General Hi! My Panda experience (so far)...

Currently reading:
General Hi! My Panda experience (so far)...

StevenB

New member
Joined
Dec 27, 2008
Messages
10
Points
1
Location
Sleepy Suffolk
Hi Folks! I’m new to the forum but have been stopping by as a guest many many times since the Spring. In May 2008 I bought a Panda Multijet and reading the posts on the forum helped to quell my raging appetite for the car during the agonising wait for it…was spec’d up with Metallic black, alloys, subwoofer, fog lamps and split/folding/sliding rear seat so took a few weeks to arrive.

The dealer was Desira in Diss and my experience with them was good. I swapped my Audi A4 Avant for the Panda would you believe!? Needed to reduce motoring costs and it is testament to the Fiat that I never really missed the Audi in terms of what it was as transport…must confess to missing the prestige image now and again but the Panda was such a great little car. By instinct I’ve always liked small cars and there is something very likeable about the Panda…when I first had a test drive in one I drove the Grande Punto straight afterwards and it was pleasant but so ordinary…no character at all.

Anyway, after 5500 miles and seven months in the Multijet I’m changing again so I thought I’d share my impressions of the car with you all. I have been blown away by it in fact. To my mind it has been designed and built with real integrity and the feeling of perceived quality is amazing for such a cheap car. I briefly flirted in a showroom with a Toyota Aygo and it really was a tin can compared to the robust Panda. I have found it generally refined and quiet once on the move. The Multijet engine never gave me the kind of economy the official figures appeared to promise but I was realistic, knowing that official figures invariably flatter a car. I reckon I have averaged 58 - 60 mpg and this truly has been mixed motoring minus motorways. I find the engine coarse and rattly when cold but this soon goes during the warm-up period (which, in common with most modern diesels, is much too long for comfort on cold winter mornings).

Performance wise, I like the car and it is adequate for most situations but it is no ball of fire. Having read many of Trackdayqueen’s comments, I agree there is a significant degree of understeer. The relative lack of grip and the body roll don’t bother me at all but I do find it reluctant to change direction when pressing on. I can honestly say though that I find it a truly endearing little car, much more than the sum of its parts.

The practicality of the car has impressed me and the sliding rear seat was a very worthwhile extra and at its rearmost setting provides great legroom in the back, at the expense of boot space of course. The five door shell is so easy to enter and exit and the equipment level spot on.

I would not pay for fog lamps again, or the hifi upgrade, which sounds awful to my ears. I know I have been spoilt by our other Audi, which has the Bose upgrade and is the most transparent, balanced sound I have ever heard in a car, but I did expect a bit more…there’s plenty of bass, as you would expect with a subwoofer, but the intrinsic quality is just not there and all the pumping bass in the world cannot compensate for that.

Mine has not used a drop of oil and has had NO issues whatsoever…no squeaks, rattles, creaks, bangs…nothing at all. Faultless reliability, in fact loads of character without any temperament, if that’s not a contradiction…I haven’t even had noisy wipers, mis-aligned washer jets or any of the other common niggles.

The downside? Well, I am changing it because although I’ve owned a few diesels, they have always been a compromise and whilst I know it is a personal experience for everyone, I find the lack of interaction with the engine bothers me…I know it is faster and cheaper to run than the 1.2 petrol but there is no aural satisfaction in revving ANY diesel engine, just a characterless drone that increases in intensity as the revs rise. So, having set out on Panda ownership to REDUCE my costs, I’m doing a slight U-turn…

So, those of you that have read this far into my rambling and excessively long post are asking, “What’s he changing to?”….a new Panda 1.2 Eleganza of course…expected in a few days in red with skydome. Will let you know how I get on and what the differences are. But, I can honestly say that I love Fiat Pandas and find their willing and loveable nature intoxicating and better in every way than other small cars I have driven. For instance, before choosing another Panda, I had an extended test drive in a brand new model Fiesta (1.25 petrol, 82 bhp) and I can see why everybody is raving about them…very accomplished indeed with a big-car feel but totally lacking in charm and afterwards it felt so good to get back into my little Fiat. Anyway, thanks for reading and thanks for posting here because I have spent many happy hours on the forum. Steve
 
Good post. I look forward to hearing how you get on with the 1.2, the reason being i have had my 1.2 for 30 months now and i was considering a swap to an MJ.
My 1.2 does pretty well, it has to accomadate two almost teenage youngsters, myself, & my Wife. In summer it has to pull a trailer loaded with a good 200kg of camping equipment, and a very large roof box generously loaded to the max 50kg:D. Even with this lot it manages 46 mpg. In summer it can manage 62mpg on a run, but in this current weather about 50mpg. These are all trip readings so you have to subtract 3mpg to get the true measured figure.
I am now being put off the MJ as savings are no longer an issue, the 1.2 Eco now gives road fund at £35 same as the MJ, and diesel is more expensive than petrol, and the car itself is more expensive also, add in dearer servicing costs and the extra 10bhp is not looking so attractive to me.
I also don't particually like driving td's, but i have never driven the MJ.
I look forward to hearing how you get on with the 1.2 and reading how you compare it to the MJ, hopefully yours will be as reliable as mine, 27k and not missed a beat.

Maybe see you trundling round Suffolk.
 
Well ive had a 1.2 eleganza for just over a year and 20k miles later ive had no problems apart from 3 light bulbs blow within a week...

kipsters mpg figures are higher than i achieve but im sure they are possible, i get around mid 40's for my normal commute, low 50's if i'm really trying and mid thirtys if im in a rush!

Well built car which i really cant fault but i have to admit im ready for a swap!!

Hope you enjoy yours!!
 
I admit the diesel is not a nice noise to listen to, but it's a small price to pay for the extra torque and economy if you ask me. My mum's 1.2 petrol in comparison felt underpowered and frequent down changes were required to keep up with other cars resulting in poor fuel economy. The MJ will cruise at 80 - 100 MPH happily and because the revs are quite high at this speed, the throttle is still responsive which makes motorway overtaking a breeze. In the 1.2 it struggles over 80 MPH. Also, the best I've had MPG wise was 82.2 MPG with perfect conditions and a lot of patients, it's possible! Average 64 MPG ish. If you have lots of hills like in Wales then the MJ is without question a better option, I've overtaken 2 bigger cars going up a hill in the Panda in 4th gear! The turbo kicks in at low revs so the power is there almost instantly.

That's just my opinion anyway, i know some people hate the MJ's, but i love mine. Best to try then compare yourself really, all depends what you're used to.
 
The MJ will cruise at 80 - 100 MPH happily and because the revs are quite high at this speed

The book top speed for the MJ is 99mph so not sure 100mph is a nice speed to cruise at, unless you have an optimistic speedo :D

Chris
 
These are the type of posts i like, i like to hear a direct comparisom.
I am not interested at sitting at 80 mph! I now finally have a clean licence and wish it to stay that way:) (Been on 9 points got the t shirt).
I would love a 100hp but it will cost more in fuel/tax/ins. That's why i was considering the MJ.
Is it worth the extra bhp/torque or not?
Await your reply StevenB
 
The book top speed for the MJ is 99mph so not sure 100mph is a nice speed to cruise at, unless you have an optimistic speedo :D

Chris

No doubt all speedos are optimistic, they are not allowed to under-read. It's probably out by about 5-6%. Actually my old MJ would cruise at an indicated 95-100mph all day without issue. It wasn't unpleasant at all, engine noise is though more pronounced than the petrol.

I wouldn't necessarily agree with draig though that the throttle is responsive. Sure once you get on boost it goes fairly well, but the response is nothing like you would get in a petrol. Unfortunately turbo lag is something that you have to learn to live with with TD's and I think that the panda TD being very small at 1.3 litres doesn't help it in this respect as there is simply nothing powerwise to be had off boost. This does give it a narrow powerband which can be frustrating at times.
 
Hello again...glad there have been some responses.

I love the MJ and for a diesel, it is impressive...once warm it is smooth and around town on a steady throttle almost silent. Mine just starts to take on a slightly different tone from 2,500 revs...just a tad harsh, maybe not even that, but the noise becomes a bit more insistent/penetrating (don't know how else to describe it)...it's not a big deal but it coincides with a healthy cruising speed in top gear, ie, 60+mph.

I have briefly driven the 1.2 petrol and found it to be slower admittedly but with a character that was maybe more eager and certainly more revvy and imho this suits the nature of the Panda that bit better.

In financial terms, I think the comparison is really relevant now that certain 1.2s are in tax band B thanks to Fiat's Eco models...they have apparently squeezed a bit more economy out of the petrols now (on paper at least) and of course petrol is about 15% cheaper...although the MJ is reputedly slightly cheaper to service I would doubt there is a difference in the real world...add to this the very significant price premium of the MJ and I reckon you would have to rack up mega mileage for the MJ to pay you back...I fully accept that the MJ is perhaps the more saleable second hand so some of its additional cost would be recouped.

I don't think you can make a water-tight case now for the MJ on cost grounds...but we are probably only talking a few quid difference over the total period of ownership so it comes down to which is the better car...I feel I am probably unusual in that I am willing to sacrifice some outright performance for the sake of mechanical smoothness and driveability...to my mind petrols have a much more linear and natural throttle response and their (admittedly more limited) abilities are spread across a much broader rev band. I wouldn't want anyone to think I am running the MJ down because I have really enjoyed running it and who knows, within a week or two of 1.2 ownership I might be howling with regret. To those that comment that the MJ is better on motorways, I have no doubt you would be right but we have no motorways in Suffolk or Norfolk. Although I love a burn up now and again as much as anyone, we live in times when I don't think you can risk it anymore...there could be a camera van around the next corner or over the brow of the next hill and I value my driving licence too much!

I'm expecting a call this week to say mine is ready so I will post something asap after that...(if not before!).

Cheers again,

Steve
 
I am not interested at sitting at 80 mph! I now finally have a clean licence and wish it to stay that way:) (Been on 9 points got the t shirt).

Allowing a 5% discrepancy in the speedo...80mph is more likely around 76mph, which won't see you pulled over on most MWays....
 
The book top speed for the MJ is 99mph so not sure 100mph is a nice speed to cruise at, unless you have an optimistic speedo :D

Chris
The book speed for my 3 cylinder 850cc Daihatsu was 85 MPH but it did 102 MPH, same with my 3 cylinder charade was also 99 MPH, but it did 112 MPH, best from the MJ was 106 MPH but like you say, how accurate the readings are will always be unknown. I know I'm always going to disagree with TDQ, not to deliberately be awkward or create any conflict, but in my opinion, the MJ has adequate power and little lag and living in Wales with very steep hills, it pulls very well indeed, much better than the 1.2 in question, which i have also driven. I'd like to drive a 100hp soon to see what the difference is TBH.
 
I know I'm always going to disagree with TDQ, not to deliberately be awkward or create any conflict, but in my opinion, the MJ has adequate power and little lag and living in Wales with very steep hills, it pulls very well indeed, much better than the 1.2 in question, which i have also driven. I'd like to drive a 100hp soon to see what the difference is TBH.

I saw 112mph indicated on the clock of my MJ, although it was a bit downhill. Saw 110mph from the 100hp but figured it'd take another 3 miles to add to that so gave up.

I think you need to drive some other cars to see what I mean about the lag. Maybe trying a 100hp will give you some insight into this. Or just drive a sporty 1.6 or above.
 
I saw 112mph indicated on the clock of my MJ, although it was a bit downhill. Saw 110mph from the 100hp but figured it'd take another 3 miles to add to that so gave up.

I think you need to drive some other cars to see what I mean about the lag. Maybe trying a 100hp will give you some insight into this. Or just drive a sporty 1.6 or above.
I used to own a Suzuki Ignis Sport, it was only a 1.5 litre 110 BHP similar to the Panda 100hp i suppose, so i know the difference between a petrol and diesel. Think the 0-60 time of the Suki was 8.6 secs but it was so smooth and refined, didn't really give the sensation of speed, the 100HP is probably better.
 
I've been running an MJ since May 07. It took over from my petrol Alfa 156 as my daily driver and I can see where StevenB is coming from in looking to swap to a petrol Panda. I too love the Panda but often pine for the aural delights of petrol. A small Fiat should be singing its heart out, not droning its way to another packet of paracetemol for the driver...... and yet there is no denying the long distance cruising and lugging ability of the MJ (when the noise ceases to be an issue). I think the key lies in what sort of driving you mainly do. If a large part of it involves intercity motorway runs with passengers/gear the MJ really is a no-brainer. If, OTOH, it's solo driver and/or non-mway fare then the petrol soundtrack and lag-free behaviour probably outweigh the torque and higher speed oomph of the MJ..

As for fuel economy, there is such a vast range reported for both cars that its difficult to be sure of what to expect. I'm still not sure if in the MJs case this is more about individual engines or driver styles. For the record mine now seems to be doing 58-62 one-up, with the odd tantalising glimpse of the high 60s and occasional depressing flirtation with the mid 50s (over full tanks). I imagine from posts here that the average gap between 1.2 and Mj would be about 10mpg. No big deal given the current derv premium.....
 
Hi StevenB
Great post, interesting what you are saying about engine characteristics, I bought a 1.2 dynamic (secondhand) to replace my wifes' punto three years ago. I was knocked out by this little green thing, even took it to wales to visit friends and apart from being a little rowdy on the M'ways it took it all in its stride. Like most people though I always wondered about the diesel, more power, better economy etc, but having driven a few diesels I do prefer petrol engines. I loved this little Panda so much I bought a new 100 hp for myself!!! I'm also from suffolk, I clocked a black mj parked up in Sudbury, perhaps that was yours, anyway if you wanted a try in 100hp let me know!!(y) John B
 
Hi John, Kipster and all those who have posted on the thread...

Well, had an interesting experience today....my Eleganza has not arrived yet but this is understandable given the holidays etc. Desira at Diss have been great and given me their MJ demonstrator until Tuesday, when mine is expected to be delivered. This was necessary because my insurnace policy on my MJ happened to run out today so of course I couldn't go on using it. I have read lots of negative stuff about car dealers, especially Fiat ones but Desira have been very good and lent me their car without question.

Anyway, I drove the demonstrator back home (30 ish miles, A roads). Like mine, it is an 08 plate but has done another thousand or so miles than mine (mine was 5500)...it has no extras like mine so the steel wheels are bit dowdy but my point is this...it was a different car to drive. Much peppier, a little bit smoother and yes, certainly a bit faster too.

I had run mine in properly (heeding advice from Honest John etc) and I have let it rev several times a week all the way up to 5000 rpm to keep things clean and free etc (obviously not within the first couple of thousand miles) but never when cold, always when it was thoroughly warm. Mine has used no oil at all since new so I thought I'd done a decent job with running in. What have others experienced with running in? Maybe it takes 10,000 miles? All I know is that the demonstrator/courtesy car I am borrowing has a nicer engine and it has probably been thrashed or at least not cossetted like mine was. No doubt some will say that there is no need to run in modern engines but I just can't imagine caning a new engine...it seems wrong to do it!

I'm not questioning whether I am doing the right thing (yet!) and I'm really looking forward to getting the Eleganza because I will gain other things too such as climate, skydome etc, but I do feel I have judged my MJ a bit harshly. But I am looking forward to that experience of letting the engine sing, as only a petrol can.

I have considered a 100hp but the early reports about the harsh ride put me off...am I right in thinking that Fiat might have tweaked it a bit? More recent comments seem less critical of the ride. And there's no denying the 100hp looks the business. I will run the Eleganza for a couple of years by which time I imagine there wil be a new Panda and a whole lot of other choices to make!

John, I wasn't in Sudbury...mine is usually to be found in the jewel in Suffolk's crown...Lowestoft (said with tongue firmly in cheek!).

Will post my first impressions of the petrol Eleganza next week hopefully.

Bye for now, Steve
 
I honestly think when running an engine in on a new car is that really you don't have to. Neither my MJ or 100hp have used any oil. I didn't go over 5500rpm for the first 100 miles but hit 5000rpm full throttle as soon as it was warmed up with delivery miles on the clock. By the time i'd done 300 miles or so I was taking it to 6000rpm, then by 400 I was going to 7K rpm.

Mind you when I test drove a demonstrator with 100 miles on the clock I was taking it to 7000rpm quite a bit. Certainly after 5000miles my engine on my 100hp has loosened up nicely. The MJ was similar, mind you I drove that with my foot to the floor most of the time anyway!

I think the trouble is if you are gentle with it to begin with all that happens is that it takes longer to run in.

The ride on the 100hp is firm. Really the rear end is too stiff. There just isn't enough movement before the bumpstops come into play. This hasn't been tweaked at all by Fiat.
 
I have considered a 100hp but the early reports about the harsh ride put me off...am I right in thinking that Fiat might have tweaked it a bit? More recent comments seem less critical of the ride.

It all comes down to what you're used to really. The 100hp is a lot softer than some cars I've driven and a lot firmer/more jarring than others. The only time it gets uncomfortable/embarrassing is when you go over speed bumps but apart from that I think it's fine. Best to drive one yourself and see what you think :D

Chris
 
If it's any help, I switched from an A4 Avant to a 1.2 Eleganza (Dualogic) and have no complaints - even in hilly Wales. The spread of torque (optimised over bhp hence only 60bhp but 75ibft) means the only time you really notice its a tiddler is when you are really loaded (e.g. me, Mrs, son & Mother in Law plus 2 weekly shops!).

In fact, I worked out that unladen, it had more torque per tonne than my 2.0 petrol Audi. I've never regretted not getting the MJ. At about 5.5thousand, all its worth revving to, if you squint, you can just about hear a metallic tappet-rattle, more than reminicent of the Alfa twin cam.:slayer:

I'll just get me coat...:eek:
 
That's brilliant, many thanks for that Calvjones! Despite my inclination towards petrol I would be lying if I said I hadn't worried at times about changing from the MJ. You are right, 75 lb/foot is pretty decent for a small petrol engine and I believe in the Fiat peak torque is at 2500 revs, which suggests it is gutsier than typical small petrol screamers.

Thanks again, Steve
 
Back
Top