Hi Everyone,

My other half and I are about to move to Piedmont in Italy. We'll be living up a mountain, so need a reliable 4x4 that is cheap to run.

I have a Delica L300 which we'll be keeping for the heavy stuff, but for the regular driving I'm trying to decided between a Panda 4x4 and a Sedici.

At the moment, my other half has an Alfa 159 Sportwagon, with a remapped 2.4 diesel in it (about 240bhp). We'll be looking at getting rid of that before the move, and after the move, we'll also have to get rid of my (heavily tweaked) Alfa 159 3.2 Q4 Sportwagon

So we're looking for something small, very cheap to run, and that has 4wd. It will need to do a trip to/from the UK 2-3 times a year, as well as a weekly round trip to Milan's airports (about 4 hours round trip).

Although both the Panda and the Sedici are great fun to drive, I'm all too painfully aware that they're both a bit of a gulf from the 3.2 Q4, especially when it comes to motorway cruising.

However needs must! Ideally I'd like to get a diesel to drive down the fuel costs.

The Sedici seems to have the same 1.9 diesel as the Alfa 156, but I've not driven the 1.3 diesel Panda.

The Panda seems a lot cheaper to run, but the Sedici, being a bit larger and with a bigger engine, would seem like a better bet for the motorway.

I've not seen any comparisons between the Sedici and Panda so wanted to get your thoughts on them.

Thanks,
TOM

I dont have much experience with the diesel, and I have no idea about the non-panda... but I have a 169 4x4 1.2 petrol (05), and most parts, other than drivetrain from gearbox back, some plastic-finish and rear suspension are interchangeable to a normal panda, and those shared parts are dirt cheap... but its SLOW - I've never driven anything this slow before, and I'm laughing the whole way... 120kph @4000rpm on a flat stretch last week, and I could not press much more out of it... it will do 0-100 faster than a heavy lorry on a good day...

go for a test-drive in both of your choices? dont rely on internet fora biased one way or another...

In short I think it can be put fairly simply.

The Panda will out perform the Sedici off road, the Sedici will probably be the better mile muncher.

what are the roads like where you are going. Is it steep ? The Panda has a very small engine.

Are you looking for off road ability. The 4X4 has very little ground clearance

cross has a little more.

There's quite a lot of road noise with the normal Panda via the tyres.

I have just done two 200 mile trips over the last week in a 1.2 dynamic

Kept to no more than 52 mph. The way they are geared its already over 2000 rpm in fifth.

Even with strong cross winds I averaged 64.9 mpg. It is possible with fairly extreme driving and no wind or tail wind to get over 68 mpg on the same journey.

If your Italian house is typical hill village style, with ultra steep and narrow roads, the Panda would suit well. And as parking anywhere in Italy is a pain! It will also slot into tiny gaps. Plenty of Panda's about there!

As you'll have another car for longer distances, why choose the Sedici? Dearer to run all ways up, especially tyres, brakes and suspension.

Why a 4x4? - Unless you're in a mountainous area that has prolonged snow, a 4x4 is of little real world benefit, and costs more to run.

Just my pennorth. Been there, done that. Love the Italian east coast.

Thank you very much everyone, really helpful replies.

Our house is high up in the mountains, down 3-4 miles of forested, unmade track, with a long narrow, steep twisty round down to the nearest village and the main roads - so lots of snow in winter, lots of ice, fair bit of mud when it all melts.

Cheap and easy parts are a big plus - used to fixing the cars myself, but would have to find the parts in Italy, and as the Sedici appears to be built by Suzuki at their factory it seems the Panda wins out there. I am used to slow in the Delica - despite the 2.5 diesel in that, it's only around 80bhp, and is just shy of 3 tons.

The mpg figures for the 1.2 are very interesting - given that engine has been around longer and parts are easier to get, I think I'll take that for a test drive and see how I get on.

On balance, reliable off-road performance and cheapness will be the most important factors, so I think I'll be looking at Pandas.

Thank you again everyone for your really helpful responses!

Based on I'd go with the Panda, whether the 2003-12 version shown here or the newer model, which seems to be just as capable

Running Costs I reckon the Panda will be better. Saying that... there’s a fellow on here claiming a big BMW is outright cheaper than a Panda so perhaps is small car drivers have it wrong!!

SB1500 said:

Running Costs I reckon the Panda will be better. Saying that... there’s a fellow on here claiming a big BMW is outright cheaper than a Panda so perhaps is small car drivers have it wrong!!

Click to expand...

Does depend a lot on how you drive it.

driving a small car at 100% isn't good on economy or wear and tear.

Where as a more powerful car will not be at 100% for the same speed.

One of the best things for me is the amount of rear space for a small car, economy and spare parts prices.

Bad points for me are noise and body roll. I do hit the bottom driving on fields and tracks. (I hill walk and metal detect). Some really steep roads have required 1st gear.