Fiat announced Panda and 500 Mild Hybrid

[Jim the Sunderer]

That's an inventive use of some old Ryobi batteries they've found in the handyman's shed.

[MrGTI6]

Pistonheads said:

In what's described as the beginning of the electrification of FCA - better late than never, right?

I would say better never than late.

[eldar]

Jim the Sunderer said:

That's an inventive use of some old Ryobi batteries they've found in the handyman's shed.

The hybrid battery in this car has less capacity than the 12v lead acid battery in my Skoda Citigo?

What am I missing?

[BFleming]

Thread revival here as the new 500 & Panda Hybrids have actually gone on sale now. The key figures:

500 Mild Hybrid: CO2 emissions from 88g/km, combined 53.3mpg. Available in the following specs:
Pop, £12,665 OTR
Lounge, £14,395
Sport, £14,565
Star, £15,895
Rockstar, £16,065
Launch Edition, £16,795

Panda Mild Hybrid: CO2 emissions from 89g/km, combined 49.6mpg.
City Cross, £13,885
Launch Edition, £14,385
Trussardi, £14,485

[anonymous-user]

paralla said:

Ladies and gentlemen (and those of you that are yet to decide). I give you a photo of a 12 Volt, 11 Amp Hour Lithium Ion battery.....



http://www.lithiumion-batterypack.com/product/1865...

So as we can all guess, a complete waste of time and a cynical marketing ploy. I am sure a lot of buyers will buy this car because it is a "hybrid" without actually understanding what exactly they are buying.

As has been said, this platform is essentially 12 years old now, does anybody actually buy fiats in the UK any more?

[David87]

Kind of offensive that this is allowed to even have the word 'hybrid' in the name. Almost as misleading as Toyota and their 'self-charging' hybrids.

[gweaver]

Bit harsh chaps. Mild hybrids use relatively simple tech to give small gains in fuel efficiency - nothing wrong with that.
The small battery is still enough capture some energy under deceleration, with much less weight and environmental penalty than a large battery.

[sleeky]

Hopefully they can use this on the 4x4 to enable them to keep selling it, I am looking at them at the mo and the 122kg co2 and 37 mpg isn't going to cut it with the new 95kg fleet averages. Although does make me wonder if now is to time to get a good deal on a twinair one, current discounts seem to get a new cross 4x4 down to about 13k (list 16.5k)

For those mocking the whole "mild" hybrid systems, expect to see lots of these on the market over the next few years as we progress towards electric. No manufacturer is going to want to spend any more time or money developing fossil fuel engines now we have a pretty clear end date, these are a quick and dirty (no pun intended) fix to bring co2 levels down while they invest in electric development.

[21st Century Man]

I'm a big fan of the Panda and have had a few of them. But I remember when they were cheap cars (4×4 excepted). Mid teens is crazy money imo when a delivery mileage mid spec i10 1.2SE is just a smidge over £8k. Surely the hybrid element in this instance is so infinitesimal as to be almost irrelevant?

[eldar]

gweaver said:

Bit harsh chaps. Mild hybrids use relatively simple tech to give small gains in fuel efficiency - nothing wrong with that.
The small battery is still enough capture some energy under deceleration, with much less weight and environmental penalty than a large battery.

What exactly is a mild hybrid?

[gweaver]

It's basically a conventional internal combustion engined vehicle, with the starter motor and alternator replaced with an ISG (integrated starter generator), which feeds electric power between the engine and a small battery, via some power electronics.

Typically the ISG is connected to the crank by a belt. When the car is decelerating, the ISG is driven off the crank, when it's accelerating it can drive the crank.

The earlier and simpler ones use a 12V system, but newer mild hybrids are 48V. I think the 12V ones only put out low single figure horsepower figures, but IIRC the 48V system that will be in the updated Swift Sport will be around 12 horsepower. That may not sound like a lot, but it's enough to power the electrical systems, run the car at traffic jam speeds, and maybe torque fill for the turbo at low engine speeds.

[eldar]

gweaver said:

It's basically a conventional internal combustion engined vehicle, with the starter motor and alternator replaced with an ISG (integrated starter generator), which feeds electric power between the engine and a small battery, via some power electronics.

Typically the ISG is connected to the crank by a belt. When the car is decelerating, the ISG is driven off the crank, when it's accelerating it can drive the crank.

The earlier and simpler ones use a 12V system, but newer mild hybrids are 48V. I think the 12V ones only put out low single figure horsepower figures, but IIRC the 48V system that will be in the updated Swift Sport will be around 12 horsepower. That may not sound like a lot, but it's enough to power the electrical systems, run the car at traffic jam speeds, and maybe torque fill for the turbo at low engine speeds.

Cheers. My Skoda citigo has stop/start, was cheap to buy, is fun to drive and more economical than these mild hybrids.

Seems a lot of expensive complication for almost no reward and a limited time to be on sale.

[gweaver]

eldar said:

Cheers. My Skoda citigo has stop/start, was cheap to buy, is fun to drive and more economical than these mild hybrids.

Seems a lot of expensive complication for almost no reward and a limited time to be on sale.

I'm a bit of a luddite myself, and intend to stick with my naturally aspirated 1.6 for a while yet, but I don't think these mild hybrids are *that* complicated. Whether the purchase price justifies the improved fuel economy is another question, but for some people it will do.
Personally, I welcome them because it means that manufacturers can keep cars viable in the face of increasing EU regulation.

FWIW the Swift 1.2 & 1.0 turbo with mild hybrid apparently return a few more mpg than the non hybrid versions, but then the non hybrids are very fuel efficient anyway (slightly more than an Up, even).

[eldar]

gweaver said:

I'm a bit of a luddite myself, and intend to stick with my naturally aspirated 1.6 for a while yet, but I don't think these mild hybrids are *that* complicated. Whether the purchase price justifies the improved fuel economy is another question, but for some people it will do.
Personally, I welcome them because it means that manufacturers can keep cars viable in the face of increasing EU regulation.

FWIW the Swift 1.2 & 1.0 turbo with mild hybrid apparently return a few more mpg than the non hybrid versions, but then the non hybrids are very fuel efficient anyway (slightly more than an Up, even).

I don’t see hybrids in general as useful for the vast majority. Lots of complexity and cost, for little benefit. Going straight to battery would seem more sensible.

[gweaver]

Yeah, because carrying around half a ton of toxic metals from China and Africa is clearly the ethically and environmentally best option.

[Roboticarm]

rare6499 said:

Six speed manual in a 500 - finally. I wonder if there’s any chance of it going in to an Abarth, only reason I haven’t got another one is the lack of a sixth get makes motorway work a bit of a pain.

Whilst a 6th gear would be nice, the 5 speed does just fine, I'm on the motorway everyday and a 80 - 90 cruise is no problem, it's much better than the 6 speed corolla t sport it replaced

Missus has a 500 pop which is equally good on motorway