ignis had a s/s PowerFlow exhaust which TBH will probably lose power as the Ignis Sport exhaust was designed by Suzuki Motorcycle department, first time they have done that on road car, so it flows really well would be hard to better it.

Plus ITG filter sitting in engine bay, debatable if that does anything but suck in hot air, again reducing power.

And as for the "re-map" by a certain company, they are being taken to small claims court by many owners for selling goods that do not meet description, i.e. the r/r figures have been manipulated so completely inaccurate. This is easy to do, you either select a lower gear for power run, say 4th or even 3rd, or increase tyre pressures, or blip throttle ever so lightly on coast down, it so so easy to cheat on r/r if you know what you are doing. I know someone who works for a well know tuning company Perfect Touch, thought of highly in Coupe circles and he put his car on there own r/r with standard ECU and "re-mapped" ECU, the standard ECU made 1bhp more and had perfect fuelling, the "re-mapped" ECU fuelling was a mess on running rich pretty much everywhere.

And as for the lowering springs, well having been in an Ignis with lower springs that are not like I had made by Suzuki Sport but by an aftermarket manufacturer, the bump stops are not cut, something Suzuki Sport give clear instructions for you to do, and the ride is too harsh and crashy, and hits bump stops which for chassis dynamics is not desirable, so I would say car would suffer in slalom test consequently.

And it was running 205/40 17 rubber on 17" 7J OZ wheels, much bigger and heavier than standard 185/50 15 rubber on 15" 5J Enkei's which are ultra light, so unsprung weight is increased dramatically, this is detrimental to performance, yet it still managed a 8.8secs 0-60, Suzuki quote 8.9 though Jap manufactures are notorious for underestimating there cars power and performance.

The fact remains the 100HP in both EVO mag and PT mag has failed to get bellow 10.5secs 0-60 a long way off manufacturer figures but the what they do quote on the 500 which runs same engine/gearbox combo and weighs near enough the same, and EVO mags car & the PT owners car are both well run in, so no tight engine to explain that one away. Just makes you stop and think.

As said to OP, for a great fun, cheap to buy and run good looking car, the Panda 100HP ticks all the box's, it's just not any where near as quick as his previous cars.

Many thanks - some good and thoughtful info there.

I've owned both a MK1 106 Rallye and an Ignis Sport, not owned a Panda 100hp, but have been in one and Emma's dad has the new 500 1.4 Sport, effectively the same car.

Click to expand...

I would like to take issue!!! Panda and 500 are not effectively the same car!

Anyway. that Ignis looks ugly compared to the aerodynamic and swept back racer looks if the panda.

@ J333EVO:



1. You're comparing a tuned car to a stock car. Even stock Ignis is more powerfull than the 100HP (109 vs 100), being lighter too (900-ish VS 975).

2. The acceleration info is tbh, odd. I raced my friends well ran in Clio 1.6 16V (0-60 in 9.6) and was noticeably faster every single time. We're talking 30, 40 m @ 60mp/h here...but then again, a tuned turbodiesel SUV would have won overall in this test if we looked at performances. These are entry level warm hatches, keep in mind...

3. This test is exactly why I hate some magazines. It scares potential buyers off with some irrelevant data. The 100HP is the queen of the twisty roads - there should have been some slaloms and braking tests. Now thats where 100HP can outperform even some much tougher competition. Been there done that...

I don't wanna give any suggestions - but for me, the 100HP was simply an amazing little car. I just could believe the bang I got for the buck. Long term...the size and the ride could be an issue though. I strongly suggest it as a second car.


F

Reply to Gofra, read before replying the information in front of you, saves people having to repeat themselves.

The Ignis had some minor mods, I didn't say it didn't, but it is debatable if they actually add anything to the Ignis, any mild gains are equalled out by much bigger heavier wheels, and the "re-mapped" ECU has been called into question and I know of more than one person who had there Ignis mapped at same owners day who is going to small claims court as it turns out the mapping is nothing more than a rip off and actually reduces power and increase fuel consumption. As I have said before there is very little you can do to a N/A car by tweaking the map, especially on a Jap car meant to run on 98RON fuel minimum. though it still managed to just beat the manufacturer figures. Read about what unsprung weight does to a car, it completely trashes the acceleration and handling.

The Ignis in UK trim weighs in at 945kgs, the Panda is quoted in UK at 975kgs, so 30kgs differance which is not even half a person. Also in UK Ignis is rated 107bhp@6400rpm and 103lb ft@4100rpm bhp/ton=115, Panda 99bhp@6000rpm 97lb ft@4250rpm bhp/ton=103, so you can see on paper not much between them. Ignis has more power higher up, and more torque lower down indicating a more flexible engine, but Fiat fitted a 6 speed box to overcome this.

EVO mag above just about all other mags loves the Panda 100HP, it even created a whole 6page article called "10K Heros" which was also shown on front cover all about what older cars you can buy for the same price as a new Panda 100HP. They couldn't get one from Fiat for article so bought one, and now run it as a long termer, which is not what is normally done, long term cars run by mags are normally owned by the manufacturer as they know they get all the free publicity from it and is only normally done when they are confident in there product. So to buy one takes a bit of commitment from them. It is also listed in there knowledge section as there favourite small hot hatch, what more endorsement do you need.

So to say that they would do anything to tarnish they car they like so much by making up slow performance figures is nonsense, they attached proper timing gear timed it at Bruntingthorpe a well know car track/testing facility and it recorded over 10.5sec 0-60, believe me, if it was faster they would have said so. This so happened to match the time from another magazine with a different 100HP.

PT mag when at Rockingham also used the infield section to test the handling, and did a slalom test both of which the Igins beat it hands down, it really was the star of the article getting 9 out of 10. The Panda was let down by under steering too much and scrubbing off speed on track and on slalom this meant taking it slower to ensure a clear path through, the brakes also wilted a bit quickly.

The virtues of the Panda are what the OP wanted to know in comparison to his old cars. I answered as honestly as I could, its slower and maybe not have as an involving chassis, but I stressed to point out both his former cars were made in small numbers to meet homologation rules of JWRC, so they are going to be less compromised as a quick cross country car, but less refined as a urban commuter.

The Panda is a great fun, well made good looking little car, handles with aplomb, has a nice weighted snappy gear change, rides reasonable well though can get confused and can feel harsh and bouncy which can feel a little unsettling. But most of all is cheap to buy and run and so far its residuals have stood up pretty well.

I suppose the only way to tell is to wait a couple of years and throw a tweaked panda in the ring with the rest of the cars in that article, I do love ignis sports though, but Ka's suck big time!

@ J333EVO:

My eyes havent fail me (yet)...as far as I can see, they claim the output of 130 BHp @ Ignis. So, eventhough all the tweaks and tuning actually decreased the power...the number is somehow...higher? It also says it has been dyno-tested. That leaves me confused mate.

You've got a point, with the wheels being bigger, but let me tell you that Pandas stock alloys weight almost 9kgs/ each, which is far from light (weighted them two weeks ago) Besides, the fact remains, Ignis is lighter and stronger by default.

I don't want to start a war here, nor claim Panda is a better car. Tbh, I was considering the Ignis Sport as a serious rival when I was buying a car, but found Panda better suited for my needs.

Oh and as for 100HP VS the 500 1.4 16V. Same chasis, same engine, different maps

F

The Ignis r/r print out is from a well know company but as I have now said twice, so this will be three times so check your eyes, as I reiterate yet again for your short sighted benefit. THEY ARE BEING TAKEN TO SMALL CLAIMS COURT BECAUSE THEY HAVE SOLD GOODS I.E RE-MAP WITH R/R PRINT OUT THAT IS NOT TRUE, when the car was tested a few weeks after the article it actually made 1bhp less on the remapped ECU than it did on a standard one!

Unless you can prove that a 500 with a 1.4 16V 99bhp 97lb ft engine and a Panda 100HP with same said engine and same said power figures has different maps, then best not to state such things as its conjecture, and looks silly as different maps to achieve the same results doesn't add up and would be a waste of manufacturer development money when an existing map exists.

The point about wheels is this; the Panda ran standard rims, its tested with standard rims & there weight is therefore irrelevant, the Igins ran much bigger heavier wheels than standard therefore it is relevant as its a change. I don't want to have to spoon feed you here but you are again not reading what is being written.

Bit strong saying you don't want to start a war, and yet you continue to argue, I gave a honest appraisal for OP's original question, why can you not accept that.