Fiat 500

Eye-catching retro supermini is still a strong challenger

December 2011

If there’s one city car that can match the VW up! for head-turning, high-street appeal, it’s the Fiat 500. With its cheeky retro looks, fizzy Latin character and upmarket cabin, this car is a firm Auto Express favourite and offers a strong challenge to any class newcomer.

Even five years after its debut, the 500 still gets noticed. Styling cues from the fifties original help the classy Fiat to stand out easily next to modern rivals. What’s more, even the basic black door mirrors and plastic wheel trims of our entry-level Pop test car failed to tarnish the model’s upmarket image.

It’s a similar story inside, where the 500 runs the up! close for premium appeal and beats it for style. The body-coloured dashboard, quality materials and comfortable driving position give the Fiat’s cabin a luxury feel that belies its £9,900 price tag.

However, the pay-off for this bargain-basement price is a lack of standard equipment. Unlike its rivals, the 500 doesn’t get air-conditioning, a leather steering wheel or Bluetooth. Adding these will cost you an extra £895.

Rear-seat passengers get less head and legroom than in the other cars, while you’ll have to find another £155 to replace the single-piece rear bench with a more versatile split-fold option.

Still, with the seats in place, the Fiat provides a useful 185 litres of storage. There are also plenty of cubbies elsewhere in the cabin, although the lack of a proper glovebox means there’s nowhere to safely conceal valuable items from prying eyes.

As with its exterior styling, the Fiat’s 1.2-litre engine has historic roots. Yet despite its advancing years, the 69bhp unit is a smooth and eager performer. It can’t quite match the outright pace of the smaller and lighter up! and Aygo, but its more muscular mid-range power delivery means the 500 is well able to keep pace with fast-moving traffic.

And despite a lack of steering feel and an occasionally bouncy ride, the 500 impresses with its agility and grip through corners. Elsewhere, it’s second only to the impressive VW when it comes to comfort and refinement on long-distance journeys.

But as you’d expect, the 500 is at its best in town. Compact dimensions and decent visibility make it easy to thread the car through crowded urban streets. Better still, a city button makes the steering even lighter, helping to reduce the strain of slotting the Fiat into tight parking spots. There’s even a standard stop-start system that cuts the engine at traffic lights to save fuel.

Yet the 500 isn’t without its faults. As with the Aygo and up!, you pay extra for electronic stability control, while high emissions and poor fuel economy make it surprisingly costly to run. Will these flaws count against it in the final reckoning?

For an alternative review of the latest Fiat 500 visit our sister site carbuyer.co.uk

BACK TO TOP

What Next

For more breaking car news and reviews, subscribe to Auto Express magazine. We'll give you 6 issues for £1 and a free gift!

< Previous Next >

5 Comments

Fuel Consumption?

Why does this test review comparing the VW UP against the Fiat 500 describe the Fiat 500 as having poor fuel economy.

Your own Economy on test figures give the VW UP 32.9 mpg vs the Fiat 500's 32.0 mpg.

Both figures look very similar to me? ...and neither of them look particularly impressive to me.

By max_b on 8 December, 2011, 8:42am

@max_b

Hi max_b

We agree - the Fiat 500 is only marginally worse than the up! using these figures. But we would expect the up! to perform better over a longer test period.

If fuel economy is your number one priority though, the Picanto or Aygo would be better options for you.

Thanks again for your comments,
Auto Express

By Rhian on 8 December, 2011, 10:41am

@max_b

I quite agree, this is typical AutoExpress "tabloid journalism", lazy statements like "surprisingly costly to run" when the difference between the Up! would be negligible smacks of favouritism and nothing else.

My view is as valid as AE's and I think the Up! is a disappointment, I would rather have the facelifted Brazilian VW Fox which is a much better package in my view. Not the mention the Up! looks a p*g from the back.

And the reply from the AE team makes no sense at all... "we'd expect it to perform better over a longer test"....How? what gave you that conclusion? why didn't you do a longer test to back up your silly statement.

And then there's the "most hotly anticipated" statement ....by whom?

By JamesRiley on 8 December, 2011, 10:33pm

@JamesRiley

Thanks for your comment James. We completely agree - your opinion is as valid as everyone else's and things would be quite dull if we all agreed on everything.

The reason we believe the 500 to be costly to run isn't just that it was the worst performer in our efficiency test and the official figures - it's also based on our experience driving other Fiat 500s over the years. Had we driven the more expensive TwinAir it would have scored better - but then it wouldn't have been a rival for the other cars.

The other factors: The good news is that it's a desirable choice so residuals are strong. But Pop trim doesn't come with much kit. According to our research as well as what readers have told us in the Driver Power reliability survey, shows it could be quite costly to maintain, despite the fact it has the longest service intervals of all cars tested here.

As for our statement about longer tests, it's based on drives in other VW up!s over the last couple of months. Unfortunately, we only had all of them together for a day - this is due to the high demand for this first UK-spec press car. We will be testing them again as soon as possible and the results will be online.

Thanks again and hope this helps,
Auto Express

By Rhian on 9 December, 2011, 10:50am