I think the issue here is how its mapped. They stuck it on a dyno and could see its output was heavily restricted. The old cars we had that were low powered had nothing to stop them giving it all they had so are not comparable.

They can't even really remap them for customers as they'd have to adjust the tax bracket.

Welcome to the future :(

So. Shark performance and the likes are due to get even more busy then? Haha

No hills in the EU lab.

 

It'll get up but it'll need the tits revved off it.

 

doubt it'll get 60mpg then.

I really find it hard to believe that it won't go up hill.

 

In the video the presenter drove one up a 10% gradient.

 

It looked like she approached in 3rd gear and at no point did I see her change down... the car got slower and slower until it stalled... Surely if she'd have changed down to 2nd and get the engine revving a bit!!!

 

My other vehicle is a 1980s mobile home. It weighs over 2.5 tonnes... and that's before 2 adults, full tank of water, luggage, food, beer (of course!) etc etc... it had 72ps when new and although it is by no means fast it will make it up hills... like any vehicle though it does require some planning and to be in the right gear at the right time. A few revs help too!

 

Phil

This is why i like a car with plenty of poke, i pay threw the nose for pollution tax but i can go up in whatever gear i like

The line...."Have you worked out a trick to get up hills"....I reckon it is change gear, a lower one.

I took my Citigo 75ps up most of the passes in the lakes and had no problem ,Hard knott pass I had to stop because of one t***in a4x4 I pulled away fine using the correct gear.That was with 3 adults and one large choccie Labrador on board ,so I would say that would be a lot fairer test for the Fiat 500 and just so auntie Beeb can have "a pc" test have both male and female 'young and old do the test .if the Fiat can't get up there then it has a problem.[emoji4]

There are lots of complaints on the fiat forum. Some from experienced drivers so I doubt it's all the driver's fault.

Do the Volkswagen Group 'Up! - Mii - Citigo have Euro 6 Emission engines yet or are they still Euro 5 ?

I think they are Euro 5 in the Citigo/Up!/Mii

 

Talking of the Mk3 Fabia with the 59bhp engine, I think some people have forgotten the Mk1 Fabia was sold with a 1.2 6V engine with only 54 bhp. or the 1.4 MPI with 60bhp or 68bhp and i would be surprised if the Mk3 is a heavier car then the Mk1.

 

So i think it is still "progress" compared to the previous mk's of Fabia

I think they are Euro 5 in the Citigo/Up!/Mii

 

Talking of the Mk3 Fabia with the 59bhp engine, I think some people have forgotten the Mk1 Fabia was sold with a 1.2 6V engine with only 54 bhp. or the 1.4 MPI with 60bhp or 68bhp and i would be surprised if the Mk3 is a heavier car then the Mk1.

 

So i think it is still "progress" compared to the previous mk's of Fabia

Only available in Europe was also the MkI 1.0 with a whopping 50Bhp!

Indeed the new Skoda Fabia from 2015 is said to be lighter.

 

& 59 bhp but Euro 6.

So it will be interesting to see if it is good for its output.

 

Obviously those with 1.2 Fiat 500 with the same BHP when a Euro 5 Compliant Engine were happier than those that got the Euro 6 ones,

or they were just not voicing there unhappieness.

 

http://autoexpress.co.uk/skoda/fabia/89261/skoda-fabia-10-se-2014-review

 

Time will tell once UK Drivers get into the All New 3rd Generation Skoda Fabia if it is suitable to carry 4 and luggage 

out and about on Hilly roads and byways and on even on motorways or if the 1.0 3 cylinder is best staying in Cities in the West that are built on the flat.

Milton Keynes maybe..

Edited 9 November, 201411 yr by goneoffSKi

Indeed the new Skoda Fabia from 2015 is said to be lighter.

 

& 59 bhp but Euro 6.

So it will be interesting to see if it is good for its output.

 

Obviously those with 1.2 Fiat 500 with the same BHP when a Euro 5 Compliant Engine were happier than those that got the Euro 6 ones,

or they were just not voicing there unhappieness.

this drive for lower emissions surely needs to be balanced in a way that doesn't compromise safety IMHO. If a car can't get up a hill then it's unfit for purpose.

this drive for lower emissions surely needs to be balanced in a way that doesn't compromise safety IMHO. If a car can't get up a hill then it's unfit for purpose.

I agree. A decent test drive would defo be needed if looking at the lower output engines to see if it suits peoples needs.

Where its hilly, the 1.2 tsi might be more suitable.

But then, my fabias only got 70bhp (more torque than the 1.0 litre though, in the right places) and i live in the Peak District. Its fine. Its not exactly fast up hill, but it doesnt struggle to keep up with the flow of traffic either.

Apart from that time when i was following a C63. It couldnt keep up then...

When we lived in Huddersfield, my wife had a 750cc Panda.  It had 34 raging horses under the bonnet and it did just fine.  She used to regularly travel with 5 people in it to the university and back and if you've ever been to Holmfirth then you'll know there's a hill or two round there. 

 

I had a black Panda at the time with the 1000cc engine in and I had all of 45bhp to play with.  Again, I managed over the four years I owned it to go up and down hills and back up them again without getting out to push at any time.  (don't ask about the brakes though)

 

I'm not saying that changing gear didn't have to happen and there was a definite need for forward planning when approaching hills.  The flip side of all this was that it was great fun and it taught us both how to drive.  Also, they were both pretty much unstoppable in snow for some reason, managing to get places that proper 4x4 vehicles struggled.

 

Even when I upgraded to a super powerful Capri 1.6 Lazer I only had 73bhp to propel us along so in my humble and slightly polemic point of view I reckon it's all a load of codswallop and people should learn to use their gears correctly. 

  

 

edit - My dream car at the time was a 4x4 Sisley.  Happy days....

 

Leaded fuel was pretty good pre 1992, & before it was totally withdrawn in the UK around 2000.

& people just took it for granted they got around 30 mpg in petrol cars & more in Diesels, but they needed the Oil changed more often.

 

Obviously people got cancer, but then the Hospital Waiting lists were shorter, there were more ambulances,

& they got to you quicker.

 

The good old days.

My Aunt had a Panda 750cc the dam thing never went up hills when we were kids. I didnt know it only had a 34bhp... all becomes clear now she did upgrade to a Skoda Favourite a the time blue with brown seats :( still it was like a rocket in comparison.

When we lived in Huddersfield, my wife had a 750cc Panda.  It had 34 raging horses under the bonnet and it did just fine.  She used to regularly travel with 5 people in it to the university and back and if you've ever been to Holmfirth or even just seen an episode of "Last of the Summer Wine" then you'll know there's a hill or two round there. 

 

 

Fixed that for you.

Edited 10 November, 201411 yr by KenONeill

I learnt to drive in my mums 750cc Panda (probably explains alot). It never had any issues with hills, so long as you timed the gear changes down right it just about kept momentum.

 

When I moved to St Albans (from York), my mk Astra sr broke down so my mum kindly lent me her 2nd 750cc Panda, I did 3 months of weekend trips to > from St Albans with a 750cc Panda loaded from floor to ceiling (only seat fitted was the drivers seat), I didn't have any trouble on the motorways (even the inclines with crawler lanes), at 1 point I even had my 50cc scooter stood upright in the car (without having to dismantle it!)

 

There is alot to be said for cars with lower powered engines & everyone at some point (prefably earlier in their driving career) should have one, they are great fun to drive (still capable of breaking speed limits) and IMO you can learn alot about car control/gear selection/braking distances etc.

 

I've not long since started riding a 125cc motorbike with a whole 9-10bhp, it's like driving my mum's Panda again, having to think carefully about gear changes/setting off speed at junctions etc.

 

While I know this isn't a Panda thread, I love how they managed to fit the spare wheel under the bonnet

My first car was a 1.0 Polo Coupe (45bhp I think). It would go up hills fine... It was a case of "rev it till the valves popped out the bonnet" but it did it!

 

There are lots of complaints on the fiat forum. Some from experienced drivers so I doubt it's all the driver's fault.

 

It defintiely seems that it's not just down to the driver then.

 

Would love to have a test drive with one and try it on a hill... I'd have to drive outside of York a bit though to find one!

 

Garrowby Hill on the way to the coast is always a good test of a vehicle.

 

The motorhome is 2nd gear all the way at about 20-30km/h!

 

I do love going up in the car though... get to bottom and plant my foot to the floor and it's off!

 

Phil

Cars of the recent past did well with low bhp because they weren't loaded with 600Kg of safety equipment,electrical toys and nice inefficient low profiles

 

Dachia seem to be making a business of simple cars maybe we'll see a bit of a bandwagon of cheap light simple cars that can manage on ickle little hp figures.

 

I had a ****ty 1989 Mk2 Astra 4 speed with a massive 75 raging horses can't find the figures now but it would do 0-60 in about 13s and manage about 45-50mpg. But it had nothing to weigh it down and skinny little 155 tyres. Other than safety not much has moved on, cars have more stuff but performance and mpg hasn't shifted all that much really.

Garrowby Hill on the way to the coast is always a good test of a vehicle.

 

 

 

 

 

I think that was the hill that my first car (Datsun Cherry F11 Saloon) got it throttle stuck full on on the way up!  

I dont understand owners complaining about lack of grunt...

Why did they buy a car with a hairdrier for an engine in the first place... Losers

I dont understand owners complaining about lack of grunt...

Why did they buy a car with a hairdrier for an engine in the first place... Losers

While its not my cup of tea, you should be able to buy a car that isn't quick, but can actually get around and is fit for purpose. A car that has been factory mapped so that it pulls the power at the slightest hint that the engine may produce some carbon dioxides is not.

They walked into a Dealership & bought a new 14 Plate or 64 Plate small light car with a 1.2 litre engine.

Not some 600cc, 900cc or 1000cc engined car that i very much doubt they thought would not be fit for purpose.

(they might have been better to though as it turns out.)

 

They could have bought some 2.5 even a 3 litre Diesel with DPF only to find out  that was not much cope as a Commuting City car.

 

As many have since 2009.

I dont understand owners complaining about lack of grunt...

Why did they buy a car with a hairdrier for an engine in the first place... Losers

Theres various reasons for this isnt there.

-just want something to nip around in (second car might be a ferrari, you dont know)

- dont want to pay a fortune in fuel

- road tax cheaper

- purchase price is cheaper

- insurance is cheaper

The list goes on.

Non of which make them losers.

They just expect their car to go up hills, which i think is a fair shout tbh.