Arkaign
Lifer
- Oct 27, 2006
- 20,736
- 1,379
- 126
Barf. I agree that the trend towards uselessly huge wheels is disgusting. They're not even good from a performance standpoint.
From a performance standpoint, I don't think they're all that great though. The TG time for one of the hot versions is middling, even for the class, and that's a pretty balanced track. In a straight line, it's a slug.
Something like the upcoming FT-86 should be better in every way except the cute factor, and perhaps interior quality given Toyota's recent slacking in that area. Similar weight, RWD, similar power to the highest-trim 500s, and the thing actually looks like a car.
I think it's just a better car for European roads and cities.
brblx
Diamond Member
- Mar 23, 2009
- 5,499
- 2
- 0
pretty much. here imo it just makes a lot more sense to buy a versa, fiesta, fit, ect or move up to a compact sedan or hatch.
when will they learn; small is cheap and big is expensive. if you wanna build a decent but plain car and sell it for lots of money, make that damned thing HUGE. :awe:
I never heard anyone describe it as beautiful, but it's a nice looking small car. Especially when compared to the competition.
Well, there is this too...
exdeath
Lifer
- Jan 29, 2004
- 13,679
- 10
- 81
But small is trendy and trendy = high profit margins.
Anyone who thinks this is beautiful are likely your typical import eurosnob elitist that judges a car based on it's badge. How many people praise the Mini and Smart car because of the association with BMW and Mercedes and because they are "small and cute"? Funny how that works... if the car has a Smart/Daimler badge, they think it's a S500. If the same car has a Ford badge, they think Pinto.
Last edited:
exdeath
Lifer
- Jan 29, 2004
- 13,679
- 10
- 81
IcePickFreak
Platinum Member
- Jul 12, 2007
- 2,428
- 9
- 81
ThatsABigOne
Diamond Member
- Nov 8, 2010
- 4,422
- 23
- 81
It is a cute car, but far from beautiful.
Ok, I can make my car look beautiful if I fiddle with contrast settings in PS.
Ok, I can make my car look beautiful if I fiddle with contrast settings in PS.
Have you actually spent any time researching this or are you just brainlessly regurgitating and perpetuating false information you heard from someone else?
Every model of the 500 has the same engine. There are no options there. Every model of the 500 has 15" wheels, except for the sport version which has 16" wheels and that starts at $17.5k. So why would you have to spend $20k for those features that are standard on the cheapest model?
As for safety. The base model which is $15.5k has seven airbags, ABS brakes, traction control and stability control. How many cars in this price range can say that? What safety feature are you claiming you have to spend $20k for? The only "safety" features not standard on the cheapest model that are available higher up are rear park assist and a theft alarm. Neither of which I would consider a safety feature.
Every model of the 500 has power door locks and windows. Power seats are missing, but don't appear to be an option on any model. So again, why are you spending $20k for features that are on the base model or not available at all?
and i'm not even that crazy about its looks...but it is a lot more classy than the 500, i think (and i admit to liking the psycho grin in the front fascia). for 18k i got 16" aluminum wheels, all your standard power/tilt/cruise type stuff, bluetooth...it's just a different level of car.
You think the picture of a non-descript generic Asian econo-box you posted looks classier than an Fiat 500? Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but you're just wrong on that one. Who on earth thinks a Mazda 3 is classy?
The reason you thought that is probably because as you have already demonstrated you have no idea what the car comes standard with. There's no $10k version because there is no stripped out barebones model. The base model even has MP3 playback capability, Ipod and bluetooth connectivity. The base model is very well equipped which may have been a tactical mistake on Fiat's part. Though I don't know when $15.5k suddenly became expensive for a new car. Odds are they weren't planning on selling millions of these in America and wanted to make a good first impression with their reentry into the market by not having a barebones model.
Doppel
Lifer
- Feb 5, 2011
- 13,306
- 3
- 0
The Versa has six airbags (ok, not seven), and abs, tcs, stability. And that's in the base $10,995 model. Also has an mp3 player with input. These safety features are totally standard on everything now. I recall it may even be law that all new vehicles have to have tcs already or will be in the next year or so.
theeedude
Lifer
- Feb 5, 2006
- 35,787
- 6,197
- 126
brblx
Diamond Member
- Mar 23, 2009
- 5,499
- 2
- 0
sorry.
also my apologies for assuming the fiat website had correct pricing. i will admit that the 20k mark was off, i remembered going to their site before and having to pick between the ~100hp engine and a lower output model. perhaps i was in the wrong country.
but anyway, i went back and checked...ok, if you want the base model, with such luxury upgrades as 15" aluminum wheels and a spare tire, it's 16,850. wow, a steal. again, it fails for the same reason the mazda2 does, it just does it harder.
also, you're fairly deluded if you think your car looks more appealing than a standard latemodel jap sedan. or korean. or domestic (well, ok, ford).
and lastly, things like 'dude, it has SEVEN AIRBAGS' also belies any intelligence. pretty much everything (if not everything) has six or more airbags now. generally 'seven airbags' means 'whoops the dash was breaking the legs of the dummy, so we added a knee bolster.'
brblx
Diamond Member
- Mar 23, 2009
- 5,499
- 2
- 0
also lol @ me saying that i thought a standard sedan with somewhat appealing styling was 'classier' than a slightly stretched smart car, and your rebuttal. you would think i called the 3 the epitome of elegance and luxury.
in general, you just demonstrate a complete lack of reading/human interaction ability and also don't appear to have shopped new cars in a solid five years.
in general, you just demonstrate a complete lack of reading/human interaction ability and also don't appear to have shopped new cars in a solid five years.
SparkyJJO
Lifer
- May 16, 2002
- 13,357
- 7
- 81
Maybe compared to a Smart, yes. But in general? No, it isn't all that good looking.
manimal
Lifer
- Mar 30, 2007
- 13,559
- 8
- 0
Growing up driving fiat 600, 131, 500, Brava, spyder etc I am a big fan of the current crop of fiats.
The quality of these cars is apparent. While some may not like the styling the very fact that some people hate it makes it that much prettier!!
Maybe we can get Alfa Romeo back next!!!!
The quality of these cars is apparent. While some may not like the styling the very fact that some people hate it makes it that much prettier!!
Maybe we can get Alfa Romeo back next!!!!
Your whole posting in this thread is weird. I'd say you're clearly looking for something different from the 500, which makes you complaining that it doesn't meet your criteria baffling.
This is not a box built to offer the best value like most of the cars you were looking at or mentioned. Sure plenty of them get decent praise for being more than that and are great cars in their own right, but they're substantially different from the 500.
The 500 is like the Mini, its not stellar value, its not the prettiest, its not roomy even considering its size, its not the most economical, its not fast, but its not a car that you buy for any of those reasons.
In short, its a car you have to "get", and you clearly do not. Is that a bad thing? No. I'm not even really a huge fan of it, but I'm glad that it exists, as it shows a willingness to make something that is more than just the sum of its parts or a value proposition. I'm glad that you can buy one in the US, and I hope its successful so that maybe car companies will stop considering the US as a market where they need to make huge bulbous cars with big engines to cater to fat Americans to have success. We missed out on so many good European cars because of that.
I do think you saying the 3 is classier shows you don't understand what class even means though. I think the 3 is ok looking even with the gaping maw and other bits that are mostly actually just cheap black plastic, but classy it is not. That's not to say you can't prefer a non-classy car's styling over a classier looking car, but that's not what you were claiming either. Understatement is classy, and the base 500 is very understated for a small hatchback. I'm not arguing that its better looking, but the gaping openings on most hatches, giant-bulging bug eye headlights, and other stuff are not understated at all.
One last thing. Comparing it to the Smart car shows you didn't do dick for actual research. There certainly are similarities, but drive both or even just speak to people that have and realize they are worlds apart.
What I would love though is to take a 500, tub it and put in a roll cage, and then stick a small high output (like say a turbo 'busa engine) in the back connected to a new rear setup (wider 18 inch wheel/tire combo). Leave the regular engine in, so you can put around and look almost like a sleeper, but then switch it over to RWD and the high rev screaming of the other engine. That or move the seats back a bit and stick that new BMW Turbo 4 cylinder up front with either AWD or power sent to the rear wheels.
Last edited:
Brilliant
MSRP is $15,500. I don't know what country you are looking at, but I'm looking at the USA website. Now you're trying to add on options you did not list in your last post to increase the price.
Nice blanket statement. I said the Mazda 3 picture you posted looks like a generic Asian econobox. And that's what it is. I didn't say all Asian cars look like that. The original claim you made was classier than a 500. As someone else has mentioned below, you don't know what classy is if you attach that word to a Mazda 3. Classy has nothing to do with looking good or bad either, you can be completely hideous looking and still be classy.
Let me requote what you have obviously forgotten you said:
"the 1.4 engine with some 15" wheels and standard power/safety features is like 20 grand."
So I ask again, what are the standard safety features the base $15,500 model lacks that other awesome and classy cars like and Mazda 3 have?
On a sort of related note, and online publication did a comprison between the Fiat 500 and a Mazda 2. The results really aren't that surpising. The Fiat was the more fun car to drive and looked better, while the Mazda was more utilitarian with the conclusion being the cars were totally different and aimed at different markets:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7QQj6c8kto&feature=related
Cheap Mazda hatchbacks might be objectively better cars, but they aren't subjectively fun or cool like the 500.
Also, they're hilarious to watch on the track.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2ZbmQVTjHw
Also, they're hilarious to watch on the track.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2ZbmQVTjHw
Sulaco
Diamond Member
- Mar 28, 2003
- 3,825
- 46
- 91
dud
Diamond Member
- Feb 18, 2001
- 7,635
- 73
- 91
Agreed. Definitely NOT one of the worst looking cars on the road today.
How about starting a thread about the Nissan Cube? Now that's a horrible looking "car".
brblx
Diamond Member
- Mar 23, 2009
- 5,499
- 2
- 0
prism
Senior member
- Oct 23, 2004
- 967
- 0
- 0
Arkaign
Lifer
- Oct 27, 2006
- 20,736
- 1,379
- 126
I passed one of these on the highway on the way home, which gave me a really odd chance to compare it to a few other cars on the road next to it. Good GOD that thing is tall! It was notably taller than a VW Beetle, and was the same height as a Pontiac Minivan driving past it. Certainly odd. Definitely not for me, but I'm glad some people like it.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter