178BHP, 140MPH Fiat 500!

-Chris-

http://www.whatcar.com/car-news/-29-000-fiat-500-revealed/251744

£29,000 Fiat 500 revealed
03 August 2010

• Fiat 500 695 Tributo Ferrari special edition
• Cost around £29,600
• Just 152 made for UK

Meet the Abarth 695 Tributo Ferrari, a £29,600 special-edition Fiat 500.


The Abarth 695 Tributo Ferrari comes with a 178bhp 1.4-litre turbocharged petrol engine, which can propel it from 0-62mph in seven seconds and on to a top speed of 140mph.

However, in comparison, the 'standard' 138bhp Esseesse version goes from 0-62mph in 7.4 seconds and has a top speed of 131mph – and costs almost £13,000 less.

The special-edition Fiat is fitted with a semi-automatic gearbox, with paddles mounted behind the steering wheel. There is also a Sport button on the dashboard that, when activated, quickens gearchanges and makes the steering more responsive.

Other sporting touches include carbonfibre door mirrors, grey alloy wheels and front air intakes.

Only 152 cars will be available to UK customers, and can be ordered through Fiat's 17 Abarth dealerships.

What'll the VRT be on this baby??

SV

Niceeeee, love it.

unkel

Sweet

Silly price though...

Fizman

Is that the same engine that's in the new SEAT Ibiza Bocanegra (Cupra)? Exact same stats.

Here she is: http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/238576/seat_ibiza_bocanegra.html

Bloody cracking little car, and WAYYYY cheaper.

Zonda999

Fizman wrote: »

Is that the same engine that's in the new SEAT Ibiza Bocanegra (Cupra)? Exact same stats.

Here she is: http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/238576/seat_ibiza_bocanegra.html

Bloody cracking little car, and WAYYYY cheaper.

Definitely not. VAG and Fiat haven't any tech sharing deals at the moment

Fizman

Zonda999 wrote: »

Definitely not. VAG and Fiat haven't any tech sharing deals at the moment

I wouldn't have thought so, but the stats are uncannily similar.

colm_mcm

Seems a bit slow

kasper

every young lad will have a bog standard one tarted up to look the same in the next few months

mle1324

Is there any reason why Fiat are doing this with there cars lately ?

1.4 turbos that can reach 130mph + ?

They've done it to the Punto, Bravo and now the 500....wont be long before they do it to the Panda or something.

Tragedy

mle1324 wrote: »

Is there any reason why Fiat are doing this with there cars lately ?

1.4 turbos that can reach 130mph + ?

They've done it to the Punto, Bravo and now the 500....wont be long before they do it to the Panda or something.

It's their new Multiair engine. Read up on it, quite interesting

mle1324

Tragedy wrote: »

It's their new Multiair engine. Read up on it, quite interesting

Will do

But tell me this,is there a massive insurance difference for a normal 1.4 and a tjet one?

Tragedy

Insurance groups are generally linked to power, if the multiair/tjet engine is a lot more powerful, then yes.

Pdfile

-Chris- wrote: »

http://www.whatcar.com/car-news/-29-000-fiat-500-revealed/251744



What'll the VRT be on this baby??

finannly a fiat that can move faster then the parts that fall off it. :pac:

Tea 1000

Pdfile wrote: »

finannly a fiat that can move faster then the parts that fall off it. :pac:

Fiats have always been relatively quick. For example, back 10 years ago people in the basic 1.4 Focus or Golf would have been wiped out by the entry level 1.2 Bravo, which was more powerful, quieter and more economical than the dirt in the other pair.

langdang

Tragedy wrote: »

Insurance groups are generally linked to power, if the multiair/tjet engine is a lot more powerful, then yes.

Don't worry it'll be "non-turbo on logbook"

robtri

Jesus its ugly.....

sorry but imho.. its a hideous piece of work and 30k stg on top of that laughable

keithclancy

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Fiats have always been relatively quick. For example, back 10 years ago people in the basic 1.4 Focus or Golf would have been wiped out by the entry level 1.2 Bravo, which was more powerful, quieter and more economical than the dirt in the other pair.

Yeh, I saw a tow truck overtake a Focus this morning

Gone Drinking

I picture hitting top speed looking something like this..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PSmx1f7wv8

Eric Cartman

still a fiat 500... 130mph wont make it less of a 'daddys money' car, also you could never even get up to 130mph between dalkey and UCD

keithclancy

Eric Cartman wrote: »

still a fiat 500... 130mph wont make it less of a 'daddys money' car, also you could never even get up to 130mph between dalkey and UCD

Wouldn't like to do 130mph in something that small for an extended amount of time !

Tiny engine in it must be screaming at that speed.

Eric Cartman

keithclancy wrote: »

Wouldn't like to do 130mph in something that small for an extended amount of time !

Tiny engine in it must be screaming at that speed.

screaming all the way to a new head gasket

langdang

Funny how in the minds of the general public a 170hp 1.4 turbo/supercharged VW engine is a wonder of modern engineering but a 170hp 1.4 turbo FIAT will DEFINITELY explode. The truth lies somewhere in between for both I'd say!

keithclancy

langdang wrote: »

Funny how in the minds of the general public a 170hp 1.4 turbo/supercharged VW engine is a wonder of modern engineering but a 170hp 1.4 turbo FIAT will DEFINITELY explode. The truth lies somewhere in between for both I'd say!

Never said that, wouldn't trust them new fangled 1.4 engines either, too small an engine doing too much work.

I remember the old turbo charged starlets years back where doing that.

Tea 1000

LIGHTNING wrote: »

I was going to say something similar, a small 170hp Italian hatch and its automatically a girls/posers car. I would love a go of it around a track or a gravel rally stage.

Ah but you see you actually have a clue, not a head full of pub notions!
I wouldn't worry about the 1.4 petrol with 170bhp any more than I'd worry about a 2 litre turbo diesel with 180 odd bhp. Both in their natural un-blown state 10 years ago were putting out similar stress-free bhp, around the 70bhp region! Therefore you could conclude that both are equally stressed!

mle1324

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Fiats have always been relatively quick. For example, back 10 years ago people in the basic 1.4 Focus or Golf would have been wiped out by the entry level 1.2 Bravo, which was more powerful, quieter and more economical than the dirt in the other pair.

So true, I believe the top speed for a 1.2 Brava (which is heavier then a Bravo) was 107mph....not bad for a 1.2

Also remember that is had more bph then the 2005 1.4 Octavia which fell in a a very low 75bph.

langdang

Ah ya Keith, not dismissing anyone on this thread - there's always gonna be a bit of banter when FIAT launch something like this It probably won't be as unreliable as people expect it to be, but try convincing non-car-enthusiasts of that. (Likewise, I wouldn't like to be footing the repair bills of a 1.4TSI 170hp Golf as it got older, but that's just my own speculation,try convincing Irish people not all VW engines are bulletproof and you'll be run out of town by a pitchfork wielding mob). I grew up in various FIATs, my first car was a FIAT, but even I'd have to have money to burn, and not be too pushed about making it to work everyday, before I'd buy that 500 over something else.

mle1324

robtri wrote: »

Jesus its ugly.....

sorry but imho.. its a hideous piece of work and 30k stg on top of that laughable

Yea can get yourself a lovely V6 Insignia for an extra grand or two

Zonda999

mle1324 wrote: »

Yea can get yourself a lovely V6 Insignia for and extra grand or two

Yep, with about 320bhp to boot in the insignia too!

Zonda999

A repmobile it is but really i dont think too many companies would let you off with that particular insignia surely?:)

mle1324

LIGHTNING wrote: »

One is a rep mobile (although a nice one) and the other is a limited edition version of a small hatchback. No real comparision between the two other than the price.

Yea i know I just mean it in the scence where I'd sooner put my $bucks$
Then again it is a limited edition.:)

Big Nasty

I've seen these two babies in action in Santa Pod:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4c0CH9T8Ik

daveharnett

Tragedy wrote: »

It's their new Multiair engine. Read up on it, quite interesting

The blurb I found from fiat is a little hard to follow (written by marketers from the look of it). My impression is that they have done away with mechanical timing and are using electronically controlled valves?

I imagine 170bhp would be quite a handful given the tiny wheelbase, weight and wheel size. Sounds like fun though. Same suspension/brakes as the SS?

EPM

daveharnett wrote: »

The blurb I found from fiat is a little hard to follow (written by marketers from the look of it). My impression is that they have done away with mechanical timing and are using electronically controlled valves?

AFAIK that's it exactly...

Weren't they giving this car to Ferrari owners a little while ago while their cars were in for a service. Think I remember something about certain dealers getting these for that purpose...

langdang

OK, I take it all back - it will blow up.
I ain't touching piezo electric valves or whatever til the Japs have them perfected for 10 years...

pajo1981

langdang wrote: »

OK, I take it all back - it will blow up.
I ain't touching piezo electric valves or whatever til the Japs have them perfected for 10 years...

You will be waiting a long time for that lot to catch up.

langdang

Looks like they are electro hydraulic and not piezoelectrically actuated, which is more reassuring. Will have to read up more on the multi-air engines, sounds interesting - like a hydraulic pushrod

daveharnett

langdang wrote: »

OK, I take it all back - it will blow up.
I ain't touching piezo electric valves or whatever til the Japs have them perfected for 10 years...

I'm sure a lot of people said the same when fiat started work on fuel injection, and look how quickly the carb became obsolete once bosch got their hands on the technology.
Provided they can engineer linear actuators that are fast, accurate and reliable enough, it's a complete no-brainer.

Matt Simis

daveharnett wrote: »

I'm sure a lot of people said the same when fiat started work on fuel injection, and look how quickly the carb became obsolete once bosch got their hands on the technology.
Provided they can engineer linear actuators that are fast, accurate and reliable enough, it's a complete no-brainer.

And Fiat's Common Rail diesel..

langdang

daveharnett wrote: »

I'm sure a lot of people said the same when fiat started work on fuel injection, and look how quickly the carb became obsolete once bosch got their hands on the technology.
Provided they can engineer linear actuators that are fast, accurate and reliable enough, it's a complete no-brainer.

I thought from your original post that they had done away with mechanical timing altogether (which suggested piezoelectric [electromagnetic is too slow apparently] fully-electronically controlled to me) but it looks like there is still a SOHC and presumably a belt or chain to drive it. So it's fancy variable valve timing, but only applicable to the intake timing currently.

L1011

Can't wait for the first one of them to get heavily crashed in to in Ireland, that block will fit in to my car and should match the body computer

kmb

mle1324 wrote: »

Will do

But tell me this,is there a massive insurance difference for a normal 1.4 and a tjet one?

I went from a 1.2 stilo to a bravo TJET 150 (0-60 IN 8.2 SECONDS) and my insurance went up by €30 and that was with 10 months left to run.

The TJET is very fast and the sports suspension makes it a joy to drive.
This is my 7th Fiat starting originally in the Fiat 850.

colm_mcm

Meh, even a Glanza would be faster, and would probably even handle better. surely this will be only bought by collectors.

Nice marketing move though.

SV

colm_mcm wrote: »

Meh, even a Glanza would be faster, and would probably even handle better. surely this will be only bought by collectors.

Nice marketing move though.

Only seriously modified glanzas are quicker.

and handle better? I doubt it...Glanzas are worse than a boat for handling

colm_mcm

To be fair, the 500 isn't exactly great to drive either. this is a 500 that is a limited edition, and in effect has been heavily modified soending more on modifications than the car was worth in the first place.

Fair comparison I think.

daveharnett

langdang wrote: »

I thought from your original post that they had done away with mechanical timing altogether (which suggested piezoelectric [electromagnetic is too slow apparently] fully-electronically controlled to me) but it looks like there is still a SOHC and presumably a belt or chain to drive it. So it's fancy variable valve timing, but only applicable to the intake timing currently.

My mistake. On further reading, it's clear that you're right - it's nothing more than fancy variable valve timing. Shame.

SV

colm_mcm wrote: »

To be fair, the 500 isn't exactly great to drive either. this is a 500 that is a limited edition, and in effect has been heavily modified soending more on modifications than the car was worth in the first place.

Fair comparison I think.

Hardly a fair comparison at all.
I know if I had to pick one which it'd be anyway.

Glanza wouldn't come close.

colm_mcm

I'm not saying I'd rather a glanza, rather that this car is hardly remarkable in any way. It's not fast, amazing looking or affordable. What's the point?
I'm sure the engine is clever but it'd need to be.

deceit

With that much money would expect alot more bhp. I am a big fan of the original punto gt's, have had 3 so far (136bhp 0-60 7secs standard 130 top speed) but think by now should have put something like a 1.8 or 2ltr turbo in these. They should have put this engine in it instead for that price (coupe 16vt engine and gets about 220 with just a chip and few other little things) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1idsmdjxWPo&feature=related. Would really but a nutty car then worth the extra cash.

Pdfile

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Fiats have always been relatively quick. For example, back 10 years ago people in the basic 1.4 Focus or Golf would have been wiped out by the entry level 1.2 Bravo, which was more powerful, quieter and more economical than the dirt in the other pair.

1.4 f.i.r.e Uno was true to its name, when not burning escorts n such on the m50 it could be found burned out in your local park. :rolleyes:

Tea 1000

Pdfile wrote: »

1.4 f.i.r.e Uno was true to its name, when not burning escorts n such on the m50 it could be found burned out in your local park. :rolleyes:

I'd rather own an Uno on fire than an Escort!

Big Nasty

Tea 1000 wrote: »

I'd rather own an Uno on fire than an Escort!

Rather an Uno than one of these!?!:eek: