Hi
For those that have them, what rpm are the twinair and multijet versions of the 4x4 and trekking doing at 60mph and 70mph (or mph per 1000 rpm in top gear)?
Particularly the trekking twinair - especially as it has the 5-speed gearbox in the trekking and 6-speed in the 4x4?
Also, has anybody done any towing with any twinair or multijet current style panda, especially the twinair -does it have the guts to haul 4 people and luggage?
Thanks

limelight986 said:

Hi
For those that have them, what rpm are the twinair and multijet versions of the 4x4 and trekking doing at 60mph and 70mph (or mph per 1000 rpm in top gear)?
Particularly the trekking twinair - especially as it has the 5-speed gearbox in the trekking and 6-speed in the 4x4?
Also, has anybody done any towing with any twinair or multijet current style panda, especially the twinair -does it have the guts to haul 4 people and luggage?
Thanks

Click to expand...

My Trekking Twinair isn't due at Hartwells until next week, so I can't yet speak from direct
experience, but I believe the 4x4 and Trekking have similar top gear ratio and revs- the extra
gear in the 4x4 is a super-low 1st mainly for off-road use.

When test-driving a 4x4 Twinair it sounded a tad busy at 70mph, but not too noisy or stressed
when on a light 'throttle' I wouldn't rate it ideal for such use, but that's not my preferred
type of road. And for towing, the Multijet would seem a better choice.

However, other people here can likely give more precise advice!



Chris

I gave a 4x4 TA a pretty thorough test drive - in another thread somewhere -and found that first gear wasn't really a crawler - second was too high to pull away from stopped without slipping the clutch more than I'd like; being used to a 100HP, the sixth gear revs on the 4x4 were the same and the less busy-sounding twin sounded quite relaxed at 80mph, though beginning to run out of puff rather than getting into its stride.

:yeahthat:

1st is not as low as it should be to be a crawler gear. You max out at 20mph.
I'll make a note of the mph/1000 revs in each gear next time I go out.

I was drivng my car today ,I think 3200 rev=70 mph ,2700=60 mph,2300=50 mph mine is a twin air 4x4 you can start off in 2nd gear ,first gear is good for off road use ,but as I have tried still pretty high but can do ,I drive a tractor so use the Low gear ratio which is slower than most cars ,still I am glad I have 6 speeds ,you can drive 30 mph in 5th gear and 35 mph in 6th and still have power to pull away in normal drive Mode in Eco Mode you need more revs before you change into the higher gears

Thanks for that!
I know that the previous generation diesel (the Euro 5 Multijet 2 1.3) only starts to be heard when it's at 80mph in 5th, which is 3000rpm. The petrol on the other hand starts to buzz loudly at 70mph (which is when it's doing just over 3000rpm like the TA 4x4) - very annoying after a few hours. What speed is it before the TA starts to get drone and buzz?

2013 Multijet 4x4 seems to be just about 50mph at 2000rpm. We found similar figures with the Panda Cross, so the transmission system is probably unchanged.

OK, did a little checking this morning.

This is the speeds in gears at 2000 rpm in a Panda 4x4 TwinAir

1st 6
2nd 12
3rd 21
4th 29
5th 37
6th 44

So 22mph/1000rpm in top

These speed are taken from the speedo and rev counter. The speed will be over reading by about 3 mph in my experience. I'll check these speed against gps when I can remember.

Personally, I found the TwinAir quieter at motorway speeds. The multijet tends to drone I found. I've read road tests that thought the petrol version was better for high speeds too. The diesel version would be better in the mud at low speeds though.

I would think for towing, the mutijet would be the one to go for. Not because of the torque, the twin air has plenty to pull, but the consumption. I reckon you'd do a lot better as the twinair is only really economical at very light throttle.

well having got back to work this afternoon forgetting house keys 80 mph =3700 rpm ,bit annoyed but alright now ,I think 85 mph=4200 rpm, the speedo is probberly 5 or 6 percent fast where my M/bike is 10% fast

Thanks!
That was exactly what i was looking for!

Thanks!
That was exactly what i was looking for!

An update.

plugged in the tomtom to check speedo against gps

at 3000rpm in 6th the speedo says 67mph.
GPS says 62.

Speedo about 7% over reading.

Probably around 20.5mph per 1000rpm in 6th then gps adjusted.

I did actually go up to 4000rpm in 6th. As I was driving I was just trying to store in my memory what happened. I think the speedo said 88mph and the gps 82, which would tie with the 7% and multiplying to revs from 3000.

All we need now is a trekking owner to do the same.
My 500 twin air in 5th from what I remember would do 92mph on the gps at 4000rpm.

deeyup said:

An update.

All we need now is a trekking owner to do the same.

Click to expand...

I'll be very happy to oblige- have got GPS and should get
my Trekking Twinair tomorrow, if things go to plan

Will be doing several long journeys during the next few days



Chris

Bet you wont sleep tonight!!

deeyup said:

I think the speedo said 88mph

Click to expand...

Just wait for the flux capacitor option and you'll be away ;-)

It was the fastest the car has been!

I'm going to skip the flux capacitor and go straight to the on board syngas plant.
Chuck rubbish in, and get fuel out!

deeyup said:

Bet you wont sleep tonight!!

Click to expand...

I slept very well- having set collection for 14:00 it wasn't exactly
rushed

I've only done about 50 miles so far, and haven't yet come up with
a proper mounting method for my cycling GPS (Garmin 800) so this
is very preliminary:

At 60MPH on GPS the revs in 5th (Trekking top gear) show 2500/min.

Which seems a bit higher-geared than the 4x4.

It certainly feels high-geared (my senses need re-calibrating for the
lack of cylinders ) but pulls surprisingly well, and is nicely quiet

Economy so far has averaged about 48MPG, but that included some
congestion in Didcot- tomorrow I'm driving to Somerset which should
provide much more meaningful data.

The sliding rear seat is brilliant, unlike the headlights which don't quite
match the Xenons on my old Mito- I'll upgrade the bulbs :idea:

Otherwise I'm very satisfied so far



Chris

Moultoneer said:

The sliding rear seat is brilliant,



Chris

Click to expand...

Finally someone else with the sliding seat. Please tell me, does your rear shelf have strings to lift it with the boot ? If so can you photo graph it. Mine does t have this. Phil

philboo said:

Finally someone else with the sliding seat. Please tell me, does your rear shelf have strings to lift it with the boot ? If so can you photo graph it. Mine does t have this. Phil

Click to expand...

No strings on mine Also, it's short, so when the seat's pushed forwards,
there's a gap- pity Fiat hasn't engineered something to cover this

Nevertheless, I intend to cover the painted metal of the rear seat-backs
with carpet (did that on my Mito) and I'll think of a way to bridge the gap!

I'm relieved to find my folded Brompton bike fits in the boot even with the
seat slid right back

I can confirm the top gear gives 25mph/1000rpm and am pleased to have
averaged over 50MPG driving at normal A-road speeds



Chris

Moultoneer said:

No strings on mine Also, it's short, so when the seat's pushed forwards,
there's a gap- pity Fiat hasn't engineered something to cover this

Nevertheless, I intend to cover the painted metal of the rear seat-backs
with carpet (did that on my Mito) and I'll think of a way to bridge the gap!

I'm relieved to find my folded Brompton bike fits in the boot even with the
seat slid right back

I can confirm the top gear gives 25mph/1000rpm and am pleased to have
averaged over 50MPG driving at normal A-road speeds



Chris

Click to expand...

Hi Chris.

Thanks for the check and update. I don't feel too hard done to now that I don't have them either

I agree the gap when the seats are forward is a bit naff but when you see what they did on the mito around the drivers steering wheel for filling the gap to allow for the reach and rake adjustment I'm not sure the solution would be very attractive.

Phil