Doesn’t beat the gross experience of seeing a cybertruck on the road. I wanna point and laugh every time. The multipla is cute in comparison. Look at this goofy lil guy <3
Would always prefer this reasonable priced vehicle with european safety measures over the ridiculously overpriced, rusty garbage container cutting fingers off or trapping people inside because of an update on a hot summer day.
I have owned two FIATs and a Lancia (FIAT Group) Delta. The Lancia was the funnest car I’ve ever owned. It chomped my Golf GTI any day. Road handling was a dream, equipment was amazing, things like stock Recaro seats, etc.
That said, I will never own a FIAT again. FIAT is Stellantis: FIAT, Peugeot, Chrysler, Citroen… Amazing impulse buys. Sweet cars new, but they age horrendously.
They are designed to fail in the short term. Amazing innovations, power oriented engines, but just too flimsy.
The Multipla is a great concept executed the FIAT way.
I believe Honda had a 6 seater subcompact. The CHR or CRV? I can’t remember. I’d pick the Honda any day.
The MKII had much better styling, BTW
I’ve rebuilt two FIAT engines. An engineer’s wet dream. A 1,20L that output nearly a 100 HP? yes, but a shitload of compromises. the fucking head was the top engine support!!! Fuck FIAT.
I must admit that the 900 was simpler than a scooter’s engine. You could probably work on it with a Leatherman and some duct tape, but I have owned motorcycles with 3X the power output.
I’ve driven some Cinquecentos. Opening the hood/bonnet has given me PTSD.
The Mk II lost all the charm of the original in my opinion. I think there is nothing cooler than going on a road trip with three people in the front (like in a transporter). To have that in a compact car would be a huge selling point for me. Who really cares about looks – cars are for utility in the first place imho.
I think old American cars had a couch instead of a front seat, so you would be able to fit an entire family (or one average sized American). How cool was that?
It was the Honda HRV, and it couldn’t hold a candle to the Multipla.
The Multipla had 6 full size seats that could all comfortably hold adults, plus the backseats where individually removable. I loaded a couch sideways in that car. Absolutely brilliant.
The middle seats on the HRV were significantly smaller, no comparison in terms of usefulness and versatility.
It was the Honda FRV and I still have one. I also had a Multipla. Both are good, in their own quirky ways. Both have slightly narrower seats than a normal car; the honda slightly narrower, but more supportive, have heating and are leather. Both are very car-like to drive, but the Honda has way better engines and better reliability. That said, getting parts for the FRV is a pain, because there weren’t many made and the wider body means that a surprising number aren’t shared with other Honda models if the same era.
Given a choice, as a practical family car, I’d take the FRV over the multipla. I do have a soft spot for the multiplugly though.
Both have slightly narrower seats than a normal car
The Multipla’s seats are narrower than a normal car? Are you american?
have heating and are leather
I think the FRV was also a significant step up in price. That being said, I never understood what’s supposed to be good about leather seats.
Both are very car-like to drive
What else should they be like?
but the Honda has way better engines and better reliability.
The one I had was the natural gas version. It might as well have been on pedals. And the noise on the motorway, between the engine and the aerodynamics, was horrendous.That being said, we got 380000km over 19 years out of that one, so not too bad.
That said, getting parts for the FRV is a pain, because there weren’t many made and the wider body means that a surprising number aren’t shared with other Honda models if the same era.
Getting parts for the Multipla was pretty easy, despite the wider body most parts were somehow shared with much smaller cars, like the FIAT Brava.
The Multipla is just inoffensive uggo. A perfectly cromulent nugget if a little 4-cylinder city nugget is all you want. I’d rather have that than a PT Cruiser.
That thing looks like someone’s just discovered the concept of curves and is just going hog wild with it. The cyberdumpster is still the worst for many reasons, but goddamn, the Cruiser is putting up a respectable fight.
I don’t think PT Cruiser is that bad. It looks like every other early oughts car except that at least this one is attempting to bring some styling from the early hot rods.
You have clearly never driven any of those. I s working at a car rental in the early oughts, when these came out. Still one of the most pitiful cars I’ve ever driven. On par only with three C 300 I think. My god these Chrysler’s just hate corners.
As ugly as they are, I’ve never met a boring pt cruiser driver. Awful alcoholic narcissists, your basic bad bitches. Often objectively awful people, but never boring.
It’d be more tolerable a design without rich Elon bros being their primary market. They’re both dorky, but the context is key. If the cybertruck was affordable and well built by a less shitty company, it wouldn’t represent the decline of American civilization.
Bold to assume the design isn’t embedded in the culture, technology, and economics in which it is built. If you tried to take a modern shape and build it in the 40s, you’d get a shitty car by design. If you tried to buy an electric car in rural America with no electric car infrastructure, it would be a bad investment based on its design. If the classic jeep wasn’t a staple of WWII, or if the 50-70s era mustangs weren’t in so many action movies, those designs wouldn’t have the popularity they have now.
This goofy Fiat is a joke, but the cybertruck is offensive. Trucks are very useful for moving stuff with fewer trips in rural America, but the cybertruck sucks at hauling, and isn’t in an area with abundant charging infrastructure. Some of the trunk space would permanently go to keeping a charger on hand if you tried to use it in rural areas. It’s larger and bulkier than necessary for cities, meaning it would be better as a sedan or compact. It’s expensive and poorly made, but unlike the multipla, it’s impractical anywhere but wealthy suburbs at a fundamental level. At least the multipla has typical Fiat usefulness.
Doesn’t beat the gross experience of seeing a cybertruck on the road. I wanna point and laugh every time. The multipla is cute in comparison. Look at this goofy lil guy <3
Would always prefer this reasonable priced vehicle with european safety measures over the ridiculously overpriced, rusty garbage container cutting fingers off or trapping people inside because of an update on a hot summer day.
I have owned two FIATs and a Lancia (FIAT Group) Delta. The Lancia was the funnest car I’ve ever owned. It chomped my Golf GTI any day. Road handling was a dream, equipment was amazing, things like stock Recaro seats, etc. That said, I will never own a FIAT again. FIAT is Stellantis: FIAT, Peugeot, Chrysler, Citroen… Amazing impulse buys. Sweet cars new, but they age horrendously.
They are designed to fail in the short term. Amazing innovations, power oriented engines, but just too flimsy.
The Multipla is a great concept executed the FIAT way.
I believe Honda had a 6 seater subcompact. The CHR or CRV? I can’t remember. I’d pick the Honda any day.
The MKII had much better styling, BTW
I must admit that the 900 was simpler than a scooter’s engine. You could probably work on it with a Leatherman and some duct tape, but I have owned motorcycles with 3X the power output. I’ve driven some Cinquecentos. Opening the hood/bonnet has given me PTSD.
The Mk II lost all the charm of the original in my opinion. I think there is nothing cooler than going on a road trip with three people in the front (like in a transporter). To have that in a compact car would be a huge selling point for me. Who really cares about looks – cars are for utility in the first place imho.
I think old American cars had a couch instead of a front seat, so you would be able to fit an entire family (or one average sized American). How cool was that?
It was the Honda HRV, and it couldn’t hold a candle to the Multipla.
The Multipla had 6 full size seats that could all comfortably hold adults, plus the backseats where individually removable. I loaded a couch sideways in that car. Absolutely brilliant.
The middle seats on the HRV were significantly smaller, no comparison in terms of usefulness and versatility.
It was the Honda FRV and I still have one. I also had a Multipla. Both are good, in their own quirky ways. Both have slightly narrower seats than a normal car; the honda slightly narrower, but more supportive, have heating and are leather. Both are very car-like to drive, but the Honda has way better engines and better reliability. That said, getting parts for the FRV is a pain, because there weren’t many made and the wider body means that a surprising number aren’t shared with other Honda models if the same era.
Given a choice, as a practical family car, I’d take the FRV over the multipla. I do have a soft spot for the multiplugly though.
The Multipla’s seats are narrower than a normal car? Are you american?
I think the FRV was also a significant step up in price. That being said, I never understood what’s supposed to be good about leather seats.
What else should they be like?
The one I had was the natural gas version. It might as well have been on pedals. And the noise on the motorway, between the engine and the aerodynamics, was horrendous.That being said, we got 380000km over 19 years out of that one, so not too bad.
Getting parts for the Multipla was pretty easy, despite the wider body most parts were somehow shared with much smaller cars, like the FIAT Brava.
It looks like a car carrying its little car friend on its back.
The Multipla is just inoffensive uggo. A perfectly cromulent nugget if a little 4-cylinder city nugget is all you want. I’d rather have that than a PT Cruiser.
That thing looks like someone’s just discovered the concept of curves and is just going hog wild with it. The cyberdumpster is still the worst for many reasons, but goddamn, the Cruiser is putting up a respectable fight.
I don’t think PT Cruiser is that bad. It looks like every other early oughts car except that at least this one is attempting to bring some styling from the early hot rods.
You have clearly never driven any of those. I s working at a car rental in the early oughts, when these came out. Still one of the most pitiful cars I’ve ever driven. On par only with three C 300 I think. My god these Chrysler’s just hate corners.
And here i thought we were talking about how the cars look.
Clearly I’ve made a mistake.
As ugly as they are, I’ve never met a boring pt cruiser driver. Awful alcoholic narcissists, your basic bad bitches. Often objectively awful people, but never boring.
Are we forgeting about this monstrosity?
Awh, the Plymouth Prowler is actually one of my favorite cars. 😅
That thing looks awesome.
Haute car-ture
It’s ugly in a cute sirta way. Like a pug.
I saw a matte black one yesterday, it looked like someone had forgotten to finish painting it and just left primer on it.
Edit: this is about seeing a Tesla in the wild, realized I was unclear
I saw one plastered with advertisements on the street in working class neighborhood. I felt bad for the person who needs to drive it and keep it safe.
This car was ahead of it’s time. I love it
When will it’s time be though? Because it was ugly then and it’s still ugly now.
It’s got soul which beats like 99% of vehicles on the road
I drove a Fiat Panda through the hills of Tuscany. Only let off the gas to shift and still barely broke 50 km/h. lol
We heard you liked car, so we put car in your car.
I would choose the Cybertruck design over this, every time.
It’d be more tolerable a design without rich Elon bros being their primary market. They’re both dorky, but the context is key. If the cybertruck was affordable and well built by a less shitty company, it wouldn’t represent the decline of American civilization.
Hmmm. Almost as if i specified
for a reason.
Bold to assume the design isn’t embedded in the culture, technology, and economics in which it is built. If you tried to take a modern shape and build it in the 40s, you’d get a shitty car by design. If you tried to buy an electric car in rural America with no electric car infrastructure, it would be a bad investment based on its design. If the classic jeep wasn’t a staple of WWII, or if the 50-70s era mustangs weren’t in so many action movies, those designs wouldn’t have the popularity they have now.
This goofy Fiat is a joke, but the cybertruck is offensive. Trucks are very useful for moving stuff with fewer trips in rural America, but the cybertruck sucks at hauling, and isn’t in an area with abundant charging infrastructure. Some of the trunk space would permanently go to keeping a charger on hand if you tried to use it in rural areas. It’s larger and bulkier than necessary for cities, meaning it would be better as a sedan or compact. It’s expensive and poorly made, but unlike the multipla, it’s impractical anywhere but wealthy suburbs at a fundamental level. At least the multipla has typical Fiat usefulness.
My fault for being unclear—i’m only talking about the aesthetics.