General Thinking of a new 319 Panda

[The Panda Nut]

Well I just bought one, and I cannot tell you how much I HATE it. It is an uneconomical, gutless and characterless tool. Its not just fat, its ugly!

This new 900 cc car does at least 39mpg driven by my Mrs who used to get nearly 80 mpg out of our 2.2 Laguna dT and a lot lot less than the Panda 100 it replaced. I expected 45 as a reasonable expectation from their claim of 49/67mpg. No chance! Not even on powerless eco mode. How can they get away with this totally unrealistic economy claim is beyond me?

I now hear that new brake discs & relining the brakes could cost £800! See the 319 Forum.

Service intervals are only 9000 miles but they don't actually do anything every other time, just look at the B thing because it seems to have issues.

The uconnect radio is a total pain and requires me to ahve a new phone, so thanks to Fiat I need two phones, one for each car as they wont accept the same one!

AVOID this car if you are wavering. I feel totally and utterly HAD by this purchase. The car has NO advantages over the old model as far as I can see and a lot of disadvantages. I could have had a new engine, gearbox, re-spray and leather interior for less than this car cost......... (Sorry forgot the cheaper road tax for buyers before until 1/4/17, after that???)

I know where I will be on 20th Jan 2020. Buying a new car and not one of these silly things.

The car is so bad on fuel my Mrs now drives the Bravo to work as it costs half - and I mean that - in fuel that the Panda does.

Don't say you were not warned.

 

[TobiasBB]

sell it? or return it...

I have the 169 2004 version, its also quite gutless and thirsty, but usefull those times when you get stuck on a really rough road or need to traverse that elevated grass/stone thing between two lanes (carriageway according to my dictionary?)... best thing is when you are in front of someone in a lowered sports-car and they have to do a u-turn..

 

[Goudrons]

There's also lots of opinion around regards the twinair engine around, none of which try to pull the wool over anyone's eyes when it comes to mpg, yes it's no where near official figures, but then a quick look at Honest Johns real mpg site will confirm no pure ICE cars actually meet theirs either.

39mpg isn't great for a small city hatchback, but for a pertol 4x4 it's pretty peerless, my last petrol 4x4 returned between 8 and 12 mpg, I only got 25mpg out of the replacement diesel version and they were slower, nowhere near as good to drive and a lot more to service and repair.

There's been various owners reviews of the newer Panda 4x4 on this site and elsewhere, most have been quite honest in my opinion (I own one myself).

Those that have offered their opinion and ran them for a while will tell you that the engine needs running in and they become much better after 12-15k.

Mpg will steadily improve, power in Eco gets much better and the gearbox gets much slicker.

Mine dragged my bike on a trailer back from Kent and around the M25 in Eco yesterday and it happily lugged it about at 60-70mph and returned 48 mpg for the trip, some of that was shuffling along in London traffic.

But writing this isn't going to be much help to anyone, people have been making decisions on buying new cars long before reviews became so popular.

Most, I guess made their initial decision on looks and I don't think anyone in their right mind decide to buy a car they already thought was ugly and fat, but buying one and telling everyone that they purposely bought a fat and ugly car might bring into question the purchasers credibility when offering their views.

I guess others will source information regarding their purchase from the sellers representative and their brochures, information like running, service and repair costs and I would think information like phone compatibility are usually readily available.

Test drives are quite popular, dealers tend to entice a test drive long before the messy business of finance comes into view, it helps them if you fall for the shine new metal first.
It's a good time for the would be purchaser to gauge if they actually want and can live with it.

Personally, I don't think it's the best 4x4 or the best Panda, I've had more than a few of both other the years.
The new 4x4 Panda is far too expensive now the Dacia Duster's hit these shores.
The later 1.2's don't drive anywhere as nice as they did until 2014.

But my biggest niggle is with the high spec/high cost cars that we somehow convince ourselves we want.
The Panda has always been about cheap motoring that offered just enough of what you actually needed without the flimflam, which is why out of all of the Pandas we've owned over the year I think our 2012 1.2 Pop is the best, but that's just my opinion.

 

[DaveMcT]

Some brand new cars feel terrible for the first 1000 miles until the engine has properly bedded in. They then feel as much better again after 10,000 though you really spot that as its so gradual.

They DO NOT benefit from gentle treatment when new. That results in a tight slow and thirsty engine. My Seicento 900 and current Panda both had that problem - driven by Miss Daisy from new and accordingly as tight as a duck's.

The fix was a few (a lot with the Sei) hard and fast motorway drives. The Sei was flat out at 80 so that's what I did with it. To begin with it would struggle to get there but after a while I was getting well over 50mpg going flat out. The good old days of pre Euro **** regulations.

Was I being brutal? Not at all - a 900cc that makes just 40bhp is way under stressed so going flat out wont hurt it. Ditto the new 900 twin (basic model) and indeed the 1200 fours.

 

[The Panda Nut]

Some brand new cars feel terrible for the first 1000 miles until the engine has properly bedded in. They then feel as much better again after 10,000 though you really spot that as its so gradual.

They DO NOT benefit from gentle treatment when new. That results in a tight slow and thirsty engine. My Seicento 900 and current Panda both had that problem - driven by Miss Daisy from new and accordingly as tight as a duck's.

The fix was a few (a lot with the Sei) hard and fast motorway drives. The Sei was flat out at 80 so that's what I did with it. To begin with it would struggle to get there but after a while I was getting well over 50mpg going flat out. The good old days of pre Euro **** regulations.

Was I being brutal? Not at all - a 900cc that makes just 40bhp is way under stressed so going flat out wont hurt it. Ditto the new 900 twin (basic model) and indeed the 1200 fours.

That's a good point you make about slow driving, and one I had really forgotten, so I will at least take the thing out and drive it a bit harder for a while to ensure it beds in properly. I do have to go back over 20 years to identify a less economical car I have owned though. Thanks for the idea.

 

[JCarp16]

I have a 2WD TA. Have had it from new and have covered 1800 miles so far. I love the TA engine but it takes some getting used to. I get 50mpg which is down on the 54mpg I used to get in the 169 1.2 but it is so much quicker than that. I like the addictive torque and the 2 cylinder noise - like a lawnmower crossed with a Merlin and a 2CV. The steering is a bit overlight but it rides fairly well on the crappy roads around me. I personally love the styling and the standard alloys that came with my lounge. I only have the basic radio in mine so can't comment on the UConnect. I think the visibility is great and the Stop start is also seamless. It's the best car I've owned and far more interesting than the Skoda it replaced.

 

[SB1500]

I hate reading these posts about the 319 Panda so much. Mostly because anyone I know in person with the new model always agrees about how 'tinny' and terrible the new models are.. One of them was former owner of my current 169 Panda for the better years of its life too! They also say how gutless and underpowered it is...

I've only ever moved it down the street etc. Not a proper drive.. All I can notice is that it's a bit smoother and everything is just so brand new and tight compared to my car .. Naturally.

I hate to believe all the bad feedback.. But there really must be something behind it for everyone to be coming out with the same opinion on the cake fed Pandas.

It's my ideal next car too. Cheap to buy, own, maintain, little bit odd, different, has character.. And the way I've saw it is a 1.2 is adequate power for its size. Certainly true for my car. I'm glad I don't have the power to overtake.. If I did I'd probably risk my life much more often. And before I get the chance to speed there's a good 15 seconds to think about it before I realise it's not worth it.. Just how bad can the new model be?!

...you could vomit in your mouth a bit thinking about the alternatives too. Literally the only one I like is the Sandero but I'm sure for the price it's got much less desirable characteristics. Meh.

 

[The Panda Nut]

I hate reading these posts about the 319 Panda so much. Mostly because anyone I know in person with the new model always agrees about how 'tinny' and terrible the new models are.. One of them was former owner of my current 169 Panda for the better years of its life too! They also say how gutless and underpowered it is...

I've only ever moved it down the street etc. Not a proper drive.. All I can notice is that it's a bit smoother and everything is just so brand new and tight compared to my car .. Naturally.

I hate to believe all the bad feedback.. But there really must be something behind it for everyone to be coming out with the same opinion on the cake fed Pandas.

It's my ideal next car too. Cheap to buy, own, maintain, little bit odd, different, has character.. And the way I've saw it is a 1.2 is adequate power for its size. Certainly true for my car. I'm glad I don't have the power to overtake.. If I did I'd probably risk my life much more often. And before I get the chance to speed there's a good 15 seconds to think about it before I realise it's not worth it.. Just how bad can the new model be?!

...you could vomit in your mouth a bit thinking about the alternatives too. Literally the only one I like is the Sandero but I'm sure for the price it's got much less desirable characteristics. Meh.

I do like the ride in the new car, which is very good, the 4x4 suspension is quite different to the FWD versions and seems the better for it - and the brakes are the same as the Panda 100 so they are very good too. Its just the fuel consumption. It has come up a little to 42.6 which is just about OK but this is in Eco mode and progress is best described as stately which drives me bonkers. Pandas are still miles better than anything else out there. Its just a shame my 4x4 Italian turbo isn't the new Alfa 4x4!

 

[AB100]

I hate reading these posts about the 319 Panda so much.

We have a 2011 Dynamic and a 2011 100hp.


1. The 319 isn't as good looking.
2. I'm not wild about the interior but the latest versions are better


That said, having rented a few 319s in Spain and driven 1500+ miles I'd say the 319 rides much better and is generally quieter (door mirror wind noise aside). The Euro6 felt a little more flexible than our Euro5, though they both feel hideous after the 100HP.You get used to it though.


Our Dynamic averages about 44mpg and the 100hp around 36mpg (the same as the 1.1 54bhp Seicento used to).


Personally I would bother with a 4WD as we have no need and why have the lesser fuel consumption.


I've always imagined a Twinair Lounge would be great fun but I'm yet to find one with an interior I could cope with.


The best riding Panda I drove was the Chrysler Ypsilon Platinum.

 

[JCarp16]

We have a 2011 Dynamic and a 2011 100hp.


1. The 319 isn't as good looking.
2. I'm not wild about the interior but the latest versions are better


That said, having rented a few 319s in Spain and driven 1500+ miles I'd say the 319 rides much better and is generally quieter (door mirror wind noise aside). The Euro6 felt a little more flexible than our Euro5, though they both feel hideous after the 100HP.You get used to it though.


Our Dynamic averages about 44mpg and the 100hp around 36mpg (the same as the 1.1 54bhp Seicento used to).


Personally I would bother with a 4WD as we have no need and why have the lesser fuel consumption.


I've always imagined a Twinair Lounge would be great fun but I'm yet to find one with an interior I could cope with.


The best riding Panda I drove was the Chrysler Ypsilon Platinum.

As the owner of a 2WD 319 TA Lounge I would highly recommend it.

As for the looks - I really didn't like them when I had my 169 but compared to the opposition I didn't like anything better. I now think the colour choice is really important and I like the styling now - especially in lounge trim.

The interior - I like it a lot because I spent three years surrounded by the funereal dark interior of a VAG product. It's like a breath of fresh air.

My MPG improves with every tank - currently on 50.5mpg (It was low 40s when new). I wouldn't go back to my 169 now because on long motorway journeys it was really tiring and it gave me backache. Mine was a lowly 1.2 dynamic though - can't speak for the 100.

 

[AB100]

As the owner of a 2WD 319 TA Lounge I would highly recommend it.

Yours has the best seats of the pre-upgrade. The dash....not so keen. Prefer grey.


Yes, the Twinair has the torque of the 100hp but without the £180 a year tax and hard ride. Sounds like a decent mix.


In my eyes it looks great in black (but there's no way I'd have black) and white.

 

[JCarp16]

Yours has the best seats of the pre-upgrade. The dash....not so keen. Prefer grey.


Yes, the Twinair has the torque of the 100hp but without the £180 a year tax and hard ride. Sounds like a decent mix.


In my eyes it looks great in black (but there's no way I'd have black) and white.

Yes. Black is great - mine looks great when clean, especially with the alloy wheels... However I live in an agricultural area and all the dust liberated from working the land ends up on your car... Black shows the dust very soon after cleaning. But my first car (Mk1 Panda 45 S) was black and it's a little bit like paying homage to the little black box...

As for the dash - I hated it when I first saw it - love it now. It's very 'marmite' but I think it's a mini-rebellion in the face of so many dark boring interiors. The only interesting ones I saw while test driving were the 500, the Panda and the Twingo. The other two cars are not allotment friendly enough and not really 'me' tbh

 

[The Panda Nut]

Some brand new cars feel terrible for the first 1000 miles until the engine has properly bedded in. They then feel as much better again after 10,000 though you really spot that as its so gradual.

They DO NOT benefit from gentle treatment when new. That results in a tight slow and thirsty engine. My Seicento 900 and current Panda both had that problem - driven by Miss Daisy from new and accordingly as tight as a duck's.

The fix was a few (a lot with the Sei) hard and fast motorway drives. The Sei was flat out at 80 so that's what I did with it. To begin with it would struggle to get there but after a while I was getting well over 50mpg going flat out. The good old days of pre Euro **** regulations.

Was I being brutal? Not at all - a 900cc that makes just 40bhp is way under stressed so going flat out wont hurt it. Ditto the new 900 twin (basic model) and indeed the 1200 fours.

The comments on running from all the Forum-ers have proved very accurate and I do now like the TA. Its the least driven car I have ever had doing not much more than 15% of my normal miles so its taking a long time to loosen off. I should remember this I suppose. The improvement came in a big change at exactly 4000 miles and its now getting progressively better as miles go on. As I am keeping it (hopefully) for 10 years I dont want to wear it out too quickly at the start.

 

[The Panda Nut]

The one hate I have for the 319is the refelction of the dash in the windscreen which is pretty off putting in some conditions. This is a pretty silly thing to design into a car. That a part the 319 is OK if a little tinny. I think the Poles chucked the specs in the bin before starting to build the 169. I just hope the new car looks as good as the old one which could nearly have passed as brand new inside and out after 105000 miles.

Pandas rule OK

 

[DaveMcT]

You can probably get a matt black mat for the dash refection problem. Agreed, you should not have to but costs should be minimal. Try some of the black anti slip matting.

For the power and economy problems - have a look here. The TwinAir power increase isn't huge but the torque gain is massive so economy should be loads better.

https://hyperchips.co.uk/

You wont hurt the engine by using it. Treating it gently while new is a sure way for it to wear out faster over the longer term as it will be creating more internal friction. That's not to say you should bounce the valves in every gear or slog it like a tractor but certainly don't do the sanctimonious snails pace acceleration and coasting to a stop that's so in fashion these days.

My bike is a BMW 1200 horizontal opposed twin. It makes around 100HP and it gets well used (on a private road of course). Its now done well over 70,000 and can be expected to do at least the same again until anything major needs doing. At 90 mph the engine is spinning at 5,500 rpm (red line 8000). It would do that all day long if my licence would survive.