Average US fuel economy, getting better but still bad.

[robchalmers]

Originally Posted by Arragonis

Depends where you live.

A decent FIAT, Ford, GM or even a Hyundai hatch will give a Miata a good run for its money cross country.

The original Mini competed against the Porsche 911 in rallies in its later days - thats 1293cc (rally engine) vs something >2 litres...

the original golf gti could outpace a ferrari 248 across the welsh mountains AND I know for a fact the a '06 audi a4 avant s-line 2.0tdi170 can keep with a Cayman S (driven by an ex-BTCC driver) across the infamous moffat-edinburgh 'beeftub' road..... not that I was in the audi

Hell my polo can shuffle along behind a miata once its up to sixty! 50-70 in top it destroys them (with half the bhp)

feeding back to euro emissions - at work we class them as Rest of the world emissions as everywhere bar the US we sell Euro4 or Euro5 spec engines. the US? a mapping change and barely noticeable one at that!

[robchalmers]

Originally Posted by zonker

I loved the previous generation Ka and was sad they never offered it here.

As for the 500, I recall that our base version weighs 2360lbs and the 1.4L EU model is 2046 lbs.

a couple blurbs from various publications about our version:

Legal requirements forced many changes to the 500. For example since European plates are wider and shorter than ours, Fiat had to re-engineer the front and rear fascias to accommodate American license plates.(screw holes) Engineers also had to rework the A-pillar trim (Trim not structure) due to differences in crash safety standards, and increase the size of the windshield wipers to meet US guidelines requiring more windshield coverage. And of course the infamous “Objects in Mirror Are Closer Than They Appear” warning had to be added to US-spec side mirrors in order to meet federal regulations.(life changing!)

Some changes satisfy consumer demand rather than legal requirements. Americans tend to travel longer distances than Europeans, so all US 500s will have cruise control, which is not standard on European models. Americans tend to enjoy slurping sodas and coffee on the go, so Fiat also increased the cupholder size for US cars. Most importantly, Fiat has never offered a true automatic transmission on the 500 in Europe, since Europeans still favor manual transmissions. But Fiat decided that for the 500 to be a success in the States, it needed a conventional automatic.

Changes for the United States include:

* Redesigned body structure for increased strength
* Retuned suspension (softer)
* Over 20 hardware modifications/additions for improved noise, vibration and harshness (NVH)(heavier sound deadening)
* New four-wheel anti-lock disc brake system (ABS) with redesigned front calipers(those used on the abarth - to stop the extra weight)
* Larger 10.5-gallon fuel tank
* New gearing for the five speed manual transmission and a new six speed automatic
* Use of a MAP sensor instead of a mass airflow sensor
* Upgraded heating and cooling system for North American climate extremes(sucks more power )
* Redesigned driver and front-passenger seats with a new armrest and seat cushion(sorry to say it but....wider?)
* Easy-entry system designed into the new front seats
* New steering wheel controls and revised steering calibration to increase stability at highway speed (against crosswinds)(numbed out from the wobble thanks to the softer ride)
* Revised stability control with electronic brake-force distribution (EBD), anti-lock brake system (ABS) and traction control systems (TCS) to control all four wheels in response to yaw and steering input; this system attempts to understand and carry out the driver’s intent. (software to help control the softer ride)
* New BOSE® Energy Efficient Series premium audio system features six premium speakers and a subwoofer

shame really its a cracking little car as it is

[Piwoslaw]

Originally Posted by pprince

Try bike riding for a dandgerous sport.

I ride my bike to work and it amazes me the brain dead vehicle drivers that cannot see me even in a bright yellow rain suit. I look like a friggin huge banana.

Very seriously, riding a bike is a wake up call in danger.

WATERPROOF CYCLING JACKET / INVISIBILITY CLOAK - eBay.co.uk

WATERPROOF CYCLING JACKET / INVISIBILITY CLOAK


Like all good waterproof Day-Glo cycling jackets, this will allow you to simmer in your own sweat on your commute to work and enable you to look like a complete pr1ck when you have to wear it around town in your lunch hour.

But what really makes this jacket stand out are its powers of invisibility. Slip it on, get on your bike and you completely disappear. It has to be seen to be believed.

Only this evening, in stationary traffic, I was able to topple onto a car and bang my fist repeatedly on the bonnet before the driver realised there was a presence RIGHT IN FRONT OF HER. Even when I shouted she was not able to look upon me – for I was in the mighty invisibility cloak!

The magic moments didn’t end there. Minutes later, riding through Moss Side, a young chap pulled in and opened his car door right in front of me. Bless. My disembodied shouting must have spooked the poor boy, because he and his friend then began hurling random abuse in my general direction, grabbing their crotches (their own not each others’) and waving their arms about in a gun shootin’ stylee. Now, I’m not sure if the jacket’s special powers include bullet proofability. But that worked out well, because as they got back in the car I got the chance to do an impromptu MAX Heart Rate test – big numbers. Cool.

Finally, I put the jacket / invisibility cloak through its paces by smiling at several pretty girls as I cycled past. Nothing. They looked straight through me. Incredible.

[robchalmers]

While the polo was off the road because it failed its test, i commuted for the first time in roughly a year and i forgot how Flipping dangerous it was! in the space of three days I had my handle bars hit twice, back tyre hit 4 times at the lights, narrowly avoided the flying remnants of Starbucks’ finest being lobbed from a window at 30+mph and almost dropped it on an oily roundabout thanks to someone who had popped there engine (found them up the next street ringing the AA)

Keeps me aware as a driver though! Think everyone should commute on bike for a minimum of 5 days a year.

[gone-ot]

...bicyclists = self-propelled "Hood Ornaments"

[Rusty Marina]

Originally Posted by cleanspeed1

The old IDI 6.9/7.3 in that chassis will do in the 14-16 mpg range all natural, will do better if turbocharged with either the factory ( nee ATS ) or a Hypermax system. The biggest problem with these engines is simply gearing.
From the factory, these engines are geared too low, and if the gearing were changed to lower the speed to 1600-1800 in top gear at cruise, the mileage goes up substantially.

I used to frequent an IDI site, and one of the founders took a stock 6.9 IDI and a 5 speed OD transmission and put it in a F150 pickup with 3.08 gears in the back. Got 30 mpg out of it.

If there was a gearset in the 2.73 to 3.08 range for the 3/4 to 1 ton rear axle that was readily available, buying an IDI truck would be an mpg dream

Thanks; yea Im told some topped out at 75 because of the gearing. The GM trucks had their 6.2 as an option in the 1/2 tons, so Im wondering if one of those would be easier on the budget, despite the fact I know the 6.9 was a much better engine

Originally Posted by Arragonis

The original Mini competed against the Porsche 911 in rallies in its later days - thats 1293cc (rally engine) vs something >2 litres...

If the 1293 you speak of was a bored out 1275 cc "A" series engine those are neat little engines (I have a couple old Morris Minors outback)

[cleanspeed1]

Originally Posted by Rusty Marina

Thanks; yea Im told some topped out at 75 because of the gearing. The GM trucks had their 6.2 as an option in the 1/2 tons, so Im wondering if one of those would be easier on the budget, despite the fact I know the 6.9 was a much better engine



If the 1293 you speak of was a bored out 1275 cc "A" series engine those are neat little engines (I have a couple old Morris Minors outback)

It would be way easier to get a good running 6.2 / 6.5 truck since they are roughly the same price as the Fords. I had a stepvan with the 6.2 and aside of putting glow plugs, controller and a starter, it was a good engine. Misunderstood, but good.

If I were to do it again, I'd put a set of 2.73s or 3.08s and a turbo on one, in a 2wd Suburban ( half ton )

[Arragonis]

Originally Posted by Rusty Marina

If the 1293 you speak of was a bored out 1275 cc "A" series engine those are neat little engines (I have a couple old Morris Minors outback)

Yep, had one in my reshelled Midget a few years back - a tail wagger on demand (and sometimes when not).

Do you really have Marinas ? The second quote on my Sig is referring to the Marina

EDIT - My first quote - I must read my own stuff sometimes.

EDIT 2 - A read of Barney Sharratt's excellent book on "The Austin" when he talks to the designer of the A-series is a laugh. The designer thought it wasn't very good...