General Is The 105 TA Engine Still Available?

[AGH1965]

Do you need an electronic cock-washer, to keep your man-tackle department fresh and itchy free (a lack of could lead to accidents don't you know...?).

Of course Brussels will make electronic cock-washers mandatory soon. I'm afraid that you in the UK are going to miss such indispensable legislation in the near future.

 

[306maxi]

I'm getting the impression you don't entirely agree with me...

I'm not butt-hurt... just calling out NCAP for their flawed methodology... so that their scores remain meaningful... in order to increase *real* rather than superficial safety standards over time.

I'm just saying that Panda got a score based on the NCAP test tthat was in force when it was tested... and now it gets a rubbish "score" because NCAP has re-tested it with a new test that the car was not capable of getting a "good" score in because the new test requirements didn't exist when it was designed and built.

Worse than that, the new tests rely on the presence of electronic aids rather than reflecting the car's passive safety which was what NCAP was originally conceived to improve. By definition, a small, cheap car built years ago when that tech' didn't even exist, is not going to have it fitted.... but the absence of said gizmo's now marks the car as "unsafe". It can't be, can it?

Worse than the worse than that, the criteria for what gizmo makes the car safe is decided by NCAP and there's an obscure correlation between what gizmo makes the "required" list and the actual road accident stats.

So, NCAP might decide that in 2019 an electronic cock-washer is mandatory because one person was injured last year whilst scratching their balls... but they ignore the 5 million seriously killed because a driver is dicking about with their iDrive instead of actually... you know.. "paying attention". Having the iDrive doesn't affect NCAP... but no cock washer means your car is the new Trabant in terms of "road safety".

I'm not buying that. NCAP needs to do better, or they won't be taken seriously... which undermines their so-earnest "road safety" message.

I'd suggest NCAP introduces a Passive safety and an Active safety score, much like they already do with the "pedestrian safety" sub-rating, rather than re-testing cars that could not have predicted what gizmo they needed to have fitted in order to pass a "safety" test years later. At the moment, the "test" is flawed and not just a little disingenuous.


Ralf S.

It’s almost as if NCAP already give cars scores for passive and active safety.

See the attachments. Guess which is a 3 star Kia Picanto and which is a 0 star Panda.

As someone who works for a car company, we’re well aware of what regulations cars need to adhere to so as to obtain homologation or a certain star rating with NCAP. There’s no excuse for a Fiat getting 0 stars.

 

[AGH1965]

Well Maxi, we are here in the FIAT 500 section of the forum, so let's look at the FIAT 500 results. The main question is: Is a 2017 FIAT 500 really unsafer than a 2007 FIAT 500?

 

[jrkitching]

No, the main message to take home from the new NCAP testing is that a 2018 500 is not meaningfully safer than a 2008 500.

In 2008, the 500 was amongst the safest of the then-current cars in its class. In 2018, it no longer is.

Fiat have stood still, whilst most other marques have moved on.

Think on this: "Whatever you did that made you successful, will not suffice to keep you successful"

In 2008, you couldn't get a sniff of a discount on a 500. Today, shopping around will likely get you close to three grand off most models in the range.

 

[puntofan01]

So you are a snob then? I’d consider a Giulia, but Alf’s in their infinite wisdom don’t make an estate, they think an suv Is a legitimate replacement for an estate. It isn’t.

No, I'm not a snob. I like the Giulia because it's a genuinely good looking car inside and out, not because it has an Alfa Romeo badge on the bonnet, and if I did own an Alfa 1 day, I wouldn't consider it to be bragging material.

You’re amazing. You state that you’re not interested in perceived quality and then in the same sentence talk about the perceived quality of one model over another.... You’re doing this for a joke, right? It’s almost as if different companies target different markets, Swedish stuff has always generally been on the more comfy end at the market....

I'm not overly bothered about perceived quality, with the exception of Seat, I don't think any manufacturers make cars with offensive interior quality. I'm never going to own a 5 series or a Volvo V70, so my comment wasn't referring to my own ownership. I merely meant that given how much it cost, the 5 series didn't strike me as being anything special, whereas the Volvo gives the impression of being a far more expensive car.

 

[306maxi]

No, the main message to take home from the new NCAP testing is that a 2018 500 is not meaningfully safer than a 2008 500.

In 2008, the 500 was amongst the safest of the then-current cars in its class. In 2018, it no longer is.

Fiat have stood still, whilst most other marques have moved on.

Think on this: "Whatever you did that made you successful, will not suffice to keep you successful"

In 2008, you couldn't get a sniff of a discount on a 500. Today, shopping around will likely get you close to three grand off most models in the range.

What he said ^

NCAP stars are for people to compare cars to each other when new.

Would it be better for NCAP to have added stars so that the 500 stayed as a 5 star car, but something newer and better equipped would have become a 6 or 7 star car?

Regardless, what we have is a level playing field and some people seem to have an issue with it because Fiat have been extremely poor in making their cars as safe as the competition.

 

[306maxi]

No, I'm not a snob. I like the Giulia because it's a genuinely good looking car inside and out, not because it has an Alfa Romeo badge on the bonnet, and if I did own an Alfa 1 day, I wouldn't consider it to be bragging material.I'm not overly bothered about perceived quality, with the exception of Seat, I don't think any manufacturers make cars with offensive interior quality. I'm never going to own a 5 series or a Volvo V70, so my comment wasn't referring to my own ownership. I merely meant that given how much it cost, the 5 series didn't strike me as being anything special, whereas the Volvo gives the impression of being a far more expensive car.

The Giulia is such a weak car styling wise. The front end is weak compared to the last 30 years of Alfas.

Again, you claim not to care about perceived quality and then you literally talk about perceived quality :facepalm:

 

[puntofan01]

I must admit, I don't see anything wrong with that front end styling.

And just because I'm not obsessed with the concept of perceived quality, that doesn't mean I have no interest in car interiors.

 

[puntofan01]

No, the main message to take home from the new NCAP testing is that a 2018 500 is not meaningfully safer than a 2008 500.

In 2008, the 500 was amongst the safest of the then-current cars in its class. In 2018, it no longer is.

Fiat have stood still, whilst most other marques have moved on.

The issue I have with current ncap rules is the major emphasis on increasingly complex electronics. Not only are they a source of potential reliability issues, they're expensive, and it pushes the price of new cars up, which in turn, makes used cars more expensive. Whilst it's relatively niche these days, there is still people who want an inexpensive runaround, hence why the Sandero, Panda Pop, and Celerio sell in the first place. By demanding that the cheapest of cars is lumbered with these expensive electrics, it's taking away the option of having a reasonably priced car.

 

[306maxi]

I must admit, I don't see anything wrong with that front end styling.

And just because I'm not obsessed with the concept of perceived quality, that doesn't mean I have no interest in car interiors.

Let me say it again just so you understand.

You say you don’t care about perceived quality and then proceed to say that you perceive the quality of one car to be better than that of another car.

It’s like me saying I don’t like breasts and then saying “phwoar! Look at the tits on that!”

 

[puntofan01]

Ok then, let me rephrase it, so you don't get confused: put simply, the Volvo is a nicer place to be than the bmw. I don't study the chemical composition of interior plastics, or run my fingers over dashboards to decide if they're too hard or not, just some interiors look nicer than others. :|

 

[306maxi]

The issue I have with current ncap rules is the major emphasis on increasingly complex electronics. Not only are they a source of potential reliability issues, they're expensive, and it pushes the price of new cars up, which in turn, makes used cars more expensive. Whilst it's relatively niche these days, there is still people who want an inexpensive runaround, hence why the Sandero, Panda Pop, and Celerio sell in the first place. By demanding that the cheapest of cars is lumbered with these expensive electrics, it's taking away the option of having a reasonably priced car.

These systems don’t cost anywhere near as much as you think. AEB is probably the most expensive of the systems and it’s not going to take you from a 0 star car to a 5 star car.

Fiat have seriously underinvested during Sergio’s tenure and now they’re paying the price. Why are other manufacturers able to offer this sort of technology on smaller cars and Fiat can’t? Sergio carking it was probably a blessing in disguise for FCA.

 

[puntofan01]

Be that as it may, it still costs money, and essentially results in people having to pay for stuff they don't actually want.

And I do agree with you on that 1. The Punto is a perfect example of that. In 2006, they did have a world beater, and if only they'd invested in it, they would have a class contender today, and I do think it's a colossal risk to put all their eggs in the 500s basket: as vw have found to their cost, whilst retro can be lucrative, get it wrong, and you can hemorrhage money.

 

[306maxi]

Be that as it may, it still costs money, and essentially results in people having to pay for stuff they don't actually want.

And I do agree with you on that 1. The Punto is a perfect example of that. In 2006, they did have a world beater, and if only they'd invested in it, they would have a class contender today, and I do think it's a colossal risk to put all their eggs in the 500s basket: as vw have found to their cost, whilst retro can be lucrative, get it wrong, and you can hemorrhage money.

Cars are allowed to be rated with a safety pack. So you can still buy the basic version, it’ll just get less stars and people will know it’s not as safe. BUT people will know that with AEB and other safety systems fitted, the car will be better.

All of these systems result in fewer accidents, how anyone can dress that up as a bad thing is beyond me.

 

[puntofan01]

I get that even the most basic engines rely on a fair few sensors to run, but I'm just not comfortable with a car having all these things which render it undriveable if they play up, which I've heard people saying has happened.

 

[Schumi2001]

Ok then, let me rephrase it, so you don't get confused: put simply, the Volvo is a nicer place to be than the bmw. I don't study the chemical composition of interior plastics, or run my fingers over dashboards to decide if they're too hard or not, just some interiors look nicer than others. :|

You wouldn't be saying that if you had to live with either for a long time!

The F10 5-series is impeccably built, has spot on ergonomics and iDrive is light years ahead of the junk Volvo fit. And, amazingly, if you price up an S60 against a 520d, they're not that far apart, even though the BMW has better engines and is a size up.

 

[jrkitching]

it's taking away the option of having a reasonably priced car.

So what value are you going to put on protecting the safety of yourself and your loved ones?

The additional cost of buying a car with properly up-to-date safety built in might seem a waste of money... ...until something bad happens. Saving a few quid on your running costs might not look like such a good idea if you're spending the rest of your life contemplating your choice from the confines of your wheelchair.

Something I learned quite late in life was that accidents always happen to someone else... ...until the day one happens to you. Ladykitching was once hit head on by a driver who was pushed into her path by an idiot pulling out of a junction without looking; if just one of the safety features built into the car hadn't worked as it should, she wouldn't be here today, and my world would have changed from colour to black & white in a second.

You only get one chance not to die. Perhaps it's no coincidence that the cheapest cars are sold in countries where life is cheap.

 

[306maxi]

So what value are you going to put on protecting the safety of yourself and your loved ones?

The additional cost of buying a car with properly up-to-date safety built in might seem a waste of money... ...until something bad happens. Saving a few quid on your running costs might not look like such a good idea if you're spending the rest of your life contemplating your choice from the confines of your wheelchair.

Something I learned quite late in life was that accidents always happen to someone else... ...until the day one happens to you. Ladykitching was once hit head on by a driver who was pushed into her path by an idiot pulling out of a junction without looking; if just one of the safety features built into the car hadn't worked as it should, she wouldn't be here today, and my world would have changed from colour to black & white in a second.

You only get one chance not to die. Perhaps it's no coincidence that the cheapest cars are sold in countries where life is cheap.

Exactly. People always rely on just not having the accident in the first place, which is great up until the point you have an accident that’s not your fault. That’s when it’s nice to have eleventy billion airbags.

I liftshare with someone who gets a new car every 6 months. The car she had before the current one has AEB. Now once it did brake because there was a Cadbury dairy milk wrapper blowing across the road, so these systems aren’t infallible, but numerous times it did also brake quicker than she could’ve reacted to someones’s stupid driving. Not that she would have had an accident, but it braked before she would have. AEB is a bloody useful thing.

I do about 26,000 miles just for work, half of that on country A roads which I say are the most dangerous types of roads AND I’m doing it when people are always in a bloody hurry. The 3 series scored 95% for adult occupant protection, so if the worst does happen at least I stand a chance. The fact that it has decent ESP with switchable traction control made driving in last winter’s severe weather rather a doddle.

If you place such little value on your own life puntofan, then that’s a bit sad.

 

[jrkitching]

People always rely on just not having the accident in the first place, which is great up until the point you have an accident that’s not your fault. That’s when it’s nice to have eleventy billion airbags.

Even if you have an accident that is your fault, it's still nice to have eleventy billion airbags.

 

[306maxi]

Even if you have an accident that is your fault, it's still nice to have eleventy billion airbags.

There is also that, but a remarkable proportion of the populace have the ability to just not have an accident don’t you know?

It’s just mind boggling when people cling onto this cheap motoring thing as if it’s the be all and end all. Even India is moving away from “Cheap is better”

https://m.economictimes.com/passeng...nit-produced-in-june/articleshow/64859186.cms