The (nuovo) Fiat 500 thread

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Automotive Insanity > The (nuovo) Fiat 500 thread

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

http://www.autolinedetroit.tv/show/1439?play

Here's an interview with FIAT's North American boss. No Automatic trans is available in the rest of the world, so they had to do one specifically for America.

I've been following the new 500 since it came out in 2006 or whatever. I really want one. :ohdear:

# ¿ Nov 23, 2010 01:20

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 23, 2024 15:29

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

The last generation Fusion (witht he Aisin/Toyota trans) was pretty much the most reliable car you could buy on the market. The only problem with the new Fusion is a software issue with the new Ford/GM trans that affected a small number of cars within a narrow range of build dates, and there's already a TSB for it. This has nothing to do with Mexico. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever to suggest that cars built in Mexico are of poor quality. ALL the common problems of the Jetta from 2 generations ago can be attributed to shoddy GERMAN parts and/or design. This is hardly surprising since most VW/Audi cars built in Germany are also (mostly) shoddily built garbage. The entire meme originates from racist American VW fanboys who need to blame browns for all their problems.

Besides, I've had unreliable cars my whole life. I worry about reliability like the English worry about the weather being too moist.

# ¿ Nov 24, 2010 01:01

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

If you watch/listen to the interview with the FIAT girl she says all the FIAT dealers will be in separate facilities.

# ¿ Nov 24, 2010 23:32

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

Why do people insist that the MINI is some kind of runaway success in North America? It's a very niche vehicle.

There isn't a single subcompact in the top 20.

Compared to large SUVs, subcompacts generally don't sell particularly well, especially not the MINI. IIRC GM's large SUVs are supply constrained this year, all their SUV plants are running at max capacity and they can't build enough trucks to meet demand. With wealth in the US increasingly being concentrated in the hands of boomers and older people who prefer SUVs, while unemployment is concentrated amongst the young, the trend does not suggest a bright future for subcompacts in the US.

Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at 17:35 on Nov 29, 2010

# ¿ Nov 29, 2010 17:27

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

Autism Sundae posted:

Because success of a car brand is measured against sales projections, not against random things like F-150 sales. Seriously, you have to suffer from some blunt force trauma to the head to look at a top 20 vehicles sold chart and say "no subcompacts, hmm they're all poo poo good sirs". BMW made a good amount of money on MINIs for a while, they don't move as many as Ford does with F-150 but the profit margins are much higher.

BMW makes a profit on MINI because the vast majority of MINI sales are in Europe and Asia. 4,000 ~$25k cars per months is nothing compared to 3,000 $60k X5s. Also, do you have any idea about the profit margins on the F-series trucks? Historically American BOF trucks and SUVs are the most profitable vehicles made by anyone in the world. This is recognized even by non-automotive publications. The claim that MINI profit margins are anywhere close to F-150 margins is extraordinary and you will need to show some kind of extraordinary evidence.

# ¿ Nov 29, 2010 18:09

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

Elephanthead posted:

Is there any reason fiat won't be using the world engine four banger? In turbo form if gets well over 200hp.

Why would they? The car was designed and released before the merger with Chrysler.

# ¿ Dec 31, 2010 04:21

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

KozmoNaut posted:

I'd have massive respect for them if they put the 1750 TBI engine in a 500, 230hp should be good for a few laughs, but I'm afraid that engine is Alfa-only, and the Giuletta QV is hella expensive...

It sounds ridiculous.

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/240904/alfa_romeo_1750_tbi.html

quote:

Looks like the V6, sonorous as it is, might be on borrowed time as the motor industry's latest example of intelligent downsizing breaks cover. So what's the secret?

It involves having a lot of valve-timing overlap � inlet and exhaust valves open together � between 1000 and 1800 rpm. This gives a direct path through the cylinder for the intake air, already compressed by the turbocharger, to add further airflow energy via the exhaust valve to the turbocharger's exhaust-driven turbine. The amount of escaping high-pressure air is quite small (it increases the total air draw by about 30 per cent) but it's enough dramatically to reduce turbo lag.

That's the scavenging bit � using the momentum of airflow to get the most air through the engine � but there's more. This being a direct-injection engine, fuel is injected only when and where it needs to burn which means, during this low-speed scavenging process, not on the inlet stroke. But just after the power stroke is completed and the hot exhaust gases are being expelled, another little squirt of fuel combines with the remaining oxygen and causes the gases to expand further in the exhaust manifold. This, of course, drives the turbo with yet more energy.

The key to all this is very close, and greatly variable, control of valve timing (on both camshafts), injection timing and ignition timing. The overlap progressively reduces up to 2000rpm, by which time the engine is behaving more like a regular, albeit still very torquey, turbo having suffered minimal lag up to that point.

And this Giuletta is putting out 230hp out of the 1.75l? I thought the 204hp 1.8t in the Mercedes E250 was impressive.

# ¿ Dec 31, 2010 19:19

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

NOTinuyasha posted:

How is the Kia Soul is the best selling subcompact in America? And how is that still 1/8 the volume of the F150?

I think its because it and the Versa are quite a bit larger than most of the other stuff on that list. It has more passenger and cargo volume than a 5 series wagon.

http://autos.aol.com/cars-compare?c...mileage=&spAd=y

It's like a little Range Rover Sport. :3:

Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at 05:02 on Jan 3, 2011

# ¿ Jan 3, 2011 04:49

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

I don't believe there are any other models in the next few years that are going to badged as FIATs. Based on interviews with Chrysler executives and Allpar, the Doblo is definitely coming next year under the Ram brand to compete with the Transit Connect, and there will be a new C-segment car based on the Alfa Giullieta platform to replace the Caliber.

# ¿ Apr 26, 2011 07:01

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

So it looks like the USDM Abarth will actually be somewhat uprated compared to the EU version.

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/05/11/2012-fiat-500-abarth-quick-spin-review/

# ¿ May 11, 2011 22:47

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

Detroit Q. Spider posted:

Well according to Edmunds the Fiesta has a slightly larger and more powerful engine (1.6 vs. 1.5, 120 BHP vs. 100) with at least comparable mileage. It's also listed as about a grand more, so I guess that's something to consider.

The Fiesta has the DSG while the Mazda2 still has a 4 speed auto.

Insideline has a longterm Mazda2

http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/Vehicles/2011-mazda-2-touring/

# ¿ Aug 17, 2011 20:06

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

OBUMMER gave Chrysler to FIAT for free, right after he personally killed the Firebird. :colbert:

# ¿ Aug 18, 2011 20:09

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

InitialDave posted:

In terms of small-car power, bear in mind Vauxhall will sell you a Corsa with 192bhp.

The Cruze is available with that same engine (at slightly less power, 180hp I think) in other markets. I think it's one of those SAAB/Opel developed engines that don't meet America emissions requirements, like the 2.8l turbo V6 in the Insignia.

# ¿ Aug 18, 2011 21:11

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:

Saab used a turboed version of that 2.8 in the past in North America, I can't imagine it would be too difficult to federalize.

They used it in the SRX until this year and it's still in the SAAB version of the SRX I think. It had to be detuned to a lower power level, had all kinds of reliability issues (the famous one where they melted a piston because someone accidentally put regular instead of premium in the tank) and every reviewer hated it anyway, so they canned it after like 1 or 2 years.

Even GM's engineers admit that it was a terrible engine choice and they should have used the 3.6l Camaro engine to begin with.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/11q3/2012_cadillac_srx-first_drive_review

The 1.6T is one of those old old designs that still uses a timing belt, if they bring it here it will probably suck and be too expensive.

Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Aug 18, 2011

# ¿ Aug 18, 2011 21:22

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:

Yeah I know it wasn't great but they did use it in the TurboX at full power.

The SRX, 9-5 and 9-4x have more power than the Turbo Xxxxxxxxx (300hp vs 280hp), I was referring to it being detuned compared to the Insignia OPC which was 325hp.

EDIT: Bleep bloop GM is a bad company.

# ¿ Aug 18, 2011 22:06

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

kimbo305 posted:

Uh oh, prepare to get grilled by Throatwarbler.

It's an Italian car assembled in Mexico by Chrysler on the old PT Cruiser line. What could possibly go wrong? :colbert:

The seat adjustment lever in Edmunds' long term tester snapped clean off in less than a week. :italy:

http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/2011/05/2012-fiat-500-sport-broken-seat-adjuster.html

I think a bigger problem for FIAT dealers is that there will be no American Alfas until 2013. They're not going to make much money just having 1 niche car for 2 years.

# ¿ Nov 17, 2011 23:13

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

PT6A posted:

Not to get this thread even further off-topic, but why does manual+AWD seem like such a poisonous combination to every manufacturer other than Subaru? Subaru is really the only manufacturer, in my opinion, that does AWD right: you can get it with a stick, and it's symmetrical at all times instead of being a FWD piece of poo poo 90% of the time.

The lack of a stick-shift and symmetrical or rear-biased AWD in most AWD cars really turns me off the majority of them, which is sad because living in a place where a bit of extra traction is well appreciated in the winter, I'd kind of like a AWD car. If the WRX had had a 6-speed and less road noise (when I was car shopping), I'd almost certainly be driving one today.

Because the take rate for AWD is actually fairly low, and so is manual. Combine both and you're looking at 1% of sales or less. It costs money to certify each drivetrain for emissions and fuel economy so the drive trains that no one will ever choose don't get made, unless the margins on a car are high enough like on a BMW. One reason the 3 series vastly outsells all its competitors is that BMW offers a relatively big selection of engines and drivetrains, but it's a pretty expensive "feature".

quote:

I would imagine that a lot of other automakers are unwilling to put in the considerable development effort. Audi does a pretty good job on their non-Haldex cars, I thought, and Saab/Haldex's XWD implementation is pretty good as well. The BMW Xdrive models are full-time AWD as well, I think, even the stick shifts.

Xdrive isn't "full time" if by that you mean "have a center differential" because it doesn't, it's just a clutchpack coupling. The E46 32_xi actually was "full time" in that it had a center differential, but it was an OPEN center differential, with no limited slip, instead the ABS system had to brake the wheels to achieve the limited slip function. Going futher back there was an E30 325xi too, it was a viscous coupling diff lock, so basically a BMW manual WRX.

quote:

Is the WRX poor gas mileage mainly based on having AWD, a really hungry engine, or a combination of the two? You would think by now someone would be able to make a full AWD car that didn't guzzle gas

The auto and manual Imprezas had different AWD implementations. The manual was a "full time" type with a center diff, the auto was a clutchpack type without a center diff. The clutchpack type was better for fuel economy, but the Subaru auto on the lower end models was always a 4 speed, so the 2 effects canceled each outher out - the 4 speed auto w/part time AWD and the 5 speed manual with full time AWD both got about the same (poor) fuel economy. Now that Subaru has switched to a CVT for its lower end models with the part time AWD they get as good or better fuel economy than many FWD competitors.

Compare AWD Subarus with CVT to FWD Toyotas of the same class:

Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at 08:03 on Jan 16, 2012

# ¿ Jan 16, 2012 07:59

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

I think there is some misunderstanding here? The Sheen ad is the one that they ended up NOT running - it was for the superbowl, they ran the other one with the girl instead. They're just releasing it now as sort of bonus youtube material, right?

# ¿ Mar 3, 2012 17:38

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

Jalopnik has driven the US spec Abarth. 5 speed manual is the only trans available, thank god.

Engine bay. Either the engine is really small or the battery really big.

As an aside I hope they start adappting the Multiair technology to Chrysler's OHV engines soon, as it seems to be a perfect fit for them. Multiair Viper would be pretty sweet.

:3:

# ¿ Mar 3, 2012 22:21

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

I wish they would sell the Twinair 2 cyl turbo over here too. 0-60 would be the most glorious sounding 11 seconds ever.

# ¿ Mar 6, 2012 18:37

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

Sir Tonk posted:

But how much would it run them to certify it for sale in the US?

Ford (I think) has said it would be too expensive to bring over their European diesels, I can see Fiat not wanting to risk it just yet.

It's not just expensive, it makes little sense for the buyer because even for VWs the extra premium one pays on top to get the diesel takes years to make back in fuel savings. It's not economically viable and it becomes less viable the cheaper the car gets, because small cars are already cheap and get pretty good fuel economy. Large percentages of VWs are diesles because with VWs your other engine options are an awful 115hp 8 valve 2.0l or a wheezy 170hp 2.5l I5 that guzzles like a V6 with the power of an I4.

...and that's assuming tha tyou won't have any unexpected maintainance problems with a diesel, and frankly looking at the track record of VW's (or anymarque really, Ford powerstroke anyone?) diesel fuel systems and emissions components, and the replacement costs of said systems, you're more than likely to spend a shitload more money just keeping a diesl on the road.

Actually the *best* case for diesels is on expensive SUVs, because the fuel savings tend to be greater when you're comparing them to twin turbo V8s that on top of everything also require premium gas too. The payback period for the price difference between a diesel and gas BMW X5 or Audi Q7 is actually better than for a Jetta. That's why they are bringing a diesel Grand Cherokee but nothing else.

# ¿ Dec 4, 2012 02:19

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 23, 2024 15:29

Throatwarbler: Nov 17, 2008; by vyelkin

Sorry to interrupt your VW shitposting but here are the new FIAT 500 ads.

http://autos.aol.com/article/fiats-new-sexy-commercials/

#4 was pretty good.

# ¿ Dec 4, 2012 04:30

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Automotive Insanity > The (nuovo) Fiat 500 thread