A few days ago, Fiat announced the first new update to a non-battery-electric Fiat 500 in, let’s see…the last refresh to a gasoline-powered Fiat 500 was in 2016 (that was just a facelift), so it’s been nine years if I’m being generous. This new updated version of the fun little city car is actually based on the 500e battery-electric car from 2020, making it one of the very few combustion-engined cars ever to have started out as a battery-EV platform, which is interesting (this was a result of a decrease in EV demand). But what everyone seems to be fixated on is the new Fiat’s speed, or lack of it. Just so you know, everyone is wrong.
Before I get into that, let’s dig into what this new 500 is: it’s a hybrid, with a 12-volt lithium-ion battery and a one-liter three-cylinder engine, which together make a modest but respectable – to me, at least – 65 horsepower (and 68 pound-feet of torque). It also has a six-speed manual transmission that sends that trim congregation of horses to the front wheels.
The electric motor is pretty modest here — a starter-motor making about 4.8 hp — but it does have regen capability. The car is expected to sell for € 19,400 to start, which is about $22,300 in American freedombucks, making this car pretty dirt cheap.
More importantly, it’s a manual hybrid car! How many of those are still around? I love it! Fiat was also nice enough to give some specs in their press release, covering some basic performance and fuel economy:
A top speed of 96 mph, 0-62 mph acceleration of 16.2 secs (17.3 secs for Convertible) and combined WLTP fuel consumption of 53 mpg (52 mpg for Convertible) make Fiat 500 Hybrid the perfect choice for efficient, urban motoring.
53 mpg seems pretty good, but what everyone seems to be fixated on are 0-100 kph (o-62 mph) times: 16.2 seconds and 17.3 for the convertible. Here in the Land of Free Refills, we generally use 0-60 times, so I’m gonna roughly guess this new hybrid 500 will be able to get to 60 in 16 seconds flat.
Most of the reporting about the new car seems to reference these acceleration numbers which are, by modern standards, perhaps a little, um, relaxed. Motor1 says the “The New Fiat 500 With a Gas Engine Is Never In a Hurry” and AutoEvolution calls it “painfully slow” and CarExpert is a little more reserved, saying “performance traded for affordability” while AutoBlog is unashamedly snarky, saying it “makes the Nissan Kicks look like a rocket.”
You know what? All of these chumps need to grow up. Going from 0 to 60 in 16 seconds is fine. Look at these babies:
Yeah this is kinda my point about the manual 500. 17.3 seconds might be fine in a small Italian town, but it’s almost dangerous in a situation where the speed limit is above 35. https://t.co/TbY01KqLiB
— Motor1 (@Motor1com) November 23, 2025
Ugh, I’m so sick of this narrative. “Almost dangerous?” Really? You know what “almost dangerous is?” Not dangerous. Sure, the new 500 isn’t fast – but it is nearly two seconds or so faster than a ’74 AMC Gremlin (17.7 seconds) and faster than a ’62 Triumph Vitesse 1600, and that name means “speed!” More importantly, just fine.
I say this as someone who has been driving cars with about 50 hp for decades and so far has never ended up dead as a result. I’ve been in more than my share of wrecks, but none have been because any of my slow cars were too slow. Sure, a car that goes to 60 in 5 seconds or so is fun, but that’s just not how people drive! Most people are not burying the pedal into the carpet every time they go on an on-ramp. They just aren’t.
Getting to 60 in 16 seconds is plenty for, like, 98% of the traffic situations you’ll encounter. I’m not saying there aren’t exceptions where more speed is genuinely helpful, but you know what? You’d be fine with a 16-second-to-60 car. Again, I say this as someone who has done it. Over and over again. I daily-drove an old Beetle in LA, and it was fine, and now I daily-drive a Nissan Pao, which does 0-60 in the same 16-ish seconds as the new Fiat 500. It’s not a big deal.
Seroiusly, how quickly do you think the tens of thousands of semi trucks get to 60 mph? It’s nowhere near as quick as 16 seconds.
Besides, all the people whining about the new 500 being too slow, where the hell do you need to get to in such a rush? The Candyass Convention? Are you the Keynote Crier? Is that why you need to rush? You don’t want to be late to whine like a little baby in front of the adoring crowd? You better hurry! I hope you can get to a full mwile-a-mwinute in 5 seconds, little fellas!
I’m sorry. That’s not fair. I’m being mean. I think I’m just sick of this whole narrative that somehow you need a car that goes to 60 in former-no-joke-sportscar times just to be “safe.” It’s silly. 16 seconds to 60 will work; nobody is going to pool-cue you into orbit as you merge onto the highway if you have even a modicum of sense about how you drive.
I mean, maybe someone will, but that can happen no matter what you drive.
Point is, everyone complaining about how slow this is just needs to calm down. It’s fine. It’s a little hybrid manual city car that sells for $22 grand. The hell do you expect?
I gather the new 500e is selling very poorly in America, and it’s the only Fiat still being sold here. Given the brand’s rep/history/depreciation here, I doubt they’d find many takers for the gas hybrid version if they brought it stateside, other than the few car guys who were intrigued by the idea of a manual hybrid (was Honda’s CRZ the last one we got here?). At $23K (assuming they could sell it for that price here, what with tarrifs and other costs) it’d be pretty close to the cheapest car for sale with the death of the Mirage and upcoming demise of the Sentra.
The new 500 isn’t bad looking at all IMO, and TBH, to me, the hybrid is more interesting than the pure EV version.
Well… When I was in college in San Diego, back in the mid-70s, and periodically visited my aunt and uncle in Pasadena, getting back onto the freeway system around there onto WB 134, the on ramp had a stop sign. There was literally no merging lane.
I was driving my ’68 Datsun 510 wagon with a 96 HP engine (allegedly, as it was eight years old) and after coming to a stop, it was wait for a gap, rev to about 5000 RPM and drop the clutch and cross your fingers. It didn’t even chirp the tires.
I never did a 0-60 timing in that car. My chipped 5M TDI Jetta was about 10 seconds to 60. With some right front wheel bouncing stuff going on.
The best 0-60 time I got in my parents’ 1965 Olds 88 was about 10 seconds. And it had a big V8 under the hood, so that was my benchmark for a fast car.
My ’17 Accord V6 can make it there in under 6 seconds. With no real drama. Both front tires spin and then do it again when the AT shifts to second and making a brief chirp shifting to third. But no significant torque steer and no other issues.
In the interest of preserving the transmission, I haven’t done that in a long time. I just wanted to see what it could do.
That kind of power does make merging onto the freeway a lot less stressful.
When we’re on holiday here in Europe. We always rent a 500 convertable “hybrid”. The hybrid boost fully charged is hardly 10 seconds long. We always laugh our asses off trying to get the thing up hills at speed. But owning one would get frustrating very quickly. This is saying something coming from a turboless volvo 240 daily driver. That 500 is not meant for regular highway use. Where it also needs high rpm, making it a less than relaxing drive. Below i’d say 50 mph it’s a fun drive.
The engine sounds nice, and you need higher rpm everywhere due to lack of hp. Being in such a small car makes everything feel faster than in large heavy cars
I’ve owned plenty of slower cars, Honda Fit and a Prius C, 10-12sec 0-60, never felt dangerous. There were a few times where I had to give it everything to merge or change lanes.
But goddamn 17sec? Would not take this car and have to merge on the 110 around the Pasadena to DTLA area. Every car entering the freeway in that area has to enter pretty damn quickly and almost blindly.
I’ve owned plenty if cars that are this slow, and they’re perfectly safe in modern traffic.
That’s no slower than a bus or an articulated truck, but you’ve got much better visibility and manoeuvrability than a bus.
Mind you, I don’t live in America.
I need sub 10 seconds 0-60 to safely merge, especially on northeastern parkways (freeways built in the 1930’s and 40’s), with short or no acceleration ramps.
And the Fiat 500 is no 80,000 lb semi, so they’ll get no tonnage rule respect.
10/10 Article contains a yellow car
But real talk, why does every car have to have a sub-5 second 0-60 time? That is enormously too much power for most people either just using a car for their daily commute and grocery trips or who have 0 experience driving powerful/sports cars.
As a current Fiat 500 owner I’ll say that’s kind of slow by the standards of a 104hp 1.4 Multi-Air, although that might be down with 1.2 liter engine sold in Europe. The two cylinder Twin-Air was actually quick with a low pressure turbo and careful tuning. I’m wary of the complexity so I’ll just look for better 500 Pop
I cannot begin to imagine the 0 to 60 of my old 1971 VW Westphalia van. Less than a minute I guess
Out of curiosity I gave it a google and there’s someone in an ’82 and it takes them almost 50 seconds!
I can truly believe that
Most people don’t hit 60 when they’re merging anyway, at least here in Virginia.
They very gently accelerate up to around 50 mph and merge as soon as possible without checking their mirrors or blind spots. Regardless of how much on-ramp they had left.
Maybe if they had to drive a 60hp car for a few months, they’d get into the habit of planning ahead and using the gas pedal when necessary?
$22K manual hybrid convertible that gets 52mpg? Yes, please add to cart.
Maaaan I know there’s no hope of this coming to America, but I want one. We get the regular EV version (which I get the impression few people want due to limited range), so it seems like it shouldn’t be too hard to homologate the hybrid version for the US, and yet… Manual transmission sales here are bad enough as-is, and I can’t pretend a large enough percentage of the target demographic of the current Fiat 500 even knows or is willing to learn how to drive manual, so I wouldn’t be surprised if there are maybe a dozen people in the whole country who would actually buy this car new.
I wish there was a greater overlap between people who know how to drive stick and people who would shamelessly drive a Fiat 500, but alas… The market for a manual Fiat 500 hybrid here is effectively nonexistent. Perhaps Fiat should offer free manual transmission lessons if they were to sell it here? One can dream that would accomplish anything.
Safety would probably be easy, but emissions would require a full certification since the only engines US certified are the 1.4 Multi-Air and Multi-Air turbo. There might also be manufacturing and tariff issues.
How many cars hypermiling get to 60 even slower? And …. Why are they always in front of me?
My early ’80s Subaru GLs were 13-15 seconds and they were fine because they had almost peak torque nearly off idle and excellent throttle response without the hesitancy of e-throttles that seems common today. In traffic or in the city, they punched well above their weight and they weren’t even that bad on the highway. I had a ’16 KIA Rio rental that did 60 in about 10 seconds and that felt unsafely slow because of the hesitant throttle, then hesitant transmission, then very limited acceleration until it hit about 3500 rpm, so waiting to pull out of any place was insufferable. Another thing about the Subarus is that I drove them 30 years ago when traffic was a lot lighter, vehicles were smaller and slower and easier to see out of, and drivers were a lot less distracted, (plus weed wasn’t legal here in MA, don’t get me started, but I’m glad there’s a ballot submission to repeal that shit). Back in the day, I drag “raced” my friend’s ’85 Delta 88 with the 307 and they were pretty even every run up to around 80 and there were a lot of cars at that performance level on the roads at that time.
Sure, trucks are slow, but they’re also massive and heavy, so they’re visible and nobody is going to try to intimidate a 15-40 ton vehicle off the road (or they won’t be effective at doing so). Even if one isn’t intimidated by tailgaters high-beaming through the rear window of this little shit box, it’s still frustrating to have to thrash the hell out of something everywhere you go only to be pushed around and be the asshole slowing everyone down, but I’m not used to being bullied or f’d with, so maybe that’s peculiar to me. It’s not necessarily about safety, it’s about annoying the shit out of everyone else. I don’t care much for most etiquette or social rules that I consider to be BS, but one of the absolute rudest things I feel one can do is be in someone’s way any longer than necessary. I hate people being in my way unnecessarily, be that on the road or walking down a street or some jerkoff holding up a line, and I also hate being the one in anyone else’s way. Of course, this depends on whether this car is closer to that abominable KIA or my GLs (or many run-of-the-mill antique cars that might not have been fast by today’s standards, but had good low end power so that they were fine in the real world) in terms of performance, but if it’s like the KIA, it would be far too much of an asshole for me to ever buy and that lack of performance is also a marker of poor value to me. I’m going to buy a new car in 2025 that’s slower with less utility (and probably worse to drive) than my early ’80s Subarus? Yeah, no. But it’s safer! IDGAF. Better rust protection? OK, sure, but I’m not looking to buy a 40+year old GL, either.
“drivers were a lot less distracted, (plus weed wasn’t legal here in MA, don’t get me started, but I’m glad there’s a ballot submission to repeal that shit”
You really think repealing legal weed is going to have any effect whatsoever on people who drive while stoned?
I could probably count on one hand the number of times I smelled weed from another car in probably 3/4 million miles of driving prior to legalization. Now, I can exceed my fingers on any given day in the nicer weather and often enough even in the winter with the windows and vent closed. I don’t know how they shut that box now that it’s opened, but at least cops can pull over all the skunk-smelling POS that are everywhere. If they will is an open question. It’s far worse than the drunks who were mainly out when bars and clubs closed and at least they face some kind of consequence. It’s not even the driving, I can’t walk through a damn parking lot or go for a walk in the woods without encountering these worthless junkies. If it at least reduces that even if it only pushes these degenerate losers to gummies, it’ll be worth it.
It will make no difference whatsoever.
Legalization is not the problem, lack of enforcement is. Driving under the influence of weed is as illegal now as it was and would be under prohibition. As you point out its damn easy to identify the perpetrators yet there is no enforcement.
That said I’d rather LEO resources focus on drunks, cokeheads, and prescription drug abusers rather than potheads. As annoying as the latter are the former are far more dangerous.
They can’t effectively enforce because there’s no adequate test that results in a short enough window to prove driving while high like there is for alcohol and legalization made offenders so onerously numerous that it would be like a giant game of whack-a-mole with limited deterrent effect. If it’s illegal, they only have to test positive. Weed addicts—that’s certainly anyone driving high—are junkies, too, and far more numerous and certainly more readily identifiable by the smell (because they’re too stupid for edibles or too addicted to wait for them to work). People who claim it isn’t addictive are either clueless or addicts making excuses for themselves. It’s not an either/or, all OUI should be hammered by enforcement, but their hands are tied with weed. Legalization ended up as tacit approval and essentially downplayed the effects, just like the big money wanted, so like any other insidious industry, they privatize the profits and socialize the costs. I stupidly voted for the legalization (not that my vote was needed), believing the BS about the poor criminalized people and assuming anyone who consumed it was already doing so and that no meaningful numbers of new people would take it up. I don’t know about the numbers of users, but it certainly unleashed an utter public disregard in hiding it. Somehow in spite of all my misanthropy, I misjudged just how depraved and weak the general population is and how prevalent it would become. These inconsiderate assholes made me miss cigarette smokers.
Again making it illegal will do absolutely nothing to solve the problem:
“Over 40% of fatal crash victims had THC levels far above legal limits, showing cannabis use before driving remains widespread. The rate didn’t drop after legalization, suggesting policy changes haven’t altered risky habits.
…
Key Points at a Glance
The high rate of THC detection remained steady over six years and did not change after the legalization of recreational cannabis.”
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/10/251005085621.htm
Idiots will do what they want regardless of legality. And I will point out that the war on drugs, especially the war on marijuana has been an absolute, colossal failure, making the problems much worse than better.
I’m not sure what that quote is supposed to prove in refute as it supports what I’m saying, if anything. As far as my contention of increased prevalence, this only logs fatal crashes, which is barely relevant and that’s also assuming the rate of testing stayed the same which, since the time of impairment can’t be pinpointed by testing, is less likely to be bothered with—if they can’t prove the dirtbag was high at the time of operation, there won’t be prosecution, no prosecution, cops don’t bother with it. I have no idea what the THC limit business is as it’s legal, so there isn’t one outside of operating a vehicle, which the test cannot determine. The law only states that scumbags can be found to be impaired for having a physical amount over a certain threshold on them or having an open container in the vehicle, nothing about a limit in their system.
I don’t expect it will go back to the way it was when these zombies were almost never encountered, but it would reduce the instances where I encounter skunk that isn’t from a cute animal and at least the police would no longer have their hands tied to arrest them. With it illegal, the inability to pinpoint an exact time becomes irrelevant as a failed drug test is enough. Maybe they won’t be able to get them on OUI specifically, but they could be hit for any use at all. Another thing is that, outside of the roadways, I won’t encounter it in public as much as many will go back to their caves or wherever they were before that I rarely encountered them. My major problem with these creatures isn’t fear of being crashed into on the roadway, it’s annoyance with the never ending encounters of horrible smell and that I am prevented from being able to do anything about it while the police are also hamstrung from keeping the vermin in check.
The war on drugs is a failure because they don’t want to win it. The problem is the market demand, which they have no interest in fixing as it means reducing the economic inequality that drives people to sell (and, to some extent, consume).
The point is fatal crashes are a very good reflection of overall dangerous driving and that the number of such crashes caused by those under the influence of marijuana did not change with legalization despite it being the least tolerated type, a class I drug. If as you say the number of obvious to anyone with eyes inebriated drivers skyrocketed after decriminalization there should have been a skyrocketing number of fatal crashes caused by those inebriated drivers. The data shows there wasn’t. I think its more likely you simply didn’t notice those criminally stoned drivers or drivers have changed their behavior to proudly displaying how stoned they are rather than trying to hide it.
IMO recriminalizing marijuana will only increase the number of incarcerated people, making them even more of a financial drain on society than they already are. It will do nothing to make the streets safer.
Don’t forget that no one redlines a base Fiat 500 in 1st and 2nd gear getting up to 60 (except maybe me). So in the real world this is probably like 25s to 60.
1976 Maverick with 250CID, California Emissions, and AT/PS/PB/AC needs 14.5 seconds to get to 60. That’s my personal worst acceptable acceleration. I have driven slower cars.
Lord knows I’m a massive Fiat apologist, but they’re dead on in saying this is urban transport. If you live in a city and don’t really leave that city except via airport, you will be perfectly fine. This car is a compliment to a choice of lifestyle. However, as a committed city girl myself, I see how many other city people want the image of not being a city person. It’s like dudes buying pickups to commute and do a modest Home Depot run twice a year but flex their manurban.
A new 500 hybrid is an intense commitment to the image of being extremely urbane. Early on it the US return of Fiat, I remember reading that the average 500 buyer made 90k per year and it was mostly a stylish urban runabout. The new hybrid 500 is exactly that still, just a lot of people are afraid to be seen with that sort of image.
It’s a bit on-brand that Stellantis put 3 cars in a press photo and couldn’t even get the running lights to work on all of them.
Did they turn them off to avoid washing out the awful greyness?
I would guess that the grey car has the halogen bulbs where the daytime running lights look different. The other two are full LED.
On another note.
My wife once got clocked doing 94 mph in her 2009 Scion xB on I-10 in Mississippi, in heavy traffic.
In a 65 mph zone.
I still am in awe that she was not given a ticket.
Something about being beautiful and all that meant she never got a ticket in her close to 50 years of driving…
Re the FIAT.
No thanks.
The difference is almost everyone gets out of the way when a semi merges. Not so much for a 500.
My attitude on this has changed a bit since moving to a location where I have an uphill ramp to the highway. My Prius struggles to get near the speed limit by the time I’m merging and if traffic is heavy it’s a stressful experience. I’ve taken to apexing the turn to the ramp in order to carry as much momentum as possible into it, and even that only helps so much.
I shudder to think what a car with an even slower 0-60 would be like in that situation. Also, how the hell is someone selling a hybrid in 2025 that is significantly slower than a Prius from 20 years ago?
“The difference is almost everyone gets out of the way when a semi merges. Not so much for a 500.”
A semi OTOH takes up the space of five cars while a 500 takes up the space of half an American pickup so there’s much less way to make with the 500.
I am absolutely with you on this one Torch. The narrative that cars of today need acceleration that would embarrass a 911 from my youth is beyond ridiculous.
The big difference is that a European will buy the minimum amount of horsepower they need to get the job done, while an American will buy as much as they can then never use more than a quarter to half of it.
Having spent PLENTY of time driving in European cities, this car is way more than adequately powered for the job – and quite a lot quicker than many of the “superminis” of old that had wheezy sub 50hp 1L mills. And it will do just fine out on the Autotrada too – Italian loafer pinning the accelerator completely flat to the floor from Rome to Naples. Europeans until very recently did not really care in the slightest about acceleration, even in quite sporty cars. They care about handling and average speeds. Drag racing is an extremely American thing (even if the Brits kind of like it too a bit).
“American will buy as much as they can then never use more than a quarter to half of it” this is a good point! people will buy large chunky cars with 300 horsepower and then never use more than 140 horsepower’s worth. meanwhile i’m FLYING past them in my 130 horsepower Prius with my foot to the floor.
The Nissan Versa, for which this fine publication just delivered a eulogy today, went from 0-60 in 10 seconds, for the same $22 grand.
I read once that the average daily-use acceleration was something like 16 or 18 seconds when you account for the fact that most people only press the pedal down a quarter. This thing will be fine, not to mention the millions of buses, trucks and caddy-type vehicles which share our roads without issue.
Having seen the way Italians drive even slower cars I don’t think there’s an issue.
This is a city car, it will be driven mostly in cities where speeds are slow anyway, it’s fine.
I think Auto websites should point out that many cars with fast acceleration are dangerous too but i know this won’t happen except for an opinion article.