Twin air vs Multijet

Long time, no new post.
Wanted to ask the general forum consensus of the TwinAir fiat engine vs the Mjet.
Looking at replacing the horrible 330d i just got rid of with a panda 4x4 and the engine choice is a tough one.

The sensible in me said jet the mjet, its been about since forever, it works, its not complicated or special, its low power, low output, low stress and given maintenance seems to outlive most of the cars its put in (and I have in a 2wd version with no real effort and a EGR light on got 75mpg on country roads)

The none sensible part of me tells me to but the petrol twin as it sounds awesome, same kind of power (i think more) comes with a 6 speed box and probably would sute my driving much better. I also hear stories about horrible MPG, failing clutches killing the gearbox and generally its a relatively new engine for fiat who seem to be phasing the powerplant out in place of a 3 cylinder unit.

If I had the choice, id go for the 1.2 fire unit but they dont do that in the 4x4

Here are the numbers although the mjet was actually hard to get hold of

875cc 8v two-cylinder turbo, 84bhp@5600rpm, 107lb ft@1900rpm
1.3 Mjet 75bhp 140lb ft

I personally always go for the bigger engine
As it won’t have to work as hard is my theory

And I do feel engines are trying to be too smart for their own good these days

I have a 1.4 petrol multiair turbo in my 2017 124 Spider, 140bhp as standard (170bhp in the Abarth version, just a different ECU map) but I now have a "phase 2" map which should be around 200 bhp, with a "muffler delete" (no silencer) exhaust and free-flow air filter, it's a real hoot

Can't you get a remap for the 1.3 multijet? What's important to you, power, torque or fuel consumption?

I agree with the above that the "rush" to small capacity petrol engines is all very well, but the fact is turbo diesels are still more powerful in the real world IF you also want good fuel economy. They've refined diesels over the last 20 years to the point where they outperform petrol (IMO) the instant grunt for overtaking and relaxed motorway cruise for example. And with modern DPF, AdBlue etc, they are far less polluting than before.

I love the lazy torque of a diesel and i think they would suit a 4x4 car better.

There is a move to penalise diesels, but given that they probably still make up a large proportion of UK cars, it'll take a while to phase them out.

On the other hand, fizzy turbo petrols are great fun to drive, but you don't generally get the fuel economy.

Petrols have some catching up to do, but nowadays the efficiency will be achieved by going hybrid.

Can't say much about the MJ but when we were in the market last year for a Fiat 500 I asked the question on the Fiat forum which was better - the 1.2 petrol or the TA? For less engine hassles I was advised to get the 1.2 which we ultimately did. Oil changes and using the correct grade is crucial in the TA apparently (goes for most cars tbh) and yes you're aware of the mpg disappointment. More of a concern in most of the current Fiat's is climate failure which is very expensive (so we got a manual aircon) and the auto gearbox (I think) which should be avoided. Funnily enough I was asked why not get the Panda which is arguably the better car but the looks won out with the females in the family

I have a fellow car club member who has a 1.3 MJet Panda he uses for his city run-around plus uses it for his Uber work. He speaks very highly of it for this use. Has done a few interstate trips in it as well, when he doesn't take his 1.4 Grande Punto Sport.

We discussed this last Friday when he picked us up for a trip to the airport for our 5 hour flight across the country in a Dreamliner to Perth (Western Australia, not Scotland).

Neither engine can be classed as decent

The twin-air sounds novel and has some character, but it has to be driven hard to make progress, which kills the fuel economy. Some reliability concerns too, which are probably down to the thrashing that the engine tends to get

The 1.3 diesel is horribly unrefined - it’s clattery and tappety and not particularly powerful or grunty.

If I had to choose, it would be the diesel , but only because it can be remapped up to a faintly desirable 100+ bhp

As Nigel has said the 1.3 Multi-jet is not a very powerful or torquey motor and is noisy too. But I'm beginning to think the thing is indestructible. We ran ours, a 90hp version, from new until over 120K before we gave it to our son. Being a tight arse he keeps running the old car until, in his words, he kills it. But this just doesn't seem to be happening! The engine now has close to 180K miles and the only thing it's ever needed was a set of glow plugs.

It is still possible to get the engine into the high 40's mpg and then just £30 a year to tax.

Bob, I had to drive my parents cross country, as such, i took there car and drove like a nun, I got 70mpg out of it!
It wasn't fast, or refined, or even nice to drive but as a way of making a car move in the most dull efficient way possible.. it seemed to work

Agreed