Review: 2008 Fiat Panda 4X4

Martin Schwoerer
by Martin Schwoerer

Guys are funny: we lust for beautiful, fast cars with which we hope to impress the neighbors, the guys, and the other sex. But memories are not made of pistonheads’ wet dreams. Looking back, the memorable machines I had were more mutt than thoroughbred: the go-anywhere, never-let-you-down, unpretty, everyday companion. Like the pickup trucks you Americans love, or the iconic 2CV, Renault R4, and VW Beetles we Europeans have in our collective memories. The Fiat Panda has always been on my short list of potential cars-as-buddies: cheap, reliable, fun to drive, unpretentious. So, I was curious: is the 4×4 version of the Panda a faithful mutt, or just another automotive dog?

The Panda looks like no other small car, because it aims to resemble a microscopic SUV (from the time when SUVs were something to emulate). It sure isn’t beautiful, but can it be called ugly? When functional things are what they pretend to be, I’d say ugly is only when the proportions are wrong, the materials are crassly cheap, or when embellishments are grotesque. So, ugly it’s not.

The 4×4 Panda has added ground clearance totaling about 11 inches; you sit high (in my case, eyes at 4ft4“). The dashboard has a pleasant, non-generic shape, the stick shift is located conveniently high, and everything looks well-made. Plastics are almost all hard, as they should be in an off-road vehicle. Headroom is gigantic; the front is a snug but airy place. Legroom in the back is OK for two slim adults, considering that this a tiny (140 inch) car.

My tester was equipped with a modern 70 hp 1.3L 16v diesel. Normally I don’t think diesels belong in a small car. Oil burners are too heavy, too loud and not really economical. But for terrain use, torque trumps all. So I was willing to reconsider. And it’s not bad. Clattery from a cold start but unloud later. The common-rail Multijet provides linear acceleration from 1,000 to 4,700 RPM and strong thrust for the all-important 45-70 mph highway spurt. Don’t ask about 0-60 please. Just trust me: you seldom feel underpowered when 70 diesel horses have only 1060KGs (1.2 US tons) to schlep. My average of 39 mpg is nothing to throw your shoes at, either.

Any vehicle that kicks me in the butt is not going to be my friend (I want a mule, not a goat!). Happily, the Panda’s ride is on the OK side of OK. It feels notchy from standstill, but, generally, the Panda is a surprisingly refined, reassuring package. Let me ask you this: what do you feel when you take a car on a spirited blast over cobblestone roads and through rocky potholes?

Does your vehicle feel fragile and uneasy or does it just shrug it off? Offroad, the Panda competes with the Range Rover. Onroad, it sports a fun and reassuring ability to take speed humps and lousy roads unperturbed. Torque steer is a non-factor, steering is lightweight and precise, and visibility is outstanding. Presto: the (for me) ideal urban car is a micro-SUV.

So there we are. The Fiat Panda 4×4 is great in the country and it’s better in town. It’s no good for high-speed, long-distance driving (too slow, too bouncy), so it’s not for me. But if I lived in one of my favorite places -– say, Zurich or Nice, or another beautiful city near the mountains – this could be one of my favorite cars.

Martin Schwoerer
Martin Schwoerer

More by Martin Schwoerer

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 52 comments
  • Lbart Lbart on Jan 27, 2009

    If it came to Canada I'd buy it in a heartbeat. Had a hard time knowing this was a discussion about a car and not a politcal debate.

  • Anonymous Anonymous on May 19, 2009

    [...] Chrysler and perhaps every vehicle subject to the latest emissions and fuel cafe standards ? Fiat Review: 2008 Fiat Panda 4X4 | The Truth About Cars cute cars they are, but 1200 cc's and 60-70 bhp ? When everyone has one of these, I'll ride a [...]

  • RHD The analyses above are on the nose.It's a hell of a good car, but the mileage is reaching the point where things that should have worn out a long time ago, and didn't, will, such as the alternator, starter, exhaust system, PS pump, and so on. The interiors tend to be the first thing to show wear, other than the tires, of course. The price is too high for a car that probably has less than a hundred thousand miles left in it without major repairs. A complete inspection is warranted, of course, and then a lower offer based on what it needs. Ten grand for any 18-year-old car is a pretty good chunk of change. It would be a very enjoyable, ride, though.
  • Fred I would get the Acura RDX, to replace my Honda HR-V. Both it and the CRV seats are uncomfortable on longer trips.
  • RHD Now that the negative Nellies have chimed in...A reasonably priced electric car would be a huge hit. There has to be an easy way to plug it in at home, in addition to the obvious relatively trickle charge via an extension cord. Price it under 30K, preferably under 25K, with a 200 mile range and you have a hit on your hands. This would be perfect for a teenager going to high school or a medium-range commuter. Imagine something like a Kia Soul, Ford Ranger, Honda CR-V, Chevy Malibu or even a Civic that costs a small fraction to fuel up compared to gasoline. Imagine not having to pay your wife's Chevron card bill every month (then try to get her off of Starbuck's and mani-pedi habits). One car is not the solution to every case imaginable. But would it be a market success? Abso-friggin-lutely. And TTAC missed today's announcement of the new Mini Aceman, which, unfortunately, will be sold only in China. It's an EV, so it's relevant to this particular article/question.
  • Ajla It would. Although if future EVs prove relatively indifferent to prior owner habits that makes me more likely to go used.
  • 28-Cars-Later One of the biggest reasons not to purchase an EV that I hear is...that they just all around suck for almost every use case imaginable.
Next