The Fiat 500 faces an interesting challenge in the US Market. Yes, it offers the fashion-nugget flair of a MINI Cooper at a lower price… but it’s also smaller, less powerful and not all that much more efficient. Automotive News [sub] reports that the new 500, which offers 101 HP from its 1.4 MultiAir engine, will be rated at 38 MPG Highway/30 MPG City with a manual transmission, and 34 MPG Highway/27 MPG City with an automatic. Compared to a 120 HP MINI Cooper, the manual 500 enjoys a 1 MPG advantage on both city and highway ratings, but with the popular automatic transmission, it actually gets worse mileage than the 36/28 MPG slushbox Cooper. Why the big discrepancy in the 500’s manual-versus-autobox efficiency? Probably because the European-spec 500 doesn’t offer an automatic, which was added to the vehicle (along with retuned suspension and more sound deadening material) just for the US market.
So, while the 500 starts some $5k lower than the MINI, and it’s not all that much smaller on the inside (front legroom is down about an inch compared to the MINI, while rear headroom is short by some 2.5 inches… but the 500 wins on other measures), the efficiency with an autobox leaves quite a bit to be desired… especially for a 100 HP, 98 lb-ft car. And with the Fiesta offering a less flashy but larger 40 MPG option (with a self-swapping gearbox) at a similar price point, the 500 has some serious charming to do.
When did fuel economy estimates start getting listed as Hwy/City vs. City/Highway?
When having a bigger fuel economy number became a selling point.
What a joke the majority of people looking at cars in the size class are looking for MPG and the 34/27 with an auto is attainable in many larger cars. Sure there are some out there that buy on cuteness but in my opinion it fails there too. The fact that the Fiat brand has little awareness and those that do remember it also remember what FIAT stood for: Fix It Again Tony is another big strike against it. Plus the fact that Fiat wants them in stand alone showrooms means very little traffic and Chrysler dealers aren’t chomping at the bit to spend the money they don’t have to do that so they probably wont be available in many areas. So it looks like the 500 is done before it even gets started.
The only vehicles I’m aware of that can get those numbers are hybrids, and those cost a bit more than these hatches. I wouldn’t count the 500 out — the standalone showrooms might hurt it initially, but if more models show up to supplement the 500, it might not be too bad.
At least Chrysler didn’t rebadge the 500 as a Chrysler. Or a Dodge. Or resurrect the Plymouth name for it.
The Civic gets 36/25, the out going 2011 Focus 35/24, 2012 Focus 40/30 Corolla 34/26, Cruze 36/?? for the auto trans models.
Dude, the fix-it-again-tony has to be just about the lamest automotive cliche possible. In virtually every public blog or thread on the new 500, there is always some guy who has to say ‘do you know what FIAT stands for…Fix It Again Tony…ha ha.’ Maybe it was cute once, but its stale now after reading it about 1000 times…
B10er, like it or not the people old enough to remember the Fiat brand in the US remember that acronym. So that is the brand perception they are up against. Those that aren’t old enough to remember that are going to be Fiat whats that.
34 might be attainable—highway mileage is easy—but that 27 city figure is a tough nut to crack in any non-hybrid automatic-equipped car. And that’s EPA; real-world results for city are often much, much worse.
It does point to an efficiency problem with the AT, though. Most modern small-car ATs get within one mile per gallon of the manual, either above or below. I’m wondering if the ratios are poorly chosen?
Those that aren’t old enough to remember that are going to be Fiat whats that.
I think that this is mistaken. As soon as the 20-something crowd finds out that “Fiat” means “Italian” its desirability will go up. Remember, that age group is always looking for what is new and cool. The MINI and all Japanese cars are old hat now, the VW Golf is played out, and an American car is not exotic enough. Young women will associate an Italian car with Italian fashion and style.
It’s important to keep in mind that the MINI brand had disappeared from the US, had last been offered by a maker (British Leyland, I don’t think it was even just “BL” by then) that had an equally bad reputation for quality if not worse, offered mileage that could also be had from larger cars, and was sold in standalone showrooms. Fiat is trying to take a page from this playbook. Of course, the MINI standalone showrooms have typically been situated next to BMW dealerships, not Chrysler dealerships, and there you may have a point. (The downtown LA Chrysler dealership now sports a Fiat badge as well, not sure where that fits in.)
Scoutdude, I have lost more of my size 11 right shoes up the ass of “Fix-It-Again-Tony” spouting clowns than I care to remember.
Enough, already.
@psarhjinian The city MPG is of less concern to most purchasers, most drivers do mixed type driving with a lot of commutes that include a fair amount of freeway so they are more likely to compare the combined or hwy ratings. Those are really shopping the city MPG can do better in with the Yaris and Fiesta with 29 MPG city. The cars I listed above are larger heavier cars which does penalize city more than hwy.
@Morea, I don’t discount that it may be seen as a fashion statement, it will probably do well with young females. Unfortunately that also means that it won’t take long before it is out of fashion. Also doing well as a fashion statement with young females works against it too, because if it is seen as a chick’s car young males will stay away in droves. Once you get out of the fashion first buyer lack of brand recognition, a limited numbers of dealers, and so-so MPG won’t do it any favors or earn it consideration among many new car buyers.
@CFclark Yes the Mini did carve out a niche despite it’s so-so MPG for it’s size based on it’s cuteness factor. However when it arrived in the US it was a different time the best selling “car” in the US was the Ford Explorer and gas was around $1 a gallon, people just didn’t care about MPG. The fact that it’s showrooms were on the same lot as BMW’s helped the few people who remembered the original forget it’s reliability, being with Chrysler likely won’t do the same for the 500. Also at the time the BMW dealers had the money to build those showrooms, the Chrysler dealers don’t at this time.
At least it isn’t as bad as the gas guzzling Chevy Cruze manual or automatic. Wait a minute…
So, let’s review.
Ford Fiesta mt: 28c/37h
Mazda2 mt: 29c/35h
Mini Cooper mt: 29c/37h
Fiat 500 mt: 30c/38h
Scion iQ: ?
smart fortwo: 33c/41h
Not really fair as the interior packaging of these cars is quite different. You may as well through the Fit in there.
So, since I get 39-41 mpg in my Smart, I can expect very close mileage in a 500 and have a *real* transmission? I’m all in on the 500. At least until I take a look at the iQ…
And don’t forget the Elantra AT/MT rated at 29/40, with room for real people and 148 HP.
Those numbers don’t impress me at all. I find it somewhat mind-boggling that cars that small aren’t achieving better numbers than that. There’s just no incentive for me to consider one of or any of them when I can buy something larger and much more comfy at the expense of a few mpg’s. As far as I’m concerned, these things are D.O.A. for me. Having said that, I may think differently if I were a young man and couldn’t afford anything better. Necessity is the mother of invention, after all, I wore those shoes once and I did own a ’76 AMC Gremlin to prove it! Come to think of it, the Gremlin WAS a shoe!
Yeah these numbers don’t impress me either when there’s a 2006 Rental spec jellybean Taurus with a 3.0V6 and room for four comfortably that I could hop in and get almost 30mpg highway. It’s a school district vehicle and I’ve calculated fuel economy on many long trips and know it can be done.
You mean the 18/25 2006 Taurus?
But yeah, aerodynamics are the controlling factor for highway mileage. If you’re not going to go in full-bore like the Prius or the old Insight, then 35-45 is about as good as a 2/4 passenger car can get on the EPA scale.
Yeah but I’m recording 28mpg in 50% state highway 50% interstate mix and I don’t exactly drive like an angel. Sue me but I always do better than EPA estimates both before and after revisions. Maybe it’s my slavish use of cruise control.
Educator Dan: Interesting you have a 2006 Taurus as a fleet vehicle. My wife and I had one of those in ’06 when we were in California on vacation. It did impress me on how well it drove. I don’t remember what our mileage was, but our driving was your normal mix of stop-and-go. A few weeks before, I was in the same area on business and had a rental ’06 Impala. I liked both of them.
@Dan
Does cruise really help that much? If so I should start trying to force myself to use it more often and stick to the right lane (which I already do unless behind somebody who is doing 45 on the freeway – I don’t have the patience for that).
What did you get in that Taurus in the city? Because my recollection is that, in urban grind, Tauruses and Impalas get ~11-15mpg while subcompacts can at least crack 20.
Let’s be fair here and choose the right tool for the right job. This car is not an interstate queen, it’s an urban runabout. It’s relative highway mileage is about as relevant as ease of parallel parking is in a Ram 3500HD.
School district bought up a ton of the 4th generation Tauruses which were basically largely fleet vehicles at that point. And yea the overdrive 4th is pretty stinking tall. They’re being rode hard and put away wet and refusing to die. Amazingly the district has purchased exactly 0 Impalas despite still having a few beater Luminas around. They also bought up the end of the production run of 2004-08 Malibus, all V6 LT models. (haven’t gotten to drive one)
City economy is much worse and if I do 50% city and 50% STATE hwy mileage drops into the low 20s. That 4th gear overdrive is crazy tall. (Just like the Impala.)
@Tankinbeans, you’ve got a w-body, try it. Hit the cruise as soon as you reach your desired speed when hitting the highway. Start using the trip odometer to measure distance between fill ups and calculate your economy. You’ll be amazed.
@Dan
Checking my mileage is something I’ve been really good about since I started driving my own car. Every tank (I have missed a few since my bro used to borrow my car and would reset the trip even if he only put a couple gallons in) I have done exactly as you say. Most of my family thinks I’m nuts when I tell them to let me know how much gas they’re putting in if they borrow my car.
I will definitely try to teach myself the art of “cruising” even around town. I usually park it at about 68-72 give or take and get dirty looks from people who have somewhere to be even when I’m in the right lane. I’m also working on perfecting my f— em posture. :)
Tank, if your family is like my family, they don’t think you’re nuts because you track your mileage. They think you’re nuts because you believe they put gas in your car when they borrow it. :-)
@Russ
Touche’
My brother had my mom borrow my car to go up and get his kids, I won’t allow him to drive it, and he used enough gas to get where he was going, about 150 miles, and put 6 gallons in (about enough to get back). In other words I came out behind on that one. Needless to say I was a little annoyed.
@tankinbeans Cruise control only gets you better MPG if you live where it is flat. If you live some place that has hills or mountains and it can cause it to drop significantly particularly on cars with a steep OD gear. In my 00 Taurus trying to use the cruise will take 2mpg off of the hwy mileage vs smart driving. Hit a hill with the cruise on the speed drops the computer drops it down a gear and stays there till after you crest the hill. If I speed up a bit before the hill and let your speed slowly drop as you climb I can keep it in OD saving gas over using cruise.
Does this thing have the aerodynamics of a brick?
Therein lies a lot of the problem. The frontal area of two people sitting upright side by side, with enough room under the seat for rear seat passengers to stick their feet under the front seat and adequate ground clearance underneath the floor, can only be reduced to a certain point before people start getting uncomfortable (too narrow). And it’s easier to get a better drag coefficient with a shape somewhat longer than this.
I’m unimpressed, but not entirely surprised. The TwinAir (which we’re not getting) is the right engine for this car.
You are wrong about the automatic transmision only offered because of the US market.
Here in Mexico, we got the european Fiat 500 since 2009, and it IS offered with the semi-automatic transmision, the dualogic, the same as the Fiat Panda.
The grumbling seems overplayed. People are going to buy the 500 primarily on cuteness. The sales arc will likely be like any styling exercise — high at first and then dropping off once the Next Best Thing comes along.
What’s wrong with that? Chrysler needs a boost. This is one quick-and-easy way to give it one. Sales are unlikely to be of blockbuster proportions, but that’s not necessary. The 500 will arguably be a success if it brings more people to think about shopping Chrysler. The cuteness factor should be enough all by itself. If gas prices continue to go up that should further help.
But since they are insisting they go in their own showrooms and carry a Fiat badge instead of a Dodge brand it won’t bring people into the Chrysler family. It’s only hope is it’s possible cuteness factor but we will have to see whether or not it strikes a cord with those who buy solely based on how cute a car is. Then like you say it’s sales will plummet when the next cute one comes along and it is no longer consider stylish among that crowd.
The 500 is a city car. The highway milage is irrelevant.
We have a winner!
People comparing highway miles are off the mark. Even a Corvette gets good highway mileage – because it has a very high top gear. The true test of efficiency is how little fuel it burns in stop and go driving.
if your driving environment is mostly highway, then I’d suggest not getting a Fiat 500. But you all had already figured that out.
It’s not as if anyone spouting “Fix it Again Tony” is in Fiat’s target demographic anyway. Chrysler makes the Volare for those people – oops, I guess not, it would have to be a Caliber.
The highway and combined MPG matter much more than that city. This “city car” stuff is BS the majority of people who shop small cars for commuters do so because thy have long commutes, very few of those are exclusively stop and go. Even if someone is looking for the best city MPG the Yaris, Fiesta and 2012 Focus beat it.
The 500s only real competitor is the Mini, it’s not an economy car like an Aveo.
Mini had been gone from the market for a long time also, and most of the early buyers were unaware of the BMW ownership.
If the product is good and reasonably reliable the resale values will be up there with Mini and the car could do well especially if some Abarth versions are available.
Agreed and I’ll be buying a 500 as soon as they bring the Abarth EsseEsse version over…
the price advantage over a mini combined with the interior room should be enough to make it competitive, but I don’t think the Mini is the biggest threat for this car.
at this price point, I would be more worried about the Yaris 3 door….and the Fiat has managed to beat the Yaris’ fuel economy (29/36 with manual).
euro spec 500 has a semi automatic, which does not impact official mpg ratings.
What interior room advantage. The Mini feels cavernous compared to the 500. I couldn’t believe how small the car actually was at the Detroit auto show.
The Fiat really shouldn’t be compared to the Fiesta as they appeal to a pretty different set of people. Fuel economy is only one metric… In my opinion the Fiat really is just a Mini Cooper/Honda CR-Z/Hyundai Veloster competitor.
I’ve sat in the 500 at the Auto Show (as well as the Fiesta), and the interiors are day and night. The 500’s interior is rather high quality, minus a few scratchy plastic panels- doors close with a solid thunk and feels almost as vault-like as the Mini Cooper’s. However, the Fiesta’s interior looks like it came from a car two generations ago. The Mazda 2’s interior is far better in my opinion, and the only car that had a worse interior was the Chevy Sonic.
You guys just don’t “get” the 500. Nobody is going to cross-shop a 500 and a Taurus or Civic. And you don’t buy one if you’re getting an econobox to pinch pennies (that’s what the Yaris is for). The 500 is aiming at the MINI’s niche: A fun to drive, small, “premium” car that’s stylish and has a bit of affordable, European exotic flair. If you’re young or urbane enough to like the 500, you likely have no memory of FIAT’s past failures here or you don’t care. All you know is that James May liked it on that episode of Top Gear you saw on youtube.
I would think the small mileage hit compared to the MINI is more than made-up by the $5k price difference, but only time will tell.
I for one welcome the FIAT 500 and wish the model the best of luck.
In the North American market, anything that’s not a fat boring car built for fat boring people is a good thing in my book.
I say the biggest challenge is not letting it become too ‘cute’. They have some good colours, and FIAT would do well bringing over sporting examples, ‘Abarth’ or not. If they are actually fun to drive, then it would be a huge boost as well!
Yes, the 500 has more leg room in the rear seat than the MINI.
Anyone know if the rear leg room is any better than the mini (i.e., is there any at all?). I’ve been seeing the 500 for a couple of years now when I go to Italy – really like it but haven’t sat in one. I’m in the target market for this car (or rather, my wife is), but some kind of useable rearseat is needed for our 6-year old. The mini is really a 2-seater.
If you’re hauling a kid, save yourself some grief and get a four-door. Fiesta, Mazda 2, Juke, Fit, there’s some fun choices under 20 grand these days.
As for the 500, I don’t see the mpg as a big problem. While not great, it isn’t terrible, and buyers for this car will be primarily concerned with styling and price. The mileage won’t be a huge selling point but it’s good enough for now. Assuming 10,000 miles a year and gas at $3.20, the difference between 30 and 27 mpg comes to $119 per year. Hopefully they’ll upgrade that slushbox in a year or two.
If you’re hauling a kid, save yourself some grief and get a four-door. Fiesta, Mazda 2, Juke, Fit, there’s some fun choices under 20 grand these days.
Skip the Fiesta, 2 and Juke: you’ll have real trouble fitting a rear-facing seat. Versa**, then Fit, if you’re carrying people.
** the Versa has more space than more than a few midsizers.
A six year old needs a car seat?
I respect Psar’s opinions, but we must remember that he’s 7’16” tall and judges everything accordingly. I’ve raised my two kids (so far) while owning small 2-door cars and neither my kids or I am complaining.
I raised one daughter with a 2-door hatchback, and a couple extra doors would have been nice to have, especially when hauling her friends around. Perhaps being hauled around in a Pinto by my parents scarred me for life, but for me kids and 2-doors are not a match made in heaven. But if someone really wants a 500, well, kids are generally skinny and flexible, so they should be able to handle any gymnastics necessary to get in the back seat.
Totally agree with Ducky: Compared these at the Detroit Auto Show. 500 interior was shockingly nice. Very stylish, but very high quality feel as well. In particular, an “espresso” colored top-of-the-line Lounge model with cream/brown leather interior was a stand-out. Priced at $21,250. Mini STARTS over $20,000, and is so pricey, they didn’t even show the bottom-line totals, just individual option prices, which I imagine could easily take it over $30,000. The 500 also comes in a plethora of exterior and interior color combinations, such a relief from the dead sea of gray clad cars. Fiesta interior in contrast looked somewhat tacky and cheap. WAY over-styled, and just didn’t look like the interior of a $20,000+ car (SES Hatch). Worse yet was the Sonic. Pictures looked promising, but in reality, it was very cheesy looking, even in top-of-the-line LTZ trim. In particular, the “motorcycle” inspired intrument binnacle looked like what it was, a cheap piece of molded plastic that looked like it would break off in your hands at any minute. Sonic was most disappointing. 500 most pleasantly surprising. 500’s $4,000 price advantage over the Mini will buy you a lot of gas for the 1 mpg difference in mileage.
Here’s my only response. That car makes the Fiesta look huge. That is all. Crawling back into my cold snowy dungeon.
The problem with buying a car that can fit your 6-year-old in the back is that he-she won’t stay 6. My daughter was 5’9″ when she was 12. How long do you plan on keeping your car?
38 vs 40 mpg per 1000 miles is about 1.3 gallons of gas. I’m not going to lose sleep over that if I bought one instead of a Fiesta.
I saw the two they had at the AutoShow in SanFrancisco last November and – with the exception of the seat lever control – the materials appeared to be of high quality and I didn’t notice any apparent build quality issues… a great little commuter car and it will find its niche.
I owned Fiats before. The gas mileage is NOT reflective of real life use. Also, The 500 is a bigger car than it looks so its going to be hard to assume it will get the expected mileage. I will drive one just for the hell of it.
I’ve driven, rented, and owned many, many cars in my 58 years on this Earth. I have yet to find a car that is more fun to drive than my 1981 Fiat X1/9. In fact, I challenge any man to suggest a car with a more grins per mile ratio.
Fiats are for people who like to drive, who know how good it feels to toss a light, excellent handling car around a curve, with the sun on your face, a bottle of Jack between your knees, a beautiful blond riding shotgun, and a gram of coke up your nose… okay, that last part was stolen from National Lampoon.
General, please don’t post things like that when there’s a pristine X1/9 for sale a couple blocks down the street. So tempting…and we already have one 80’s European car too many.
Ok…how about a Porsche 914 2.0?
I can think of lots of cars that are more smiles per mile in stock form than a x 1/9 but in keeping with the small, light, topless category the S2000. The exhaust note alone from a S2000 alone is enough to top the X 1/9, and I am about the farthest thing from a Honda Fan boy since I prefer my cars to be “Found On Road Dead” and sporting 8 cyls arranged in a V.
I’ve driven the 914 2.0 and it’s a nice car, but not the equal of the X… not as light-footed, or on center. It lacks “personality”.
I probably should’ve added a qualifier that the suggester had to have actually driven an X.
Almost settled on an ’07 S2000 (and I am a Honda fan) before I decided to buy the ’07 350Z. The S2000 has a lot of scoot, fun to rev, but the cockpit wasn’t as roomy or as comfortable as an X and I should mention I’m 6’2″ and about 240lbs.
Its staring us all in the face – the 500’s automatic needs work. How many decades back is that? You know, Europa not being able to bring in a decent automatic that can slush it on our turf..?
This car is going to die a fast death on the US market. Clearly, it has no MPG advantage over much bigger cars. What else is going to justify its right to exist? Price? If Fiat ready to sell reasonably spec’ed model for $15,000?
For the 100th time: This is NOT an econocar
Yes, it´s reasonably economic, but the main point is style.
There are much better choices for economic people than the Mini and Fiat 500.
Last I checked… not everybody bases car buying decisions as a Corolla driving accountant would.
This thing oozes quality and style over say something like a Yaris, or an Aveo.
Both boring cheap plasticky cars.
As to space and room: somebody up there said that th Mini was cavernous compared to the Cincuecento. Really? I beag to differ. In one important aspect, headroom (at least up front cause I haven’tt saat in back in neither car) is much better in Fiat. Yes it’s narrower, but not by much. Spacewise, Italians are always a master of packaging. Yes it looks smaller on the outside, but inside it’s just as good as mini (plus it doesn’t have the faulty ergonomics of instrument placement like mini).
At least in my opinion, if you want to race, go with Mini (specially Cooper S), or wait for 500 Abarth SS. If you want to cruise go with Fiat.
I agree, the mini feel claustrophobic in comparison, I’m tall and I like a lot of headroom, and there is none of it in the mini. It was one of many reasons why I chose a smart over the mini (besides price, features…etc)
I guess I’m one of the few who has been in the back seat of a 500. I’m 6’1″, 220 lbs. and 62 years old. I had little problem getting in (my 12 year old grandson had no problem at all) and it was surprisingly comfortable. Had I just gotten out of a panther taxi, my opinion might have been different, but the point is, there’s more room than expected.
The short trip, with about five miles at 65 on the freeway, was tolerable, but for long trips, my personal preference is an aisle seat in a Greyhound charter, with the refrigerator and bathroom in back. The driver of the 500 had a manual and really had to thrash the engine to get anywhere, so an automatic seems foolhardy. They might be better off with the Euro semi-auto, but the big problem is what the “Tooltime” guy kept saying: it needs More Power.
I’ve seen custom coachbuilders stretch out VW bugs, but they’re not going to touch the 500 until it has a stronger drivetrain. Too bad, I’d like to see a 4-door stretched 500. For now, don’t expect a 500 driver to hear much “fix it again Tony” talk. Since it’ll be sold next to Chrysler dealers, the most hurtful thing a 500 driver will hear is “That thing got a hemi in it?”