I’ve bashed concept cars for quite a while, so seeing as the weekend is almost here, I thought I’d do something good, something positive, and something fun for a change.
Concept cars really need a concept, but often they’re nothing more than an in-production car with stick on bits or a chance to gauge public reaction. Fiat are as guilty of this as anyone, but in the case of the Trepiuno, the car was so maniacally grin inducing that I can forgive them in an instant (at least this once).
Trepiuno is apparently the Italian for “three plus one”. Quite why the Italians had a single word for this purpose before they had a car that needed it, I have no idea. Similarly, I have no idea why Fiat thought they needed the gimmick like 3+1 for this car, it was never in danger of needing such a crutch.
They rolled out the Trepiuno to an enthusiastic Geneva motor show in 2004. Little more than a styling exercise based on the original 500, the car was an instant hit. Whether they were or weren’t working on a production version, they certainly were after the show.
In no time at all, the new 500 was born. It was a carbon copy of the Trepiuno. Virtually nothing was altered, testimony to the original designers art.
Yes, it’s cute. Yes, it’s twee. Yes, it’s small. But, yes, it makes you smile so hard your ears ache. It’s like a cross between the Jetsons and the original 500. It’s as if it had never gone out of production, and Fiat had kept updating it. The car has an irrepressible spirit. One look at the spedo and it’s mix of old and new and you can’t help looking like a feline from Cheshire.
The open top versions have a cloth roof that folds away, much as the original did but without the leaks and the mildew. Because it slides on runners you can even open and close it at something like 50mph. Try that in a Porsche or Ferrari (as a disclaimer in these litigious times – don’t, that was an attempt at humor).
There’s even a version of the 500 that has an engine capable of 55mpg (it’s called Multiair, has 2 cylinders and 85bhp but isn’t available in the US). That’s not a publicity stunt, it really is that economical in the real world.
One of the things retro cars do is play on your memories of the original car. I remember a friend driving four of us into London for a night out. When we got back to the car it had been boxed in with barely an inch free at either end. There was no chance of driving it out, so we just picked it up and walked it sideways out onto the road. Try doing that with anything made in the last 20 years.
But for all the happy memories, there are plenty that aren’t. That drive into London was painful, folded up in the rear seat. The engine droned on more than a politician at election time, and the heater was only for decoration. Perhaps if Fiat’s designers had remembered such things they would never have given life to the Trepiuno. I’m glad they forgot.
What do you think about the 500? Is it a joy to behold, or do you have hate filled memories of an old one rusting on your driveway? Could you live with a car that size, or do you think anything smaller that Delaware represent cruel and unusual punishment? And if this car doesn’t make you smile, what – legal, decent and honest thing – does?
Cheers!
Can’t get very excited over this toy. My idea of a car is a ’58 or ’59 Cadillac. That’s when cars had personality.
59 Cadillac? Don’t like the new 500? Ah, fins aren’t what they used to be, eh?!
I guess I grew up with these sort of cars (though I never had a 500) so I’m probably biased, but I do like it. Design-wise they’ve done a good job of capturing the best of the 500-unique style and bringing it up to date. You could probably put one a Fiat in the trunk of a Cadillac and not even notice!
Cheers!
Hi Nigel. Is the old version not the car that was licensed for production in Spain by SEAT? I had many rides in the Seat version and drove one a few times in the 70s. In the front seat they were tolerable. Overall I preferred that ugly little Citroen3 speed thing with this lawn mower engine. It did well on rural roads.
The bigger weird looking Citroen with the adjustable hydraulic suspension was nice on the roads of southern Europe. My wealthy uncle in Washington DC eventually supplied me nicely with an aluminum body diesel land rover that served me well but the governor was maddening on those occasional straight stretches of highway. It always worked well and tolerated the primitive roads of Spain and Portugal.
One of the fascinating things about European automobiles in the 70s is that Chrysler was producing a very durable and comfortable compact(by American standards) 4 door that was loved by Taxi drivers in southern Europe. They got good mileage, were very comfortable, handled well, and lasted forever. That same reliable and practical design was not sold by Chrysler in the USA! Chrysler turned out garbage in the USA that no European taxi driver would have touched. They were happy to let the Japanese sell cars of similar concept and lesser quality than there European marketed compacts. The Japanese nearly drove Chrysler from the market place but not for a taxpayer bailout.
I will always wonder why on earth Chrysler didn’t release their European vehicles on the USA/Canadian market. The only decent cars that Chrysler produced in the 70s and early 80s were sold in Europe.
Hi Holmes.
Wow, I knew SEAT licensed cars but I never knew they did a version of the 500. If anything the few pictures I’ve found of it on the internet make it look even closer to the new model. There’s something new everyday.
Fiat, SEAT, Land Rover and Citroen, you’ve had a very cosmopolitan life (even if there’s no ejector seat equipped Aston in that list!). Funny you should say your Land rover didn’t do well in a straight line. One of the things I’ve always though about US/european cars was that US cars were designed for straight lines (because of the cross country distances and freeways) and european cars were designed for corners, hills and tiny parking spaces (because that mostly what they’ve got).
I’ve never understood US car companies either. They were panned by the Japanese who introduced cars that were more european in style and reliable. US car makers fought back with political clout and half-assed “small” designs, whereas they should have turned to their numerous european operations and imported their designs (the very thing the Japanese were aspiring to). Sure, the Japanese had reliability that no-one else could match, but at least they would have had cars that looked the part, rather than a part.
The sad thing is that GM finally picked up on the idea when Saturn started importing Opel/Vauxhall designs. They had just changed their entire range of cars when the financial fiasco started and GM put them out of business. Or, as my colleagues at work put it, Saturn gave up all hope when I bought one.
Cheers!