Jalopnik: US Fiat 500 pricing to start at $15,500

Guys, come on, bad arguement :D Even I only have to apply 3500RPM and dump the clutch to impress the girls do a smokey start. :lol:

If you rarely use such small engines with this kind of power you'll have a hard time judging their perofmance. :p The 500 has enough grunt with any engine configuration.:)
 
My 1.4 makes front tyres struggle in first gear. It's far from 200hp.

Put economy tires on a geo metro and it will smoke 'em both all day long. Doesn't change the fact that I want some damn power out of my cars, and on normal tires(Re: Not eco-yuppie long life economy safety hazard tires, which scarily are standard on a lot of eco-minded citycars) a car with less than 200HP is going to struggle to spin them in first gear.

On a somewhat unrelated note I've always wondered how cars manage to stay on the road with eco tires...
Making the tyres slip is less about power than about torque at the wheels.

Economy engines lack both. In order to make either one you need to burn fuel, and this goes against the goal of the typical four cylinder engine.

If you rarely use such small engines with this kind of power you'll have a hard time judging their perofmance. :p The 500 has enough grunt with any engine configuration.:)
I lived with a 1.6L inline four for a couple of years. Learned to drive on it. It lacked sufficient power to impress me. When I was getting on the freeway I laid into it, shifted just below redline, which oddly enough for a DOHC inline four was only 5900RPM, and it still felt like I could push it faster.

It was rated at 110HP and 125FT LBs.

I might test drive the Abarth 500 but I'm fairly certain a stock one just won't have enough power for my tastes. I don't like engines that have no torque. I don't want to have to drop three gears and rev until the valves dance around on the hood to get around a drunken semi. I want useable power right off of idle. Call me spoiled by large displacement, lazy, low-revving torque monsters if you want but I want some brute force, and I have yet to run across a four cylinder commuter car that had any to offer.

Oh, and before you point it out, I am fully aware that a supercharged or large displacement I4 can make the type of power I want. But you don't find those in commuter cars. You find them in sports cars like the Miata. Or S2000. Or anything by Lotus/Caterham. Or any of the hopped up Minis. Even a Cobalt SS will work if you don't mind a bit of torque steer. Coincidentally these are also the small cars I actually want.
 
Put economy tires on a geo metro and it will smoke 'em both all day long. Doesn't change the fact that I want some damn power out of my cars, and on normal tires(Re: Not eco-yuppie long life economy safety hazard tires, which scarily are standard on a lot of eco-minded citycars) a car with less than 200HP is going to struggle to spin them in first gear.

I'm on Continental non-eco rubber.

Economy engines lack both. In order to make either one you need to burn fuel, and this goes against the goal of the typical four cylinder engine.

My economy engine makes more torque than the non-economy engine of the same peak power that it replaced.

It was rated at 110HP and 125FT LBs.

Torque at the wheels is what matters for making them spin.

Also, my 1.4 makes more torque at the driveshaft than that.

I don't like engines that have no torque. I don't want to have to drop three gears and rev until the valves dance around on the hood to get around a drunken semi. I want useable power right off of idle. Call me spoiled by large displacement, lazy, low-revving torque monsters if you want but I want some brute force, and I have yet to run across a four cylinder commuter car that had any to offer.

Diesel :wicked:
 
Last edited:
My 160hp comfortably spins the tires in first, and can do a bit in second. But I do feel like it's underpowered.





V8 or bust.






Or V12.





V10 works too.
 
Oh, and before you point it out, I am fully aware that a supercharged or large displacement I4 can make the type of power I want. But you don't find those in commuter cars. You find them in sports cars like the Miata. Or S2000. Or anything by Lotus/Caterham. Or any of the hopped up Minis. Even a Cobalt SS will work if you don't mind a bit of torque steer. Coincidentally these are also the small cars I actually want.

This paragraph makes it obvious that you have no fucking idea what you are talking about at all. All engines you mention have a displacement of 2.0 liters or less, not exactly what i'd call large displacement, even for a four-banger.

I find it funny that you go on and on about four-bangers missing low-end torque and having to be revved like shit, only to explicitly exclude the notoriously rev-hungry, 9000rpm redline S2000 engine. Shows how good you know your four-bangers.

On top of that, apart from the S2000, all the engines in the cars you mentioned are shared with econoboxes.
The Miata's engine is not only NA (judging from the sizeable Miata community on this forum, debating the pros and cons of turboing them seems to be one of the favourite pasttimes of Miata owners) but is also used in the bread-and-butter Mazda 3. Most Caterhams use the NA Ford Duratec engine well-known from the Focus and Fiesta, while the 1.8 Toyota Engine used in the NA Lotuses has a lower power output than the variant used in the U.S. market Matrix hatch. And don't get me started about the 1.6 "Prince" engine in the top-spec Mini, known from giants of sportyness like the Citroen C4 and Peugeot 308.

What makes these cars, especially the Lotuses and Caterhams, but also the Miata, so much more sporty than the econoboxes the engines are lifted from is a lack of weight and a brilliant chassis, not OMG POWERRRR!

And don't start about aftermarket mods. As the engines are the same, all of the mods are applicable to econoboxes as well. And if you'd ever been to a VW, Opel or ricer enthusiast's meeting, you'd know they are used, FWD or not.
 
Last edited:
Diesels are also generally not available in economy cars in the US, VW being the only exception.
 
Diesel will give more torque, but then you have the problem of a ridiculously narrow powerband causing the same shifting requirement he complained about.
It's not an issue unless you drive badly. And for people who drive badly there's an easy escape route in a doppelkopplungsgetriebe or similar.
 
Diesel will give more torque, but then you have the problem of a ridiculously narrow powerband causing the same shifting requirement he complained about.

https://pic.armedcats.net/n/na/narf/2011/03/16/1_motor.jpg

^ 50% power or more over 75% of the rev range.

https://pic.armedcats.net/n/na/narf/2011/03/16/S_motor_001.jpg

^ 50% power or more over 75% of the rev range.

One's a diesel, the other's a petrol, both are in the same type of car, both provide half the peak power or more over three quarters of the rev range.



Things look even better for the diesel if you compare it to a N/A petrol engine.

https://pic.armedcats.net/n/na/narf/2011/03/16/C_motor.jpg

^ 50% power or more over 67% of the rev range - a slightly more narrow power band than the diesel.
 
I'm taking a leap... I have just listed my GTI for sale and will be buying a 500 as soon as I sell it.

1.8t down to a 1.2, this car is that good. I took an extended drive with my friend's 500 and I'm convinced.
 
Last edited:
I'm taking a leap... I have just listed my GTI for sale and will be buying a 500 as soon as I sell it.

1.8t down to a 1.2, this car is that good. I took an extended drive with my friend's 500 and I'm convinced.

Yay, another Fiat fan :D
 
I'm taking a leap... I have just listed my GTI for sale and will be buying a 500 as soon as I sell it.

1.8t down to a 1.2, this car is that good. I took an extended drive with my friend's 500 and I'm convinced.

Very nice! :D Hopefully they'll be a post in the "post your car" subforum! :D
 
Top