General 1.2 vs 0.9 TA

[AusPanda]

I have read the many threads on this but had never tried a 1.2-litre Panda (I own a TA manual).

Finally got to drive a 500 1.2 man for a few days last week.

That was really interesting. I loved its smoothness and willingness to rev. The TA is lumpy by comparison and the TA's ignition cut-out at 5500rpm in first makes mockery of its happiness to rev. Also makes the drop in revs between first and second really noticeable and frustrating when you need to wring the most out of it.

Yet the 1.2's complete lack of torque -- you have to rev it to make it go -- makes me like my TA even more. The TA's mid-range punch makes such a difference, whether it's making a gap in the traffic or just being able to stay in a taller gear climbing a hill. Couldn't believe how many times I'd have to knock back the 1.2 a gear -- or two -- just to maintain 60km/h up a hill.

Each to their own and all of that, I know. For mine, it's def the TA.

Also was taking to someone recently about the TA's possible demise. He pointed out that the huge investment in that engine meant it couldn't be shown the door so quickly. What was it -2010? what it was revealed. Aside from disappointing real-world fuel consumption, there has been no other problem with the TA as far as I can see.

 

[The Pretender]

I have driven the 1.2ltr FIRE engine in the 169 model for 3 years.
After a few months i decided it needed a tune, in fact the engine produced only 65 hp of the 69 hp it should have and around 107 Nm of torque.
After the remap it had real 75 hp and 123 Nm of torque and it made a very noticeable difference.
Then i decided that i wanted the new Panda and took the time to take a back to back test drive in the Panda 1.2ltr FIRE and the 85 TwinAir.
The 1.2ltr FIRE engine was a fine drive but far from earth moving compare to my 75 hp tuned 169 Panda, the 85 TA was a different story and the choice was simple.
I have been driving the 85 TA for a year now, and i'm still smiling when i drive it.

 

[R1NGA]

I agree with Pretender. I've come to my 85TA from after 5 years with the 169 model 1.2, which although a lovely smooth engine, was really VERY slow in standard form and struggled to maintain 70mph up some of the steeper UK motorway inclines. What it needed was a 110bhp supercharger conversion, which some of you may remember is exactly what it got. A proper rocketship that car and sooo understated. All going really well until the Rotrex devoured its own internals and forced me to convert the car back to standard....

.... but, I reckon day-to-day the TA in my current 4x4 is a better overall engine - and quicker point-to-point - than even the supercharged 1.2, as it has more torque from low revs and that's what makes the biggest difference. Nothing wrong with a current 1.2 whatsoever, it's just that once you've gotten used to the pull available from 2000rpm in the TA, you never want to lose it. The only part of the old car I miss is the ability to do a genuine 120+mph (on a track) and see the look on other drivers' faces as they were passed by a wheezy old 4x4 Panda with some small black badge on the back...

 

[The Pretender]

I still think a standard 1.2ltr 69 hp FIRE is a great engine for hobbling about round town.
But the minute you go up-hill you start shifting down the gears to keep it up to speed.
When i drove through the "Ardennen - Belgium" with the 169 Panda 1.2ltr, the car really struggling to keep up to speed.
With the 85 TA i breeze through it, like no tomorrow.

 

[Tom95]

I'm really sorry guys, but I'm going to have to go against the grain here.

The 1.2 is by far my favourite. Why? Because it's smooth, free-revving, refined and very economical. I've yet to thrash it worse than 5.7l/100km.

In fact, the slowness is what makes it enjoyable. I know this is a strange concept, but look at it this way: A 'fast' car (say a Subaru WRX) does the 0-100 sprint in what; 6 seconds? Whereas the 1.2 Panda takes, by comparison, a glacial 14 seconds. That gives you so much more time to enjoy yourself. No?

Around town the 1.2 is plenty, and it sure is fun to thrash occasionally.

That's just my 2 cents...

 

[Goudrons]

I think we all need to remember there are two 1.2's!
Pre and post March 2014.

We've one of each of the 1.2's and a 4x4TA.

The pre '14 1.2 is by far the more usable day to day.
Bags more torque than the post '14 and just feels more alive to the right foot.

The post '14 is a little quieter, lacks a bit of torque, it isn't completely hopeless, but does feel like it's not as sharp as the pre '14.

The TA with it's 5500 rpm redline, well that occurs at 4 mph and around 0.5 of a second after pulling away in the 4x4 with it's low first gear!

In heavy traffic it can be fairly painful, forget the quick, early change and you headbutt the steering wheel and pray the bus up your arse doesn't slam into you!

 

[Alexiloki]

Have to say I like my 1.2. Having recently driven a 2014 1.2 as a loan car which had clearly not had its updates done, it was like trying to stir a vat of tar with a matchstick trying to get that moving!

Mine is a 2015 and is much better and I think it's a engine that ages well, since I've started putting more miles on it the engine is much looser, revving more freely (even though it did anyway) and giving more power and MPG along the way.

This is my Second third generation panda and Neither have ever given me less than 44mpg no matter how hard I've thrashed them, highest I've ever had was on the M1 last year with that offensive 60 off miles of average speed cameras when at the end of it the car said I'd done 72mpg through the whole stint. Currently sitting at a average of about 48-52 over a whole tank depending on driving conditions.

I have to say the TA is fun to drive, however for me it's too buzzy, too many vibrations and the redline is too low, but each to their own after all

 

[Al D]

If Britain didn't get any rain, would I have had a Twin Air 4x4? Probably not. But it's reassuring where I am when it does. Would I have a '15 onwards 1.2 every day the sun was out? In a heartbeat. And a third lower fuel bill. But I'm happy enough