Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My father bought & used the...original 500 in Italy ,in...1956..! I have photos of him,proud of his "Topolino "(" mouse")
Full of romantic nostalgia,since my father has passed away,I was eager to consider this new version as a city car,for communting...
When I checked it,it was a complete disappointment.
Clustrophobic interior,not good for any purpose. Negative in all aspects...
It was a charming idea which proved to be worthless in reality.
Insults are nice, just proves the arrogance and ignorance you have toward real facts.
The Fiat Spyder was a 80's vehicle ...
The only way they will sell is if Obamanation forces people to buy them.
More failed government intervention.
Hey, you started the insults with the "keyboard racer" comments. I guarantee you there are plenty of people in this forum with just as much tech and industry experience as you, they just don't throw it in peoples faces every 5 minutes to prove the superiority of their random musings on cars.
The FIAT Spyder ended production in 1985 and the last US units were sold in 1984 as 1985 models. I said, FIAT hasn't sold a car in the US since 1984, which is absolutely true...that was also 25+ years ago.
Now we come to your real issue, why try to hide it? Heck we may actually agree on the fallacy of government support for these types of cars, but that doesn't mean you need to belittle the technology.
As for the quote from Tahil, it comes from an interview done by EV World regarding a paper he published in 2006. Here is the link to the interview:
1. Tahil based his assumptions on all car production in the US switching to hybrids at a rate of 17 million units a year and global production of 60 million units. That simply won't happen.
2. He based his calculations on the current mined reserves but ignored additional resources that are available and the impact of increasing lithium prices. For instance, lithium tailings are present in almost all mining operations. Currently it isn't recovered, because it isn't worth it. A rise in prices with demand would change that. Additionally, he ignores the recent development of new sources such as the lithium bed in Nevada that overnight doubled the worlds known supply of lithium. There is also little to no exploration for lithium deposits, because it is so cheap, if prices went up we would start looking for it because it becomes "economically feasible". His entire paper was predicated on lithium prices and supply remaining bound to current levels. He also ignores the fact that lithium can be extracted from sea water. While this is costly, it is a virtually infinite supply.
3. The cost of lithium can go up dramatically without impacting the cost of the batteries substantially because lithium is only a small part of the total battery.
4. The bulk of current lithium use is tied to glass and ceramics because it is cheaper than alternatives. However, alternatives readily exist. A paper out of Germany stated that there is enough lithium currently available to build 10 billion cars. At a rate of 60 million a year, our lithium supplies would last 166 years.
5. Nowhere does he argue against electric cars, he just thinks we should develop different battery technology such as ZEBRA and Zinc-Air batteries, which have existed for decades and are made from virtually limitless sources. These batteries are already being explored by Toyota, Daimler and GM. The only reason they haven't been used yet is that lithium is cheaper to get the desired result.
ETA - If you believe that peak lithium is a reality, why do you believe that peak oil is a fallacy?
I actually liked the interior of the Fiat 500 when I sat in the one that was at the Denver auto show. I don't know if it was the top-of-the-line model or what, but it was a lot better than what I had expected.
Also, I think it's worth it to give it a chance. I drive a Chrysler vehicle (a Jeep) and have owned another Jeep in the past, and I never had major problems with either of them, despite the fact that Consumer Reports listed my models as being poor in reliability.
With that said, I wouldn't buy the Fiat 500 because while I do drive in the city, I also want something that can get up to speed on the freeway relatively quickly and also want something that I can take on vacation, camping, etc. I don't want two separate vehicles so that I can fulfill both of those needs.
Till the timing belt snaps and takes all the intake valves out.They were famous for head gasket problems and over heating when I worked at the Fiat dealer "Alan Byer" in Syracuse,NY like I said .My opinions are based on working on the dam things for yrs.
You said '60s, that was an '81 with a 2 liter engine You'd have never SEEN one if you worked on them in the '60s. And I've had 3 of them, rebuilt a couple from the ground up and never had an issue.
Quote:
Same deal with Saab stories, Triumphs, Jags.
The "elite" in you're state are the only ones buying Volts.The sales # speak for themselves.
YOu didnt' read a damn thing I typed did you? Your ignorance is showing.
Quote:
Carry on "keyboard racer".
Keyboard racer? Where the eff does that come from?
Your credibility is zero if you want to use Fiats from the '60s to pan Fiats now, and IGNORE Hyundais of 20 years ago to champion Hyundais now.
Resove that bit of hipocrisy and maybe I'll stop thinking of you as another fake mechanic.
Quote:
Comparing a Mini Cooper to that Fiat is really hilarious,the Cooper is a fun cool looking car.The Fiat looks like something in my son's Mattel hot wheels collection.lol
But that's just MO.
BTW, I own a MINI Cooper. I've driven the 500. The modern Fiat 500 was designed by the same guy that designed the modern Cooper, and they are the same size cars. They are comparable and very similar in both role and market.
Lets keep everything on topic and about the car. Personal attacks won't help this discussion at all. If you have something to add about the Fiat 500 then please add it. If you want to compare cars then please do that. Other than that keep it on topic.
The Abarth will cost $30k? That kind of money buys a Mustang GT. Or you can buy a V6 Mustang and put the other $10k into gas, which won't be that much since the Mustang with a manual trans will probably get mid-high 20s in mixed driving.
I dunno why people go on and one that its expensive. If you look at its main competition (MINI COOPER) it is priced thousands less. If you compare the Base Fiat 500 POP with similar small cars, its pricing is competitive. I went to various auto maker websites and chose their cheapest model and optioned it like a base 500 (floor mats, cruise, power windows/door locks, cruise). I did not add alloys as the base Fiat 500 does not come with alloys. It comes with floor mats which all the others did not, so I added that.
Prices do not include freight
Here is what I found.
FIAT 500 POP (no added options) 15,500
Honda Fit 15,275 (1)
Hyundai Accent 4 door 14,290
Kia Rio LX 15,840(2)
Kia Soul Base 15,795(1)
MIN1 20,313 (1)
Nissan Yarris hatchback 15,105
Toyota Yaris L 2 door 15,055 (1)
The looks of a car will always influence my decision to buy a car, and if I end up sacrificing conveniences, so be it, at least I've driving a car I find extremely attractive.
I haven't figured it out yet, why the tinier cars for sale in the U.S. are not as attactive as the tiny cars I've seen on my foreign travels, like the Ford Ka, which I'd buy in a heart beat if I could buy it here!
I've seen the new Fiat parked in a few parking ramps in Las Vegas here, have walked around it, studied it, and for some reason it just doesn't grab me. But the color can make the difference in attractiveness. I recently saw an all-black one parked somewhere and thought: Wow! To me, like a totally different Fiat than a white one I saw!
Last edited by tijlover; 11-23-2011 at 12:45 AM..
Reason: edit
The Abarth will cost $30k? That kind of money buys a Mustang GT. Or you can buy a V6 Mustang and put the other $10k into gas, which won't be that much since the Mustang with a manual trans will probably get mid-high 20s in mixed driving.
The Abarth will base at $23k, not $30k. THat's less than the Cooper S. YOu can option a Cooper S up over $30k already, withthe John Cooper Works able to hit almost $40k with options.
It doesn't cross shop against the Mustang, as it's aimed at a completely differnt customer, that wants a smaller, more agile subcompact sport coupe. I have a mustang GT and a Mini Cooper. they are vastly differnt cars and normally very differnt peopel woudl buy them. The Abarth is not for the Mustang customer, and the Mustang is not for the Abarth/Cooper S customer.
Interestingly enough when the Abarth comes out, if the dealers aren't stupid with mark-ups, I may look into trading in my Mustang on one.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
