General Would you recommend these latest shape Pandas?

[RobertG500]

Hello All,
I have owned my 53 plate type 169 Panda for over 6 years so am very familiar with them. My daily car - Toyota Aygo - has just been written off and I am seriously considering a newer Panda as it's replacement!
Looking at Lounge models, and as with my current Panda, the 1.2 engine.
So - would you recommend one if these and how much of an improvement, or otherwise, are they over the older Panda?
Any feedback welcome please?
Many thanks!

 

[porta]

I’ve had three of the 169 pandas 1.2 and multijet) and have driven both the latest panda and 500 with the 1.2…I’m now on a 2019 panda cross with the twinair, I’d recommend that engine over the 1.2’s, unless you want economy, the twinair is just so tempting to ‘screw the ass off it’ old Fiat style…

 

[Leroypanda]

Yes go fetch one, same as your old panda,but a bit more refined.Check the rear axel and sump (rust), if you want reliability go for a euro5 1.2 ( upto 2015) get the cambelt and waterpump done and youll have no issues.

 

[varesecrazy]

We had a panda like yours for 10+ years ( probably our best car..)

Swapped for a 2013 lounge, more kit.. but not 'better' .. came with a twinair 85bhp

I have another twinair..and wont cloud issues with that..

BUT.. we bought a 1242FIRE 69bhp in a 2018 500 ... it makes the panda look good

Better ride... better power..and better fuel economy in the 312 panda
£0 VED too vs £160

Where are you based.. plenty of 8 year old cars around in certain regions ..

Not a 'trendy purchase' ;-)


Charlie - near the M4

 

[Lingottoroof]

We bought a 2013 Twinair Lounge in November and I can certainly recommend it, it's utterly brilliant.

Nippy for what it is, zero road tax and mid 40s mpg in normal usage. Really comfortable too and capable on the motorway as well as normal roads.

The only criticism I have is that with our isofix baby seat in the back the front seat is too far forward to feel safe (we're both tall). Plus I think we probably underestimated the paraphernalia you need to carry round with a baby...

For this reason we will probably move it on but will be sad to do so.

I also have an old Porsche and the Panda mostly relegates it to the garage which speaks volumes.

I'd say go for it, they are great little cars

 

[varesecrazy]

Basic concept is sound..
Far better than a 500..

Im disappointed with the 1242 cc 69 bhp

The twinair having more torque and peak bhp shows in mpg

But.. my other TA is 6 speed

5 speed panda isnt as comfortable between 1st and second.. 'roll through' junctions are clunky
1st is almost Crawler gear..
2nd wont lug from 3mph

1242cc FIRE : Not sure if the 'watchdog thread' emissions vs drivability issues that ruined so many 500 owners experience afflicted the 'same' panda?

Get out and drive a few...

500's too if you struggle to compare motors

 

[The Panda Nut]

My opinion for what its worth. I didnt like the new Panda at first but do find it more refined. Its BIG compared with the 169 which is dwarfed by the new model. Small size was a real plus for me especially with the 100HP. After a while with the new models I wouldnt want to go back though as they are just a bit easier to live with and the ride is better. TA in ECO mode is about the same as a 1.2 petrol at full chat. 1.2 is way more economical though. I think a lot of style was lost in the improved model but it has a charm of its own, 4x4 gives a good compromise. Power is there if you choose to use it and economy can, just about , be wrung out of it at a push. Recent 450 miles in the icy conditions make me realsie just how good the 4x4 is when the going is poor. The ride is excellent and againnot a foot wrog all the way and boy it was VERY icy for a lot of the miles.
I cannot think of any other car at any price I would choose in preference.

 

[Goudrons]

We had a 2014 Lounge with the 1.2 69hp engine (Euro 6), along with a 4x4 Twinair and a 2012 Panda Pop 1.2 69hp (Euro 5).
Before those we had a 1.1 Active (169).
The Lounge is still in the family as we moved it on to the mother in law and it's still going strong.

There are some significant differences with this electronics on the later 1.2 69hp (Euro 6 from around March 2014) and they made some headlines a few years ago when fitted to the 500.
It's throttle is fly by wire and it does tend to control the revs a little when pulling away.
Lift the clutch in first and it'll increase the revs itself and creep a little to aid a smooth getaway.
Most modern cars do this these days, though I think Fiat found a cost effective way of doing this that might cause a problem (we'll come back to that in a moment)

Trouble starts if you try and input too much throttle yourself while it's sorting it out it's self, it can bog down a bit.
One minute it's controlling the fueling and air, then suddenly it finds the throttle wide open as you're stamping on the pedal.

I wrote it may cause a problem as a lot of repeat owners bought these models and were used to how the older models worked, so found it strange.
Nowadays most drivers are used to this sort of thing and tend to expect it.

They also don't feel as gutsy, like they are a little bit stangled lower in the rpm range.

Before Euro 6 they tend to feel a little more gutsy lower in the rpms and a little more revy, the 2012 Pop we had did seem to drive much like the older 169 model.
It's not really a deal breaker, just one felt a bit more revy and the other a bit more smoother, certainly a little quieter and a little bit more grown up.

It's also worth noting I had the ability at the time to jump from Euro 5 to the Euro 6 (and to the Twinair 4x4) instantly, so some of the differences did tend to stick out a fair bit.

There isn't much between the Lounge and an Easy with air con, so I wouldn't dismiss an Easy over a Lounge if it was in decent nic.
(my sister has a 2016 Easy and loves it, then again she loved her 169 dynamic before that)

 

[Jerseywurzel]

Yes, I would.
I had a Mylife Dynamic in 2011, 1.2 Fire engine and loved it. When the new shape came out, I wasn't too sure if I liked it do left it.
Went to the garage in 2019 and asked to look at it. They had a 1.2 Lounge with loads of extras, made a tempting offer on the old one and so I bought it.
Like all Pandas, needs a bit of running in but boy, do I prefer the new one over the old? Hell yeah!
It's a little roomier, a little smoother aand gives better mpg then the Mylife, and that was good.
On long motorway trips it is more comfortable and just keeps going. You won't be disappointed
Wurzel

 

[Herts Hillhopper]

The 'new shape' Panda is actually now over 10 years old in its design (introduced in 2012). The primary thing over the previous model is it is bigger in every direction. This means more space, better ride and safer (a lot of the added size was because its stronger, the doors are thicker and so on). On the other hand, it's also a bit heavier. When introduced it did well in the crash tests of the time. It still would, but the scoring system has changed and using the latest version of the test it got no stars at all! It's not less safe than it was in 2012, just the goalposts have moved. Much of what it 'failed' on in more recent testing is a lack of modern safety electronics like collision avoidance or 'stay in lane' systems, or 'only' having four airbags. It's still a lot safer than a 169 model.

The old Panda was very similar to the 500 (and made in the same factory). Apart from the engines and, apparently the heater unit, practically every other part is different post-2012, notably the suspension system (the car is a fair bit wider now). There's more 'elbow room' in the front and more legroom in the back. The boot's bigger too. It needs a little more space to park in though.

More recent versions of the Panda (but also other makes too) have had engine tweaks to give better environmental performance – the Euro 6 standard – but these come at the cost of less enjoyable on-the-road performance. This seems to be particularly true of the 1.2 petrol engine. The 'engine of year' winning TwinAir was hailed as a marvel when introduced, and in lab tests had unbelievable economy and low emissions. Trouble is, they were just that: unbelievable in the real world. So poor in fact that Fiat dropped that engine from most of its models in about 2018 because in the newer 'real world' tests it was way off the mark. Same for the diesel (MultiJet), which was much worse with NOx emissions than earlier lab tests suggested. Still a good engine though - mines a 2018 diesel! It still has lower carbon emissions than the petrols and easily averages 55mpg in my 4x4.

Summary: compared to the 169 model its a huge leap forwards. But, compared to newer designed cars lit is now definitely not as up to date especially with tech and safety stuff. I love mine though ... and Im on my third 312 model.

 

[mowermender70]

hi have had 3 of these pandas ist one autocar used for road test it was blue reg rv12 uvx geat little car also a 2014 red and then the last one 2017 black great cars now got quobo trecking 1.3 diesel making my 24th fiat since 1963













jthe last one

 

[Marcus Daly]

Compared to newer designed cars lit is now definitely not as up to date especially with tech and safety stuff. I love mine though ... and Im on my third 312 model.

I agree it’s completely off-the-pace now compared to every other car in its class. And yet I can’t think of any other car in its class I’d swap mine for. Including, it has to be said, a slightly newer Panda—there’s no way I’d swap a Twin Air for that wretched fake “hybrid”.

 

[The Pretender]

Always TwinAir turbo for me, the 1.2ltr 8v VVT 69 pk FIRE engine is great, but the TwinAir Turbo is so much more suitable for a quick spin around town and motorways.
I'm very happy with my 500 sport 105 hp/145 Nm, 6-speed, Discs brakes all-around, and now tuned to 122 hp/182 Nm, it is a shame FIAT never put this tech in the present Panda, for example in the short lived Panda Hybrid Sport, it would be a worthy Panda Sport.

 

[The Panda Nut]

Agree with most of the above. TA uses more fuel but goes like an 85hp. Its as quick as the 1.2 when set in eco and much quicker when eco is off. I wouldnt want anything else. Might buy one more if the 4x4 returns in 23. 1.2 does 60+mpg on a run with ease. Ta can do this but boy is it hard work and VERY boring.