Hi,

Missus is looking at a 500, we kind of fell for a 500 twin air, partly because of its crazy good mpg stats.

However, on further reading, a few sites/people saying they can't get near the quoted figures and 1 site even said they only got 35mpg!

This would make the 1.2 actually much better on the old motion lotion.

So from actual owners what kind of mpg are you getting from both the 0.9 and the 1.2

Your help is very much appreciated.

Thanks,

Please do a search of the forum, this has been done to death....

beany_bot said:

Hi,

Missus is looking at a 500, we kind of fell for a 500 twin air, partly because of its crazy good mpg stats.

However, on further reading, a few sites/people saying they can't get near the quoted figures and 1 site even said they only got 35mpg!

This would make the 1.2 actually much better on the old motion lotion.

So from actual owners what kind of mpg are you getting from both the 0.9 and the 1.2

Your help is very much appreciated.

Thanks,

Click to expand...

We have TA and 1.2
Over 10k mikes they actually average out about the same. Approx 42mpg
TA is sensitive to driving style, the 1.2, less so.
The TA has more performance than 1.2 which clinches it for me.
Hope this helps

Yup, having a read through some just now.
Would appear that in almost every situation the 1.2 return considerably more mpg. This is NOT what fiat advertise and quite frankly has even put me off the car somewhat. Rather disappointed. I though finally we had found a car to match the small diesels in mpg. Even the dealer was telling us such things.

The Twins said:

We have TA and 1.2
Over 10k mikes they actually average out about the same. Approx 42mpg
TA is sensitive to driving style, the 1.2, less so.
The TA has more performance than 1.2 which clinches it for me.
Hope this helps

Click to expand...

I love this forum.. ... Well esp fellow forumites like The Twins who provide decent, straight to the point answers....
Isn't it Maxi

Btw for the OP, my Mrs has had her 500 S TA, 2 months, done 2000 miles, average around 42mpg :thumbup:

beany_bot said:

Yup, having a read through some just now.
Would appear that in almost every situation the 1.2 return considerably more mpg. This is NOT what fiat advertise and quite frankly has even put me off the car somewhat. Rather disappointed. I though finally we had found a car to match the small diesels in mpg. Even the dealer was telling us such things.

Click to expand...

Drive them all, choose the one you like the best. Do the sums, the end.

If the difference between 42 and 50-55 mpg makes that much of a difference to you, I would like to question the rationale behind purchasing a brand new car, the fuel is a relatively smaller proportion of the purchase cost of the vehicle in a 'normal' lifetime.

bgunn said:

Drive them all, choose the one you like the best. Do the sums, the end.

If the difference between 42 and 50-55 mpg makes that much of a difference to you, I would like to question the rationale behind purchasing a brand new car, the fuel is a relatively smaller proportion of the purchase cost of the vehicle in a 'normal' lifetime.

Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

You could spend the rest of the night trawling through 50+ pages of posts, but you won't get better advice than this.

If you want cheap motoring, buy a cheap car - this perhaps. The 500 is not a cheap car and if the difference in fuel cost between a TA & a 1.2 breaks the deal, you really would do better with a Panda.

Our experience having both 1.2 and TA and both me and my wife driving both cars is that overall there is very little difference day to day in MPG.. Unless you are prepared to drive really, really carefully in the TA and then it will return better MPG based on the same journey.

The difference that everyone seems to miss is that even though the TA is a smaller engine you get more performance, new tech and therefore higher selling price.

If you are not an 'engine enthusiast' and just want to get in, drive and noth think about it then the 1.2 is maybe the more economical option if you factor in the lower price to purchase the car in the first place.

beany_bot I have the TA it's a great car. 1.2 sits in the middle of the ECO and norm mode on the TA. I would save your money and get the 1.2 and £500 in cash for the Mrs for hand bag, shoes and goodies, it will pay dividends oh the 1.2 is a mighty fine car and with better MPG.

Keep us posted !!

beany_bot said:

Hi,

Missus is looking at a 500, we kind of fell for a 500 twin air, partly because of its crazy good mpg stats.

However, on further reading, a few sites/people saying they can't get near the quoted figures and 1 site even said they only got 35mpg!

This would make the 1.2 actually much better on the old motion lotion.

So from actual owners what kind of mpg are you getting from both the 0.9 and the 1.2

Your help is very much appreciated.

Thanks,

Click to expand...

Comes down to a decision of economy versus the funky sound and funfator of the TwinAir.
If it is just transport you want go for the 1.2

This discussion was had in depth just recently

https://www.fiatforum.com/500/329412-what-engine-should-i-get-ta-1-2-a.html

Thanks folks, great info. We aren't looking at a new car, a 1 year old one.
I agree the mpg isn't the be all and end all. However it is a big factor for us as there will be a lot of miles getting driven and it's rather worrying when every single car site and every single dealership lists the TA and easily 20+mpg better than the 1.2.
Indeed if you simply Google "greenest petrol car" first result, first page, the TA is listed as the best car money can buy at 71+mpg.
Unfortunately a lot of people are going to get badly badly burned by that.
If I saw 71+mpg advertised I would expect comfortably 60mpg returned with "normal" (not uber frugal) driving.

Anyway, thanks to the good folks on here, help has been found. We are going to get a 1.2 (the missus has no interest in engine note or "fun")
(or maybe a diesel?)

Thanks.

beany_bot said:

However it is a big factor for us as there will be a lot of miles getting driven and it's rather worrying when every single car site and every single dealership lists the TA and easily 20+mpg better than the 1.2.
Indeed if you simply Google "greenest petrol car" first result, first page, the TA is listed as the best car money can buy at 71+mpg.
Unfortunately a lot of people are going to get badly badly burned by that.
If I saw 71+mpg advertised I would expect comfortably 60mpg returned with "normal" (not uber frugal)

Click to expand...

I'd agree with you.

IMO the official figures seriously misrepresent the real world difference in economy between the two cars.

That doesn't make the TA either a bad choice or a bad car, but there are definitely better options if you want lowest possible running costs.

Btw, I'd seriously question the economics of a 12 month old 500. High residuals & a poor 3rd yr warranty probably make buying new a better option.

If your budget won't stretch, consider a 1.2 Panda instead. You can buy a new one & have a lot of change in your pocket compared to a late model used 500.

jrkitching said:

:yeahthat:

You could spend the rest of the night trawling through 50+ pages of posts

The 500 is not a cheap car and if the difference in fuel cost between a TA & a 1.2 breaks the deal, you really would do better with a Panda.

Click to expand...

Hello, my name is JR 'Panda' Kitching...
You can call me Panda for short

Excuse my fab SOH... He's right thou..there's loads of pages of posts about the 1.2 vs TA... I know, I've read most of them when we were deciding just 5 months ago which one to get for my OH..

jrkitching said:

Btw, I'd seriously question the economics of a 12 month old 500. High residuals & a poor 3rd yr warranty probably make buying new a better option.

If your budget won't stretch, consider a 1.2 Panda instead. You can buy a new one & have a lot of change in your pocket compared to a late model used 500.

Click to expand...

Did he just use the 'P' word again?!?

But again, seriously JR has hit nail on the head - the difference between prices, high residuals on used Vs New... I think you'll be surprised...
Plus the bonus of having a full 3 year warranty and an extra MOT-Free year.

This is not the first (or last) time people are seduced by 'official' MPG figures. The main thing to remember (and sing it like a mantra) on the way to the dealers is there is no 'cheap car, powerful engine, low mpg' vehicle out there! Like everything in life, buying a car is a compromise... Good luck to OP! (btw, I'd go for Panda too )

Thanks all.

As for the "new vs old" thing. I think we have decided on a "used" 13 plate, with maybe a couple thousand miles. 1.2 Lounges coming in 9 grand for these. That's surely the most sensible option? seeing as how you save a couple grand from split new and the car is as good as new.

Whats up with the 3rd year warranty? is it no good

As for the panda, yeah I would probably go for the panda too (as would everyone in a "sensible" world) .

Alas she likes the 500. And thats just that.

A little off topic, but does anyone know how those official fuel consumption figures are actually obtained -- is the car driven by a robot on a test track or something? They must drive like a sleepy granny to obtain figures of 3.9L/100km!

The Twins said:

Our experience having both 1.2 and TA and both me and my wife driving both cars is that overall there is very little difference day to day in MPG.. Unless you are prepared to drive really, really carefully in the TA and then it will return better MPG based on the same journey.

The difference that everyone seems to miss is that even though the TA is a smaller engine you get more performance, new tech and therefore higher selling price.

If you are not an 'engine enthusiast' and just want to get in, drive and noth think about it then the 1.2 is maybe the more economical option if you factor in the lower price to purchase the car in the first place.

Click to expand...

I still haven't got round to driving a TA, but what you've said here is pretty much what I have thought to be the case when reading all of the comments about fuel consumption etc.
beany_bot - I still think it is worth test driving both the 1.2 and TA and then making a decision from there. Appreciate you might just want to go for the 1.2 (which is a great little engine on its own), but if you are not 100% sure that it's the one for you, it might bite you on the bum later down the line.

Try ringing your dealer and asking them if they have got both a 1.2 and TA demonstrator. Then you can hopefully test drive one after the other following the same route (if possible do one that's at least 5 or 6 miles with a mix of roads).

As long as you reset the trip before starting either car up, this should give you a rough idea of what is possible for each engine.

44sunsets said:

A little off topic, but does anyone know how those official fuel consumption figures are actually obtained -- is the car driven by a robot on a test track or something? They must drive like a sleepy granny to obtain figures of 3.9L/100km!

Click to expand...

The car is driven on a rolling road in lab conditions. So wind resistance isn't accounted for, for one.

Super Uwe said:

I still haven't got round to driving a TA, but what you've said here is pretty much what I have thought to be the case when reading all of the comments about fuel consumption etc.

beany_bot - I still think it is worth test driving both the 1.2 and TA and then making a decision from there. Appreciate you might just want to go for the 1.2 (which is a great little engine on its own), but if you are not 100% sure that it's the one for you, it might bite you on the bum later down the line.

Try ringing your dealer and asking them if they have got both a 1.2 and TA demonstrator. Then you can hopefully test drive one after the other following the same route (if possible do one that's at least 5 or 6 miles with a mix of roads).

As long as you reset the trip before starting either car up, this should give you a rough idea of what is possible for each engine.

Click to expand...

Thanks, We have driven the TA. personally I loved the putter of the engine and its "eagerness to please". However the car isn't my car and the missus cares not a jot about the engine (just wants easiest to drive and ideally most economical in normal conditions). She doesn't even know what a cylinder is. The 1.2 therefore seems the way to go as she will be "used" to it (coming from an old 1.3 KA.)

Shes worked really hard for a new job and Im therefore not putting too much input into the selection. This will be her first "new" nice car (If it were up to me with beige trousers on I would probably go for Hyundai i10 or something like that, having owned a few Fiats in the past *Cough Cough ) However she thinks the 500 is cute and therefore is her fav of the superminins we have looked at. Therefore, its the one we will get! It really is a charming car to be fair.

Ah right, thanks for the info.

Well you can't really go wrong with the 1.2, it's cheap to run, maintain and uses up little petrol. Even if you do decide to give it some beans, you'll be hard pressed to return anything less than 40MPG on a mixed cycle once it's been running for a few thousand miles.

Fully understand why your missus wants a 500 though, it just seems to have this magical effect on people!

We loved owning ours (a white 1.2 Pop), and the new shape Panda 1.2 Easy which we bought last year has been a great car for us with an 18-month old - sooooo much easier to get stuff in and out, not to mention the extra space as well.

But - we do still miss not having a 500 about the place. There's no logical reason for that, it's just a gut feeling