FIAT 500 USA MPG

[sketch]

If you want a car with similar horsepower numbers and better EPA figures, I'll have a 2006 Toyota Prius for sale in (hopefully) a couple weeks.  110 combined horsepower, 48/45 MPG on the 2007-2010 scale.  83,000 miles, beat up on the outside but mechanically it's almost perfect.



Let me know!

[Springer2011]

2011 Hyundai Elantra, 148 horsepower, 6 speed manual and automatic, no eco package or special transmission charge needed, 2700 lbs curb weight, and 29/40 mpg EPA numbers for all cars. Wow Fiat should be looking at this and how they did it. They are not using direct injection and variable valve lift yet either.

Fiat 500, 105 horsepower, 2200 lbs curb weight, and 27/34 mpg automatic EPA numbers.

Fiat has less weight, less horsepower but much lower EPA rating for automatic.

Just food for thought.

[CaliberSRT4]

I don't think Fiat needs to take any lessons from the Elantra. The 500's competition is the MINI, Yaris, Fit, Smart, etc. The Elantra is more of a mainstream compact sedan. I think its main competition in terms of the type of vehicle and fuel economy is the 2011 Chevy Cruze Eco, 2011 Ford Fiesta SFE sedan, and 2012 Ford Focus. Of course it isn't cut and dry by any means, and the sedans do compete with the hatchbacks for a lot of buyers. But the 500 is unique, it isn't trying to be an Elantra.

That said, the Fiat 500 does match the Elantra's fuel economy with the 5-speed manual, despite the disadvantage of having one less gear, and a less streamlined shape. The Fiat 500 almost competes well in terms of price and content, while having a lot more options and customizability than the Elantra.

However, the automatic transmission is subpar as you point out. I'm sure Fiat already recognizes this. With a new automatic transmission, the fuel economy performance could easily be fixed. As it stands now, the manual transmission has a big advantage.

[Fiat500USA]

Hi Springer2011, welcome to the forum!

I think one of the things we have to remember is the engine on the Fiat is 30 years old. It was a ground breaking design and has been updated, and of course, it has MultiAir, but it is still an older design.

The feeling I got was that it was more important that the car drives great than to put extreme fuel economy out there.  

[sketch]

You're leaving out an important fact: the Fiat 500 is not a Hyundai.

[CaliberSRT4]

The engine on the Fiat 500 is not 30 years old. It is one year old, tops, and is a brand new engine. Saying that it is originally based on a design from 30 years ago is meaningless. By the same token, just about any modern internal combustion engine is based on a design from over 100 years ago, the 4-stroke otto cycle combustion engine. The 1.4L MultiAir does lack direct injection, but so do many other new engines, so it is by no means commonplace. Also, the 1.4L MultiAir will receive a turbo next year (Abarth). So the engine is just as modern as any competitors.

The reason the Elantra gets as good or better fuel economy than the 500 is mostly aerodynamics and better transmissions. The engines themselves are likely on par with one another.

[sketch]

The Rolls Royce 6 3/4 Litre V8 has been around since WW II as well, but you don't hear people harp on that for being unrefined! ;)

[Springer2011]

Well I think many people missed the point that I made by bringing up the Elantra. The message was the car is 400 lbs heavier, 43 more horsepower, heavier class, and yet better automatic mileage.

Lets take the emotions out of reading this post and hopefully someone makes changes in the Fiat500 at some time. Fiat did a great job of upgrading the car but missed in the transmission department in my opinion. Here is my logic.

I have a generic beef with US auto manufacturers in general that many of the engines and technology in Europe is not brought to the US. We lag significantly in the diesel area.

The Mini Coopers in Europe and the US use the same or similar transmissions, 6 speeds.

The European Fiat 500 uses a 6 speed manual but the US only gets a 5 speed. It seems to me that keeping a 6 speed would be a better idea for many reasons that I will not get into, it is obvious though. Some of the entry level cars from other manufacturers use 5 speeds with 6 speeds on most other cars. If you already are using a 6 speed though seems it would be easier to keep the car this way. Ask yourself what is the cost differential in a 5 speed or 6 speed to the factory, my guess $100, but I am not an expert. Their are many benefits when upgrading from a 5 speed to 6 speed and if the cost is $100 or less seems like money well spent.

The European Fiat 500 uses the 6 speed dualogic that is efficient. I think this may use an electro hydraulic clutch pak instead of a torque converter. The US though gets an older design automatic with a torque converter. I have a 2009 VW with a DSG transmission and this is a great transmission, not perfect but very nice. I am going to gift this car and get a Fiat 500 auto, but would be happier with a better auto.

Aisin has a six speed automatic available that is more efficient than the transmission selected, why not use this.

I know VW is famous for not bringing in all their engine/transmission combos from Europe. Fiat did a great job updating the Fiat 500 but the transmissions in my opinion are a miss. If they would have used similar trans as in Europe I think they would have even a greater success.

Remember you can make all the excuses you want as a response but it is pretty obvious if you but on your common sense hat and take of your emotions hat, you should see the point made here.

[sketch]

The six speed manual simply will not fit in the US car due to additional structural reinforcement added to make the car safer for American roads.

I'd rather survive a crash and have one less cog, thanks.

As for the Dualogic, I can imagine it's a strange system.  I'm not sure if you guys have watched the videos from the press event, but Laura Soave explained a few things about the Aisin automatic for the US market.  She said that they'd given her a car with the robotised manual to take home for a day, and immediately she determined it's not going to be accepted by the American public.

One of the biggest complaints about the Smart fortwo is the automated manual transmission, even in Europe since there is no conventional manual available.  I've seen most claim that it's too sluggish and jerky.  I'd imagine it's part of the reason they haven't really taken off in the states.

Now, this isn't a huge issue for Fiat in Europe, because the take rate for automatic gearboxes is very low.  In America, however, some 7% of new cars are sold with manuals, and Fiat expects no more than 20% of buyers or so to go with the manual gearbox.  The Dualogic is a single-clutch system, from what I understand, so I'd imagine it's quite slow.

Volkswagen's DSG is indeed an impressive gearbox, but it's a double clutch system, designed for performance.  A side effect of its (almost unbelievably) fast shifts is that it's easier to live with.  I've spent some time with the DSG, though, and even it does take a bit of getting used to.

Soave continued to say that the pairing of the Aisin 6-speed unit was done at the last minute, just to make sure the car would be as good as it can be for the market.  I'd wager this is why the manual will be the first to market—I doubt that was the plan from the start.  No, the 500 is not the most economical car, but that's not its raison d'être.  With the automatic, it's more refined, which is an important part of the package.

Don't get me wrong, Hyundai has done quite an impressive job with its new Elantra, but it competes in a different segment.  I would contend that the buyer looking purely for an inexpensive high-MPG car will go elsewhere, whereas the style-conscious buyers looking for an inexpensive, small, fun to drive high-MPG car will be eyeing the Cinquecento just as they've been eyeing the Mini all these years.

[Springer2011]

Sketch - Obviously you agree with me by saying the Aisin was a last minute decision and the 6 speed manual will not fit in the frame.

[sketch]

I agree that neither transmission is optimal.  The distinction is that I don't think it's all that important.

While a six speed transmission by itself might have been $100 more expensive, Fiat simply does not have one that fits.  Their options, besides going with the 5-speed, would be either to develop a new transmission which fits around the safety load path or to alter the design of the safety feature.  The R&D costs for the former would be, I'm sure, expensive, which would cut into the price advantage the 500 has over its main competitor.  The latter is, in my opinion, unacceptable.

The automatic, on the other hand, is purely a good business decision for the market.  I would bet that more people would be turned off by the robotised manual than will be turned off by the rather low MPG rating.  I still contend that most people will be buying the car because it's stylish, not because it's particularly economical.  As for the "more efficient Aisin unit", I'm sure they went with the best one they could source that fit in the car.

If you want the utmost in fuel economy, get a Prius.  It's more practical than the Cinquecento in just about every category I can think of.  If you want something cheap and economical, get a Yaris or something.  It's... well, it's cheap.

If you want your car to be something more than mere transportation from point A to point B, if you're the type who prefers the drive to its destination, if you like to smile every time you walk out of your door and up to your driveway simply because of what's there, well, the Fiat 500 is far and away the most inexpensive and most economical way to do it.

[Springer1952]

Sketch - If you want the utmost in fuel economy buy a Prius.

You know there are many reasons why GM and Chrysler filed bankruptcy in the past.

[Fiat500USA]

CaliberSRT4 wrote

The engine on the Fiat 500 is not 30 years old. It is one year old, tops, and is a brand new engine. Saying that it is originally based on a design from 30 years ago is meaningless. By the same token, just about any modern internal combustion engine is based on a design from over 100 years ago, the 4-stroke otto cycle combustion engine. The 1.4L MultiAir does lack direct injection, but so do many other new engines, so it is by no means commonplace. Also, the 1.4L MultiAir will receive a turbo next year (Abarth). So the engine is just as modern as any competitors.

The reason the Elantra gets as good or better fuel economy than the 500 is mostly aerodynamics and better transmissions. The engines themselves are likely on par with one another.

Hi CaliberRT$,

The engine we have in the US is the evolution of the FIRE series developed in the 1980's. The engine was upgraded in 2003, and we have the significant update with the MultiAir system added, but the architecture is still much older than, let's say the SGE/TwinAir. These newer engine designs have the benefit of the latest technology being developed around them at the concept level, which is much more efficient that upgrading an older design to newer standards.

For example, here is something on the new TwinAir:

"... Last but not least, the new engine was painstakingly optimized and tuned. For instance, the basic twin-cylinder architecture - combined with the low friction of internal parts - makes this engine best-in-class at a world level in terms of low friction. Furthermore, calculated simulations have been used to identify the best possible unit displacement in terms of thermo-dynamic efficiency, and the best fluid dynamic configuration to optimize and get the best out of the MultiAir system."

I use this to illustrate that a new engine has the advantages of being optimized from the beginning, it's something that the 1368cc FIRE didn't have the benefit of, they used the existing design, and that makes a difference.

Now there is no denying some cars get better gas mileage (the Hyundai sounds pretty outrageous). I'm just trying to explore why the 500 mileage is rated what it is. The above is my opinion.

The next time I talk with someone who knows I'll run my theory by them ;)

Best regards,

Chris

[Small Car Lover]

Gosh, with all the complaining about fuel economy I keep coming back the fact that the 500 and the Smart are the only gasoline, non-hybrid cars in the USA with City EPA of 30 or greater.  Is the smart really a close competitor to the 500?  I think the Smart is in a class by itself.

No doubt there is room for improvement.  That is always the case.

The fact remains the 500 has the best city EPA of any gas non hybrid.  Lets give credit where it's due.

[Fiat500USA]

Small Car Lover wrote

Gosh, with all the complaining about fuel economy I keep coming back the fact that the 500 and the Smart are the only gasoline, non-hybrid cars in the USA with City EPA of 30 or greater.  Is the smart really a close competitor to the 500?  I think the Smart is in a class by itself.

No doubt there is room for improvement.  That is always the case.

The fact remains the 500 has the best city EPA of any gas non hybrid.  Lets give credit where it's due.

[ciddyguy]

Yep, essentially what fiat500usa said.

However, Wikipedia (not always true) does show the 1368 (1.4L) FIRE engine having been introduced in 2003, but not noting any iteration of the 1368cc motor prior to that time frame. the motors shown in 2 different lists with the first one being the older 768cc motor from 1986-1992 up through 1108cc, from 1993-2000.

The motors in production currently in the 2nd list begin with a newer 1108cc from 2001 up through the 1368cc (1.4L) with the 1.4L having been the 8V Starjet with sequential multi-point injection when introduced in 2003, with the 16V with port deactivation being introduced in 2005 and the MultiAir in 2009. No mention of the 1.4 prior to 2003 but the Brava/131 shows a 1367cc DOHC motor in its last iteration (1981-1984) before it ceased production according to Wikipedia.

I would imagine if time were taken to root through the Fiat site or Chris' site, we'd be able to get more definitive info/history on the 1.4L motor but we CAN safely guess that this motor has been around since at least 1984, if not much newer.

I DID read very recently that this motor may well see direct injection before long too, but that requires an all new head to accommodate it.

[Springer2011]

I hope Fiat does more legwork on the automatic transmission version. The final drive ratios auto vs manual seems to be 4.10 vs 3.73. This would give 10% lower mileage for the auto version which is where the mileage differential is.

Since the auto version has a lower first gear and higher sixth gear it appears to me that the final drive ratio for the auto version could be equal at least or lower than the manual version. This small change would improve the mileage.

I also do not agree with the logic that american drivers will not prefer a electro hydraulic clutch and shift assembly on the auto version. My 2009 Dodge 5 speed auto is nowhere near as precise and smooth shifting as the VW DSG auto on my VW. The Dodge transmission hunts and pecks, etc. I think if you had american drivers drive on old slush box auto and then drive some of the new high tech auto's they would choose the new high tech auto's in a side by side comparison. That is my actual experience and that is my choice. Also I am an engineer type who knows and understands the differences.

The Smart car auto is one of the worst out there for smoothness, etc. The worst in my book.  The DSG transmissions used in US cars are used on the diesel only versions in some makes since they are extremely efficient as well as being a good performance transmission. Wow two bangs for the buck. The VW DSG's would be a good choice for a comparison. Having a side to side comparison to the Dualogic and current auto would also be informative.  Factory costs for an old slush box design vs a high tech auto most likely would be about $100.

Hopefuly when the Fiat body structure was designed they had in mind the manual transmission footprint at the same time. I would hope that there was not an oops moment when the six speed manual would not fit. There are many engineering solutions to the same problem.

[sketch]

The DuaLogic is not a dual clutch gearbox like the VW DSG.  It is a single-clutch model, like the universally panned gearbox in the smart fortwo.

I agree that the DSG is a fantastic transmission, and that's why it's done well here.  Similarly, the "automatic" in the Fiesta is a dual-clutch model, and it has likewise been praised for its refinement.  Unfortunately, Fiat's single-clutch system (DuaLogic is sort of a misleading product name), almost entirely by nature, cannot provide a quick enough shift to be smooth, since it does not have the "advantage" of the torque converter to transmit some power in between gears.  Dual clutch systems are so (unbelievably!) quick that it doesn't matter.

[navy48]

I've heard from others that they can consistently get 40+ with the 5sp.  haven't heard any actual feedback on the autos, but my guess is that the advertised 27/34 is about right.  maybe under ideal conditions you might be able to squeeze 1-2mpgs more, but thats about it.

I'm buying one for the mpg's but also for the 'fun factor'.  while I like the Mini, it sits way too low for me as I can't get in and out easily.  had a smart car and it was really easy to get in and out, just had other issues.  the 500 seems to be just right for ME.  

a perfect blend of comfort, fun and gas mileage.......:)

[navy48]

LOL....the smart IS in a class by itself.  not that that is a good thing.  as a past smart owner, I can honestly say that the "car" was what it is:  small, fun, easy to maneuver and fuel efficient.  that's about it.  basic transportation for to and from work and running a few errands.

as for the 500, much more room, nearly as fuel efficient, just as much fun and well, a REAL car.  also, I've compared parts prices and the 500 parts seem to be MUCH less than those on a smart.  

while the smart may have been a $15,000 car, you're paying Mercedes $80,000 car prices for parts, not to mention that now service and parts will all be handled through MB dealers.   and to go with those prices, you get  the MB attitude and snobbyness.  THIS is why I dumped my smart and am now ready to get a 500.