Does anyone have any information on the speeds in the gears at 6000 rpm for the 1.4 engine and the six-speed box? Or table of gear ratios and final-drive ratio would be OK.

Many thanks

John

J333EVO said:

Panda 100HP (got details from a mix of sites)
1st 3.545
2nd 2.158
3rd 1.480
4th 1.210
5th 0.921
6th 0.766
FD 4.07

Click to expand...

I'd assume the 100hp box is similar to the 500's, at least if you have the 15" wheels. If you go for the 16" they might change the ratios a bit.

No guarantee the above ratios are correct though.

Kristian

The Panda 100hp has a smaller rolling circumference than the 500.

Oh yeah didn't realise that...sorry

100hp - 195/45/15 (278.2mm radius)

500 - 185/55/15 (292.2mm radius) or 195/45/16 (291mm radius)

Looks like it will be the same box on the 15" or 16" wheel at least. 1.2mm change is nothing.

Krisitan

Gearbox

* Type 6-speed Manual
* 1st 3.54 / 4.7
* 2nd 2.15 / 7.8
* 3rd 1.48 / 11.3
* 4th 1.12 / 14.9
* 5th 0.92 / 18.2
* 6th 0.77 / 21.9
* Final drive 4.07

Taken from here.

Very similar. I wonder if my 100hp ratios are correct now

Krisitan

Errrr - right.

You blokes are brilliant. Now I have to do some serious maths, I suppose - first of all we need the rolling circumferance for the 15" wheels to get the distance travelled per revolution, yes?

John

This any use?

Put in all the tyre sizes, ratios, FD and then put in the gear shift as 6000rpm. It will list the speeds at 6k in all the gears

kritip said:

Gearbox

500 1.4 16V
1st 3.54 / 4.7
2nd 2.15 / 7.8
3rd 1.48 / 11.3
4th 1.12 / 14.9
5th 0.92 / 18.2
6th 0.77 / 21.9
Final drive 4.07

Panda 100HP
1st 3.545
2nd 2.158
3rd 1.480
4th 1.210
5th 0.921
6th 0.766
FD 4.07

Very similar. I wonder if my 100hp ratios are correct now

Krisitan

Click to expand...

I'd say for all intents and purposes those are the same figures, the difference is so small its negligible and could be dependent on how they rounded from 3 to 2 figures. Fiat would not go to expense of engineering different ratios IMO, they would only change final drive for much bigger wheels if performance was affected.

The first set of figures also show MPH/per 1000RPM in gear.

So 70mph in 6th = 3196RPM
80mph = 3653RPM

Which for a small car seems pretty good, considering a Clio 197 has something like 18mph per/1000rpm in 6th, though this was criticised and on all new 197's the 5th and 6th gears have been raised.

The 6 speed box in our Sei 1.4 16V works out about 19.5mph/per 1000rpm as 80 is just over 4000rpm.

Brilliant spreadsheet, many thanks for that. Wish I'd had it back in 1973 when I was playing around with tyres and final drive sprockets on Ducati motorcycles. So it would seem the 1.4 500 is nicely geared to hit top speed (110 mph at 6,000rpm, with a bit more to come in favorable conditions) in 5th gear, with 6th as useful overdrive to reduce noise and fuel consumption on motorways.

John

The attached is for the 100hp and was linked in another FF post. I downloaded it directly of Fiat's site, so its probably very reliable.

The only major difference between the 100hp and 500 was the 4th gear, but now i guess that was just a typo as the 100hp pdf matches the 500 ratio pretty much.


By using the same box, they will have better fuel economya dn therefore lower emissions, which is probably why they kept it. It may also go some way to explaining the 500's higher 0-60 compared to 100hp, due to the differerent larger wheels.


I also have this box as Aaron+Emma above, with 185/55/14's, and as said the rpm are a fair bit higher at 80mph.

I wonder if i could squeeze 16" in.......nah....i prefer the acceleration (if not the extra engine noise of higher rpm's)

Kristian

Here's the BIG question.....if the Panda 100HP has the same power and ratios as the 500 1.4 100HP, but with a bigger frontal area and more weight, why is the Panda's 0-60 figure a full second quicker than the 500?

I have a suspicion that the settings on the fly-by-wire throttle linkage have been set with a view to preserving the drivetrain of the 500. Less aggressive standing starts means fewer warranty claims.

Or is it perhaps a marketing thing? The 500 needs to look slower than the Abarth, so nobbling the 500 sure helps the 0-60 time of the Abarth variants
look good.

Any ideas?

500abarth said:

Here's the BIG question.....if the Panda 100HP has the same power and ratios as the 500 1.4 100HP, but with a bigger frontal area and more weight, why is the Panda's 0-60 figure a full second quicker than the 500?

I have a suspicion that the settings on the fly-by-wire throttle linkage have been set with a view to preserving the drivetrain of the 500. Less aggressive standing starts means fewer warranty claims.

Or is it perhaps a marketing thing? The 500 needs to look slower than the Abarth, so nobbling the 500 sure helps the 0-60 time of the Abarth variants
look good.

Any ideas?

Click to expand...

I've taken both on a test drive and the Panda felt far more quicker. Part of it will be down to the car being lighter, but I suspect the Panda is just mapped differently. Perhaps to make the separaton between the Abarth a bit more distinct like you say

What makes the 1.4 Fiat 500 'slow' for me under acceleration is the fact that the 1st and 2nd gears are very very far from each other ratio wise. (i have the duallogic mind you). Since the 1.4 100 hp is a real NA type engine with a small capacity, it has no torque at all low down and you really have to be above 4,000 rpm at all times if you are in a 'fast' mood! And in 1st gear even if you take it up to 6,500 rpm +, when you hit 2nd you are not near enough to the sweet spot meaning that acceleration is ruined!

ahmett said:

What makes the 1.4 Fiat 500 'slow' for me under acceleration is the fact that the 1st and 2nd gears are very very far from each other ratio wise. (i have the duallogic mind you). Since the 1.4 100 hp is a real NA type engine with a small capacity, it has no torque at all low down and you really have to be above 4,000 rpm at all times if you are in a 'fast' mood! And in 1st gear even if you take it up to 6,500 rpm +, when you hit 2nd you are not near enough to the sweet spot meaning that acceleration is ruined!

Click to expand...

On the manual 100HP/500 Sport, taking the engine to 6,800 rpm or so in first gear will drop the revs to 4,000 on changing up to second - within a few hundred rpm of the peak of the torque curve - can't find a sweeter spot than that.

306maxi said:

I've taken both on a test drive and the Panda felt far more quicker. Part of it will be down to the car being lighter, but I suspect the Panda is just mapped differently. Perhaps to make the separaton between the Abarth a bit more distinct like you say

Click to expand...

But the Panda is heavier.....that's what has me mystified. Same gear ratios, same final drive, but more weight and bigger frontal area, but the Panda is a second quicker 0-60. WTF?

does the panda have a bigger frontal area? The 500 is wider.....

500abarth said:

But the Panda is heavier.....that's what has me mystified. Same gear ratios, same final drive, but more weight and bigger frontal area, but the Panda is a second quicker 0-60. WTF?

Click to expand...

Not to sure if this would qualify as 'the proof of the pudding' ?

There is something cool about the Panda 100bhp. Reckon it's a great no nonsense car. Seems to be a bit thirsty judging by some of the threads and was taken about on it being drop because of emission regs.

in the video, 500 has extra weight due to the guy with the camera on the passenger seat and panda seems to have only the driver but.. still so close. I'd say 500 could have won in equal conditions.

durukan said:

in the video, 500 has extra weight due to the guy with the camera on the passenger seat and panda seems to have only the driver but.. still so close. I'd say 500 could have won in equal conditions.

Click to expand...

nope.. someone also sitting on the passenger seat of panda

durukan said:

nope.. someone also sitting on the passenger seat of panda

Click to expand...

Like I said, the 500 1.4 and Panda 100hp felt like different cars to me. The 100hp handled like a go kart and felt very keen and the 500 just wasn't as good in either way.