Fiat Grande Panda vs Renault 5 vs Mini Cooper E review

Before anyone cries foul, yes, we realise this is an uneven contest. This range-topping electric Mini costs half as much again as the electric Panda. It is not a conventional group test. Instead, it demonstrates just how much variety there is among appealing small cars. That variety is not merely visual: it extends to the way you use them and the way they drive. These are more than cars; they have character and somehow seem alive. At a time when the global motor industry has decided – because it believes you have decided – that you require a shapeless crossover, a generic twin-screen interface and indifferent dynamics, that is reassuring.

Fiat Grande Panda: cheap without being dull

For outright savings, choose the Grande Panda. Beneath this version sits a less expensive Red trim, priced at £20,995. It delivers identical power and the same 199 miles of WLTP-rated range as this flagship La Prima. The Red is the Grande Panda to have, because, like every Panda before it, it feels inexpensive because it is inexpensive. Yet it never suggests that affordability has to mean boredom. It cuts costs with perfectly smart white steel wheels, omits roof rails and heated seats, uses manual climate control, and has no integrated satnav on its centre display – though you will probably mirror your phone anyway.

Strong design need not be costly. The bodywork is cleanly drawn and satisfyingly chunky. Pixel-inspired lighting details are echoed by the cabin air vents. Matching rectangles with semi-circular ends appear across the dashboard, instrument binnacle, lower console and door-handle surrounds. The interior finishes are not costly, multi-layer soft-touch plastics, but their textures – like their forms – clearly show genuine design consideration. Fiat logos are repeatedly embossed into the plastic, fabric and even the body panels themselves. Concealed behind the Fiat script at the front is the Panda’s outstanding distinctive feature: a permanently fitted, spiral-wound charging lead. Pull it out, connect it, then let it spring back afterwards, avoiding the dirty nuisance of winding it into the boot.

Photography: Jonny Fleetwood

The Renault feels pricier, while remaining good value. Its entry price is £22,995, but spending a further £4k for the tested 5 Techno at £26,995 brings worthwhile extra equipment and a substantial increase in electric range – 254 miles under WLTP. The 5’s styling draws upon Renault 5s from the past, though it does not directly copy one particular model or generation. It is an up-to-date shape made from a blend of historical references.

Inside, the R5 creates a convincingly stylish, more premium atmosphere with fabric and stitching. Its central display is straightforward to operate, while the intuitive Google-based navigation plans charging stops. The driver display’s graphics, however, are a fussy and distracting collection of diagonal stripes. Look beyond that and every required detail is present.

The newest Mini generation successfully moves away from the somewhat slavish retro approach of earlier ones. Its cabin feels genuinely contemporary and engaging, using cloth whose graduated colour weaves add visual depth. The circular display is either a foolish concept or, at least, an intriguing one that has not been fully exploited. This test car includes a head-up display; normally a somewhat unnecessary feature, here it is almost essential.

Controls, cabin space and usability

The Mini has the fewest physical controls and too often sends you searching through screen menus. Even so, it works better than first impressions suggest, as certain controls – the lighting switchgear, for example – also call up display shortcuts. A quick-menu button gets you near, though not entirely to, the settings for disabling lane assistance and speed warnings. Renault and Fiat manage this more directly with proper buttons. Renaults feature more hardware controls than almost any current car, along with a small wood of steering-column stalks, and that is to their credit. The Fiat has fewer controls, but it also gives you far fewer software functions to manage. It is delightfully Zen: there are no driving modes, configurable displays or choice-induced paralysis.

Both the Mini and R5 position you low in the car, creating a sporty, connected sensation. Sportiness holds no interest for the Panda, which places you higher for a clearer view out. In the rear, the Mini has only two seatbelts, although adults fit about as well as they do in the Fiat, which is likely too narrow for three people. The wider Renault pinches your shins and feet. Should you need substantial boot space, dismiss the Mini immediately.

Fiat Grande Panda, Renault 5 and Mini Cooper E on the road

When moving, the Fiat does nothing to undermine its cheerful nature. It rides softly and accelerates gently. With so little power, power understeer is not a concern; the same applies to torque steer. Simply point it down the road and it generally behaves with composure. Its steering and brakes are light yet progressive, making it easy to increase loads smoothly. Long-travel suspension permits some body movement, but not enough to alter your line. It absorbs sizeable impacts and extreme cambers with little fuss. There is little audible disturbance, too, leaving the impression of a sturdily built car. To understand why driving a slow car flat out can often be more enjoyable than driving a fast one slowly, take a Panda along a bumpy country road.

Compare the wheel-to-arch gaps of the Fiat with those of the Mini and their contrasting suspension philosophies are immediately apparent. The Mini is broad, low and uncompromising. That makes it alert and grippy on smooth tarmac, of which this country notably has little. On rougher roads, it bounces along the undulations and, more seriously, is pushed off line when a front wheel encounters a bump or hollow. Its steering offers no help.

Around the straight-ahead, the steering is not especially quick, so the car remains settled on motorways. Apply more lock, though, and it suddenly turns into the bend with excessive eagerness. Should this happen as a bump nudges you towards the apex, or if an overzealous throttle application introduces torque steer, it can swiftly become demanding. This is the Mini Cooper E with the JCW pack. The Cooper SE has more power, while John Cooper Works specification has more still. They are 184, 218 and 258bhp. With the JCW, things simply feel rather overwrought. Then again, the three-cylinder petrol Coopers were generally more entertaining than the most powerful four-cylinders.

For performance and suspension stiffness, the Renault sits neatly between the Fiat and Mini, yet on the road it possesses a harmony and tidiness of movement that neither rival matches. Its springs are taut like the Mini’s, but it has greater travel over major bumps and is far less easily knocked off course when a bump arrives while it is turning, braking or accelerating. Its damping is supple and mature. That encourages you to drive it hard and use its precise, mildly playful response to on-and-off throttle inputs to fine-tune the cornering line. It is a sophisticated car.

As expected, the tested cars’ battery capacities and performance increase with their prices. The Panda has 43.8kWh for 199 miles, taking 11.0secs to 62mph. Renault’s 52kWh provides 254 miles and 7.9secs – and it feels every bit as much quicker as those figures imply, with a useful burst of motorway performance as well. The Mini E is faster than expected for an entry-level car, reaching 62mph in 7.3secs. Need more speed? There is a choice. All have 49.2kWh for – depending on tyre size – up to 250 miles of range.

The Mini and R5 can both cruise comfortably at motorway overtaking speeds without creating much noise. That will, however, reduce their range. As the Panda’s power fades after around 60mph, you will probably cruise more slowly than in the other pair and come closer to its WLTP range.

The 5 is the best car here, justifying its price over the Fiat. The fact it’s better than the dearer Mini is also a big win

The reason for recommending the least expensive Panda is that it is plainly the bargain. The specification tested here costs the same and offers the same range as the cheapest small-battery R5. Yet the R5 is the better car. Meanwhile, the most affordable electric Mini costs £29,420 – roughly the price of the R5 in this test specification, with Techno trim, the larger battery and more power – but offers Panda-like range.

When people complain that electric cars cost too much, I always say, “Yes, but that’s because all cars are expensive”. Match the specification and power of a petrol Corsa to the R5 here and its list price is identical. The Panda is the exception. Pick Red trim and it is considerably less expensive than the others, while still making you happy.

The 5 is the strongest car of the three, earning its price premium over the Fiat. Beating the more expensive Mini is another major success. It is therefore the best of these three.