AGH1965
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2015
- Messages
- 649
- Points
- 106
General Is the 500 still competitive?
- Thread starter zanes
- Start date
Currently reading:
General Is the 500 still competitive?
ahmett
Prominent member
Why don't you like turbo engines? Don't you like high torque at low revs?
I hate throttle lag and if I want high torque at low revs I'd just get a diesel much more economical
AGH1965
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2015
- Messages
- 649
- Points
- 106
Re: Euro6 1.2 Throttle Response, Hill Start Issues & Watchdog report
Like most competitors FIAT develops 3 cylinder engines. A brand new 80 hp 1.0 3 cylinder engine will be introduced in the Brazilian FIAT Uno later this year. It wouldn't surprise me if that engine crosses the Atlantic to replace the 1.2.
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2013
- Messages
- 1,537
- Points
- 276
With a modern turbo there is no throttle lag. OK maybe a tiny bit below 1000rpm, but we all know you never drive there and at any rate no small NA engine is going to pull strongly from those revs anyway.
My Skyline has big throttle lag but that engine was developed in the 80's.
ahmett
Prominent member
So a diesel 1 series it is for you then as the petrol engines are turbo charged. However, I can't say I've noticed any throttle lag on modern petrol turbos.
ahmett
Prominent member
I have a 'sensitive' feel to driving
yes a 116 or 120d is my target ! May give the 500 to my 19 year old brother when he gets his licence
AGH1965
Member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2015
- Messages
- 649
- Points
- 106
Natural? Please, consider a horse carriage!
OP
OP
In fairness, this is pretty much what we found; although the only one I can remember is the 1.2TCE from renault (bang on 100hp I think) these sorts of engines generally have pretty small turbos so "response" (both turbo lag and boost threshold) at low revs is good- they generally start to run out of breath relatively early but for 95% of people 95% of the time it's not really an issue.
The swift sport is a good example of this- with the new high lift cams and variable intake system introduced in the new model (2012 on) it only really finds its feet past about 3-3500rpm, but from there on to the redline it's very nice. Again, to some extent, horses for courses- it's what I'm used to- I'm sure for some people it's really not what they want. The example I use is when I was given a diesel S-cross as a courtesy car- I didn't like it at all, but if you gave a swift to a diesel s-cross owner they'd say it was crap on fuel and has to have the breasts revved off it to get anywhere.
Unless, of course, you're VW; in which case you compound charge an engine (so it's always "on boost" to some extent, unlike a straight turbo charged engine) to a very high output, couple it with the modern "extended interval servicing" crap and wonder why timing chains start letting go.
There are other "issues" with the 500 though I feel- it's a premium-priced product from a non-premium manufacturer with thoroughly non-premium customer service (a huge issue IMHO), based on a design that's the best part of 15 years old. It could do with replacing (7 years is a fair run, I think we'd all agree) but FIAT have a big problem there- what do they replace it with?
Last edited:
jazzster500
New member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2014
- Messages
- 22
- Points
- 5
So how is the suspension on the swift now, I had a 2006 model with 1.5 engine 4 speed auto the car was ok, the mpg was 35 but for a 1.5 old style auto I suppose it was ok, the suspension though for me was way to hard, i have a 500 dualogic 1.2 but only getting 39 mpg out of it though i am doing a lot of short journeys so doesnt help, but 1.4 jazz did the same with the same journeys.
OP
OP
Absolutely fine- even my sport has far better suspension set up (mostly in terms of damping and hence ride) than my old 500; though that was one with the early, non Ka/C rear suspension.
The swift is very much a wheel-in-each-corner sort of car, so that helps with the ride.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,579
- Points
- 828
So what if the 500 is 7 years old? If they tweak it, Fiat will end up with same situation as Mini and vw: the new Mini looks obese, to be quite frank, and the new VW Beetle looks like an old version that's had a lot of weight put on the roof! Thanks to design "progress" these retro designs have completely lost their way. Granted, like the Beetle, the 500 is completely the wrong mechanical layout to the car it visually resembles, but to my eyes, it is by far the most successful piece of styling out of the 3 retro cars.
OP
OP
That would be why I said:
Sooner or later the cute looks will not be enough to keep it selling.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,579
- Points
- 828
By which time, the retro craze may well have died down anyway.
I couldn't care less if it's retro or not, I just like the looks. Maybe I'm a retro sort of guy without knowing it?
I'm not a petrol head, and cars generally leave me cold. How people can get all exited about Ferraris, Lamborghinis or exotica, or even be bothered watching Top Gear I don't know. Yawn.
The thing is, when I first saw a Fiat 500, it really turned my head. I was a Mini freak in the past having owned eight of them over the years, and the 500 hits the same buttons with me. The Twinair engine hit more buttons.
I love it and it's put fun back into my driving.
Cheers,
Mick.
I'm not a petrol head, and cars generally leave me cold. How people can get all exited about Ferraris, Lamborghinis or exotica, or even be bothered watching Top Gear I don't know. Yawn.
The thing is, when I first saw a Fiat 500, it really turned my head. I was a Mini freak in the past having owned eight of them over the years, and the 500 hits the same buttons with me. The Twinair engine hit more buttons.
I love it and it's put fun back into my driving.
Cheers,
Mick.
griff74
Member
I'm sorry Zanes but it sounds to me like you have something against the 500, esp as you now drive a Suzuki Swift which came out in 2004 and has only been lightly updated since then btw...) which to my eyes a rather bland but awkward looking generic hatchback with a very dull looking and cheaply finished interior, yes I have driven one, a 1.6 (I think it was) Sport and I found it only ok, didn't feel very quick, handling averagely only and there was nothing about it that made it stand out as an exciting car, to me the 500, esp in Sport or Abarth form, is a much more attractive, fun, characterful car. Yes I know the Suzuki will probably be more reliable long term and have better warranty\dealer support, but as far as I am concerned (and lets be honest, the vast majority of people as well considering how few of them are sold compared to the 500!) there are more important things than safe and dull. A car to me is more than just simple A2B transport, it had to look and feel good and all the 500's I've driven, including a 1.2 Pop, have put a smile on my face, the 500 looks great and even though the interior isn't top notch quality, there is plenty of nice design touch's and flair to make it a nice place to be.
The 500 is currently (as we have seen) undergoing a bit of a refresh, which will hopefully address some of the issues it currently has but to be honest, Fiat knows they don't have to do that much as they keep selling so well (a replacement\major update for the base 1.2 would be a good idea though!)
The 500 is currently (as we have seen) undergoing a bit of a refresh, which will hopefully address some of the issues it currently has but to be honest, Fiat knows they don't have to do that much as they keep selling so well (a replacement\major update for the base 1.2 would be a good idea though!)
OP
OP
Erm, no. Really, just no. I drove one for five years with minimal complaints.
Also wrong.
Bolded bit disagrees with practically every road test of the sport, but YMMV
Remind me what's special about the Sport 500?
As I said up thread, it's personal preference- though I'd put strong money on most people's preferences these days being safe, reliable and economical. I can't see FIAT selling as many if it was only available with the twinair, and had a low NCAP score. Suzuki are a niche manufacturer here but are showing very strong sales growth and were recently placed second in a reliability survey, if you consider those valid.
Agreed, as I mentioned I was happy with mine.
Are these updates anything more than altering trim levels?
Which was, essentially, what I said in my first post of this thread, and what I've been saying for some time in the EU6 thread.
Believe it or not I didn't start this thread to be a swift vs. 500 argument (in fact I didn't start it at all
) but I will back up my views if that's what people want it to be.
Last edited:
Not taking sides here.
Seems like the present Swift came out in 2004/5 and was updated in 2010.
[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_Swift"]Suzuki Swift - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@<title>Suzuki Swift - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</title>@@AMEPARAM@@Suzuki Swift[/ame]
Mick.
Seems like the present Swift came out in 2004/5 and was updated in 2010.
[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzuki_Swift"]Suzuki Swift - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@<title>Suzuki Swift - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</title>@@AMEPARAM@@Suzuki Swift[/ame]
Mick.
OP
OP
Not taking sides here.
Seems like the present Swift came out in 2004/5 and was updated in 2010.
Suzuki Swift - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mick.
Could you point out where that says the Mk.3 is simply an update of the Mk.2- I'm fairly confident that whilst they might look very similar (well, not <that> similar) they are in fact "properly" different cars.
