General Looking for a fun 2nd car (£5k max) to drive around Yorkshire Dales in at the weekends. Talk me out of an old high mileage 2011-ish Fiat 500 TwinAir!

[varesecrazy]

Yorkshire dales..
Plenty to get a derv hot

And non dpf ones are simpler to work on too ;-)

 

[vexorg]

Plus diesels make a lot of noise at the best of times, let alone in a very small car.

Not all diesels sound bad, yes, some, like the old fiat 1.9 sound like a little man with a jackhammer under the bonnet, but the citroen I have now is a very subtle low pitched rumble rather than the usual diesel knock.

If the engine isn't going to get hot, then you may want to re-assess your definition of "fun"

 

[AC43]

Not all diesels sound bad, yes, some, like the old fiat 1.9 sound like a little man with a jackhammer under the bonnet, but the citroen I have now is a very subtle low pitched rumble rather than the usual diesel knock.

If the engine isn't going to get hot, then you may want to re-assess your definition of "fun"

By definition petrols reach operating temperature must more quickly than diesels. They always have done which is why petrols have always been more suited to short city hops than diesels. The 1.2 reaches operating temperature in a very short space of time - maybe half a mile by which point the heater's blowing nice and hot.

One of my neighbours is a builder and has a Transit. He's had so many problems with DFF's getting clogged that he literally drives from London to Watford and back one a week (!).

Horses for courses, but a petrol is much better for what I need.

As for fun, I love bombing round London in a small car and the 500 is perfect. Short, narrow, nippy, smooth.

 

[Troubles with 500c]

Diesels generate NOX in far greater volumes than petrol engines. Most diesels older than 2016 fall foul of ULEZ’s and these will increase in number.

 

[vexorg]

By definition petrols reach operating temperature must more quickly than diesels. They always have done which is why petrols have always been more suited to short city hops than diesels. The 1.2 reaches operating temperature in a very short space of time - maybe half a mile by which point the heater's blowing nice and hot.

I'm not really sure that is a definition of a petrol engine, anyhow, I'd put money on my citroen using less fuel than a petrol for short journeys, in fact any journey, regardless of engine temperature heating time. And think about it, how many diesel taxis are there, and how many use petrol?

 

[Troubles with 500c]

They used to use Asbestos in Brake Pads because it was the best material for the job. However, we now know it can be deadly and so it’s no longer used.

Diesel engines are more economical, no one disputes that. It’s the NOX gases they produce that are harmful. Older diesels will more than likely be banned.

 

[AC43]

I'm not really sure that is a definition of a petrol engine, anyhow, I'd put money on my citroen using less fuel than a petrol for short journeys, in fact any journey, regardless of engine temperature heating time. And think about it, how many diesel taxis are there, and how many use petrol?

Due the vast compression ratios, diesels have extremely heavy cast iron engine blocks compared to petrols which mean they take a lot longer to reach temperature. And they're more efficient/slower revving which also slows down the heating process.

I don't know what mix of short and long journeys the OP does, but for my use case, anyway, petrol wins all day long. Well, an EV would be even better but I'm about £25k short of getting a 500e.

The 500 does maybe 1,500 miles a year and the majority of the journeys it does are very short. A round trip to the tube is less than 1.5 miles, same for the supermarket. For that use case (short trips, stop start, never warmed up) a diesel just wouldn't function properly.

Horses for courses. Diesels are super-efficient on medium to long journeys on A roads and motorways.

 

[vexorg]

The 500 does maybe 1,500 miles a year and the majority of the journeys it does are very short.

So based on that, the OP should buy a 1.2 500 for a fun runaround on the yorkshire dales??

 

[AC43]

So based on that, the OP should buy a 1.2 500 for a fun runaround on the yorkshire dales??

The OP's original question was about whether or not he should buy an older, high mileage TA or not. I looked at TA's myself and then at older 1.4's and finally plumped for a newer 1.2.

I was expecting it to feel extremely underpowered as my other car is a V8 Mercedes with an additional 317bhp. But I was pleasantly surprised when I drove the Fiat 200 miles home from Huddersfield to London. I've got a mate with a 1.2 who does open water swimming all over the UK and goes everywhere in it. He recently drove it from London to Wales and back.

It's the least powerful car I've had since a Mini 850 in the mid 80's but you can row it along OK. And the FIRE engine is surely the lowest-maintenance option out there when compared with TA's and diesels especially when they get older.

I'm not telling the OP to get a 1.2, I'm just sharing my experiences.

 

[JTD_Liam]

I think the OP really needs to drive a 500 with the 1.2 engine and the TwinAir and go from there. Personally after experiencing the TwinAir (85bhp version) in my Parents 500 for over 3 years and having countless 500 1.2 models as courtesy cars when my cars have gone in for servicing etc, there's no way I'd buy a 1.2 500. I had a 1996 Mk1 Punto with the 1.2 FIRE engine and loved it, so i'm not anti-1.2, but by the time they tweaked the emissions and added VVT to it for the 500, it was nowhere near as fun. Still not as bad as a lot of rivals small engines, but it just felt a bit strangled to me, especially compared to the revvy and raspy FIRE engine from earlier years - arguably the best version of the 1.2 is in the 2003-2010 Panda. The 1.2 in cars from around 2014 had a strange habit of suddenly revving when finding the biting point (due to a clutch switch I think) which made for jerky moves away from junctions, too. They are bombproof, but the post 2013 ones I've driven were just too strained for me.

The TwinAir is a riot - hitting the rev limiter in 1st or 2nd is scarily easy as they love to rev (and will drink fuel in the process) but they go eerily quiet at motorway cruising speeds with pulling power still in reserve, where the 1.2 will be droning under the bonnet and not getting any quicker. So you either have a motorbike-like buzz box around town or on country lanes, or a surprisingly relaxed engine on faster roads - the road noise does make up for it, but that's the case on all 500s. Yes you might have a UniAir module failure or DMF let go, but most of the faults on the 500 are boot wiring and exterior door handles, plus suspension wear & rear beam corrosion - and they can happen on any 500. The trade off with the TwinAir is it's an absolute hoot to drive. The 1.2 is a safer bet from a reliability perspective, but not as fun in my view.

The diesel is largely pointless in the 500/Panda unless you're doing loads of long journeys - it has the potential reliability risks of the TwinAir but without the fun drive - in this case the worst of both Worlds. They're not terrible engines per se (few Fiat engines are, despite the reputation) and I owned an Alfa MiTo with an 85bhp version of the 1.3 diesel for 3 years with no problems, as with the engines in all 6 Fiat's/Alfa's i've owned. It's by far the least rattly Fiat diesel I've driven (in 85bhp form) but I imagine even that'll be magnified in a car with as little sound proofing as the 500/Panda. You'll also have trouble finding one that's not absolutely clapped out, in a 500 especially, as so few sold.

 

[AC43]

I think the OP really needs to drive a 500 with the 1.2 engine and the TwinAir and go from there. Personally after experiencing the TwinAir (85bhp version) in my Parents 500 for over 3 years and having countless 500 1.2 models as courtesy cars when my cars have gone in for servicing etc, there's no way I'd buy a 1.2 500. I had a 1996 Mk1 Punto with the 1.2 FIRE engine and loved it, so i'm not anti-1.2, but by the time they tweaked the emissions and added VVT to it for the 500, it was nowhere near as fun. Still not as bad as a lot of rivals small engines, but it just felt a bit strangled to me, especially compared to the revvy and raspy FIRE engine from earlier years - arguably the best version of the 1.2 is in the 2003-2010 Panda. The 1.2 in cars from around 2014 had a strange habit of suddenly revving when finding the biting point (due to a clutch switch I think) which made for jerky moves away from junctions, too. They are bombproof, but the post 2013 ones I've driven were just too strained for me.

The TwinAir is a riot - hitting the rev limiter in 1st or 2nd is scarily easy as they love to rev (and will drink fuel in the process) but they go eerily quiet at motorway cruising speeds with pulling power still in reserve, where the 1.2 will be droning under the bonnet and not getting any quicker. So you either have a motorbike-like buzz box around town or on country lanes, or a surprisingly relaxed engine on faster roads - the road noise does make up for it, but that's the case on all 500s. Yes you might have a UniAir module failure or DMF let go, but most of the faults on the 500 are boot wiring and exterior door handles, plus suspension wear & rear beam corrosion - and they can happen on any 500. The trade off with the TwinAir is it's an absolute hoot to drive. The 1.2 is a safer bet from a reliability perspective, but not as fun in my view.

The diesel is largely pointless in the 500/Panda unless you're doing loads of long journeys - it has the potential reliability risks of the TwinAir but without the fun drive - in this case the worst of both Worlds. They're not terrible engines per se (few Fiat engines are, despite the reputation) and I owned an Alfa MiTo with an 85bhp version of the 1.3 diesel for 3 years with no problems, as with the engines in all 6 Fiat's/Alfa's i've owned. It's by far the least rattly Fiat diesel I've driven (in 85bhp form) but I imagine even that'll be magnified in a car with as little sound proofing as the 500/Panda. You'll also have trouble finding one that's not absolutely clapped out, in a 500 especially, as so few sold.

Thanks; really useful insight from someone who knows all three engines well.

 

[Piccolo Nero e Bella]

Having driven both my 500C Lounge Twinair and my wife's 500C Pop 1.2 side by side for six years I have to say the two cars are chalk and cheese. I found the 1.2 Dualogic sedate (and smoother riding on the 14" steels) but the manual TA (with a somewhat harsher ride on its 16" alloys) is always a willing collaborator when I want a bit of fun. And the growl from under the bonnet when you put the boot in is a hoot.

 

[DutchWheels]

I've just got to say that this forum and the depth of interaction and info available is wonderful. So many responses and genuinely helpful advice to my question - thanks all.

It's the least powerful car I've had since a Mini 850 in the mid 80's but you can row it along OK. And the FIRE engine is surely the lowest-maintenance option out there when compared with TA's and diesels especially when they get older.

I'm not telling the OP to get a 1.2, I'm just sharing my experiences.

A nice tidy 1.2 will likely satisfy all my driving desires for now - I'm a simple man and really enjoyed chugging along on my slow Royal Enfield motorbike more than any of the faster ones I had! Cheap tax, cheap insurance, more fun than our big family Skoda - sounds like a winner.

That said, I'm currently trying to convince myself I can find a little extra cash and get an Abarth - you Abarth fan-folk on here seem to love it and most of the video reviews I've seen online, even for older ones, sing it's praises. Well, they admit it's not a great car if you look at it sensibly, but they all say it's a heck of a lot of fun

I've seen a few higher mileage (70-90k) ones for £6-7k that have good service history and look in good condition in the photos at least. Or I could stick to my £5k budget and get an even older higher mileage Abarth, but feel the lower mileage ones would be a slightly more sensible gamble.

 

[puntodeltathema]

Must admit I find my 2017 500 1.2 surprisingly eager (despite the Euro 6 tweaks) though one does need to wring it out...but then the FIRE engine could always do that, along with other great small capacity old-school Fiat engines.

However - just a word in support of the 100hp 1.4 16v engine in the 500 - getting on a bit now (last ones were 2010/11) but have just a bit more go than the 1.2 (i.e. 2 seconds quicker to 60, to the extent that counts). If you don't like white (!) they can be difficult to find but might be worth thinking about. Check the rear beam axle which seems to be the main issue on the early 500s now.

With apologies if you've already been round that block on this thread!

Nick

 

[varesecrazy]

Interesting that people think the 1242 is ok.. Im finding mine gutless..
but I'm well out of practice.. 3,000 rpm has been the 'amber line' for the last 8 years ;-)

 

[vexorg]

Interesting that people think the 1242 is ok.

I think "ok" is the right term, it will get you to tesco and back without too much issue. That's what you expect from any car, so the minimum is "ok"

 

[varesecrazy]

Best engine Ive had was the TwinSpark Alfa.. power AND mpg (what VVT should be for..)
Govt charging £250 VED killed that

 

[puntodeltathema]

I probably spend a lot of my time a bit over @veresecrazy 's amber line....much to the annoyance of the "EcoDrive" app.

The general established need to hold the gears and rev out in small n/a Fiats is a bit in tension with that app and the "Shift" indicator which I universally ignore.

 

[Piccolo Nero e Bella]

When you're hiking along in busy traffic who's got time to be looking for little arrows in the display? In any case, on bright sunny days mine's invisible due to reflection...!

 

[AC43]

I've just got to say that this forum and the depth of interaction and info available is wonderful. So many responses and genuinely helpful advice to my question - thanks all.



A nice tidy 1.2 will likely satisfy all my driving desires for now - I'm a simple man and really enjoyed chugging along on my slow Royal Enfield motorbike more than any of the faster ones I had! Cheap tax, cheap insurance, more fun than our big family Skoda - sounds like a winner.

That said, I'm currently trying to convince myself I can find a little extra cash and get an Abarth - you Abarth fan-folk on here seem to love it and most of the video reviews I've seen online, even for older ones, sing it's praises. Well, they admit it's not a great car if you look at it sensibly, but they all say it's a heck of a lot of fun

I've seen a few higher mileage (70-90k) ones for £6-7k that have good service history and look in good condition in the photos at least. Or I could stick to my £5k budget and get an even older higher mileage Abarth, but feel the lower mileage ones would be a slightly more sensible gamble.

Let us know what you test and what you think.

I started my search looking at Abarths and MINI Cooper S's. I got as far as test driving a Cooper but was appalled at the ride which put me off MINI's for good.

Before I scratched the Abarth itch, SWMBO reminded me were looking for a local runabout that we could run on buttons and that we could afford to insure for my 17 year old. And one with "the retro bits on it". Ahh....I see.....

I wouldn't be at all surprised if you test, like and buy an Abarth. Like all 500's they're not perfect but they sound like a complete hoot to drive.