How do 500's do after 9 years and 80k miles?

[AC43]

Hi, just wondering if anyone has experience of a middle aged 500 on 80k miles.

I've seen a nice 2009 Sport that's done 80k.

I had a 500x hire car on 50k and it still felt pretty taught although there was the odd clonk and the odd piece of trim hanging off.

It's a long way away - I'm just wondering if it's worth a look.

[AC43]

Update; the OH flat refuses to countenance an 80K car and simply won't budge.

Still, a 40k car is only £1k more.

Now I've found a metallic blue one with pale grey interior that matches my Merc.

Want.

[AC43]

DELTAHPE said:

What exactly is the function of this vehicle? If you want practicality you should consider a panda the most underrated car in the known universe

Edited by DELTAHPE on Saturday 15th September 21:05

1,500 miles a year max bombing round London Zone 2. Short trips, speedbumps.

EDIT; I suggested a Panda but was met with a blank look. I think it's perfect for what we need, more practical than a 500 and it doesn't suffer from "500 tax".

'er indoors still wants a 500 though...

Edited by AC43 on Monday 17th September 17:25

[AC43]

SimianWonder said:

The 1.2 Engine is basically bombproof, but the same can't be said for the rest of the car, sadly.

Front suspension top mounts, front wishbone bushes and rear shock absorber bushes are all made out of cheese and the bushes are not available separately, so if you find a split bush (which I've seen on multiple cars less than three years old, having covered substantially less than 20,000 miles) you'll need a new suspension arm or shock absorber.

The door handles are a weak point, and can either break at the front pivot point (at which stage they are still repairable) or snap off entirely leaving you clambering over the passenger seat to get in.

Timing belts are due every five years or 72,000 miles, though on the plus side I don't recall ever seeing a single one which had failed, either prematurely or otherwise.

I certainly wouldn't be buying any example at that age without a decent warranty on it.

Thanks. Useful advice.

[AC43]

DELTAHPE said:

AC43 said:

1,500 miles a year max bombing round London Zone 2. Short trips, speedbumps.

EDIT; I suggested a Panda but was met with a blank look. I think it's perfect for what we need, more practical than a 500 and it doesn't suffer from "500 tax".

'er indoors still wants a 500 though...

Edited by AC43 on Monday 17th September 17:25

Show her a 100hp or a panda cross that may bring enlightenment! Alternatively give in and just go for an early Abarth ;-)

The MIL has a Panda. I think it might the Cross - it's got the off road 4 x 4-type bits and bobs on it. I genuinely think it looks great. But it just doesn't register with my OH. At all.

Again, I'd have a 100hp in a heartbeat. I was pointing out loads of Pandas on holiday in Italy in August but again; refusal to contemplate them.

I'm not sure about the Abarth after someone posted on here about how hard and crashy the suspension could be.

At the end of the day the whole idea is to have a cheap small warm hatch city car.

Bollx. I'll just keep the old Cio going......

[AC43]

LuS1fer said:

AC43 said:

The MIL has a Panda. I think it might the Cross - it's got the off road 4 x 4-type bits and bobs on it. I genuinely think it looks great. But it just doesn't register with my OH. At all.

Nor kids. My OH loves Fiat "bubble cars" but would not countenance a Panda, freely (though bear in mind she is not dull so still uses her mother's disability Suzuki Celerio so it's not a point of principle).

Looking for a newer car recently, they had a brand new pale grey Panda Cross 4x4 in the Fiat showroom for a very tempting £14800. However, my 12 year old son ridiculed its 85hp and said he would get a restraining order if I so much as considered it...

The MIL's is in a dark green metallic with chunky wheels, privacy glass and a great interior. I think it looks great. But this is a car intended primarily for my wife and my opinions counts for nothing.

To be fair she doesn't interfere when I but yet another V8 Merc for myself so I musn't grumble.

[AC43]

DELTAHPE said:

AC43 said:

The MIL has a Panda. I think it might the Cross - it's got the off road 4 x 4-type bits and bobs on it. I genuinely think it looks great. But it just doesn't register with my OH. At all.

Again, I'd have a 100hp in a heartbeat. I was pointing out loads of Pandas on holiday in Italy in August but again; refusal to contemplate them.

I'm not sure about the Abarth after someone posted on here about how hard and crashy the suspension could be.

At the end of the day the whole idea is to have a cheap small warm hatch city car.

Bollx. I'll just keep the old Cio going......

I'm approaching the age of being an old codger and have an Abarth as my one and only car, I don't worry about the bumps and if they did an Abarth Panda I'd probably have had one of those instead pandas are just so versatile.

Thanks. Won't rule the Abarth out completely then.

And, yes, a 130bhp Panda would be a hoot. Plus more practical for lugging stuff about from time to time.

[AC43]

threadlock said:

We've got a 2010 1.2 500C that we've owned from new and done 82k miles in. It's been great. I'm bored of it and would love to swap for something different but I hardly ever drive it and my wife still loves it. Running costs have been low since all it's needed is servicing, tyres and a couple of door handles.

If your wife wants one and you're not expecting any sort of performance from the engine or the last word in refinement and handling then they seem like good little cars.

Thanks.

I'm erring on the side of a 1.4 to give it a little more grunt. The OH's Clio is a 1.6 16v. The performance is very similar.

[AC43]

LuS1fer said:

AC43 said:

Thanks.

I'm erring on the side of a 1.4 to give it a little more grunt. The OH's Clio is a 1.6 16v. The performance is very similar.

I know it's newer but I had a Twin Air as a hire car on holiday and it went very well.

That's not a bad shout - just read a review and the Twin Air actually has more torque than the 1.4. Apparently it's good round town. Interesting.....

[AC43]

LuS1fer said:

AC43 said:

That's not a bad shout - just read a review and the Twin Air actually has more torque than the 1.4. Apparently it's good round town. Interesting.....

I should say I have had both as hire cars and the Twin Air felt much faster and had a great gear knob. The downside is it sounds like a bag of nails (I had to check it wasn't disel) but that soon adds to the character that the other lacked.

They do sound distinctive/a bit odd from outside. I'd just assumed they were a bit gutless but they're only something like 10bhp down on the 1.4's with something like 10lb/ft more torque. Round town the additional torque is probably much more useful that the missing top end. For example my wife's Clio mainly lives between 1,000 and 3,000 rpm.

Plus, short of a hybrid, it's pretty much the cleanest way to drive in town.