News

Fiat has given a first look at its new Grizzly crossovers - larger versions of the Grande Panda that are aimed to give the brand a footing in Europe's crucial C-segment. 

To be sold in both fastback and straighter-edged SUV form, the Grizzly is an affordable family SUV "designed for the three regions" Fiat sells in, according to CEO Olivier François: Europe, Latin America and the Middle East and Africa.

"It completes the Panda and Grande Panda families," he said, previewing the duo at Fiat parent company Stellantis's investor day presentation in Michigan. 

"It has the same DNA and is built on the same car, but it's a different animal. It will not just elevate the market share, it will elevate everything: the revenue, the margins and the brand."

The Grizzly – expected to be officially revealed at the Paris motor show in October – will be built on Stellantis's value-oriented Smart Car platform, as used for the Grande Panda, Citroën C3 and Vauxhall Frontera. 

Sized and priced to rival the likes of the Dacia Duster and Skoda Kamiq, the Grizzly will be offered with the same choice of petrol, hybrid and electric powertrains as its little brother. 

It forms part of a wave of new Fiat products aimed at bolstering the brand's coverage of the affordable car market and attracting new buyers. 

Also in the pipeline is a new four-seat microcar (pictured below in green) to sit above the Citroën Ami-based Topolino and a new electric city car inspired by the original 1980s Panda (in orange).

This new sub-£15k entry EV will be produced at Stellantis's Pomigliano plant in Italy alongside a Citroën twin, which today was confirmed to revive the 2CV name and be designed with heavy influence from its 1940s forebear.

Unlike Citroën, Fiat didn't go so far as to preview the design of its new model, but François promised that "the real design is not the revival of an icon, it is literally the next icon".

We all know of cars which were fitted with an outstanding engine right from the start.

If you can’t immediately bring one to mind, the Bugatti Chiron is a good example. There are also many cars which were more or less ordinary in their original forms but became more desirable in one way or another because a new engine was added to the range, or because an existing engine became available in a significantly altered form.

Here are 28 models which we believe are part of the second category, listed in alphabetical order.

---

AC Ace

The AC Ace roadster was introduced in 1953 and was fitted with several engines during its production run, the most powerful being a 2.6-litre Ford straight-six. Its handling made it an effective road-legal competition car, but over in Texas Carroll Shelby (1923-2012) reckoned it would be better if it had a lot more power.

Rather than dismissing this thought and moving on to something else, he created the Cobra, a reworked Ace with a Ford Windsor V8 engine initially measuring 4.3 litres and later 4.7. The Cobra proved to be a mighty car in racing, even more so when it went into a new generation with a 7.0-litre Ford FE V8 under the bonnet.

---

Alpine A110

The original A110 (not the current model launched in 2017) was initially powered by Renault’s little Cléon-Fonte engine. This was later replaced by the larger Cléon-Alu, which had made its debut in the Renault 16.

It’s difficult to imagine the 16 being an effective competition car, but its engine turned the A110 into a world-beater. In 1973, Alpine thrashed the opposition in the inaugural World Rally Championship, winning six rounds and finishing the season with 147 points to Fiat’s 84 and Ford’s 76.

---

Audi A4

Audi has a lot of history in this area. Most of its models have high-performance S and –  more excitingly – RS derivatives whose engines are far more powerful than those in the regular versions.

The A4 is a case in point. Its RS 4 equivalents have always had splendid engines. Perhaps the finest, and certainly the best-sounding, was the screaming 4.2-litre V8 also used in the Audi R8. It produced over 400bhp, well in advance of what could be expected from any other A4.

---

Audi Q7

Every Q7 is an imposing beast no matter what powers it, but Audi went to new and unexpected levels when it fitted the large SUV with a 5.9-litre diesel V12. This engine, which has never been used in any other production car, produced 493bhp, which was enough to push the 2635kg Q7 from 0-62mph in an astonishing 5.5 seconds.

Fortunately, the brakes and suspension were up to the task, but acceleration like this was still exhilarating or – depending on your mood – alarming. And it didn’t come cheap. Priced just short of £100,000 in the UK, the 6.0 V12 TDI, as it was branded, cost around £40,000 more than the next most expensive Q7. Data suggests that 21 reside on British roads today.

---

BMW M3

Almost by definition, every M3 has had an engine which transforms it into something quite different from the regular BMW 3 Series. This was particularly true of the generation sold between 2007 and 2013, which was powered by the 4.0-litre (and, for the GTS variant, 4.4-litre) S65 V8.

A multiple award winner, the S65 made this M3 the first to produce over 400bhp in standard form. It wasn’t the only V8 used in an M3, because a tiny number of earlier cars were fitted with one too, but it was the only engine of this type used for every example in any generation.

---

Cadillac CT6

In most forms, the CT6 was a full-size luxury saloon. The CT6-V was that too, but it was also a very impressive performer thanks to its 550bhp 4.2-litre V8 engine, commonly known as the Blackwing. It was also available in the CT6 Platinum, producing 500bhp.

These cars were sold only in the 2019 model year. The entire CT6 range was discontinued shortly afterwards, partly due to poor sales and partly because the Detroit-Hamtramck plant where every version was built was retooled to produce electric vehicles instead. The Blackwing name has been used again for the most powerful versions of the CT4 and CT5, but neither of these is fitted with the Blackwing engine.

---

Chevrolet Corvette

Since the Corvette is one of the most popular sports cars in history, it seems strange now that the first-generation version did not sell at all well when it was introduced in 1953 with a straight-six engine. Two years later, it became available with the new Chevy Small Block V8, originally in 4.3-litre form but later extended first to 4.6 and later to 5.4 litres.

It was almost as if this was what the American public had been waiting for. Corvette sales rose dramatically, and a car which might have been abandoned at an early stage remained in production until 1962. Six decades later, its latest descendant is still doing well, and still powered by a V8 engine.

---

Dodge Challenger

The current Challenger (the third distinct model to bear that name in over half a century) has been sold in several quite startling forms, with enormous power outputs. Even in that context, the SRT Demon variant, sold only in the 2018 model year, is outstanding.

Its 6.2-litre supercharged V8 engine is the most powerful ever fitted to any road-legal Dodge, or indeed any Chrysler. On regular 91-octane petrol it produced 808bhp, but with the optional Demon Crate package and running 100-octane race fuel its output reached 840bhp. The lower figure has more or less been equalled by the current Challenger SRT Super Stock, but that car has slightly less torque.

---

Fiat 500

The 500 was originally available with a variety of four-cylinder petrol engines. Three years after its launch in 2007, Fiat added the two-cylinder TwinAir, the first engine designed from the start to use the remarkable MultiAir technology which had previously been added to existing units.

Getting anywhere near the official fuel consumption figures was quite a challenge, and there was a lot of vibration until Fiat decided to add a dual-mass flywheel. But the popularity of the 500 has always been due to its cuteness more than anything else, and with the TwinAir purring away it sounded as cute as it looked.

---

Ford Cortina

Most first-generation Cortinas were powered by either 1.2- or 1.5-litre versions of the pre-crossflow Ford Kent engine. In 1963, a year after production began, the car was transformed by a new power source, resulting in the epoch-making Lotus Cortina.

In its nether regions, this engine was basically the same as a Kent, but it had a completely different cylinder head. Known as the Lotus Twin Cam, it had made its debut the previous year in the Elan sports car. For the first time, here was a Cortina with a power output of over 100bhp. Further modifications brought great success in racing and rallying, in addition to the standard car’s appeal as the 1960s equivalent of a hot hatch.

---

Ford Escort

As with the Cortina, the Lotus Twin Cam engine turned the mainstream first-generation Escort into something altogether more special, but the bar was raised much higher when Ford launched the Cosworth BDA-powered RS1600 in 1970.

Like the Twin Cam, it was based on the Kent engine, and in standard form it wasn’t much more powerful. However, with four valves per cylinder it was far more responsive to tuning, with the result that the Mk1 Escort became one of the great rally cars of the early to mid 70s. Even today, hearing a fully tuned RS1600 screaming through a forest stage is a memorable experience.

---

Ford Sierra

The mid-sized European Ford between the Cortina and the Mondeo was available in its earlier days with a variety of engines, none of them particularly dramatic with the possible exception of a large V6. The game-changer was the 2.0-litre four-cylinder unit which powered the Sierra RS Cosworth from 1986 onwards.

At its heart, it was quite humble, being based on the well-established Pinto engine. A turbocharger and a 16-valve cylinder head made quite a difference, though. Even in its least potent form it produced over 200bhp, which no other Sierra engine could even approach. Further modified for competition use, it could reach outputs on the far side of 600bhp.

---

Honda Civic Type R

Honda has been producing Type R variants of its Civic since 1997, and since 2001 they have all been powered by a 2.0-litre engine. For 15 years, these were known for their remarkable power, their ability to rev well beyond 8000rpm and a certain lack of oomph before the VTEC variable valve timing switched from tea-with-the-vicar to the-zombies-are-coming mode.

Honda changed the game entirely in 2015 when it added a turbocharger. The engine was now limited to a relatively modest 7000rpm, but suddenly there was plenty of mid-range power, and the peak figure shot up to 306bhp. After some mild tweaking, it was raised further to 316bhp.

---

Lancia Thema

The Thema was a luxury saloon based on the same platform also used for the Alfa Romeo 164, Fiat Croma and Saab 9000. Two years after it was launched, Lancia added an outstanding version called the 8.32, named after the number of cylinders and valves in its engine.

At 2.9 litres, this wasn’t quite the largest unit fitted to the Thema, but it was by far the most powerful. Derived from the Ferrari Dino V8, it produced 215bhp, a full 40bhp more than the 3.0-litre Alfa Romeo V6 which it demoted to second place in the range.

---

Lotus Europa

Launched in 1965, the Europa was a very early example – though by no means the first – of a mid-engined road-going sports car. To begin with, it was powered by the Cléon-Alu engine from the Renault 16, and also used that car’s transaxle which, unlike any transmission available from usual supplier Ford, could easily be adapted to suit the mid-engined layout.

Lotus continued using the transaxle through the Europa’s production life, but it eventually swapped the engine for its own Ford-based Twin Cam. Power outputs accordingly shot up, initially to 105bhp and later to 126bhp, giving the Europa far more straightline performance than it had started out with.

---

Mazda CX-7

Replacing a powerful petrol engine with a much less powerful diesel may seem like a backward step, but in this case it was the right thing to do. The CX-7 SUV was initially available only in the UK with the 256bhp 2.3-litre petrol engine also found in the high-performance Mazda3 MPS and Mazda6 MPS. Everyone knew this was a bad idea – including, they would quietly admit, Mazda’s British representatives.

Two years later, in 2009, that engine was dropped in favour of a 2.5-litre diesel. The price went up, and the power output dropped by a startling 85bhp, but the CX-7 was now subject to £190 less Vehicle Excise Duty each year and was, according to the official fuel economy figures, 10mpg less thirsty. A previously almost unsellable vehicle had now been transformed into something that suited its target customers.

---

Mercedes A-Class

The third-generation A-Class was mostly available with a variety of engines with power outputs in the 100-210bhp range. One year after launch, though, Mercedes introduced the four-wheel drive A 45 AMG variant (subsequently renamed Mercedes-AMG A 45).

The difference this made to the car’s straightline performance was phenomenal. The highest power output in the range had now shot up by 70% to 355bhp, and that was only the start. Following a revision, it rose still further to 376bhp. Today’s fastest A-Class has a different but conceptually similar engine which produces 416bhp.

---

Mercedes R-Class

In a spectacular example of what we called “Mercedes’ every-engine-in-everything product planning,” the R-Class became available with a 503bhp 6.2-litre V8 engine a year after its launch.

As a large luxury MPV, it was well suited to powerful engines, but this was a whole new ball game. The big V8 produced 503bhp, which was far more than anyone needed – or, apparently, wanted. Sales were minimal, and the R 63 AMG, as it was called, disappeared from the price lists very quickly.

---

MGB

The MGB roadster was launched in 1962, and a coupe version called the MGB GT came along three years later. In an attempt to create a high-performance variant, MG first fitted a 2.9-litre straight-six engine and called the result MGC, but this was unsatisfactory and was abandoned after just two years.

A second attempt followed in 1973. This time, MG created the MGB GT V8 by fitting the 3.5-litre Buick-derived Rover engine into the coupe. It didn’t last much longer than the MGC had, but by general consent it was a far superior car.

---

Renault 6

This was a very mild but still valid example of the principle we’re discussing. The 6 was designed as an upmarket alternative to the Renault 4 which was fitted at its launch in 1968 with the same immediate post-War Billancourt engine, even though the larger and more powerful Cléon-Fonte had been available for six years.

In 1970, Renault did the right thing and added the Cléon-Fonte to the range. With this engine, the 6 still wasn’t especially quick – and didn’t really need to be – but it was at least acceptably so. As we said in a 1974 road test, there was “no doubt that Renault’s engineers got their sums exactly right” at the second attempt.

---

Renault Clio Renaultsport

The first few versions of Renault’s hottest Clio were all powered by a high-revving, naturally-aspirated 2.0-litre engine. This policy changed dramatically in 2013, when Renault switched to a 1.6-litre turbo co-developed with Alliance partner Nissan and producing similar power (197bhp).

There was no doubt that the Clio’s character had been transformed. The question was whether this was a positive or a negative move. There were those who felt the superior mid-range performance was a major improvement, but we reckoned that “all the previous car’s impish zip has been sucked mercilessly from the bone”.

---

Saab 96

Saab fitted nothing but two-stroke engines to its cars all the way from the launch of the 92 in 1949 until nearly halfway through the production life of the 96 (the 92’s second successor) 18 years later. At this point, it switched to a four-stoke V4 developed by Ford of Germany.

It wasn’t one of the world’s great engines, but it was more powerful than anything Saab had used in the past. Crucially, it also didn’t sound like a wasp trapped in a tin can or emit clouds of smelly blue smoke. The 96 lasted until 1980, which it certainly wouldn’t have done if Saab had persevered with the two-stroke.

---

Sunbeam Alpine

The story of the Sunbeam Tiger almost exactly mirrors that of the slightly earlier AC Cobra. Both cars were suggested by Carroll Shelby, who (in the case of the Tiger) thought there was nothing wrong with Sunbeam’s Alpine sports car that couldn’t be fixed by giving it more power.

As with the Cobra, the Alpine was converted to accept the Ford Windsor engine (4.3 litres at first, later 4.7) and given a suitably aggressive name. This time, though, there would be no progression to a larger Ford V8.

---

Vanden Plas Princess

Of the several cars known as Vanden Plas Princess, the one we’re interested in here was the large, Farina-designed saloon which was almost identical to models produced by Austin and Wolseley. All were powered by a 2.9-litre straight-six engine, but only the Princess was taken a stage further.

 

In 1964, it was given a new name – Princess R – following several revisions, the most dramatic being the fitment of a 3.9-litre engine developed by Rolls-Royce. The power output jumped from around 120bhp to 175bhp, which made the Princess far quicker than before, though given the nature of the car it’s likely that more effortless high-speed cruising was considered more important than sharper acceleration.

---

Vauxhall Carlton

The Carlton GSi was a fine car with excellent handling and a strong 3.0-litre 24-valve engine. It was also the basis of that Wagner opera on wheels, the Lotus Carlton. Despite claims to the contrary elsewhere on the internet, every example of this model came off the Opel production line in Rüsselsheim as a standard GSi before being shipped to Lotus in Hethel for a conversion which lasted 150 hours.

The alterations included raising the capacity of the six-cylinder engine from 3.0 litres to 3.6 and fitting two Garrett turbochargers. Power output accordingly shot up from the original 204bhp to 377bhp (if the engines was fed with sufficiently high-octane petrol), and the straightline performance improved to such an extent that there were calls for the car to be banned.

---

Volkswagen Golf R

The first two generations of Golf R were known as R32, a reference to their 3.2-litre V6 engines. They were quick and sounded fabulous, but that engine was very heavy and mounted almost entirely ahead of the front axle, which created major handling problems in the original version. The next one was better, but still occasionally troublesome, especially over a series of closely-spaced crests.

For the generation after that, Volkswagen ditched the 32 part of the name and fitted a turbocharged 2.0-litre four-cylinder. This was more powerful, but crucially it was also lighter. The handling issues disappeared completely, and the R became the splendid hot hatch it should have been in the first place.

---

Volkswagen Passat

The Passat introduced in 1997 was (a former owner writes) a worthy but not particularly exciting car available with engines which could mostly be described as straightforward – except one. This was a 4.0-litre W8, essentially two 2.0-litre V4s mounted on a common crankcase, the only engine of that type ever fitted to a production car.

Available from 2001, it produced 271bhp, making it the most powerful engine used in a Passat of that generation by over 80bhp. Despite its outstanding features, it sold very badly, and the project was soon abandoned, which may have been what VW expected to happen.

---

Volkswagen Touareg

In another piece of extravagant engine policy, Volkswagen added a 6.0-litre W12 to the Touareg two years after the big SUV was launched. This engine was nearly as rare as the W8 fitted to the Passat, but was also used in the Audi A8, the Bentley Continental and the VW Phaeton.

Once again, this engine blitzed all the others in the range in terms of performance, with a maximum output of 444bhp. VW initially planned to build only 500 examples of this particular Touareg, but continued production when it proved to be surprisingly popular.

---

Morris Minor

At the time of its launch in 1948, the Minor was fitted with a 918cc engine based on a Wolseley design which was already 20 years old. It was extremely unlikely that this unit would last, as the car did, until as late as 1971. In fact, the change happened very early in the Minor’s career. In 1952, Morris was brought together with its former arch-rival Austin in the British Motor Corporation.

This gave Morris access to the new BMC A-Series engine, which had just been introduced in the Austin A30. Despite being smaller, at 803cc, the A-Series had similar power to the engine it replaced, and far more scope for development. By the end of Minor production, it was being used in 1098cc form, and still had nearly three decades more life left in it.

---

Talbot Sunbeam

Most Sunbeams were fitted with either 1.3- or 1.6-litre versions of the engine used in the Hillman Avenger or a 928cc unit derived from that of the Hillman Imp. The outlier was a 2.2-litre 16-valve Lotus motor, part of a range which was used both in the Jensen-Healey sports car and several models produced by Lotus itself.

With a power output of 150bhp, the Sunbeam Lotus was a formidable road car, but that wasn’t its main purpose. The idea had been to attract publicity for the brand through motorsport, and it worked. Just before four-wheel drive turned the whole scene upside-down, the Sunbeam Lotus was competitive enough to earn Talbot the Manufacturers’ title in the 1981 World Rally Championship.

---

Vauxhall Chevette

The Chevette was initially a small hatchback (though saloons and an estate followed) based on the Opel Kadett. Nearly every version was fitted with a 1256cc engine, but Vauxhall, like Talbot with the Sunbeam, decided that a more powerful version intended for rallying would be good for publicity.

There was no way that the original engine would be suitable for this, so Vauxhall took its 2.3-litre Slant-4 engine, added a 16-valve cylinder head and put it under the bonnet to create the Chevette HS (pictured). (Early rally cars were fitted with a similar head developed by Lotus, but this was soon banned.) The same mechanical arrangement was used for the later HSR, which had several fibreglass panels, including wide front and rear wings which gave the car a very dramatic appearance.

---

Don't panic. Yes, you are looking at a Fiat Panda and a Renault 5, but no, you haven't fallen down a wormhole and been dumped into the early 1980s.

The names may be those of familiar old stagers, but this pair of bang-up-to-date EVs represent Europe's most convincing fightback yet against the wave of ever-hotter, low-cost competition from China.

Yet there's more to this duo than eye-catching price tags and wallet-friendly finance deals. Much, much more. You see, both the 5 and the Panda were designed by teams who reckoned that if the established European brands are to have a future, they need to look to the past. In fact, it's no surprise that both cars feature the creative input of François Leboine, current design boss at Fiat and previously part of Renault's advanced vehicle design team at the time the reborn 5 was being formed.

And the parallels don't end there, because each of these contenders is aimed at a similar audience, takes up roughly the same space on the road, travels a similar distance on a charge and in entry-level guise, as tested here, is priced within a biscuit of the other. Yet after spending time with our new-wave nostalgics, we have also found some crucial differences, both in design intent and driving dynamics. Which approach is better? Well, that's where it gets complicated.

We're already very familiar with the reborn 5, which has become a firm favourite here at Autocar. Even now, a year or so after its launch, the retro-infused Renault has the power to stop traffic and start conversations. It's not just the car's futuristic yet familiar lines: it's also the neat details such as the illuminated '5' in the bonnet that doubles as a battery charge indicator and the subtly flared wheel arches that evoke the wild, mid-engined, Group B rallying 5 Turbo.

And yet today, when the minty fresh (both in its newness and its eye-catching hue) Panda rolls up to our road test rendezvous, the Renault's power to distract is instantly sapped. The new Fiat is a bigger car than its predecessor (it's a Grande Panda now - geddit?), graduating from the city car class to the supermini sector, but the square-rigged influence of the Giorgetto Giugiaro-penned original is clear to see.

That 1980 icon's looks were the result of an obsessively rational pursuit of low production costs, the car's simple panel pressings and flat glass helping to make it easier and cheaper to build than contemporary rivals. This new Panda was also conceived with a beady eye on the bottom line, but the cost savings have been achieved through the modern-day expedient of hardware sharing: it sits on Stellantis's Smart Car platform, which also underpins the new Citroën C3, Citroën C3 Aircross and Vauxhall Frontera.

While the 5 aims for a certain suave sophistication, the Panda is out-and-out fun in its approach. Everywhere you look there's a design flourish that captivates or an Easter egg ready to be found, from the large 'PANDA' script stamped into its flanks through to numerous appearances of Fiat's old diagonal four-bar logo and our entry-level Pop version's steel wheels.

Highlights include the holographic badges in the C-pillars, the pixelated LED headlamps and the 3D tail-lights that appear to be housed in a Perspex display case. Or how about the neat, retractable charging cable hidden in the front grille? Whichever way you look at it, the Panda effortlessly mixes the clever and the cool.

Fiat's designers have kept the creativity coming inside, where the Panda melds form and function to excellent effect. Jump behind the wheel and you're greeted by a neat digital instrument display and infotainment touchscreen that are framed within an evocation of the old Lingotto factory's rooftop test track. Finished in a translucent yellow plastic, it glows pleasingly when backlit by the sun. Embossed 'Panda' badges are everywhere, while the word 'ciao' is stamped on the inside of the tailgate.

It's colourful too, from the blue plastic trim for the dashboard and doors (made from recycled drinks containers) to the natty fabric covering the glovebox. Combined with the large windows, this creates a bright and cheery ambience.

What it can't match is the 5's premium feel and sense of solidity - although it feels robust enough. It's all so easy to use, too, with physical controls for frequently used functions and straightforward infotainment that syncs seamlessly with your phone.

Stick your head into the 5 and it all seems a little sombre at first, but even in entry-level Evolution guise its richer materials and a more expensive-looking digital display give it a classier atmosphere. This is a cooler and more cosseting environment - an upmarket counterpoint to the Panda's airy feel and funky charm. There are some nods to its ancestor (the stitched dashtop matching the ribbed moulding of the original), but the 5, slathered in soft-touch materials, feels a more grown-up proposition.

Whichever way you cut it, the Panda is the more practical machine. For starters, there's more space for those sitting in the back. The 5's more cramped rear compartment is compounded by smaller side windows and dark trim that combine to create a sense of claustrophobia. Fiat's designers have also put more thought into storage, dotting handy cubbies, trays and compartments around the Panda's cabin; Renault's lot force you to leave more of your stuff in trouser pockets.

The Panda's 361-litre load area sticks the boot into the 5 for carrying capacity, holding a handy 35-litre advantage. Both benefit from a 60/40-split folding rear bench but are also hobbled by high load lips. Yet in the final reckoning, the Panda is the more roomy and versatile option overall. This is a car that could just about pass muster as your only set of family wheels.

Settle yourself behind the wheel and prepare to go for a drive and the tables turn. You sit lower in the 5 and it's easier to find the perfect seating position; the Panda's driver is a little more perched, its smattering of rugged SUV exterior cues carrying over to a raised driving position. The 5 isn't without its flaws, though: if you manage to operate the column-mounted gear selector without setting the wipers flailing, then kudos to you.

The 5's more upmarket visual and tactile vibe translates to the initial driving experience. With its multi-link rear axle and greater use of sound- deadening, it has a greater sense of plushness from the get-go.

In truth, there's little in it for outright ride quality between the pair, each dealing with bigger long-wave undulations with a nicely damped waft yet exhibiting some brittleness over more challenging torn and twisted surfaces, of which there are many here in the Malvern Hills. Yet in the 5, nastier impacts are more muted, while it rounds the edges of the sharper impacts better than the Panda. The 5 is a more hushed cruiser overall, insulating its occupants more effectively from wind and road noise. But while the Panda is a more obtrusive companion, it's far from wearing and, range aside, neither car should dissuade you from embarking on long-haul excursions.

It's in more dynamic situations that the 5 gets to put some distance - literally - between itself and the Fiat. While its 118bhp motor is just 7bhp up on the Panda's, the fractionally lighter and much torquier 5 responds more crisply to its accelerator (the Panda is a little sluggish when first moving away), while ramping up through the driver modes to Sport results in ever-increasing urgency to the requests of your right foot. It's no surprise to find the 5's claimed 0-62mph time of 9.0sec is a couple of seconds faster than the Panda's, even if both have more than enough urge for everyday use.

The Panda's less racy remit is highlighted by its shortage of adjustable drive settings (there's just a Comfort button that adds a syrupy response to the accelerator) and lack of adjustment for the regenerative braking. On the plus side, the default set-up offers such a natural off-throttle retardation calibration that you rarely miss the 5's scope for manual fine-tuning.

The 5 also feels fleeter of foot through the corners, even if its light steering's sensitivity away from the straight-ahead means delicacy is needed for smooth progress (the brake pedal requires an equally soft touch). 

Of course, the upshot is that the 5 feels alive when pushing on, darting towards the apex with greater alacrity and proving keener to subtly tighten its line with a lift of the throttle. There's real warm-hatch energy to the French car and, in many respects, it's a more satisfying steer than its hotter sibling, the Alpine A290.

Yet the Panda isn't without driver appeal. Its steering is more naturally paced and has greater reassuring heft, while its wider tyres (205-section, compared with 195-section on the 5) means it actually clings on harder and corners with the same even-keeled poise. It's not quite as biddable or nimble but, like all the best small Italian and French machinery, it can cover ground deceptively quickly, resulting in surprising point-to-point pace.

Totting up the scores at the end of a hard day's evaluation it quickly becomes clear that this pair are pretty much tied on points. Yet despite being so closely matched, the 5 and Panda actually have quite different characters.

The 5 is a more engaging driver's car, faster and more agile, and for people like us that counts for rather a lot. Yet for all its style, verve and upmarket allure, it's a less versatile small car - one that, like the original BMW Mini of 2000, is an object of desire as much as one of utility. For many that will be just fine, but the Panda proves that it's possible to be both charming and useful.

No, it's not quite as clear-sighted in its logic as some of Fiat's greatest pint-sized hits, and some of the design flourishes are just a little try-hard, but the Panda is a car that makes you grin just by being in its presence, while its thoughtful packaging allows it to just about fulfil the role of a larger car, much like the Uno did in the 1980s and first-generation Punto did in the 1990s.

Ultimately, each of our contenders oozes the sort of star quality that makes them difficult to resist. Yet in the final reckoning, the Panda's panache, purposefulness and price give it the win by the width of a single strand of spaghetto. Forza, Fiat - bravissimo!

	FIAT GRANDE PANDA ELECTRIC POP	RENAULT 5 E-TECH URBAN RANGE EVOLUTION
Rating	4.5 stars	4.5 stars
Price	£20,995	£21,495
Engine	Permanent magnet synchronous motor	Permanent magnet synchronous motor
Power	111bhp	118bhp
Torque	90lb ft	166lb ft
Kerb weight	1532kg	1463kg
0-62mph	11.0sec	9.0sec
Top speed	82mph	93mph
Battery	43.8kWh (usable)	40.0kWh (usable)
Range (WLTP)	199 miles	192 miles
Economy (test)	3.8mpkWh	4.0mpkWh

Plug and play

Both of these cars favour a relatively small battery (40kWh for the 5 and 44kWh for the Panda), which result in similar WLTP ranges (the Panda's 199 miles pipping the 5's by seven miles). On a relatively mild spring day, each car reckoned somewhere around 185 miles was possible on a nearly full charge. We also saw economy figures that hovered around the 4.0mpkWh mark when they were driven swiftly but sensibly (the 5 earns efficiency bonus points for its standard heat pump).

The Panda's novel retractable charging lead is limited to battery replenishment at 7kW, but there's also a standard charging port at the rear of the car capable of 100kW. By contrast, the Renault maxes out at 80kW, but its smaller battery means that a 20-80% charge likewise takes around 30 minutes.