General Going from a 100HP to a Twin Air (or 1.2) - have you?

Currently reading:
General Going from a 100HP to a Twin Air (or 1.2) - have you?

Hi guys.

Just to update - had a very enjoyable long drive of a 15,000 mile TA (see pic below) today and quite impressed.

The actual vehicle build, interior quality and general feel is certainly a significant step up from my 100HP (second pic). The small increase in size certainly feels much more noticeable than the tape measure might say.

As for the drive - well, not sure why it has a Marmite reputation - felt fine to me, obviously not as perky in any way as the rev-tastic 100HP but still fine - quite nippy up to 60 odd in some nice ommph through the gears and managed to hit a typical M25 level....... of top speed so impressive there too. Characterful noises from the engine but really pretty quiet at cruising speeds.

Only real shame is the way it runs out of puff at 5k and the horrible rev-limiter kicking in at a paltry 5600 even though the rev counter redlines at 6500 - presumably just the same unit from the 1.2. At 5600 the 100HP still had another 1400 revs to give but the TA rev band although narrower still has much to offer in fun terms.

I did not think it felt better driving in a diesel style (ie using the torque, higher gears, lower revs) although this would give better mpg I know but just not much fun.

You can throw it round OK (even the Trekking model I drove), again no 100HP but the ride and refinement were another big gain over that.

The gearchange and clutch were fine - not as slick as the 100 again but I'm used to a proper agricultural Landy so the Fiat is super smooth/light in comparison. A nice spread of gears although I'd like to try the 6 speeder.

So, all in all a cracking car for the money - the best option unless they give us another proper 'warm' version of the Panda, we can dream.

I must say too how nice the white with dark grey bodykit Trekking/4x4 version looks - just like my old white 100HP - as everyone knows the only colour for Panda is white with black bits! ;) I had my eyes on a Lounge but the 4x4 bodykit and especially the dark wheels really look much more special and the olive interior is to me by far the nicest and most practical, shame it's not available on the Lounge.

Just need to make a decision now but I think it will be more a case of what comes along in budget and the right spec be it a 100HP, TA FWD or even a 4x4 but I really want to try the 6 speeder 4x4 and even a 1.2 to see how it's more revvy nature and hire car type thrashability might work as the 1.2s are so common and relatively cheap.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2518.JPG
    IMG_2518.JPG
    2.8 MB · Views: 47
  • 100hp.jpg
    100hp.jpg
    220.3 KB · Views: 44
Last edited:
Totally agree about not driving a TA like a diesel - keep it spinning between two and a half and five and a half thousand rpm.
 
Hi guys.

Just to update - had a very enjoyable long drive of a 15,000 mile TA (see pic below) today and quite impressed.

The actual vehicle build, interior quality and general feel is certainly a significant step up from my 100HP (second pic). The small increase in size certainly feels much more noticeable than the tape measure might say.

As for the drive - well, not sure why it has a Marmite reputation - felt fine to me, obviously not as perky in any way as the rev-tastic 100HP but still fine - quite nippy up to 60 odd in some nice ommph through the gears and managed to hit a typical M25 level....... of top speed so impressive there too. Characterful noises from the engine but really pretty quiet at cruising speeds.

Only real shame is the way it runs out of puff at 5k and the horrible rev-limiter kicking in at a paltry 5600 even though the rev counter redlines at 6500 - presumably just the same unit from the 1.2. At 5600 the 100HP still had another 1400 revs to give but the TA rev band although narrower still has much to offer in fun terms.

I did not think it felt better driving in a diesel style (ie using the torque, higher gears, lower revs) although this would give better mpg I know but just not much fun.

You can throw it round OK (even the Trekking model I drove), again no 100HP but the ride and refinement were another big gain over that.

The gearchange and clutch were fine - not as slick as the 100 again but I'm used to a proper agricultural Landy so the Fiat is super smooth/light in comparison. A nice spread of gears although I'd like to try the 6 speeder.

So, all in all a cracking car for the money - the best option unless they give us another proper 'warm' version of the Panda, we can dream.

I must say too how nice the white with dark grey bodykit Trekking/4x4 version looks - just like my old white 100HP - as everyone knows the only colour for Panda is white with black bits! ;) I had my eyes on a Lounge but the 4x4 bodykit and especially the dark wheels really look much more special and the olive interior is to me by far the nicest and most practical, shame it's not available on the Lounge.

Just need to make a decision now but I think it will be more a case of what comes along in budget and the right spec be it a 100HP, TA FWD or even a 4x4 but I really want to try the 6 speeder 4x4 and even a 1.2 to see how it's more revvy nature and hire car type thrashability might work as the 1.2s are so common and relatively cheap.
Small world! The car pictured is our old TA Trekking. We traded her in for a Panda City Cross a few weeks ago. I must admit the Trekking was great on the motorway with the TA torque, but most of our driving is around town these days and personally I just started to find the TA a little bit too noisy in traffic (many will call it characterful). We didn't want to go diesel, but still wanted the raised ride height and off road styling. The city cross ticked our boxes and it has the sweet 1.2 engine. No 4x4 or special traction control, but it has the same wheels and tyres as the 4x4 Cross so that might help a little bit in the snow....
 
Hi.
I was at Ayr hospital today and got a right idiot in a Fiesta trying to prove he knew how to drive. I eventually had enough of his stupidity. A quick blast in second and third saw him off for good. Both gears went to 6500 with no issues. From 4500 rpm the little 1.2 was accelerating really strongly. To be fair I rarely drive hard these days, I'm sure the engine feels livelier at all speeds now.
 
DO NOT expect it to be remotely the same. SUre they are fine but I regret changing. The TA is ludicrously thirst by comparison too. My 100HP driven flat out on a long run would easily do 45mpg. The TA struggles to get this driven VEry carefully. They are not Bad, but very VEry differenton not even a patch on that fab 1.4.
 
DO NOT expect it to be remotely the same. SUre they are fine but I regret changing. The TA is ludicrously thirst by comparison too. My 100HP driven flat out on a long run would easily do 45mpg. The TA struggles to get this driven VEry carefully. They are not Bad, but very VEry differenton not even a patch on that fab 1.4.
Never managed to get below 45mpg in my TA - even when running in during the winter. That's with two different driving styles - one leisurely and one pressing on. Was that a Euro5 or Euro6 engine?

I have noticed that I get better economy from Super - so I do 'treat' it on occasion.
 
Never managed to get above 45 from a tank of fuel in my TA, even driven very carefully, and that was achieved when tootling around rural A/B roads at 50. Yesterday I ripped through £20 of fuel in just one commuting day (65 miles along the A14/A11 and back). My mental arithmetic works that out at 37 mpg. Pathetic, really.
 
I do wonder why the experience with economy varies so wildly. I can get over 400 miles from a tank but others rarely achieve 300 miles. The disparity makes me wonder if it's just down to driving style and terrain - could fuel quality and software have anything to do with it?
 
I do wonder why the experience with economy varies so wildly. I can get over 400 miles from a tank but others rarely achieve 300 miles. The disparity makes me wonder if it's just down to driving style and terrain - could fuel quality and software have anything to do with it?

Ambient temperature seems to have more influence than you'd expect - we spend April, May June and September, October in Italy and I get low 40s, the other months, in Devon, I get 37-38. I don't think the journey profile is too different.
 
My last Panda was a 2010 100HP and I posted about that here:

https://www.fiatforum.com/panda/444026-after-three-years-finally-got-myself-100hp.html

I'd love another 100HP but finding another late one in the right condition/spec/miles etc is proving near impossible plus the fact they are getting pretty old now and we want one to keep for quite a few years it leads me to a newer say 2014ish Panda.

But....given the 100HP will never be seen again - no traction control, NA engine that loves 7000 revs etc how will I get on with the Twin Air!?

Or should I go for the regular 1.2 69hp and just thrash the nuts off it like all small Fiats of old?

I've read/watched many reviews - but specifically does the TA drive anything like the 100HP?

What puts me off a bit is talk of the power band being rather more diesel like (ie narrow and lower down) - for me the best thing of all in the 100HP was that third gear 4000 - 7000 B road power band, instant unstoppable response and endless fun.

Where does the TA redline/limiter actually come in and can you happily take it there?

Is the 1.2 any better in terms of 'normal' petrol feel and driving at the top end of the revs?

I will drive both but interested really to hear thoughts from those who have (had to) moved on from the 100HP?

Lastly I have read issues re' mapping on the post '14 Pandas - what is this all about please?

PS - not worried about TA economy - we do relatively few miles and as long as a car averages over 30 that's fine with me.

Drive the TA with gust and it will respond. Certainly gets along on the motorway although the speedo is so inaccurate deduct at least 10 when it says 80! If you want cornering low profile tyres might be a good idea too.

The big let down however is the seats which are pants compared with the 100. On balance I like the TA a lot but its no 100 really. If you like the 100 try thr Abarth 500 160 HP+ these are a total hoot and it won't be long before I cannot resist any longer. May be I'll grow up one day, perhaps when i'm 80.....
 
My last Panda was a 2010 100HP ..
What puts me off a bit is talk of the power band being rather more diesel like (ie narrow and lower down) - for me the best thing of all in the 100HP was that third gear 4000 - 7000 B road power band, instant unstoppable response and endless fun.

Where does the TA redline/limiter actually come in and can you happily take it there?

Is the 1.2 any better in terms of 'normal' petrol feel and driving at the top end of the revs?...

I used to take full advantage of the 100HP's appetite for revs, and I agree that means between 4000 and 7000. Two things about the TA - mine's a 4x4 so a little slower than a 2wd. From where I come on to the A30 from my usual filling station to an overhead bridge the 100HP would get to 80 mph if I really pushed it; the 4x4 TA gets to - 79 mph. The TA is at its best between 3000 and 5600 revs, which can be considered a marginally wider band (5600/3000 = 1.87) than the 100HP (7000/4000 = 1.75). It has a different character, and I certainly wouldn't slog it like a diesel, that's no fun at all, but it is effective in its own way. Though I don't find the TA to be lumpy, I was pleasantly surprised by the smoothness of Mrs b_u's Euro 5 1.2 when I did 60 or so miles in it the other day, so perhaps I've got used to the twin, but the 1.2's instant pickup was more than cancelled out by the overall lack of grunt.
 
Hi (Peter) Panda Nut?

You may remember we met a year or so ago when you kindly helped me out with some spare 100 HP alloys. :)

Your input is welcome as while searching before this topic one that came up frequently was your 'what have I done swapping 100 HP for 4x4' or something similar!

We both loved the 100 HP and I'd buy one if I could get hold of the local owner's white 2010 Pandamonium with sunroof and 15,000 miles!

But times move on sadly and a newer model it will be I think for many reasons - as I plan to keep as a stand by car on the drive (we tend to buy/sell main vehicles/campers all the time it seems) low running costs/tax, no cam belt, more space, perhaps more safety in the 'passenger cell' etc not to mention just having a newer car without maybe the rear axle rust issues or whatever.

Having now driven one and sat in a few the dash/ergonomics cannot compare to the 100 HP but in many other ways the Trekking in particular hits the sweet spot for me - 100 HPish bodykit, nice alloys, general equipment, higher suspension/compliant ride on UK roads, slightly better than FWD poor surface capability and I love the Pumpkin interior on the white models. No weight penalty over the FWD (compared to the 4x4) and just a smidge down on mpg and acceleration/top speed etc due I guess to the tyres and maybe higher drag.

I also think the 5 speed box will work better and I don't want the low 1st and from what I've read the 5 speed 5th is higher than the 6 gear 6th??

Shame no discs all round as per the 4x4 (rear drums in 2017 still?!?) but you cannot have it all.

Certainly the TA Trekking I drove was great fun, quiet, comfortable and quick enough.

I just need to find one in the right spec that has dropped most of it's value as I think they should hold up quite well in a few years much like the 100 HP with nice ones bottoming out to £2500 or so.
 
Last edited:
I do wonder why the experience with economy varies so wildly. I can get over 400 miles from a tank but others rarely achieve 300 miles. The disparity makes me wonder if it's just down to driving style and terrain - could fuel quality and software have anything to do with it?

Please if you ever find out do let us know! I can force mine up to 55mpg but it needs a long run, and a very gentle right foot. It seems best with eco switch off unless cruising on a very flat road. It also varies one day to the next. I find this is really annoying. I can get the Bravo up over 85mpg on a run without to much trouble. With the cost of fuel now so high it matters. Today on a run back from Norwich of 13 miles driven briskly but not hard I was rewarded with 19.2mpg which is appalling. I am going to have to revert to just not looking. I think also aerodynamics of a house doesn't help and wind direction makes a big impact too.
 
Hi.
I was at Ayr hospital today and got a right idiot in a Fiesta trying to prove he knew how to drive. I eventually had enough of his stupidity. A quick blast in second and third saw him off for good. Both gears went to 6500 with no issues. From 4500 rpm the little 1.2 was accelerating really strongly. To be fair I rarely drive hard these days, I'm sure the engine feels livelier at all speeds now.

A good blast occasionally undoubtedly makes a car run better for a while. Good policy to take them for a brisk run and open them up thoroughly before an MOT.
 
Hi (Peter) Panda Nut?

You may remember we met a year or so ago when you kindly helped me out with some spare 100 HP alloys. :)

Your input is welcome as while searching before this topic one that came up frequently was your 'what have I done swapping 100 HP for 4x4' or something similar!

We both loved the 100 HP and I'd buy one if I could get hold of the local owner's white 2010 Pandamonium with sunroof and 15,000 miles!

But times move on sadly and a newer model it will be I think for many reasons - as I plan to keep as a stand by car on the drive (we tend to buy/sell main vehicles/campers all the time it seems) low running costs/tax, no cam belt, more space, perhaps more safety in the 'passenger cell' etc not to mention just having a newer car without maybe the rear axle rust issues or whatever.

Having now driven one and sat in a few the dash/ergonomics cannot compare to the 100 HP but in many other ways the Trekking in particular hits the sweet spot for me - 100 HPish bodykit, nice alloys, general equipment, higher suspension/compliant ride on UK roads, slightly better than FWD poor surface capability and I love the Pumpkin interior on the white models. No weight penalty over the FWD (compared to the 4x4) and just a smidge down on mpg and acceleration/top speed etc due I guess to the tyres and maybe higher drag.

I also think the 5 speed box will work better and I don't want the low 1st and from what I've read the 5 speed 5th is higher than the 6 gear 6th??

Shame no discs all round as per the 4x4 (rear drums in 2017 still?!?) but you cannot have it all.

Certainly the TA Trekking I drove was great fun, quiet, comfortable and quick enough.

I just need to find one in the right spec that has dropped most of it's value as I think they should hold up quite well in a few years much like the 100 HP with nice ones bottoming out to £2500 or so.

Hi Max. Yes I think you might be onto something with the trekking idea. I wonder if I will ever really use the 4x4 capability. You can retro fit discs if you are of a mind to do so. Just watch out for B awful economy from the TA. Apart from that I enjoy the car and it does have a decent turn of speed on a motorway. The seats are not very good though! OK except on a long run.

Its true too that the TA has no camshafts so no chain or belt, but the multi air units sound as if they are fragile and extremely expensive!
 
Last edited:
Please if you ever find out do let us know! I can force mine up to 55mpg but it needs a long run, and a very gentle right foot. It seems best with eco switch off unless cruising on a very flat road. It also varies one day to the next. I find this is really annoying. I can get the Bravo up over 85mpg on a run without to much trouble. With the cost of fuel now so high it matters. Today on a run back from Norwich of 13 miles driven briskly but not hard I was rewarded with 19.2mpg which is appalling. I am going to have to revert to just not looking. I think also aerodynamics of a house doesn't help and wind direction makes a big impact too.
I do have my suspicions that they use a lot of fuel at start up and when cold. I noticed when my car was running in and the economy was lower my exhaust seemed very sooty - like the car had been running unusually rich. I don't know if this is by design - it seems to do it less now, but the economy seems much lower on short trips compared to longer ones - moreso than my last two cars. Bizarrely for a city car I don't think the TA is a city engine - it doesn't ever seem happy at those speeds and the fuel economy around town confirms that. Eco improves this slightly. On the open road it's another story - long motorway runs I've seen my best figures - without being particularly gentle with the throttle.
 
Its true too that the TA has no camshafts so no chain or belt, but the multi air units sound as if they are fragile and extremely expensive!

They have a camshaft and that is driven by a cam chain.

It's just the link between the camshaft and the valve lifter is fluid (engine oil).

The engine oil is pumped up into and controlled by the Multiair solenoids via a filter/relief valve into passage ways between the cam and the valve lifter.

By increasing and decreasing the oils pressure within the link alters the valve lift and timing.

Basically it has a "Hot" inlet camshaft profile that works best at higher engine speeds, but not very well at slower speeds.

So it backs off the lift and alters it's timing by reducing oil in the link for slower engine speeds as less oil doesn't transmit the full cam profile, then pumps more oil into the links to transmit the full cam's profile at higher engine speeds.


As it can control the air entering the engine at all engine speeds better, it does without a throttle butterfly valve in the inlet.

This reduces pumping losses (the effort the engine expends) that would normally be created when the falling pistons suck in air through a closed or partially throttle valve.

There have been a few Multiair problems, though most seem to involve the unit fitted to the four cylinder engines.

As it's reliant on engine oil, it's vital the correct grade and spec is used and that the oils level is correct (wait to you see the dipstick, it's almost impossible to read!).

The oil works hard and is prone, like all turbo charged cars to carbon building up in it, so regular changes should keep it in good health.

Oddly, cleaning or replacing the Multiairs filter isn't part of any service schedule, though it is fairly easy to get at, remove and clean through a cap in the top of the cam cover.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top