Shop4Parts - UK's largest online superstore for FIAT and Alfa Romeo parts

General Is The 105 TA Engine Still Available?

Currently reading:
General Is The 105 TA Engine Still Available?

Ralf S. said:
You think having an iDrive or any kind of infotainment system is not distracting *at all*, compared to having nothing to fiddle with at all....?? And you think driving a 500 is confusing..

Well, okay... Let's best leave it there. ;)

But I hope people will think about what the NCAP scores actually mean. My old dad always used to say if you can understand how something works, you can understand if you're being ripped off or not (he was talking about financial "products"... but it still holds up generally).

Hopefully any reader will be able to see the different arguments in this thread and think about it independently rather than just swallowing the Groupthink, and then make their own mind up.

Meanwhile, luckily with so many other "safe" cars out there with all the NCAP knee-trembler gizmo's and 6 out of 5 star NCAP ratings, I will rest assured that in the event of an accident, the other car will deploy it's self-inflating external impact-mattress or whatever and my tatty old (must be minus 10 stars) Stilo deathtrap won't be damaged at all, never mind reduced to a pile of old baked bean cans. :D

Drive safe! :)


Ralf S.




Ralf S.
Click to expand...

I never said that I thought driving a 500 was confusing. If you’re at the point where you have to make stuff up then it would appear that you’ve got nothing intelligent to add to the discussion.

Your dads argument has little/no relevance here. I have no idea how a fuel injector works, am I being ripped off?

People said the same banal/uninformed crap in the 80s and 90s when cars with crumple zones started becoming more and more common. Now they realise that modern cars are safer.
 
Ralf S. said:
Somebody gets it.... :)

But to be fair, I guess NCAP would say they are re-visiting the oldest models still out there (and only Fiat really have such popular models that old... :D ) But my argument is still that they shouldn't really be wasting time/confusing the public doing it, and also with how they're doing it.

NCAP is based in Brussels... it's EU ... and if if I was mischievous I might hazard a guess that Italy is probably having some kind of barny with the EU over its proposal economic policies ... and EU could be turning the odd screw.... :D I doubt the Eurocrats are that sinister or clever... but it does highlight that there are potentially a lot of factors involved in any test, or rating system... It's best for us to remain vigilant, slightly cynical in a good way and think for ourselves.


Ralf S.
Click to expand...
Its been a long time since I've read such entertaining bull excrement on this forum.
 
306maxi said:
The system detected a metallic object passing in front of the car and it reacted accordingly. Missiles that cost tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds can also be confused by foil and other metallic items, it’s called chaff https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaff_(countermeasure)

Standards move on, what was once exceptional is ordinary. Simple as that.
Click to expand...
No offence, but that still doesn't give me any reassurance.

And fair enough, but keep things in perspective: we're talking about cars from the mid 00s, not cars from the 80s/early 90s, with passenger compartments made of crisp packets.
 
puntofan01 said:
No offence, but that still doesn't give me any reassurance.

And fair enough, but keep things in perspective: we're talking about cars from the mid 00s, not cars from the 80s/early 90s, with passenger compartments made of crisp packets.
Click to expand...

Oh but there is a massive difference! whilst older vehicles were just starting to use high strength steel in their structures in the early noughties, nowadays with the push for CO2 being even tighter, HSS is being used more and more and means that cars perform even better in crashes than their noughties predecessors hence why something that was 10 years ago a 5 star car is now a 3 star car or worse.

I’m finding it laughable the way some people are behaving on here, acting as if there’s some sort of conspiracy against Fiat coming out of Brussels is just insanity. Failing to understand that as times go by standards improve, knowledge grows and best practice becomes better fleshed out.

Has no one heard of “Occam’s razor”? Which states that the simplest hypothesis (ie that Fiat have failed to invest in their platforms and now has inferior product to the competition) is more likely to be correct than hypotheses that rely on bonkers ideas that rely on the EU wanting to punish Italy through Fiat Chrapsler.
 
jrkitching said:
But only the first time; it's partly why I've such negative feelings (with all due respect to @typecastboy) about repaired structurally damaged cars.
Click to expand...

Thing is people can’t be repaired or replaced if the car crumples around them. But yeah, I do agree that using high strength steel is going to contribute to cars going to the graveyard a bit early.
 
306maxi said:
I’m finding it laughable the way some people are behaving on here
Click to expand...
Well, replace laughable with sad and you have my opinion.

Some people here grab every opportunity to bash FIAT: "The company is crap, the cars are crap, ..." And not once, but time after time after time. This is a forum for FIAT enthusiasts. Why annoy us? Why try to convince us that we were stupid to buy a FIAT? Please, let us enjoy our cars!
 
AGH1965 said:
Well, replace laughable with sad and you have my opinion.

Some people here grab every opportunity to bash FIAT: "The company is crap, the cars are crap, ..." And not once, but time after time after time. This is a forum for FIAT enthusiasts. Why annoy us? Why try to convince us that we were stupid to buy a FIAT? Please, let us enjoy our cars!
Click to expand...

No one’s stopping you from enjoying your car, if someone posting about Fiat’s lack of investment in their cars stops you from enjoying your car then forums are probably not for you.
 
puntofan01 said:
Personally, I'm more concerned about Fiat not investing in new models full stop, rather than them not investing in electronic interferences.
Click to expand...

It's true Fiat haven't invested in many of their older models but I wouldn't say they're not investing in new ones.

They have forked out massively on new brands and pumped untold amounts into new models like the Giulia, Stelvio, Levante and a host of new Jeeps like the Gladiator (what a name!)

It isn't a shock that they are targeting large markets like China with their premium products first, but they do have plans for the Fiat brand it's self and new models are in the pipeline.

I have written before, but the lead times of new models are fairly short these days due to platform sharing and their new small car platform and global line of modular engines will be the base on the next 500, but this time it will be a global model, suitable for all markets. Hanging off this will be the next line of more local models for Europe, India, South America etc, like the Panda.


With regards to NCAP, it's pretty obvious that they would retest any car that still sells fairly well (it's still Italy's best seller) after all these years and has had no major update.

I think Fiats problem is that they have invested heavily in new or more profitable brands and have yet to update the Fiat branded products themselves, which to be fair is their budget brand, they're still sorting through the mess of so many brands, platforms and engines spread right around the world.

The recent Punto and Panda results are at best a push that it's time to get on with the job.

If there was any real malice from Brussels/NCAP, they could have retested their best seller, the 500 and that is effectively based on a 16 year old platform from the 169 Panda, we don't need to be Nostradamus to predict that result and it's not unimaginable that this would set them back far more than the Punto and Panda results.
 
The question is though, when will they invest in a new Panda/500, and will they have the brains to develop a new supermini to replace the Punto?

With regards to their other investments, as much as I love Alfa Romeos, (without doubt, they're the best looking cars available to the ((relatively!)) common man,) I do think they've invested rather too heavily in the Alfa brand: I don't know how well the latest products sell in Italy, but certainly in the UK, they've been a complete flop, and I doubt they're doing terribly well in the rest of Europe either. I feel they should've perhaps spent a bit less on the new Alfas and jeeps, and injected some much needed cash into the Fiat range: they've completely neglected their main customer base! Who knows, perhaps if they'd invested in a new Punto a few years ago, they might be shifting a few more Tipos here!
 
These premium SUV's target market is China.
Their market has exploded over 200% in the last 10 years and shows little sign of slowing down.
Their top seller moves more the half a million a year. Their 10th best seller moves a third of a million a year.

Any global car company that isn't chasing this market isn't going to launch much in the future in any smaller markets like the UK.
Our top seller moves around 90 thousand a year.


The new 500 is planned later this year, autumn I believe.
It was put back a while as I think it was due to be announced late last year, but they are keen to get it right and not have to re engineer it for the US and other markets like they did with the last one.

It already has a model number of 332 and I seem to think the new Panda will hang off this, so should be around at the same time. (model 170)

I am not sure a new Punto is coming.
There was talk of the Argo getting badged as a Punto, though since it seems Fiat aren't keen on this and will probably flog the Tipo to death over the next ten years or badge a Dodge up with a Fiat related name or stretch the 500 and add a couple of doors.
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't it make sense to develop a new Panda at the same time as the new 500?! And surely if they developed a new supermini, and made sure they got it right, it could be quite lucrative? Whilst the margins might be lower, if it sells like hot cakes, that'll bring money to their pot. Bearing in mind that at 1 point, the mk1 Punto was the best selling car in Europe, they're mad to just turn their back on this segment! Plus we desperately need a good looking supermini on the market, lol! ;)
 
puntofan01 said:
Wouldn't it make sense to develop a new Panda at the same time as the new 500?! And surely if they developed a new supermini, and made sure they got it right, it could be quite lucrative? Whilst the margins might be lower, if it sells like hot cakes, that'll bring money to their pot. Bearing in mind that at 1 point, the mk1 Punto was the best selling car in Europe, they're mad to just turn their back on this segment! Plus we desperately need a good looking supermini on the market, lol! ;)
Click to expand...

You wouldn’t develop both cars at the same time because that then means you need twice the amount of engineering staff for the time of the project and then when both cars are delivered then you need to make them all redundant until you start working on the facelift versions of both cars. Plus rather than risking just the sales from one car, you’re risking the sales from both cars if there’s a delay.

Not going to give away timelines on a public forum, but we delivered a new car last year, a new slightly different body variant is coming in the next few months and then after a decent period releasing another body variant.

The beauty of this is that you can overlap the old variants with new variants with less risk if there’s a delay in one or all of the projects. You can use lessons learnt on the first project on the subsequent projects as well because there’s still time to make changes to the cars coming later on.

Agree regarding the Punto, it was a real looker when it came out and they shouldn’t have left the Punto to die.
 
Ralf S. said:
Very interesting discussions... and I suppose that it's true that a 500 or a Panda is relatively not as "class leading" in safety 2018 than it was in 2008... but that just emphasises the flaws with NCAP.



NCAP safety is only relative. It may be true that a 500 or Panda is relatively less "safe" compared to other cars now than it was in 2008. That does not (as NCAP now insinuates) make it less "safe" in absolute terms. Imagine Usain Bolt runs 100m in 9 seconds. Next year his cousin Bosain Nuts, using a legal supplement/new medical and nutritional technology runs 100m in 8.8 seconds. NCAP says that Usain is now a back-marking slow-coach. 100m in 9s clearly is not "slow". Panda managed 3 or 4 stars when it was Usain Bolt. It is not now suddenly unsafe. NCAP should add new stars to its system rather than revisit past results when the recent/past results were otherwise impressive.



Which brings me to my second problem with NCAP;



The NCAP scores are based on the possession of passive "aids" of often dubious relevance to the number of accidents they might prevent. If NCAP was properly serious then an automatic speed limit recognition system and speed limiter would be the "must have" accessory that should be worth a star all by itself... but it isn't. iDrive and any form of in-car "entertainment" should earn a de-merit just for being fitted... but they don't.



Let's say NCAP suddenly decides that hill-holders make a difference to the few cars who have another one roll back into them every year... reducing creased bumpers at a traffic lights is a noble objective but is it really the kind of accident that makes a difference to people..? Or does hill holders just reduce the statistics? Hint; "statistics" is how NCAP earns its funding. Panda without hill-holders suddenly loses a star. A newer car built with one, gains a star. That's how it works.



I'm not necessarily biased towards Fiat (although this is a Fiat Forum, not "Safety Vest World" so guess what...? :D ) but for me, if there is a car that earned 5 stars and then a few years later it gets zero just because it doesn't have certain gizmo's and features added (even though the consequences of not having them are in many cases of dubious value compared to the actual saftey benefit), then that implies to me that there is a defective evaluation and/or scoring system.



We should not just blindly swallow whatever comes out of NCAP. They risk confusing the consumers by their clumsy approach. NCAP... you had 4*... but this year I give you 1*.



Ralf S.
Click to expand...



I know nothing about NCAP but surely the score is relative to the current safety standards available, so what was deemed safe 10 years ago is now no longer that safe as things have moved on considerably and a 4* then could well be a 1* today relatively. A car that was apparently safe in 1970 by 1970 standards is certainly not considered safe today
 
puntofan01 said:
Personally, I'm more concerned about Fiat not investing in new models full stop, rather than them not investing in electronic interferences.
Click to expand...

That’s what I’m talking about though. There’s no point in putting these things into either the 500 or Panda now. For example if you were to add an automatic emergency brake on the 500 you’d need a new grille, probably a new bumper, then you’ll need an ECU for it all. You’ll need some studs or some holes in the panels to mount it on. That costs tens of thousands of pounds. Does the body ecu have enough channels? Probably not so you’ll need a new body ECU then, that costs money and the software for that costs even more. Then there’s the changes to the harnesses which is surpisingly costly. On top of that you’ve got to test it all. That involves hand built parts which are stupidly expensive because you’re only making 10 of them rather than 10,000.

That’s why you don’t tend to get new content released unless you’ve got a new platform or a facelift of that platform. You’re unlikely to make that money back.
 
Mercky said:
I know nothing about NCAP but surely the score is relative to the current safety standards available, so what was deemed safe 10 years ago is now no longer that safe as things have moved on considerably and a 4* then could well be a 1* today relatively. A car that was apparently safe in 1970 by 1970 standards is certainly not considered safe today
Click to expand...

Exactly. It’s pretty obvious, yet some people want to see this as some sort of EU funded anti-Fiat conspiracy.
 
306maxi said:
NCAP retest cars after a time period... in the time Fiat have had the Grande Punto/Punto, VW for instance have had 3 different Polos, of course the Polo is going to do better. Ford have had 3 different Fiestas as well.. Renault 3 different Clios.

Stop blaming NCAP for retesting the dross that Fiat keep on producing.

Fiat are close to becoming a former car maker. A 0 or 1 star rating would kill the 500. They need to up their game or they will die.
Click to expand...

[FONT=&quot]The Punto was in production too long with too little update, no getting away from that, but in the time since Fiat launched the 2011 Panda, VW have had the same Up! in production. I'm pleased to see that if you delve into the VW Up! result on EuroNCAP it does say that as of January 2018 the rating has expired, but that was in January 2018 and EuroNCAP are still showing it as a 5 star car until you go into the results a little deeper and select Rating Validity. If the rating expired a year ago, why has it not been retested - the Panda's rating also expired in January 2018 and has already been retested :rolleyes:

I'm not blaming NCAP for Fiat not updating their models, you can clearly see that from when i wrote the following above:[/FONT]

JTD_Liam said:
Fiat have failed to update their models with the latest safety equipment and have been caught out, which is their silly fault. Considering the sales of the 500 and Panda they had no excuse not to maintain investment.
Click to expand...

I'm blaming EuroNCAP for being misleading and having so many different ratings running side by side. I get that the tests need to change, but there's so many revisions to the tests showing on the EuroNCAP website that it's near impossible to do a comparison of two vehicles safety anymore.

Fiat absolutely do need to up their game. Their model range is largely either old, below par or both. However, according to this Auto Express article https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/best-cars/62600/safest-cars-for-sale-in-the-uk-2019 Fiat Group (FCA) have produced the safest vehicles tested by NCAP in 3 of the past 8 years, with the Alfa Giulietta (2010), Fiat 500L (2012) and Jeep Cherokee (2013). Not exactly dross in the safety department, then.

Also, if Fiat were really THAT terrible, why did you buy one, and why on Earth do you still have one?!
 
JTD_Liam said:
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The Punto was in production too long with too little update, no getting away from that, but in the time since Fiat launched the 2011 Panda, VW have had the same Up! in production. I'm pleased to see that if you delve into the VW Up! result on EuroNCAP it does say that as of January 2018 the rating has expired, but that was in January 2018 and EuroNCAP are still showing it as a 5 star car until you go into the results a little deeper and select Rating Validity. If the rating expired a year ago, why has it not been retested - the Panda's rating also expired in January 2018 and has already been retested :rolleyes:

I'm not blaming NCAP for Fiat not updating their models, you can clearly see that from when i wrote the following above:[/FONT]



I'm blaming EuroNCAP for being misleading and having so many different ratings running side by side. I get that the tests need to change, but there's so many revisions to the tests showing on the EuroNCAP website that it's near impossible to do a comparison of two vehicles safety anymore.

Fiat absolutely do need to up their game. Their model range is largely either old, below par or both. However, according to this Auto Express article https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/best-cars/62600/safest-cars-for-sale-in-the-uk-2019 Fiat Group (FCA) have produced the safest vehicles tested by NCAP in 3 of the past 8 years, with the Alfa Giulietta (2010), Fiat 500L (2012) and Jeep Cherokee (2013). Not exactly dross in the safety department, then.

Also, if Fiat were really THAT terrible, why did you buy one, and why on Earth do you still have one? Don't bother to answer that (y)
Click to expand...

Cripes, it’s like Groundhog Day. As jrkitching said, the 500 WAS market leading when it came out. We bought ours in 2009 when it was at the top of its game.

As for why the Up! still shows as a 5 star car, I’d hazard a guess and say that the Up! Is probably not much longer for this world OR the replacement is imminent.

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/volks...ine-as-brand-seeks-to-boost-profits-and-lower
 
306maxi said:
Cripes, it’s like Groundhog Day. As @jrkitching said, the 500 WAS market leading when it came out. We bought ours in 2009 when it was at the top of its game.

As for why the Up! still shows as a 5 star car, I’d hazard a guess and say that the Up! Is probably not much longer for this world OR the replacement is imminent.

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/volks...ine-as-brand-seeks-to-boost-profits-and-lower
Click to expand...

I'm just a bit sick of hearing how utterly awful Fiat are, on a Fiat Forum. Yeah, they need new models and need to do more meaningful updates throughout models lifecycles but it really gets tiresome seeing people actively encourage people to buy other brands at every possible opportunity. There'll be no investment in Fiat at all if people keep doing this, as they'll disappear.

Fair comment re the 500, Fiat have milked it for all its worth, though it's testament to it that it was still selling in such decent numbers up to a couple of years ago, with only one half-decent update. It must still be relatively satisfying to own otherwise you'd have got rid, surely?

This is my issue - the Up! is showing as a 5 star car, when it's highly likely it won't be anymore. Both Up! and Panda had ratings which expired 12 months ago - the Panda has been put through the mill and been re-tested as zero stars, but the Up! gets to carry on with its out of date 5 star rating. If they're going to start re-testing cars they need to be a bit more open about how they're going about it. If they can't retest everything every 5 years for example, perhaps it'd be better to just leave everything with its original rating, rather than making certain makes/models a skapegoat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Technical No Gears available
Replies
2
Views
328
varesecrazy
V
D
Technical TA 0.9 105 Clutch & Gear Selector Cables
Replies
1
Views
344
John202020
John202020
sammy19
  • Question
Technical Fiat 500 TA 2011
Replies
3
Views
622
puntodeltathema
puntodeltathema
O
  • Solved
Technical Anyone know what this Twin Air engine part is?
Replies
11
Views
813
John202020
John202020
S
Technical Squeaking steering wheel - 2011 TA
Replies
8
Views
624
The Panda Nut
The Panda Nut
Back
Top