General TwinAir Thread (including MPG)

[grimwau]

Just washed the car and whilst wiping down the door shut on the drivers side found proof positive that the 500 is just, as others have christened it "a Panda in a posh frock."

 

[Mikey1985]

Just washed the car and whilst wiping down the door shut on the drivers side found proof positive that the 500 is just, as others have christened it "a Panda in a posh frock."

lmao, that's pretty bad. I think it's good that it's related to a good old reliable car like the panda, the bad thing is it doesn't just say fiat panda but 1.2 active!! deary me :bang:

 

[306maxi]

That's a funny one Tony! I wonder if yours has had the 16bhp downgrade to match up with the sticker?

 

[keeforelli]

Just washed the car and whilst wiping down the door shut on the drivers side found proof positive that the 500 is just, as others have christened it "a Panda in a posh frock."

er- is this on your new twn air???

you could close the 'compliment' thread quickly with this pic too

 

[grimwau]

That's a funny one Tony! I wonder if yours has had the 16bhp downgrade to match up with the sticker?

Detuned you say (That's supposed to be read in a Yoda voice) well I'm gonna give it a remap by sticking a 105BHP sticker over the top of it as soon as the model comes out.

er- is this on your new twn air???

you could close the 'compliment' thread quickly with this pic too

Unfortunately, Yes! I didn't have much street cred to start with but now I'll just be relegated to tree hugging forums.

 

[grimwau]

Just to remain faithful to the thread title (including MPG)

 

[keeforelli]

Just to remain faithful to the thread title (including MPG)

being used to the economy i have had with the MJ engine, im really not sure i could go back to 35MPG to get this engine...

though the jist all the way through has been 'wait till it losens up'.. its a LONG way off even the 1.2 economy at the mo.

what mix of driving have you done to achieve this?

 

[Ms_Cinq]

If its true you found that Panda sticker on your 500
you could go to a motoring magazine with the story. Hilarious!

I wont be buying twinair given your poor mpgs. I feel sorry for you if you bought it for the economy, but am grateful for the information guys and girls. Much appreciated.

 

[306maxi]

Just to remain faithful to the thread title (including MPG)

What sort of roads though Tony and what sort of traffic? How many trips was that? Admittedly that does look very poor but I reckon on its summer tyres our 1.2 wouldn't be far off that in the right (or is that wrong?) conditions. If we had the winter tyres on our car which had 3 tanks around 47 mpg would probably be doing about 40 I reckon.

 

[D4nny8oy]

Just washed the car and whilst wiping down the door shut on the drivers side found proof positive that the 500 is just, as others have christened it "a Panda in a posh frock."

FFS! Fiat need to take Stevie Wonder off sticker duty- they made the same cock-up with the Grande 1.2/1.4 stickers.

 

[Tlbarrs]

being used to the economy i have had with the MJ engine, im really not sure i could go back to 35MPG to get this engine...

though the jist all the way through has been 'wait till it losens up'.. its a LONG way off even the 1.2 economy at the mo.

what mix of driving have you done to achieve this?

Hi grimwau is your sat nav the B&M Tom Tom that is fitted to the evo ? If so do all the B&M functions work as they should . Thanks

 

[grimwau]

I remember you saying you did around 70-75mph on motorways fairly frequently grimwau, how hard does it rev during this baring in mind you should treat a new car fairly gently?

p.s any more worries regarding the oil leak??

At 70MPH it is pulling less than 3000RPM and despite the opinion that new engines don't need to be run in I am from the old school and always try to break an engine in gently. I suppose it is due to how things were done when I began my apprenticeship, back in the day, lol.

I always remember when a RR or Bentley had it's engine reconditioned the mechanic who carried out the work had to drive the car to the petrol pumps and fill the tank with fuel and add the equivalent amount of shots of REDEX and then drive the car for at least 60 miles before double checking everything back in the workshop.

The car is going back to the dealership on Saturday for them to give it the once over and also to fit a new microphone.

If its true you found that Panda sticker on your 500
you could go to a motoring magazine with the story. Hilarious!

I wont be buying twinair given your poor mpgs. I feel sorry for you if you bought it for the economy, but am grateful for the information guys and girls. Much appreciated.

I'm keeping an open mind at the moment regarding the MPG and hoping it will improve after it has a few more miles under it's belt.

I did buy it for it's perceived economy despite reading in the press about how poorly it fared in the consumption stakes. I couldn't perceive how two cylinders, the size of lager cans could possibly achieve such poor figures. I had a Hillman Imp that was also 875cc and I had no problem achieving 50MPG from it. I also can't understand how using so much fuel can make it eco friendly.

wont you lose out alot selling the twinair so early?....this is also making me consider the abarth as a next car...AGAIN!..

That is the price you pay when you buy new I'm afraid. But, it isn't so much about the money as the fact that it was a present for the wife and it hasn't given her the wow factor I was hoping for. I have to admit that if the car was for myself I would be OK with it.

What sort of roads though Tony and what sort of traffic? How many trips was that? Admittedly that does look very poor but I reckon on its summer tyres our 1.2 wouldn't be far off that in the right (or is that wrong?) conditions. If we had the winter tyres on our car which had 3 tanks around 47 mpg would probably be doing about 40 I reckon.

Two motorway trips of over 100 miles at 65 - 75mph, the rest to and from work, 5 miles each way and she starts at 6.30AM so hardly any traffic until the return journey at 3.30PM, plus the obligatory shopping trips. Have to say that when it is available she has quickly got used to the Stop and Start.

FFS! Fiat need to take Stevie Wonder off sticker duty- they made the same cock-up with the Grande 1.2/1.4 stickers.

At least Stevie had an excuse, lol.

Hi grimwau is your sat nav the B&M Tom Tom that is fitted to the evo ? If so do all the B&M functions work as they should . Thanks

Yep! Once paired to the car's BLUE&ME the car symbol appeared in the display so all the functions, ie. ECODrive and gearchange reminders, Fuel consumption figures, Media Player etc. are all displayed and work fine. To be honest I didn't actually need another SatNav as my TomTom 730T worked fine and I had all the latest maps, POIs and cameras etc. it was mainly for the tidyness and the fact that the wife can control the USB music without having to keep leaning across to use the steering wheel controls to change tracks.

Will do, it should be next month/no later than March, along with the Bi-colour option for the hatch too if that's your thing. If i can get 46 MPG from an Abarth, i have no doubt you could get the same, probably more!

One thing you may want to note is that the 1.4 Multiair engine is arriving in the Abarth 500 next year, so maybe that's the time to change. By then it will be Multiair 2, so expect around 150 to 160 BHP standard and 60+ MPG!

Cheers Draig, not really bothered too much about outright power but I would certainly get your guy to programme a box giving more torque/better fuel consumption as he seems really on the ball. Anyway, I'm not exactly convinced at the moment that the multiair is the answer to improved fuel consumption. if you see where I'm coming from.

 

[Nats]

These mpg figures are quite concerning - I know engines need loosening up but these figures are half the advertised mpg!!

I actually only changed my car for the better fuel economy as the saving in petrol would go a long way towards the extra cost of a new car per month. My existing car is only 2 years old so I'm losing a lot by part exchanging it and if it turns out that the twinair doesn't achieve anywhere near the advertised figure I will really regret getting it due to the extra cost

The advertised figures have to have been achieved somewhere surely, and would the car which was tested have also been run in for so many miles? I'm struggling to understand!

If it does turn out that in the long run these cars aren't achieving near to these figures then surely they have been mis-sold as I certainly wouldn't have bought one and would have gone for 1.2 in a year or so.

 

[RobinPJ]

These mpg figures are quite concerning - I know engines need loosening up but these figures are half the advertised mpg!!

I actually only changed my car for the better fuel economy as the saving in petrol would go a long way towards the extra cost of a new car per month. My existing car is only 2 years old so I'm losing a lot by part exchanging it and if it turns out that the twinair doesn't achieve anywhere near the advertised figure I will really regret getting it due to the extra cost

The advertised figures have to have been achieved somewhere surely, and would the car which was tested have also been run in for so many miles? I'm struggling to understand!

If it does turn out that in the long run these cars aren't achieving near to these figures then surely they have been mis-sold as I certainly wouldn't have bought one and would have gone for 1.2 in a year or so.

Sadly manufacturers know the official testing regime for fuel consumption and so no doubt will tweak their engine management systems to get the best possible results in those precise conditions - which are so clearly not replicated in the "real world". In the past it may be that there was less of this as buyers were probably less interested in the economy/environment. With fuel prices and ecowarriors where they are today, this is only going to get worse.

It's much like crash testing - if you ever have a "side pole impact" that replicates the Euro NCAP test (http://www.euroncap.com/Content-Web...-a046-e586550c3ece/pole-side-impact.aspx)then you will probably walk away unharmed, but move the parameters around a little and the car - designed to score highly in that specific test - may not fare so well (and neither may you).

At one level it is the manufacturers "playing the game" - at another it makes the tests a lot less meaningful. In the case of the Twinair, unless something pretty dramatic happens as the engines loosen up, the tests will be meaningless - and I suspect Fiat will have some angry punters to deal with (especially given how they have priced the TwinAir over the 1.2).

 

[Nats]

Yes, I know that realistically you can knock a few miles off the figures they publish but I've never heard of anything so far off as this|!!

It's too early to know what will happen and you never know, with it being a new type of engine, maybe it really will loosen up to that extent! I for one really hope so as I'm sure the dealers do too

 

[Venters]

To be fair. Tonys 35mpg is by far the lowest figure I've even heard of for the twin. I'd very much doubt if this is going to be anything like the average we find for twins by this time next year.
Fiat has literally spend 100s of millions of Euros developing this technology.

 

[RobinPJ]

To be fair. Tonys 35mpg is by far the lowest figure I've even heard of for the twin. I'd very much doubt if this is going to be anything like the average we find for twins by this time next year.
Fiat has literally spend 100s of millions of Euros developing this technology.

Is there any way to test if Tony's car is doing something wrong? Emissions test?

 

[Mikey1985]

Sadly manufacturers know the official testing regime for fuel consumption and so no doubt will tweak their engine management systems to get the best possible results in those precise conditions

Sorry but MPG figures are regulated by the government and no engine tweaks can be made whatsoever. They use expert drivers to achieve the figures and sadly most of us out there are not experts! The mpg figure has to be always attainable albeit with great difficulty.

Grimwau, I know you hate eco drive but it is a very good measure of a persons ability to drive well under eco conditions. I will be taking all your mpg figures with a pinch of salt unless you were to consider posting a screenshot of your overall eco rating out of 100, I think that's fair.

p.s it's unfortunate Fiat released the car during the freezing cold winter, this is definately harming the press the car is getting. The cold weather coupled with the car's rev happy nature is contributing alot to the low mpg figures we are hearing about i'm sure.

 

[RobinPJ]

Sorry but MPG figures are regulated by the government and no engine tweaks can be made whatsoever.

Sorry I must have not made myself clear. I meant that precisely because all cars are tested on the same basis there is the possibility for manafacturers to make sure that their cars perform well under those specific conditions, but less well in real life.

Another example is noise regulations where some manafucturers use butterfly valves that only open when the engine revs past the point at which noise tests are performed.

 

[grimwau]

Grimwau, I know you hate eco drive but it is a very good measure of a persons ability to drive well under eco conditions. I will be taking all your mpg figures with a pinch of salt unless you were to consider posting a screenshot of your overall eco rating out of 100, I think that's fair.

Mikey, you can take them with a shovelfull of salt if you desire but the fact remains that I am an experienced driver and I know how to get the best economy from my cars. The same trip to the dealers in my diesel would show a shade over 80MPG whereas in the TwinAir I am lucky to achieve 45MPG under the same driving conditions.

You seem to be more uptight about this than I am and you don't even have a twinair.

I said that I am keeping an open mind about the fuel consumption until I have clocked up more miles, I would ask that you also wait as by that time we might have some more owners contributing to the debate.

As Venters has stated, my figures are lowest he has seen for the twin so perhaps there could be an underlying problem. There was talk of software upgrades due to incorrect mapping but as far as I know any software updates were applied at the factory before shipping.