VeneziaBlue500x said:

I have the same problem with my 500X as well, the suspension is rather too stiff for my taste and on some imperfections it "carries" the vibration up the cabin.

I asked about it in Turin and the answer I got: the target audience of the 500X is youngsters with a family who want a sporty ride. So the hard suspension is by design.

I did find that any custom shop that does off-road suspensions can replace them with adjustable shocks, I was offered the "gold" ohlins (https://www.ohlins.com/) which are rather expensive.

I still haven't decided on a course of action yet.

Click to expand...

When you say expensive what sort of price are you looking at?
Had a quick look and all I could see was for motorcycles.
You have to remember that if you sell the car you're going to take a big hit on depreciation so they may not be that expensive if you end up keeping it.

In saying that my son has just bought an brand new Audi A5 and it's reminded me how well a "sporting" car can ride. Yes I know it costs more than twice the price of the Fiat, but it drives like three times the price.

I seem to change my mind on the car every time I drive it.
Sometimes its acceptable sometimes it really annoys. Whatever unfortunately I seldom enjoy it.
I don't buy what Fiat are saying. I think they have just thrown some suspension at it. Sporting does not have to be hard.
I'll probably see the year out and then get something else.

Yeah, I noticed the firm ride on the test drive, but decided it was acceptable - certainly better damped than the 500 hatch it was replacing. Curiously it seems to absorb speed bumps better than most cars I've had.
I bought the Lounge trim because I liked the contrasting leather seats, and am very pleased with it. If I had been buying new I would have asked if 17" wheels were available, but as it's used I didn't have this option. I've improved it slightly by reducing the tyre pressures, which were a little high.

NitramA said:

When you say expensive what sort of price are you looking at?
Had a quick look and all I could see was for motorcycles.
You have to remember that if you sell the car you're going to take a big hit on depreciation so they may not be that expensive if you end up keeping it.

In saying that my son has just bought an brand new Audi A5 and it's reminded me how well a "sporting" car can ride. Yes I know it costs more than twice the price of the Fiat, but it drives like three times the price.

I seem to change my mind on the car every time I drive it.
Sometimes its acceptable sometimes it really annoys. Whatever unfortunately I seldom enjoy it.
I don't buy what Fiat are saying. I think they have just thrown some suspension at it. Sporting does not have to be hard.
I'll probably see the year out and then get something else.

Click to expand...

This thing is bloody annoying me!!
At the suggestion of an earlier post I raised the tyre pressures up to maximum according to the handbook. The ride seemed as bad as ever and I'd just about decided to get rid.
I then decided to go back to standard pressures (2.4 bar I think) and set them up really accurately.
Funny thing is it changed the ride dramatically. I find the ride almost acceptable - certainly not as bad as before.
So this could be down to the lowering of pressures (I don't think it was that as I'd had them at that level before), the mileage (now at 7k miles) or that I'm driving on different roads (lots of main roads and motorways, with a bit of town).
I think its a combination of all three.
My main problem is that I'd convinced my wife I wanted another car and she's given me the Green light.
I'm not sure its that bad anymore.
I can't admit I'm wrong!!!

NitramA said:

This thing is bloody annoying me!!
At the suggestion of an earlier post I raised the tyre pressures up to maximum according to the handbook. The ride seemed as bad as ever and I'd just about decided to get rid.
I then decided to go back to standard pressures (2.4 bar I think) and set them up really accurately.
Funny thing is it changed the ride dramatically. I find the ride almost acceptable - certainly not as bad as before.
So this could be down to the lowering of pressures (I don't think it was that as I'd had them at that level before), the mileage (now at 7k miles) or that I'm driving on different roads (lots of main roads and motorways, with a bit of town).
I think its a combination of all three.
My main problem is that I'd convinced my wife I wanted another car and she's given me the Green light.
I'm not sure its that bad anymore.
I can't admit I'm wrong!!!

Click to expand...

I've got 18" rims, I fastidiously keep the tyre pressures at 2.4 bar and I find the ride perfectly acceptable. Each to his/her own but I have no complaints

Alanw47 said:

I've got 18" rims, I fastidiously keep the tyre pressures at 2.4 bar and I find the ride perfectly acceptable. Each to his/her own but I have no complaints

Click to expand...

Is 2.4 bar the lower or higher value?
If its the lower I agree it seems they have to be spot on.

NitramA said:

Is 2.4 bar the lower or higher value?
If its the lower I agree it seems they have to be spot on.

Click to expand...

As I recall 2.4 bar is the value for normal loads, therefore the lower. I hardly ever load mine up enough to worry about what the tyre pressures for that should be

Sachs shock absobers seem to get (very) good reviews, and are not very expensive.

Just a thought.. after driving my sister's Renort Megane on "getting old" (hard) Accelera tyres compounded by some cold +3C weather...

Can you try a tyre change? Some tyres are just more compliant than others and you might be able to improve the ride by fitting different tyres.

I can't see that "compliance" is one of the new tyre label ratings but Noise is.. and I guess a quieter tyre might have a construction that makes it gentler on the suspension too?

It's worth checking out what the standard tyres look like on one of the sites - e.g.

http://www.blackcircles.com/general/tyre-labelling/tyre-label

If yours are one of the noisier options, then there may be mileage in looking at one of the quieter options. If yours are already one of the quieter options, then that knackers my idea..


Ralf S.

NitramA said:

As everyone knows the 500x doesn't ride particularly well on 18" wheels.

It's not so bad that I need to sell it- 3 years with Audi S line suspension means I'm used to a hard ride.

It's just that it's a little crude in the way it goes about its business.

ive also got a theory that temperature has an effect on the damping, seems to ride better when it's hot!!



Anyway the reason for the post. Does anyone know if the dampers can be replaced? Not with rock hard boy racer stuff, but with more sophisticated adjustable kit.

My background is motorcycles and I know there are lots of options available for them.

Surely that's the same in the car world?

Click to expand...

Having just got back from the Garden Centre I can categorically state that 300 litres of compost in the back improves the ride on 18" rims no end.

Alanw47 said:

Having just got back from the Garden Centre I can categorically state that 300 litres of compost in the back improves the ride on 18" rims no end.

Click to expand...

I seem to remember that a handling upgrade for some cars (Cortina's or Marina's?) in the 70's was to put some bags of concrete in the boot.
Might try it

Regarding tyres, I fitted Michelin Cross Climates to our other car, and these improved the ride and reduced road noise, as well as improving cold weather grip. Unfortunately I don't think they are available yet in the size required for the 500X 18" rims.

I just picked up a 500X for my daughter, which has 18" snows. Appalled at the ride "quality".

It's how the response to road bumps feel. Bumping around is fine, but this feels trashy. Smooth road manners seem fine.

I have an '12 Audi A8 D4, kind of a gold standard with air suspension. We have a Q5 on big rubber, it's a nice ride. I have a VW bug, on 18's rides way better. I also have two Fiat 500's and with 16" rubber, have a good ride as well. My 17" kit for the 500 is summer only.

The durometer of rubber drops with heat. So it simply is more supple.
The sidewall of a tire determines ride quality, and a thinner belt. A more supple sidewall improves response. More air volume available and less rubber is a good thing.

I have Michelins from my Audi A8 D3 that should fit, 255/45R18 so will try those. The Q5 runs a huge 235/60 series tire so it's no wonder that ride is smooooth.

Upsizing the 500X might be OK - BUT add spacers to maintain stability/rollover resistance. Either that or downsize to the 17's and use a nice soft riding touring tire. Michelins are A++ but tirerack also has recommendations on which is the best riding tire.

I stuck with mine for 18 months and just couldn't come to terms with the ride quality -and God I tried!
Finally succumbed to a Volvo XC40 and have never looked back.
The 500X was a really promising car but was built to a "that'll just about do" standard which is a real shame as it not only cost £££ in depreciation I felt I had to spend a fair amount more to be confident I wouldn't make the same mistake on my next car.
The 500X was a car that I hoped would stop me being precious about my cars (Audi/Jag/Merc etc) but it seems to have had the opposite effect and I really did want to like it!
The thought of being able to park and not worry about some a** opening their door on it was a real attraction.

This is always a tricky one especially with the 500X.

The 500X was targeted as a small SUV. You could have City / Cross Plus / 2x4 and 4x4 combinations. Given the ground clearance, ride height and suspension travel limits for SUV/Off Road then 18" wheels would look better than 16". Meanwhile we have people who want on their town cars those super large wheels and super low profile rubber bands.

I guess Fiat accidentally cornered themselves in attempting to "cross" the boundary between 500L size for normal road/town use only and the mini SUV 4x4 category.

I have a 500X Cross Plus 2x4 on 18" and I'm quite happy with the ride and the handling is excellent even verging exceptional (coming from a motor sport background and cars that feel like bricks - Strada Abarth 130TC).

I gather from this 500X forum that many have gone to 16" wheels and matching higher profile tyres and are much happier.

Comparing the 500X with the XC40, whose starting price is about 50% more, is a bit unfair.
I changed my 500X about a year ago because I needed a bit more legroom, I still liked the car and found the ride acceptable given the handling seemed very good for a tall car.
The Hyundai i30 Fastback I have now does ride better, despite having 40 (as opposed to the Fiat's 45) section tyres. This could be down to its multi-link rear suspension, and the fact that it's a lower car with a longer wheelbase, so the deflection from horizontal at road level produces less movement of the occupents.
The 40 section Michelin Pilots do give more road noise than the Goodyear F1s that the 500X had, though. When they need changing I'll go for some all season tyres, which have a more compliant sidewall. We've recently fitted some Nexen all seasons to our little 500C and road noise, and especially ride quality, have improved.

I'm interested to try the 500X Sport with its lowered height to compare ride.

NitramA said:

I stuck with mine for 18 months and just couldn't come to terms with the ride quality -and God I tried!
Finally succumbed to a Volvo XC40 and have never looked back.
The 500X was a really promising car but was built to a "that'll just about do" standard which is a real shame as it not only cost £££ in depreciation I felt I had to spend a fair amount more to be confident I wouldn't make the same mistake on my next car.
The 500X was a car that I hoped would stop me being precious about my cars (Audi/Jag/Merc etc) but it seems to have had the opposite effect and I really did want to like it!
The thought of being able to park and not worry about some a** opening their door on it was a real attraction.

Click to expand...

That's a bit harsh... 500Xcosts £20k for a Sport 1.3 Auto flavour, which I'd say is a typical mid-upper range spec'.. whereas an XC40 in the regular "Momentum" trim comes in at £30k for (admittedly) a 1.5 Auto but otherwise pretty much similar in other respects.

For the money, 500X is great value I think, especially if you price up a VW Polo, for example... but the compromise is that the engineering is simpler and the parts are not going to last so long.

On the other hand, if Fiat sprinkled another £4000 on the components, it would be as good as the Volvo, just look better... .. only nobody would buy it because "it's a Fiat"... Every time they've tried it they get their fingers burnt. It's a pity really.


Ralf S.

Ralf S. said:

That's a bit harsh... 500Xcosts £20k for a Sport 1.3 Auto flavour, which I'd say is a typical mid-upper range spec'.. whereas an XC40 in the regular "Momentum" trim comes in at £30k for (admittedly) a 1.5 Auto but otherwise pretty much similar in other respects.

For the money, 500X is great value I think, especially if you price up a VW Polo, for example... but the compromise is that the engineering is simpler and the parts are not going to last so long.

On the other hand, if Fiat sprinkled another £4000 on the components, it would be as good as the Volvo, just look better... .. only nobody would buy it because "it's a Fiat"... Every time they've tried it they get their fingers burnt. It's a pity really.


Ralf S.

Click to expand...

Hi Ralf, You're right. probably more a reflection on my prejudices and character defects than anything else.

But to be clear I wasn't expecting a mid-upper segment car - that's exactly the sort expense I was looking to leave behind

I so much wanted to like the 500x and in many areas I did, except I could never overlook the ride quality.

Every time I drove it the jiggly ride would come to the fore. I was even looking at changing the suspension units in an effort to fix it (look at my previous posts).

For me, personally, it was something that spoilt the whole car and could have been fixed by Fiat easily enough.

And before you condemn me for being a car snob (and after reading my previous post I'd have to agree with you) my wife has a Panda Trekking TA and I absolutely love it. When it was up for renewal we couldn't find anything as good to replace it so bought it!
I find the ride quality in that is in a different league and it was half the price.

And don't think that the Volvo is without fault too. At least I could see out the back in the 500X

NitramA said:

Hi Ralf, You're right. probably more a reflection on my prejudices and character defects than anything else.

But to be clear I wasn't expecting a mid-upper segment car - that's exactly the sort expense I was looking to leave behind

I so much wanted to like the 500x and in many areas I did, except I could never overlook the ride quality.

Every time I drove it the jiggly ride would come to the fore. I was even looking at changing the suspension units in an effort to fix it (look at my previous posts).

For me, personally, it was something that spoilt the whole car and could have been fixed by Fiat easily enough.

And before you condemn me for being a car snob (and after reading my previous post I'd have to agree with you) my wife has a Panda Trekking TA and I absolutely love it. When it was up for renewal we couldn't find anything as good to replace it so bought it!
I find the ride quality in that is in a different league and it was half the price.

And don't think that the Volvo is without fault too. At least I could see out the back in the 500X

Click to expand...

One final point - I do seem to keep coming back to this forum so the car must have had an effect on me!!!

A friend has got a Citroen C3 Aircross, which is around the same size and price as the 500X, and it demonstrates that you can get a good ride without spending too much.