(T) Soggy understeer?

Can I just get a quick poll of people who've found the new 500 to have too much understeer?

A few of my friends have commented recently that the car refuses to oversteer at all even with severe provocation and understeers horrendously when pushed. Others have stated no such problem and find the car handles beautifully when pushed.

I'd like to try and work out what the common factor is so if you can mention what size wheels you've tried as well it would help. If you know your tyre pressures and what make the tyres are too even better.

Conti 185/55s on 15s with a MJtd and the front is very obedient, thank you.

Cheers

D

You wouldn't want a front wheel drive car to oversteer; unless you like lamp posts and ditches that is

I don't think the 500 1.4 understeers much, but coming from a Panda 1.2 with eco tyres (polished wood might give more grip) perhaps it's just me.

Anyone that goes from a 205 GTI to a 500 will no doubt complain though.

You have ESP?

Well, I am swapping between a 205 (not a GTi, though) and the 500 on a regular basis. The 205 was noted for terminal lift-off oversteer, and I would rather do without that, thank you very much. At the moderate speeds which I drive at I would say the 500 handling is pretty neutral - it just goes where you point it. No real vices or issues observed so far. This is a 1.4 Sport on 15" alloys with Michelin tyres, running at 32 psi front, 30 rear.

John

All opinions aside what I am trying to distinguish between here is why some cars have substantially more understeer than others.

Anyone experiencing terminal lift-off oversteer like the old 205 GTi in a 500 must be doing something very different and as for whether or not it is desirable is purely a matter of personal preference.

In this particular instance the owners of the cars are looking for generally neutral tending towards very slight oversteer when provoked, some cars are exhibiting this by default while others just understeer no matter what you do.

If you turn into a corner a little too fast understeer is preferable to oversteer but the ability to rectify the mistake by backing off the throttle to decrease the understeer is as vital to avoiding ditches and hedges as avoiding massive oversteer. It is this generally neutral balance that the cars are supposed to have.

So back to the original question then, can readers of this thread please provide their experiences (with their own car)? If you don't own a 500 or have never driven one it should be pretty obvious that you don't need to contribute.

Whatever my findings turn out to be I will post the conclusions here.

So far I have evidence of three different makes of tyre being fitted "as standard" and that seems to be the biggest lead I have...

If different tyres are being fitted therin may lie a clue. Another issue - when I checked my tyre pressures after delivery they were wildly over-inflated (poor PDI). If certain owners have never checked theirs, this might skew the results. Also to take into account - the 1.4 versions have different front springs than the 1.2 and 1.3.

John

Subjective experience from testing a 1200 8v and 1400 16v back to back is that the spring rate difference isn't that huge and the understeer was similarly present *but* we couldn't check the tyre pressure at the time - hence the question I started with.

My personal favorite is the over inflated tyres but that's just me and I don't have enough evidence to prove it or a car on hand to try it out with.

Shoddy PDI wouldn't surprise me

As this is more likely to lead to understeer than oversteer. I must admit our red sport dealer demo felt very neutral to me. But then I'm generally comparing it to the marea which despite some handling mods still understeers like a train.

Now ironically my Marea was nice and neutral and oversteered easily when provoked - no mods...

1.4 lounge, 15 inch wheels

feels pretty damn good to me (sport button pressed I might add, the weighting makes a world of difference feedback wise)

no noticeable understeer to report

Thinking again about the original question, it would seem odd if there were any great differences in road manners between a sample of 500s. Perhaps we might expect the diesel versions, which are a little more nose-heavy, to understeer a tad more. But on public roads it is very difficult to approach the limits of handling in safety - we would really need to do some track testing to come up with repeatable and meaningfull results. Also, as the Beast rightly points out, the 1.4 has ESP as standard, and this cannot be switched out. Anytime you approach the limits of adhesion, the ESP will kick in, and presumably (if it works as advertised) will attempt to bring the car back on what it thinks is the intended line. Quite how it knows where the corner is going is another matter (I suppose the fact that it is made by Bosch is a certain comfort).

Anyhow, in the interests of science I approached all the bends on the way home last night with a certain degree of verve, and can report that as I thought, the inherent balance of the car is neutral to mild understeer. In other words, the faster you go, the more steering lock you have to apply. Lifting-off did not provoke any unsettling shift of line or balance. I certainly would not categorize it as massively understeering or "soggy". The handling in general feels very similar to my old (1960s) Mini Cooper 1340, except that you are higher up and there is therefore a greater sensation of weight transfer to the outer front wheel. I think at this early stage the car could certainly benefit from better shock absorbers, and perhaps a modicum of lowering too. Compared with the 205, the 500 feels less precise and refined in the steering feedback that the driver receives - I would reckon to be able to put the offside front wheel over a catseye with accuracy in the Pug, but I'm not so sure about the 500.

It is interesting how few people have commented here - does no-one read the technical section?

John

Fair few points there well made which I completely agree with.

Also most sections the technical subforums have fewer post i think mainly because the majority or members feel they are not mechanicaly knowledgeable enough to enter debates so tend to just lurk.

Today I final collected my Panda 100HP from the dealer so I now have the benefit of having driven a 500 1.4 sport, Panda 1.2 and 100hp on the same road (industrial area with plenty of tight roundabouts and poorly surfaced tarmac).

My conclusion is that the 500 is the most neutral handling and composed of the three and has the best steering feel and weight in cornering. No soggy understeer here then!

I tried to achieve the same corner entry and exit speeds in the Panda 1.2 which had no ESP and skinny eco tyres but the body roll and lack of grip from the eco tyres made it feel very nervous and the front end didn't want to turn in.

The 100hp on the other hand has too light steering with sport mode off and I wasn't able to set it up for the tighter corners as the brakes were so efficient it slowed down too much. I think it would be the best handling of the 3 but will require practise to drive it on the limit whereas the 500 was easy to drive fast from the word go.

It is curious that three cars with the same floor pan give such different feedback. The tyres and suspension settings have obviously been chosen with different end users in mind. Would be good to compare them in the wet too and test the 16 and 15" 500 tyres. I have an inkling that the Michelin models would be better than the Continental which tend to be a bit harder.