Ahh it's the 1.2 with 60bhp isn't it. The 1.1 has less... blimey, must be horrendous, that's nearly half the power of the 100hp!
Currently reading:
General 1.1 Active Eco
Ahh it's the 1.2 with 60bhp isn't it. The 1.1 has less... blimey, must be horrendous, that's nearly half the power of the 100hp!
Thanks all, sounds about right (and I have not knackared it first drive). I noticed you have to stay in third till 70 on duel carrageway as 4th and 5th have nothing left at all acceleration wise. Also Blue Bank at Slights and Devils Elbow at Hole of Horcum had to stay in 2nd as even 3rd was slowing down at about 30mph (they are 1 in 4 I think). Reminded me of my old Skoda, we used to get overtaken on them two hills (we could only do about 5mph in 1st). Round town though very nippy, really impressed so far as most driving will be round town on on the flat. And parking makes a change to be able to open doors on both sides to get out, old car could only get out one side as it was so fat.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2009
- Messages
- 272
- Points
- 44
Its not as bad as it sounds trust me. My previous car to the Active had a 2.5 V6 with about 180 horses. I thought I was really going to struggle with such a small engine with a lot less power. However as I said around town (where I spend 99% of my time) the car is fine. I would dare say its quick from 0 to 30. Get it out of town though and you really have to work those gears and nail it to make progress. It doesnt bother me though I am happy to cruise along on the motorway at 60, I guess im getting old.
in my active atleast 1st gear whines (has done since new)
it sounds like a supercharger haha one that only works in 1st which is why its so rapid to 30.
i now wait for people to diagree with me about the whine and tell me i have a collapsed bearing
it sounds like a supercharger haha one that only works in 1st which is why its so rapid to 30.
i now wait for people to diagree with me about the whine and tell me i have a collapsed bearing
Sounds pretty bad to me.
I had a 1.2 500 courtesy car and that felt so slow. I couldn't cope with that little power, honest I couldn't.
There's something satisfying about driving an underpowered car though - maintaining momentum, apex speed, etc.
Try the 1.4 100hp in the 500 then! Unbearabley slow and really frustrating to drive! Drove me nuts!Sounds pretty bad to me.
I had a 1.2 500 courtesy car and that felt so slow. I couldn't cope with that little power, honest I couldn't.
Same here, i came from a 2L petrol turbo with about 170BHP and i've found the Panda fine - u just have to adjust your driving style. Still not sure why the limiter wasn't cutting in at 115mph going down the steep gradient into Dover - maybe it doesn't have one
. Uphill does kill the speed unless you have a good run at it but it'll sit quite happy at 80mph on the M2 on the way to work and still do 45mpg so i can't complain, anyway i've always got the motorbikes for when i need a fix of speed to blow the cobwebs out
Nope there is nothing satisfying about it, found that whole experience a bit crap. No less than 100hp for me.
Isn't the 100HP actually 99BHP though?!
Well yes there is that. But I honestly think after this car I will be heading towards 150-200bhp cars again. I just miss it.
It's accelerating from a standstill when 100BHP [or 99!] seems too little - once on the move I don't mind.
To be honest I would change around here as well, 1st is nearly pointless (mind mine is a non-eco model). 3rd is good up to 50+ though if you wanna make more rapid progress - i feel the car pulls better towards the top of the rev range (or maybe it just sounds quicker
). Mind you, my engine has 36k on it so should be a lot looser than most active eco's which are relatively new. On flat ground she can easily do 30mph in 5th and I go over the speed bumps in our street in 4th which i think is fantastic for such a small engine (not cutting out or labouring!). I get a lot of joy getting the most out of the small engine - feels like I am actually driving the car if you get what i mean. As for the up to 30 accelleration thing, I would agree the 1.1 is very quick. I would definitely say the panda feels quicker than our 1.8l Astra to 25-30 (mind you its an auto), or my bros 1.2 grande punto which I would say feels more underpowered than the 1.1l panda.
Floydfan - me thinks there is a limiter as I forgot to change up one day shortly after getting the car with the stereo blaring and the car jerked like the engine was slowing itself down if that makes sense.
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2009
- Messages
- 272
- Points
- 44
I totally agree with this.
With the V6 it was just so easy to drive. No matter what gear it was in it would just pull with zero effort. It would even set off in 3rd with no problems. However with the Active you have to be hands on and you start to drive again. You have to really work the gears and use plenty of revs to get the best out of it. Its like those pilots you see on Disco documentarys talking about old planes. They currently fly high tec fighter planes that almost fly themselves. But they love to get in the cockpit of an old plane like a Spitfire where they really do have to fly the thing.
A lot can be said of the Actives skinny tyres as well. I have never had a car corner so well. It just grips and turns so quickly with no roll or drama. I would like to know what the Active Ecos 0 to 30 time is because I think that would give a better picture.
I should also add that you tend to change your driving style. I am no stranger to speed and if you look at how many points I have had you will see that. With the V6 I would drive it hard and fast because the power was there to be used. However in the Active I dart around town doing legal speeds. At no point around town have I ever complained about the Actives power. The only time I have a complaint about the lack of power is out of towns. On a B road with the V6 you would just drop it down and the power was right there and you would fly past traffic. However I find the Active totally useless in those situations and in fact dangerous. You just dont have the power to be able to pass traffic safely. You either need a very long straight road with a big gap or a large downhill section.
Another positive thing about the Active is that I am less likely to be done for speeding. That will give my license a chance to clear after all the hammering its had in recent years.
Last edited:
A lot of enthusiastic drivers often say that their first car was one of the most enjoyable. Skinny tyres, low power and a lack of driving aids often results in the purest of drives [in a similar way to your Spitfire example]. The thrill of driving [to quote Evo magazine], for me, is getting the most from the machinery available, be it 50bhp or 300bhp. The benefit of the former is, of course, that the limits are lower and if overstepped, the results are hopefully not as catastrophic.
An excess of power does make overtaking safer. However, if you simply just don't have the power, you don't overtake and as a result, aren't putting yourself at risk. I enjoy making progress on the right road, but am always wary of passing slower vehicles because if an approaching car is also travelling quickly, that's one high closing speed!
I think for me an essential requirement is that a car has enough power to get past the duffers on the road which let's face it tend to be plenty down your average A road.
The 100hp has enough power for this, just about, but I couldn't cope with a lower powered car where I'd need an age to overtake. To put it in context I remember the days of driving Jonny's (BaT) 'Erise' (K20A powered elise) and the funny thing was you'd move out to overtake say two cars and end up doing five, though inevitably 120mph down an A road by the time you've passed that many cars was getting a bit silly (but 0-100mph in 9.5 secs makes a fast car!). I do at times wish I was in the Integra, simply for it's overtaking ability as I just can't bear being behind duffers driving at 45mph in a 60mph zone.
The 100hp has enough power for this, just about, but I couldn't cope with a lower powered car where I'd need an age to overtake. To put it in context I remember the days of driving Jonny's (BaT) 'Erise' (K20A powered elise) and the funny thing was you'd move out to overtake say two cars and end up doing five, though inevitably 120mph down an A road by the time you've passed that many cars was getting a bit silly (but 0-100mph in 9.5 secs makes a fast car!). I do at times wish I was in the Integra, simply for it's overtaking ability as I just can't bear being behind duffers driving at 45mph in a 60mph zone.
I agree with the other person. It can be fun to be driving in a car without much power. Although it does depend on more than just how much power it has. My 899cc Seicento was fun, but the 1.2 Panda was very boring IMHO, dispite having a lot more power.
Well, even my 899cc Seicento could over take somebody at 45mph in a 60mph zone. It is a lot easier in the 100HP, but even the Seicento was adequate.
I kind of agree, my first 3 cars were 850cc 3cylinder engined Tin boxes, so unrefined, but great fun to drive and sounded awesome! But, the lack of power does become very tiresome, that's why i got rid of the Panda MJ, fairly nippy but the lack of power combined with the dreadful din made for a frustrating drive at times, especially in super hilly Wales!
I like the Abarth now because it's still quite a quick little thing, but it has limits and it's not that powerful so on the right road, you also have to work the engine/gears etc. But on the perfect road, it's simply awesome! Again, overtaking a car doing 40 or 50 soon results in a excess speed of over a ton without realising it...
I like the Abarth now because it's still quite a quick little thing, but it has limits and it's not that powerful so on the right road, you also have to work the engine/gears etc. But on the perfect road, it's simply awesome!
Again, overtaking a car doing 40 or 50 soon results in a excess speed of over a ton without realising it...
