I currently have a previous gen 1.2 Panda and am thinking about getting a new gen around about Christmas.Can anyone tell me if the TA has a lot more mid-range punch than the 1.2.The 0-60 time doesn't really matter too much but I do quite a lot of motorway miles so in gear grunt is quite important
General TA v 1.2 Mid-Range Punch
- Thread starter steffo
- Start date
Currently reading:
General TA v 1.2 Mid-Range Punch
Moultoneer
Member
My previous cars have all been turbo-diesels, and I've never felt short-changed by the Twinair's
torque at anything above 1500rpm. And there's always the option of going down a gear and enjoying
its lovely noise when revved a bit!
On the motorway this is rarely needed, my Trekking accelerates well in top (5th) at 50+ MPH.
I can't compare wih the 1.2 Panda as I've never tried one...
Chris
I moved from a petrol Mk3 4x4 (I think they were 1.2??) to a T/A Mk4 4x4.
The difference is night and day. As others have and will continue to say the T/A is a hoot to drive and makes the car very nippy indeed. Allow the revs to go above the sub 2.2k rpm 'economy zone' and this little motor really sparkles. Its not difficult to see instantaneous (and thankfully very brief) single-digit fuel consumption if you push it...
Though to be fair this is only in standing start brisk get-aways. Mid range acceleration is excellent and not quite so alarming on the fuel gauge.
The difference is night and day. As others have and will continue to say the T/A is a hoot to drive and makes the car very nippy indeed. Allow the revs to go above the sub 2.2k rpm 'economy zone' and this little motor really sparkles. Its not difficult to see instantaneous (and thankfully very brief) single-digit fuel consumption if you push it...
Though to be fair this is only in standing start brisk get-aways. Mid range acceleration is excellent and not quite so alarming on the fuel gauge.
Last edited:
If your sales guy is anything like the chap at Westover Salisbury, he will egg you on to really push the car. Why? Because you will grin like a Cheshire cat and be signing an order form before the afternoon is out. A simple trap that 'got me' and no doubt many other happy Mk4 customers.
I'm hoping they just let me take the car out unsupervised
But am looking forward to the experience. My first drive was in a beautiful little white Seat 850 coupe (a Fiat made in Spain). Firmly clutching the wooden spoked steering wheel I could get up to an electrifying 140kph - on a long downhill gradient. And I tell you I felt like Chuck Yeager watching that quivering speedo needle babbo_umbro
Established member
Mrs b_u had a Mk 3 MJ and now has a 1.2, I had a 100HP and now have a 4x4 TA. Even the 4x4 TA is much quicker than the 1.2, and in any gear from 2500 to 5500 revs it's at least as quick as the 100HP (though less economical - if that matters).
I recently test drove both a Panda 4x4 TA and the Panda 4x4 MJ back to back with a view to buying. I had also recently driven a 2007 1.2 Panda 4x4 and I regularly drive my wife's 500 1.2. The 1.2 (69bhp) engine in the 500 is a gem, it really suits the car and can be driven gently for economy but also responds to being given some revs and driven hard and pulls well to about 4500 revs. Admittedly the 1.2 in the Panda 4x4 was only 60bhp but it felt slow in comparison to our 500.
By comparison the TA in the Panda 4x4 was a really interesting drive, it pulls well from 1500rpm but seems to run out of puff above 4000, but has plenty of mid range pull. It also makes a fantastic noise particularly in 1st and 2nd gear although I found first a bit low TBH. The car feels light and agile. The 4x4 MJ feels less special and much more like an 'ordinary' car - I am used to driving my car, a diesel Volvo XC60, although the extra weight of the MJ makes it feel a little more 'planted'. It definitely needs the 6 speed gearbox though as it runs out of gears at m-way speeds, plus I don't know why they didn't fit the 4x4 MJ with the 95bhp engine that is used in the 500 MJ, especially as the price differential is the same as between the 500 TA and 500 MJ?
I'm currently looking for a good dea,l but if I buy it'll be the TA.
By comparison the TA in the Panda 4x4 was a really interesting drive, it pulls well from 1500rpm but seems to run out of puff above 4000, but has plenty of mid range pull. It also makes a fantastic noise particularly in 1st and 2nd gear although I found first a bit low TBH. The car feels light and agile. The 4x4 MJ feels less special and much more like an 'ordinary' car - I am used to driving my car, a diesel Volvo XC60, although the extra weight of the MJ makes it feel a little more 'planted'. It definitely needs the 6 speed gearbox though as it runs out of gears at m-way speeds, plus I don't know why they didn't fit the 4x4 MJ with the 95bhp engine that is used in the 500 MJ, especially as the price differential is the same as between the 500 TA and 500 MJ?
I'm currently looking for a good dea,l but if I buy it'll be the TA.
Great post!
The 1.2 is a lovely engine, but I guess if you are doing a lot of motorway miles it will struggle to offer brilliant acceleration above 60mph to be honest.
It certainly doesn't feel bad when you are doing 70 by any means, but to be fair to the little beast, its strengths lie in pulling the car along up to around 50mph. I find second gear going from 15-20mph to 40-45mph the most fun (and loud probably!
).The only way I could see the 1.2 being a better bet than the TA is if you are basing it on cost. The 1.2 is, generally speaking, a lot cheaper to buy, and although it's £30 a year tax as opposed to nothing for the TA, it will probably end up costing less to run than the TA in the long term.
But I think you will probably find the TA is going to be a better match for you based on what you have said. Nevertheless, try and test drive both - and don't be afraid to give either some welly!
mbellinger
New member
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2013
- Messages
- 5
- Points
- 2
I currently have an '05 4x4 1.2 which, as others have said, is the old 60bhp engine. It is a smooth quiet car but the engine is frankly rather gutless and it would struggle to pull the skin off of a rice pudding. This did not bother me as I use the car almost exclusively for suburban driving, which the gearing suits well, and the low speed smoothness is appreciated. The odd longer trips I have done on motorways etc have been fine as long as you accept that acceleration at 60-70mph is limited, to say the least and drive accordingly. I actually enjoy this facet of the drive experience, as I like the laid back relaxing style of the Panda, and when I want to go fast, I drive my other car, which is blessed with nearly 500 horsepower.
However, like the poster above I am about to change the car for the new model, also in 4x4 trim. I drove both the TA and the Multijet. I drove both cars back to back for over two hours on a wide variety of roads, by the way. My findings were the complete opposite of the previous correspondent. The TA makes a fantastic noise but that is about it. It felt over fussy compared to my laid back 1.2, and always seemd to be in the wrong gear. It was of course much more powerful in real terms, but the engine and car seemed unsuited to me - it may work better in the ordinary Panda chassis, and I know it does in the 500 as I have driven a few.
By contrast the MJ was perfect. This is one of the most refined small diesels in the marketplace anyway, and the tidal wave of low speed torque completely suits the 4x4 character. It also means a lot less gear changing, and I suspect in my mainly urban usage, its fuel consumption should also be rather better than the TA. Okay it doesn't sound as nice, but in every other dimension, for me, it outpointed the TA in this set up. Like I said, in a regular 2WD Panda chassis, it might be different.
So, as you may have guessed, I plumped for the Multijet. Anyway, I pick up the new car on Monday so the proof will be after living with it for a while, but for now at least, I am (very) happy with my choice.
However, like the poster above I am about to change the car for the new model, also in 4x4 trim. I drove both the TA and the Multijet. I drove both cars back to back for over two hours on a wide variety of roads, by the way. My findings were the complete opposite of the previous correspondent. The TA makes a fantastic noise but that is about it. It felt over fussy compared to my laid back 1.2, and always seemd to be in the wrong gear. It was of course much more powerful in real terms, but the engine and car seemed unsuited to me - it may work better in the ordinary Panda chassis, and I know it does in the 500 as I have driven a few.
By contrast the MJ was perfect. This is one of the most refined small diesels in the marketplace anyway, and the tidal wave of low speed torque completely suits the 4x4 character. It also means a lot less gear changing, and I suspect in my mainly urban usage, its fuel consumption should also be rather better than the TA. Okay it doesn't sound as nice, but in every other dimension, for me, it outpointed the TA in this set up. Like I said, in a regular 2WD Panda chassis, it might be different.
So, as you may have guessed, I plumped for the Multijet. Anyway, I pick up the new car on Monday so the proof will be after living with it for a while, but for now at least, I am (very) happy with my choice.
After reading the above comparisons between TA and Diesel Panda 4x4 I would like to offer my view on the subject.
In a perfect world we would have that diesel engine without DPF, so no worries, paired with the 6-speed gearbox that is used on the TA 4x4 model.
Then we could have a usable 1st gear for real 4x4 climbing abilities plus a usable 6th gear for quietness traveling at motorway speed, plus diesel real world fuel economy all around.
However, in the real world there are a couple (or more) problems with that arrangement.
The 6-speed gear box paired with that diesel engine might not fit in the available space.
The 6-speed gearbox paired with that diesel engine might be too expensive to begin with.
The 6-speed gearbox paired with that diesel engine might require other possibly expensive modifications as well because of higher torque (like a new clutch etc).
DPFs are required by law, so diesels having these could in the long run be proven unsuitable for continuous small journeys around town centers although salesmen usually claim that DPFs can regenerate while the engine is idling (yea, right!).
In view of the above, in the real world, the TA engine for the 4x4 seems like the only real option, at least to me.
In a perfect world we would have that diesel engine without DPF, so no worries, paired with the 6-speed gearbox that is used on the TA 4x4 model.
Then we could have a usable 1st gear for real 4x4 climbing abilities plus a usable 6th gear for quietness traveling at motorway speed, plus diesel real world fuel economy all around.
However, in the real world there are a couple (or more) problems with that arrangement.
The 6-speed gear box paired with that diesel engine might not fit in the available space.
The 6-speed gearbox paired with that diesel engine might be too expensive to begin with.
The 6-speed gearbox paired with that diesel engine might require other possibly expensive modifications as well because of higher torque (like a new clutch etc).
DPFs are required by law, so diesels having these could in the long run be proven unsuitable for continuous small journeys around town centers although salesmen usually claim that DPFs can regenerate while the engine is idling (yea, right!).
In view of the above, in the real world, the TA engine for the 4x4 seems like the only real option, at least to me.
You're right about the TA needing more gear changes - as it's a 'fizzy' little engine. The MJ does indeed have bags of torque but feels heavier and is definitely a gear short at m-way speeds, even the saleswoman admitted this!
If as you say, you mostly use your Panda for urban usage didn't you have any reservations about DPF issues? Also I don't think that the MJ justifies the £1000 price premium especially with the 5 spd 'box, not forgetting that it is it in the £105.00 VED bracket too.
Yep, all reasons y I went for the TA - that + novelty value and wanting to be a bit different
babbo_umbro
Established member
That's interesting - when Mrs b_u had a non-4x4 MJ I found that I was constantly rowing it along with the gear lever - much more so than the 100HP or my new 4x4 TA. I found the usable rev band in the MJ was from 2000 to about 4500 rpm - with nothing much happening at that top end - while the TA pulls from 2000 to 5500. Also the MJ eat front tyres.
Damn right Charlie! We spent 2 hours with the lovely Suki, who was happy letting me scoot around mini roundabouts (just 'checking any understeer tendencies'), as well as bombing down the A3 at 80mph.will we be able to detact the GRIN in your text..??,
Very impressive. And entertaining. And so was the car
Just running through options and prices now at home... 2 rear seats or three? Dunno, not planning on sitting back there! Think I'll go go for the spare wheel. And my wife wants electrically heated seats and screen. What else is worth going for??
Exciting times
Nick
Damn right Charlie! We spent 2 hours with the lovely Suki, who was happy letting me scoot around mini roundabouts (just 'checking any understeer tendencies'), as well as bombing down the A3 at 80mph.
Very impressive. And entertaining. And so was the car
Just running through options and prices now at home... 2 rear seats or three? Dunno, not planning on sitting back there! Think I'll go go for the spare wheel. And my wife wants electrically heated seats and screen. What else is worth going for??
Exciting times
Nick
If the sliding rear seat is available again then I can def recommend it. Also the climate control is very good..... Oh and get the leather steering wheel cos the std plastic one is awful!
Good shout about the sliding rear seats, according to the website they appear to be back. To be honest, we have used three seats a few times in the back (and it is nice to know that we can legally carry five people). But if the option is available then I think it would be a great shout as it would increase flexibility even more.
As for the steering wheel...meh!
A wheel's a wheel to me, but I do know what you mean about the quality of it compared to the leather one.Only other option I would recommend is the folding front passenger seat/table. Although I have actually taken out the plastic table bit (found it too annoying!), I have managed to fit a few really long items in the car. It's been absolutely brilliant!
