backtop


Print 111 comment(s) - last by mindless1.. on Aug 24 at 1:01 PM


Fiat 500c and 500
Fiat blames nascent dealer network on poor sales

Fiat was supposed to make a triumphant return to the U.S. market with its diminutive and distinctively styled 500. However, things haven't exactly panned out exactly the way that Fiat planned according to The Detroit News.

The 500 is a subcompact that is being pitted directly against the Mini Cooper (an upcoming Arbath model will target the Mini Cooper S). On a lesser degree, the 500 also competed with the Smart fortwo and the upcoming Scion iQ.

However, sales of the tiny four-seater are nowhere close to reaching the lofty goals set by Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne. Fiat expected to sell 50,000 500s during 2011 in North America. Through the first seven months of 2011, Fiat sold fewer than 12,000.

For comparison, BMW AG's Mini brand had total sales of 34,527 through July. The two-door Cooper/Cooper S coupe and convertible models alone accounted for over 20,000 of those sales.

Laura Soave, head of Fiat North America says that establishing a dealer network in the U.S. has taken longer than expected which has contributed to the poor sales. "We have coverage now, so now is the time for us to turn this up," Soave added.

Two basic models of the vehicles are currently available to U.S. customers: the 500 (coupe) and the 500c (convertible). The cheapest model available is the 500 Pop which has a base MSRP of $15,550 (the cheapest Mini Cooper will set you back $19,400). The Fiat 500 also has good fuel economy for a subcompact with EPA ratings of 30mpg in the city and 38mpg on the highway with a 5-speed manual. 

Shares of Fiat SpA dropped over 4 percent on the news of poor 500 sales.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Price/efficiency suck on microcars!
By CharonPDX on 8/17/2011 1:32:12 PM , Rating: 2
Why the hell are these microcars so expensive, and have such crappy gas mileage?

A Hyundai Accent gets better mileage, has more space, and costs less. Wasn't the entire point of the Smart in Europe to be a very efficient, very cheap car? What happened in coming to the US? What is up with these microcars being pieces of stylish crap in the US?




RE: Price/efficiency suck on microcars!
By wookie1 on 8/17/2011 3:14:19 PM , Rating: 2
My '99 Honda Civic hatchback got about 32 city and 34 hwy MPG, and had plenty of room for groceries.

My '89 Suzuki Swift GTi was similar in size to the Fiat, but was sporty with the 100HP engine, and had plenty of room for groceries. It got about 36 city and 40-42 hwy MPG.

Why such poor mileage for the Fiat?


RE: Price/efficiency suck on microcars!
By Iaiken on 8/17/2011 3:44:40 PM , Rating: 2
Because testing standards have changed and cars weigh far more than they used to.

Fiat 500 is a small car, but it weighs 2363lbs while the '99 Civic hatches weighed only 2222lbs in spite of being significantly larger.

Seriously, this comes up every time someone brings up mileage and it's the same stupid statement every single time. I also find your numbers extremely suspect as everywhere I can find empirical data from Civic\Swift GTi owners, they all quote MPG figures that are 5-10 mpg lower than what you are stating here.

Why so much bull sh!t from the wookie?


By Philippine Mango on 8/18/2011 8:08:59 AM , Rating: 2
The '96-'00 civic hatchbacks had manual transmissions with taller gear ratios that other comparable civics which is what usually gave them better fuel economy. So when you hear about civic owners touting mpg in the mid 30s to low 40s, usually they're hatchback owners... Otherwise, aside from lots of highway driving or living in rural areas (no traffic), fuel economy in these cars is usually low to mid 30s. The autotragic versions get significantly worse so it just depends on who you ask.


By shiftypy on 8/22/2011 8:34:14 AM , Rating: 2
Thats the problem. You get tiny cars than weigh so much you get no savings at all. Mask it by getting an efficient engine and think nobody will notice? But for weight and smarts that go into it, the cost of the car is big as well.

What if you put this efficient engine in a light body?
I'm thinking Richard Hammonds Opel "Oliver" Kadett which weighs under 1800 pounds. Surely with modern parts and materials you can make it acceptable by todays standards without sacrificing much.
... And then "safety" people emerge and ruin everything


RE: Price/efficiency suck on microcars!
By Spuke on 8/17/2011 3:54:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
My '89 Suzuki Swift GTi was similar in size to the Fiat
I remember those. Drove one once, fun car. The Swift is probably 500-600 lbs lighter than the 500 so it's 100hp would be working with far less weight.


RE: Price/efficiency suck on microcars!
By Iaiken on 8/17/2011 3:57:51 PM , Rating: 2
The 500 has 110lbs of air bags crammed into it.


RE: Price/efficiency suck on microcars!
By Spuke on 8/17/2011 6:49:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The 500 has 110lbs of air bags crammed into it.
You don't really think that is it for safety equipment, do you?


By YashBudini on 8/17/2011 11:29:44 PM , Rating: 2
Can you elaborate?


"If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion." -- Scientology founder L. Ron. Hubbard














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki