General EARLY panda..worth more..or less ? no ABS

Currently reading:
General EARLY panda..worth more..or less ? no ABS

Joined
Apr 27, 2011
Messages
34,870
Points
7,798
Location
Near the M4
Now in posession of our twinair 319

The time has come to let our 2004 Active go.

Owned since Dec.2014 its been great.

Never needed a bulb or fuse.

And has the ' Dynamic spec' of later years. ( we tried an 07 model but sold it again as wasnt as nice a car to own)

Job relocation..70 miles a day has forced the inevitable..

So is it worth storing?

Insurance value is laughable..

Opinions please :)

Charlie
 
I do 80 - 90 miles a day in mine, keep it and use it, it can't owe you anything now ?

It is fine.. :)
but in 15 years mpg and comfort have moved on.
Being 60hp overtaking convoys of trucks can take some planning.. 8)

Just not the correct vehicle for that use.

The mj punto was better when used last week..
But its ' not a panda..' :(
 
I do 80 - 90 miles a day in mine, keep it and use it, it can't owe you anything now ?

It is fine.. :)
but in 15 years mpg and comfort have moved on.
Being 60hp overtaking convoys of trucks can take some planning.. :cool:

Just not the correct vehicle for that use.

The mj punto was better when used last week..
But its ' not a panda..' :(
 
My experience is lack of use on an old car will kill it faster than anything else. I would not even try to store it. If you have replaced it with a TA move it on. If you need another later on they are at least plentiful.

I just bought a 312 1.2 Lounge 2014. The mpg on the computer over 2500 miles was 47.5 when I test drove this morning. I dont know who or how it was driven. This is better than the TA 4x4 which seems to be topping out at 43 driven by my other half. But it will do 46 on a run without too much effort.
The 312 1.2 stacks up well against our 169 but seems rather slow top end and struggles to get past indicated 70 which is probably nearer 60. It will get there in the end but it is slow. It goes OK off the line though. TA's started with ^)HP I believe and I imagine that might be a bit leisurely too.

If you are going to get another car I would definitely go for diesel unless city centre work is involved regularly as the diesel will do 75mpg without sweat.
 
This panda TA has 11K ON CLOCK..
SO probably still freeing off.

My punto TA Took @20k.. very lively now at @47k

But the panda seemed ok at 70
Same 3,000 rpm despite only 5 speed.

It is actually the spaces between the gears I am finding a bit long.. will come with practice..and a freer..more flexible motor.

Charlie
 
I bought the 100HP over a Dynamic 60 to commute 35 miles each way on duals and motorways. Frankly, the 1200/60 would have been fine and better on petrol. The 100HP has more power for fast hills on duals but you have to drop to 5th or even 4th and rev it (not a complaint, that's how the 100HP is). On A roads with potential for overtaking the 100HP has the edge but its still not a properly quick car so such overtakes need plenty of road. In short, if you can't do the overtake in the 1200/60 you probably wouldn't manage it in the 100HP either.

In my opinion the 1200/60 is tuned well below it's capability so driving on motorways is not even slightly stressing it. I think it would benefit greatly from a sports exhaust manifold and slightly larger throttle body as it does feel strangled but costs are not insignificant. A better exhaust manifold on the 100HP would probably give more mid range for better overtakes or maintaining speed on hilly dual carriageways.

The only downside with the lower spec models is seating comfort in the front (they are all basic in the back). I get on OK with the Dynamic (even for 250 mile runs) but do prefer the 100HP seats. Seats from a higher spec 500 would be nice but try before you buy.
 
Ahhh, I have the mighty MJ so have the best of both worlds, impressive mpg and a turn of pace that upsets quite a few people that have small car syndrome. Lol
 
Ahhh, I have the mighty MJ so have the best of both worlds, impressive mpg and a turn of pace that upsets quite a few people that have small car syndrome. Lol

It's great fun annoying the point and squirt Golf GTI Audi TT etc drivers who get too close to a slow car before pulling out to overtake. They get upset that you are in front of them (no matter how fast you're going) then get in your way if you do let them go by.
 
The 1.2 (60 and 69 PS) has a bore x stroke of 70.8x78.9 mm. An undersquare engine (stroke > bore), means good MPG and low RPM torque, much like Diesels.
Max power at 5000 or 5500 RPM, but because of the long stroke, I suppose, it doesnt build RPM so fast , so it needs some time to get to 5000 RPM


The 1.1 (54 PS) has a bore x stroke of 70 x 72 mm
Shorter stroke, almost a square engine.

Racing engines are square (bore=stroke) or oversquare (stroke < bore), so shorter stroke for higher RPM / faster RPM buildup.
Not so great for MPG or cooling/heat transfer, but gets faster at 5000 RPM, where it has max power.

I have both engines, always liked 1.1 more for it's faster RPM response, but I never figuered out why until recently.
Learned about square/ oversquare / undersquare engines in a Ferrari book, I think this "shorter stroke lenght" stuff explains much of the 1.1 charm vs 1.2 with longer stroke
 
Last edited:
If you really want to learn about engine design look up David Vizard on You Tube. He pioneered gas flowing with an air flow bench and Janspeed engines. He's mostly talking about the old Austin A Series engine but his comments apply to any IC engine.The info on valves and port design is especially interesting.
 
Back
Top