im Axle Specialists

General Is The 105 TA Engine Still Available?

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

JTD_Liam said:
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 gets to carry on with its out of date 5 star rating.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.
Click to expand...

Listen, I don’t know exactly why the Up! Hasn’t been retested, like I said, it might be that it’s not long for this world or that a replacement is coming really soon so NCAP testing it would be a waste.

Why should people continue to recommend Fiat products that are no longer competitive? Why would anyone in their right mind recommend or buy a car that is so far behind the times?

Up until about the facelift I was happily recommending the 500 and Panda to people. But since then the competition really have moved forward and it really isn’t the car to buy anymore. Why would I in good faith recommend a new car that is sub par compared to the other cars people could buy? This isn’t just about NCAP ratings either. If I was buying that class of car now, I’d probably grab an Up! GTI. They look great and they’re a hoot to drive, kind of like a newer Panda 100hp.
 
I guess some of us are stuck in the past, I wouldn't buy a new car on principles that you would likely find ridiculous (some of which have been covered by others in this thread). Really the only reason I have the MiTo is because I'm covering so many miles commuting, so it made sense to get a modern-ish diesel and one with a decent RFL was always going to be priority #1 . If I lived closer to work, I'd still be driving my 20 year old Seicento or 16 year old Mitsubishi.

I appreciate what NCAP are doing, but a lot of these systems make more sense when you take out the worst thing in a car - the human driver. While humans are still in control of these 1,000+ kg boxes going in excess of 30 mph driving should be considered a dangerous thing to do. The more safety systems get implemented, the more complacent drivers become and the more likely they are to do something stupid. Until every car on the road loses that one most dangerous element, it doesn't matter what systems are added, people will still be stupid.

This thread has gotten waaaay off of the original topic...
 
Economy of 'safe' motoring. I'll just use AU numbers for my own convenience.

Person A buys a 'unsafe' car for $20k

Person B buys a 5 star 'as safe as possible' car for $100k

Average person keeps a car for 7 years, so maybe a 20% residual. So theoretically 7 cars over a lifetime. Median wage is around $50k average driver is licensed for 50 years.

Person A spends $112,000 on their cars.

Person B spends $560,000 on their cars.

That's a ludicrous nine years off their lives - just to be safe, and of course that's not factoring in the massive difference in running costs between the two. You could retire almost a decade early (which in incidentally significantly reduces your accident risk), or retire on a pile of cash.

Statistically, car accidents reduce your life expectancy by about 1 month (with of course no guarantee that a 'safe' car will save you), so safety tech has to be very, very cheap to make statistical sense.

As to the 500, frankly a 2007 car based on an even older platform still scoring three stars in 2018 is impressive, considering how say Suzuki only managed the same score for a brand new 2018 model.
 
Last edited:
Although I’d happily have them and they’re a good thing, I suspect safety devices are now becoming more of a marketing tool, as you say, human error will always win through
 
Last edited:
Anyway, back on topic, regardless of safety scores I reckon the 105 may become a sought after cult car a la the 100hp, there are schools of thought that say it was overall the best 500 inc Abarths
 
Last edited:
306maxi said:
If I was buying that class of car now, I’d probably grab an Up! GTI.
Click to expand...
:yuck: Utterly disgusting!
- Only available in a few awful colours
- Cheap halogen headlights (no xenon or full led)
- Ugly phone holder on the dahsboard
- Normal shopping crate doesn't fit in the trunk
 
AGH1965 said:
:yuck: Utterly disgusting!
- Only available in a few awful colours
- Cheap halogen headlights (no xenon or full led)
- Ugly phone holder on the dahsboard
- Normal shopping crate doesn't fit in the trunk
Click to expand...

-only available on traditional VW GTI colours
-halogen headlights are just fine
-phone holder is ugly to be fair
-in the UK we don’t use shopping crates and there’s only two of us so the boot would be just fine
 
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...

Well... that's the precisely the crux of the argument.

NCAP is supposed to be a rating system... so every car ought to have a "safety rating" where zero would be the equivalent of a baked bean tin with an engine in it and where there is no theoretical top limit.

If Panda/500/anything was awarded 5 stars, then 5 stars can't anytime ever become zero stars... *because* (this is the tricky bit that appears difficult to grasp...) zero is the metaphotical baked bean tin with an engine in it.

> My old Stilo (a 2001 design) scored 3 stars.
> Panda is a 4 star car... so it's "safer" (under NCAP's own criteria, agree with them or not) than a Stilo. So far so good.
> Now in 2019... Panda is suddenly "zero" stars. So it's less "safe" than my Stilo, according to NCAP (unless I know I have to pull out the small-print and work out which spec' of tests were carried out... and work out what zero stars in one test means in the other test. Frankly that's what NCAP is supposed to be doing.

We all knoe, because we're interested, that Stilo is an "old-style" 3-stars and Panda is "new-style" zero stars... but as has been mentioned, VW Up and the Kia Muesli Plus and any number of other cars which we don't know about are still carrying their old-style rating.

So.... the rating should be a rating that the car carries forever. Panda scored 4, Stilo scored 3.. easy to understand and lasts forever.

Secondly, is the other problem with NCAP. A car might be able to survive being run over by a 40-ton articulated lorry carrying a nuclear warhead, but the new criteria marks a car down if it doesn't have gizmo's fitted. So, built like a brick ***t-house = 5 stars... not fitted with an automatic dusk sensor or something; = minus 2 stars... :D

As I've written above somewhere.. if you understand how it works you can work out whether you're being ripped off. If you can understand how NCAP calculates it's scores, then you can work out how relevant it all is. At the moment it seems confused and even a bit egregious... but that's only my opinion. It's always best to form your own.


Ralf S.
 
Interestingly the EuroNCAP re-rating hits us directly in the pocket here in NZ, where vehicle relicensing costs (“road tax”) are linked to the safety rating.

We had this first with our 2008 500 going from five to three stars two years ago - $83 to $140 - I queried why the rating for new models was applied retrospectively and at first they thought it was a mistake, then confirmed in writing that it was “standard policy to use the most up-to-date information available”. This only affects re-tested models, of course. If you drive a FIAT Stilo, then it’s still in the safest category, as it was originally five stars and wasn’t re-tested.

Now the same thing has happened with our 2015 Giulietta - from five to three stars as well.

If you drive a newish Panda or Punto in NZ then it would be even worse, now zero stars so a five-fold increase in annual costs. You probably can’t even import one as it won’t meet the safety requirements for used imports. But you’ll be fine with an old Grande Punto as it’s a different model (!) and still five stars.

Our new Labour government has decided to abolish this system as it is “unfair to have owners of expensive new cars paying less tax than owners of older cars’”. Is that true when you could buy five of those safer Stilos for the price of one Giulietta?

Clearly our system was broken by EuroNCAP inconsistent ratings, and our government didn’t know how to fix it...

Now perhaps you’ll see why I’m more on the side of Ralph S and less on the side of Maxi. I would have preferred six or seven stars going to new vehicles (IF the improvements are quantifiable; when a motorcyclist slams into the back of your Golf 7 because it braked sharply after someone in a parked car opened a door, I’m not sure they are, but that’s a different topic anyway. And this has nothing to do with the TwinAir 105.)

-Alex
 
Last edited:
Ralf S. said:
Well... that's the precisely the crux of the argument.

NCAP is supposed to be a rating system... so every car ought to have a "safety rating" where zero would be the equivalent of a baked bean tin with an engine in it and where there is no theoretical top limit.

If Panda/500/anything was awarded 5 stars, then 5 stars can't anytime ever become zero stars... *because* (this is the tricky bit that appears difficult to grasp...) zero is the metaphotical baked bean tin with an engine in it.

> My old Stilo (a 2001 design) scored 3 stars.
> Panda is a 4 star car... so it's "safer" (under NCAP's own criteria, agree with them or not) than a Stilo. So far so good.
> Now in 2019... Panda is suddenly "zero" stars. So it's less "safe" than my Stilo, according to NCAP (unless I know I have to pull out the small-print and work out which spec' of tests were carried out... and work out what zero stars in one test means in the other test. Frankly that's what NCAP is supposed to be doing.

We all knoe, because we're interested, that Stilo is an "old-style" 3-stars and Panda is "new-style" zero stars... but as has been mentioned, VW Up and the Kia Muesli Plus and any number of other cars which we don't know about are still carrying their old-style rating.

So.... the rating should be a rating that the car carries forever. Panda scored 4, Stilo scored 3.. easy to understand and lasts forever.

Secondly, is the other problem with NCAP. A car might be able to survive being run over by a 40-ton articulated lorry carrying a nuclear warhead, but the new criteria marks a car down if it doesn't have gizmo's fitted. So, built like a brick ***t-house = 5 stars... not fitted with an automatic dusk sensor or something; = minus 2 stars... :D

As I've written above somewhere.. if you understand how it works you can work out whether you're being ripped off. If you can understand how NCAP calculates it's scores, then you can work out how relevant it all is. At the moment it seems confused and even a bit egregious... but that's only my opinion. It's always best to form your own.


Ralf S.
Click to expand...

So much text, so little understanding.

If you actually look into Euro NCAP, you’ll find that 0 stars is the rating given to a car that meets the very minimum standard at the time of testing. Standards move on and what was a 3 star car is now a 0 star car. Simple. 0 stars doesn’t mean it’s a death trap.

This is somewhat akin to me walking into a Dutch pancake house and ordering pancakes and expecting Belgian waffles. It’s not the pancake houses fault that I’m a thick **** and don’t know what I’m doing.

It’s a pity that Euro NCAP don’t give you a guide to interpreting the star ratings. Oh wait! They do! https://www.euroncap.com/en/about-euro-ncap/how-to-read-the-stars/ It clearly states that the newest rating is the most relevant one. Quite frankly i someone thinks a Stilo is safer than a modern car because they’re too ignorant or stupid to do some research then their death will be no great tragedy.
 

Attachments

  • 925E3D61-752A-4303-8F36-8101FF1D7CE2.jpeg
    925E3D61-752A-4303-8F36-8101FF1D7CE2.jpeg
    655.1 KB · Views: 62
alexGS said:
Interestingly the EuroNCAP re-rating hits us directly in the pocket here in NZ, where vehicle relicensing costs (“road tax”) are linked to the safety rating.

We had this first with our 2008 500 going from five to three stars two years ago - $83 to $140 - I queried why the rating for new models was applied retrospectively and at first they thought it was a mistake, then confirmed in writing that it was “standard policy to use the most up-to-date information available”. This only affects re-tested models, of course. If you drive a FIAT Stilo, then it’s still in the safest category, as it was originally five stars and wasn’t re-tested.

Now the same thing has happened with our 2015 Giulietta - from five to three stars as well.

If you drive a newish Panda or Punto in NZ then it would be even worse, now zero stars so a five-fold increase in annual costs. You probably can’t even import one as it won’t meet the safety requirements for used imports. But you’ll be fine with an old Grande Punto as it’s a different model (!) and still five stars.

Our new Labour government has decided to abolish this system as it is “unfair to have owners of expensive new cars paying less tax than owners of older cars’”. Is that true when you could buy five of those safer Stilos for the price of one Giulietta?

Clearly our system was broken by EuroNCAP inconsistent ratings, and our government didn’t know how to fix it...

Now perhaps you’ll see why I’m more on the side of Ralph S and less on the side of Maxi. I would have preferred six or seven stars going to new vehicles (IF the improvements are quantifiable; when a motorcyclist slams into the back of your Golf 7 because it braked sharply after someone in a parked car opened a door, I’m not sure they are, but that’s a different topic anyway. And this has nothing to do with the TwinAir 105.)

-Alex
Click to expand...

In all honesty it sounds like a really poor system based on a minsunderstanding of Euro NCAP. If the motorcyclist kills themselves because they were tailgating the golf then surely this is a good thing? Removing faulty genetic material from the gene pool is never a bad thing?
 
306maxi said:
So much text, so little understanding.

If you actually look into Euro NCAP, you’ll find that 0 stars is the rating given to a car that meets the very minimum standard at the time of testing. Standards move on and what was a 3 star car is now a 0 star car. Simple. 0 stars doesn’t mean it’s a death trap.

This is somewhat akin to me walking into a Dutch pancake house and ordering pancakes and expecting Belgian waffles. It’s not the pancake houses fault that I’m a thick **** and don’t know what I’m doing.

It’s a pity that Euro NCAP don’t give you a guide to interpreting the star ratings. Oh wait! They do! https://www.euroncap.com/en/about-euro-ncap/how-to-read-the-stars/ It clearly states that the newest rating is the most relevant one. Quite frankly i someone thinks a Stilo is safer than a modern car because they’re too ignorant or stupid to do some research then their death will be no great tragedy.
Click to expand...


You seem rather bitter Max. I think my arguments have been quite polite and logical... I'm getting the impression that you happen to disagree with them which is fine... but you continually resort to sarcasm which I presume you think is the lowest form of wit (it isn't) and name-calling.

Whatever bad thing happened to you in your life, I'm sorry... but this is a car forum and it's for discussion and for different ideas. Maybe you're in the wrong place if you can't accept that there's sometimes a different viewpoint.

"...their death will be no great tragedy..." Really?

You need some joy in your life. I hope you find it.


Ralf S.
 
Ralf S. said:
You seem rather bitter Max. I think my arguments have been quite polite and logical... I'm getting the impression that you happen to disagree with them which is fine... but you continually resort to sarcasm which I presume you think is the lowest form of wit (it isn't) and name-calling.

Whatever bad thing happened to you in your life, I'm sorry... but this is a car forum and it's for discussion and for different ideas. Maybe you're in the wrong place if you can't accept that there's sometimes a different viewpoint.

"...their death will be no great tragedy..." Really?

You need some joy in your life. I hope you find it.


Ralf S.
Click to expand...

I’m not bitter, I just took the time to actually do some research, perhaps give it a go?
 
306maxi said:
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.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, that does make sense.

And IMO, the Punto is still a looker, which no other manufacturer has managed to equal. (I believe that a good looking car will always be a looker, regardless of age, and vice versa.) I would almost be prepared to bet that it would've sold even better with a more "desirable" badge on its bonnet...
 
Fiat can't win. They design a very Italian / striking looking car and people criticise it for either being over-styled / odd looking or slate the quality. (Pre-facelift Multiplayers, for example)

When they up the quality and play safe (thinking Stilo) - they get branded as boring and staid.

The Punto was a great looking car through to the end (even if sometimes a facelift ruined the original design!) - but was always slated for lagging behind on quality and driving experience (having driven a Punto, a last generation Fiesta and a current Corsa, I disagree).

So it's no surprise that Fiat are sticking with the winning formula of the 500 range. Even BMW have done that with the MINI range. Although they have properly updated it over the years.

The Tipo is a smart looking thing, but small range of engines and trim coupled with list prices which don't reflect real selling prices doesn't help.
 
306maxi said:
Quite frankly i someone thinks a Stilo is safer than a modern car because they’re too ignorant or stupid to do some research then their death will be no great tragedy.
Click to expand...

306maxi said:
If the motorcyclist kills themselves because they were tailgating the golf then surely this is a good thing?
Click to expand...

Take a step back, Maxi, and think about what you've posted. I'm sure there are quite a few folks here who would regard these as offensive comments.

Any human death is a tragedy. The homeless person who dies huddled in a shop doorway on a freezing January night, with only a few sheets of cardboard to protect them from the crippling cold. The drug addict who overdoses in a squalid squat. Just making some bad choices doesn't make their death any less tragic.

I believe one of the hallmarks of a responsible, compassionate society is to do something to protect those who, for whatever reason, are making unwise choices. Most of us have had a moment of madness whilst driving, but we don't deserve to die for it just because some manufacturer has put profit before safety.

What Euro NCAP are doing may be flawed, but it sure is way better than doing nothing at all.
 
Last edited:
jrkitching said:
Take a step back, Maxi, and think about what you've posted. I'm sure there are quite a few folks here who would regard these as offensive comments.

Any human death is a tragedy. The homeless person who dies huddled in a shop doorway on a freezing January night, with only a few sheets of cardboard to protect them from the crippling cold. The drug addict who overdoses in a squalid squat. Just making some bad choices doesn't make their death any less tragic.

I believe one of the hallmarks of a responsible, compassionate society is to do something to protect those who, for whatever reason, are making unwise choices. Most of us have had a moment of madness whilst driving, but we don't deserve to die for it just because some manufacturer has put profit before safety.

What Euro NCAP are doing may be flawed, but it sure is way better than doing nothing at all.
Click to expand...

I despair at the human race though, so many people make obviously stupid decisions and then cry when it goes wrong. Accidents happen, but when common sense could have prevented an accident then there’s no real excuse. Being educated and researching things is out of fashion, so you get people accusing the EU of being involved because they haven’t done any research. I posted a link to the NCAP site explaining how star ratings work and how to compare them, it’s quite clear and well explained, but do you think anyone (other than possibly yourself) actually clicked it? I doubt it.

People have made their minds up and don’t want information that could challenge their pre-conceived notion of what is right and what is wrong.

I stand by my statement that Fiat have failed to invest in new product and these 0 star ratings (which indicate that a car meets minimum standards, NOT that it’s a death trap) are the symptom. Marchionne was an accountant and had no idea how to run a car company. It shows. Whilst his death might be a tragedy for those around him, as all deaths are, it willl be a positive for Fiat Chrapsler in the long run.

I’ve worked in the industry for 2 years as of this coming March. It’s been eye opening and has made me realise how little I knew about cars and how little I still know to be honest!
 
jrkitching said:
Any human death is a tragedy. The homeless person who dies huddled in a shop doorway on a freezing January night, with only a few sheets of cardboard to protect them from the crippling cold. The drug addict who overdoses in a squalid squat. Just making some bad choices doesn't make their death any less tragic..
Click to expand...

Tragedies in varying amounts.

If the homeless person was given no support and died because of society just not giving a crap, then yeah that’s a major tragedy.

If the homeless person was given loads of opportunity to live in accommodation and chose not to, then it’s still a waste of life and all, but not as much of a tragedy as the previous hypothetical homeless person.

I think as a society we’ve become too compassionate and that helps people to justify their own poor behaviour.

I got tailgated by half a dozen idiots yesterday. Why should I be hurt become some idiot either doesn’t understand reaction time or simply doesn’t care?
 
306maxi said:
I think as a society we’ve become too compassionate and that helps people to justify their own poor behaviour.

I got tailgated by half a dozen idiots yesterday. Why should I be hurt become some idiot either doesn’t understand reaction time or simply doesn’t care?
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more. The aforementioned hypothetical motorcyclist is a perfect example of someone ultimately responsible for their own demise. Sticking with a motoring theme, boy racers are another perfect example.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Technical No Gears available
Replies
2
Views
322
varesecrazy
V
D
Technical TA 0.9 105 Clutch & Gear Selector Cables
Replies
1
Views
341
John202020
John202020
sammy19
  • Question
Technical Fiat 500 TA 2011
Replies
3
Views
611
puntodeltathema
puntodeltathema
O
  • Solved
Technical Anyone know what this Twin Air engine part is?
Replies
11
Views
803
John202020
John202020
S
Technical Squeaking steering wheel - 2011 TA
Replies
8
Views
613
The Panda Nut
The Panda Nut
Back
Top