Tell me about your living with an X1/9 experiences
Discussion
I quite fancy one as my next "general competition" car. I've typically used Midgets in the past, and probably should again, but quite fancy a change.
Would be a later (mid 80's) 1500. I've looked at prices and for what I have to spend it would be mechanically and structurally sound, but maybe a little down at heal. Which is OK as they tend to end up scruffy after a year or two of rallying / autotesting / production car trialling etc.
Interested if you've experienced any difficulty of ownership rather than competitiveness. It will be competitive enough. I realise that it wouldn't be as easy to own as a Midget.
Will be kept inside in dehumidified building. Long periods of inactivity then go fast, then parked again.
Thanks
Would be a later (mid 80's) 1500. I've looked at prices and for what I have to spend it would be mechanically and structurally sound, but maybe a little down at heal. Which is OK as they tend to end up scruffy after a year or two of rallying / autotesting / production car trialling etc.
Interested if you've experienced any difficulty of ownership rather than competitiveness. It will be competitive enough. I realise that it wouldn't be as easy to own as a Midget.
Will be kept inside in dehumidified building. Long periods of inactivity then go fast, then parked again.
Thanks
RUST
The gearbox on the 5-speeds is a bit of a weak point (usually synchro on 2nd gear or reverse), and the gearchange itself can be a bit baulky (it's a rod linkage with a bonded rubber flexible connection... I think that getting the right amount of flex might be a bit hit and miss).
Apart from that, they're lovely little things. Not quick, though (but if you're used to Midgets...). The targa roof works well, and they're surprisingly practical and civilised, with boots front and rear
Being mid-engined (and skinny tyres) they handle nicely but don't take at all well to lifting off mid-bend and you can't hang the tail out like you can on a Midget.
Edited to add: what sort of competition are you thinking about? They were never very popular or successful in period, probably because they are (for their size and era) extremely heavy. They were just about the only open-top sportscar designed to pass a high-speed rollover crash test that the Americans were threatening in the early '70's, but which never materialised. As a result, the 1500 in standard form has a kerb weight of 920kg - a good couple of hundred kilos heavier than a Midget!
The gearbox on the 5-speeds is a bit of a weak point (usually synchro on 2nd gear or reverse), and the gearchange itself can be a bit baulky (it's a rod linkage with a bonded rubber flexible connection... I think that getting the right amount of flex might be a bit hit and miss).
Apart from that, they're lovely little things. Not quick, though (but if you're used to Midgets...). The targa roof works well, and they're surprisingly practical and civilised, with boots front and rear
Being mid-engined (and skinny tyres) they handle nicely but don't take at all well to lifting off mid-bend and you can't hang the tail out like you can on a Midget.
Edited to add: what sort of competition are you thinking about? They were never very popular or successful in period, probably because they are (for their size and era) extremely heavy. They were just about the only open-top sportscar designed to pass a high-speed rollover crash test that the Americans were threatening in the early '70's, but which never materialised. As a result, the 1500 in standard form has a kerb weight of 920kg - a good couple of hundred kilos heavier than a Midget!
Edited by Equus on Saturday 18th December 06:50
Equus said:
RUST
The gearbox on the 5-speeds is a bit of a weak point (usually synchro on 2nd gear or reverse), and the gearchange itself can be a bit baulky (it's a rod linkage with a bonded rubber flexible connection... I think that getting the right amount of flex might be a bit hit and miss).
Apart from that, they're lovely little things. Not quick, though (but if you're used to Midgets...). The targa roof works well, and they're surprisingly practical and civilised, with boots front and rear
Being mid-engined (and skinny tyres) they handle nicely but don't take at all well to lifting off mid-bend and you can't hang the tail out like you can on a Midget.
Edited to add: what sort of competition are you thinking about? They were never very popular or successful in period, probably because they are (for their size and era) extremely heavy. They were just about the only open-top sportscar designed to pass a high-speed rollover crash test that the Americans were threatening in the early '70's, but which never materialised. As a result, the 1500 in standard form has a kerb weight of 920kg - a good couple of hundred kilos heavier than a Midget!
Thanks - yes I'm aware of the weight issue. Though some of that can be offset by not having a roll cage (its not compulsory at the end of the motorsport pool I drink at, but I wouldn't compete in a Midget without one). The gearbox on the 5-speeds is a bit of a weak point (usually synchro on 2nd gear or reverse), and the gearchange itself can be a bit baulky (it's a rod linkage with a bonded rubber flexible connection... I think that getting the right amount of flex might be a bit hit and miss).
Apart from that, they're lovely little things. Not quick, though (but if you're used to Midgets...). The targa roof works well, and they're surprisingly practical and civilised, with boots front and rear
Being mid-engined (and skinny tyres) they handle nicely but don't take at all well to lifting off mid-bend and you can't hang the tail out like you can on a Midget.
Edited to add: what sort of competition are you thinking about? They were never very popular or successful in period, probably because they are (for their size and era) extremely heavy. They were just about the only open-top sportscar designed to pass a high-speed rollover crash test that the Americans were threatening in the early '70's, but which never materialised. As a result, the 1500 in standard form has a kerb weight of 920kg - a good couple of hundred kilos heavier than a Midget!
Edited by Equus on Saturday 18th December 06:50
I'd use if for road rallies, classic rallies (Clubmans', not stage), autotests, trialing etc. Possibly a bit of hillclimbing but I have another car for that.
ClaphamGT3 said:
Have you actually driven one?
I am not at all tall (6'1") and I just couldn't get comfortable in one. I have long legs (36" inside leg) and just couldn't get the seat far enough back
That's an interesting point.I am not at all tall (6'1") and I just couldn't get comfortable in one. I have long legs (36" inside leg) and just couldn't get the seat far enough back
I'm 6'4" with 34" inside leg and I fitted just fine - better than my MK3 3.0S Capri I was driving at the time.
I was driving an early 1500 which I think was on a '79 'T' plate and found the legroom and headroom much better than the post '82 Bertone cars.
ClaphamGT3 said:
Have you actually driven one?
I am not at all tall (6'1") and I just couldn't get comfortable in one. I have long legs (36" inside leg) and just couldn't get the seat far enough back
Had two, the first one early model 81 had better space and was great back in the 80's, the second an 88 in 2000 was rubbish. The 88 model was just too small for me being just 6' the roll hoop was at the correct height to remove the top of my head in a shunt. Noisy, poor brakes, not a lot of go, also was hard to use the footbrake as my legs hit the steering wheel which was somewhat dangerous, just shows how what in your 20's seems fun is actually not when you are older. Best thing is to take on out for a decent test drive and see if it floats your boat.I am not at all tall (6'1") and I just couldn't get comfortable in one. I have long legs (36" inside leg) and just couldn't get the seat far enough back
Mr2 's are a far far better car.
Edited by Export56 on Saturday 18th December 18:09
I've owned two at different times "way back yonder" - A bog standard car, and a modified Dallara wide body version.
As noted all ready, one of their biggest problems is weight - It's a heavy car, with a massive rollover structure built into the body shell, big heavy beams in the doors for side impact protection, and great big heavy US-spec bumpers fitted front and rear (quite a bit of weight can be saved by swapping the standard 1.5 bumpers to the earlier 1.3 bumpers).
In standard form:
The 1.5 litre engine develops 83 bhp @ 6,000rpm, and 87 lb.ft @ 3200rpm. Below 4,000rpm it feels pretty gutless (whilst things get a little better over 4,000rpm, it still doesn't feel like a power-house)
The gearbox suffers from weak synchromesh on all the gears, with 1st/2nd and 3rd being especially prone to failure - It is most definitely not suited to any sort of competition use!
The brakes are unassisted four wheel discs, which in principle should be pretty good, but in reality, they tend to go from barely slowing the car down, to locking up all four wheels, with very little in between.
Driving-wise, with a 0 to 100 kph (0 to 62mph) time of 11.1 seconds, off the line it feels pretty useless. Once on the move and (finally) up to speed, so long as you keep the momentum going through corners/bends, it's a nicely balanced car (one advantage of the low powered engine is, you can apply full power without getting into any trouble).
To keep the momentum going means keeping the revs above 4,000 rpm (something Italian cars love to do anyway), which can mean quite a lot of gear changing - With weak synchromeshes, this is not ideal.
The Dallara wide-body:
The wide bodied car was modified before I owned it, and the seller knew very little about what had been done to the car.
The carburetor and air cleaner had obviously been replaced, and in the (small) file that came with the car, there was a bill for an uprated camshaft.
Without being able to confirm what exactly had been done to the car, it felt "perkier" than the standard car (not "night and day" quicker, but definitely improved)
The gearbox was okay if you changed gear slowly, but you couldn't rush changes due to worn synchro's (unless you liked the sound of gear teeth graunching away!). I had planned to have the gearbox rebuilt at sometime, but as is the way of these things, I changed cars before I ever got to changing the gearbox.
The brakes were standard (as far as I could tell), but with the wider wheels/tyres front and rear, the car seemed to brake better than the standard car setup - Less prone to locking up.
The suspension was much stiffer than standard, and could be uncomfortable on rough roads. On a smooth road, combined with the wider wheels/tyres (235 wide 13" if I remember correctly), in the dry the car was like a limpet - You couldn't un-stick it at all.
On a soaking wet road though, the wide tyres could sit on top of deep puddles and make things "entertaining", to say the least.
In general:
There's a surprising amount of room in the cabin (I'm @ 6' 2" and fit in the car without issue), and they are easy to live with.
The throttle pedal feels very upright, and can be painful to use initially, but you adapt to it with regular driving.
The interior plastics feel cheap and fragile (I seem to recall the air vents feeling very flimsy).
They are incredibly well thought out when it comes to boot space. Even with the targa top stored under the lid, the front boot looses no space whatsoever!. And ...... You still have a reasonable sized boot sitting behind the engine, in it's own separate compartment.
As a car for going out for a drive on a sunny day, with the roof off, and nowhere to be in a major hurry, the Fiat X1/9 is a great little car.
As a car for motorsport activity? - Personally, I wouldn't even consider it: Under powered engine, weak gearbox, too heavy, and needing a lot of modification to be competitive.
Would I own another X1/9?: Yes, I think they're a great little car, and a proper: "baby Ferrari" - Which, having owned two X1/9's, and now owning a Ferrari 328 GTS, I feel qualified to say (there are some notable mechanical similarities between the Ferrari 328 GTS and the Fiat X1/9 )
As noted all ready, one of their biggest problems is weight - It's a heavy car, with a massive rollover structure built into the body shell, big heavy beams in the doors for side impact protection, and great big heavy US-spec bumpers fitted front and rear (quite a bit of weight can be saved by swapping the standard 1.5 bumpers to the earlier 1.3 bumpers).
In standard form:
The 1.5 litre engine develops 83 bhp @ 6,000rpm, and 87 lb.ft @ 3200rpm. Below 4,000rpm it feels pretty gutless (whilst things get a little better over 4,000rpm, it still doesn't feel like a power-house)
The gearbox suffers from weak synchromesh on all the gears, with 1st/2nd and 3rd being especially prone to failure - It is most definitely not suited to any sort of competition use!
The brakes are unassisted four wheel discs, which in principle should be pretty good, but in reality, they tend to go from barely slowing the car down, to locking up all four wheels, with very little in between.
Driving-wise, with a 0 to 100 kph (0 to 62mph) time of 11.1 seconds, off the line it feels pretty useless. Once on the move and (finally) up to speed, so long as you keep the momentum going through corners/bends, it's a nicely balanced car (one advantage of the low powered engine is, you can apply full power without getting into any trouble).
To keep the momentum going means keeping the revs above 4,000 rpm (something Italian cars love to do anyway), which can mean quite a lot of gear changing - With weak synchromeshes, this is not ideal.
The Dallara wide-body:
The wide bodied car was modified before I owned it, and the seller knew very little about what had been done to the car.
The carburetor and air cleaner had obviously been replaced, and in the (small) file that came with the car, there was a bill for an uprated camshaft.
Without being able to confirm what exactly had been done to the car, it felt "perkier" than the standard car (not "night and day" quicker, but definitely improved)
The gearbox was okay if you changed gear slowly, but you couldn't rush changes due to worn synchro's (unless you liked the sound of gear teeth graunching away!). I had planned to have the gearbox rebuilt at sometime, but as is the way of these things, I changed cars before I ever got to changing the gearbox.
The brakes were standard (as far as I could tell), but with the wider wheels/tyres front and rear, the car seemed to brake better than the standard car setup - Less prone to locking up.
The suspension was much stiffer than standard, and could be uncomfortable on rough roads. On a smooth road, combined with the wider wheels/tyres (235 wide 13" if I remember correctly), in the dry the car was like a limpet - You couldn't un-stick it at all.
On a soaking wet road though, the wide tyres could sit on top of deep puddles and make things "entertaining", to say the least.
In general:
There's a surprising amount of room in the cabin (I'm @ 6' 2" and fit in the car without issue), and they are easy to live with.
The throttle pedal feels very upright, and can be painful to use initially, but you adapt to it with regular driving.
The interior plastics feel cheap and fragile (I seem to recall the air vents feeling very flimsy).
They are incredibly well thought out when it comes to boot space. Even with the targa top stored under the lid, the front boot looses no space whatsoever!. And ...... You still have a reasonable sized boot sitting behind the engine, in it's own separate compartment.
As a car for going out for a drive on a sunny day, with the roof off, and nowhere to be in a major hurry, the Fiat X1/9 is a great little car.
As a car for motorsport activity? - Personally, I wouldn't even consider it: Under powered engine, weak gearbox, too heavy, and needing a lot of modification to be competitive.
Would I own another X1/9?: Yes, I think they're a great little car, and a proper: "baby Ferrari" - Which, having owned two X1/9's, and now owning a Ferrari 328 GTS, I feel qualified to say (there are some notable mechanical similarities between the Ferrari 328 GTS and the Fiat X1/9 )
ClaphamGT3 said:
Have you actually driven one?
I am not at all tall (6'1") and I just couldn't get comfortable in one. I have long legs (36" inside leg) and just couldn't get the seat far enough back
6' 1" and: "not tall" - Hillarious! I am not at all tall (6'1") and I just couldn't get comfortable in one. I have long legs (36" inside leg) and just couldn't get the seat far enough back
Average UK height for a man in the UK in 2021 is 5' 10"
Most people would say someone over 6' is tall.
over 6' 4" would be exceptionally tall.
If you're 6' 1" with a 36" inside leg, then I'd say your problem is less about your height, and more about your proportions.
I'm just under 6' 2", and people describe me as being tall.
My height is pretty much 50% body/50% legs (34" inside leg), and I fit in the X1/9 just fine (I would say though that I'm pretty much at the limit of comfortable in one)
People over simplify things when it comes to height and fitting in a car - They assume being over 6' tall, a person will not fit.
It's more complex than that though. You could have three people all 6' 2" but:
No.1's height is made up of 2/3rd's body and 1/3rd legs: Leg room okay/Headroom no good.
No. 2's height is made up of 1/2 body and 1/2 legs: Leg room okay/Headroom okay.
No.3's height is made up of 1/3rd body and 2/3rd's legs: Legroom no good/Headroom fine.
I briefly owned a 1500 gran finale. All the things people say about the handling and zingy engine are true. It's surprisingly easy to get to stuff for a mid engine car and the parts are cheap and available for an old Italian.
Interiors are very fragile on the gran finale.
Reason my ownership was a brief one was due to size. At 6ft I had the steering wheel rubbing my legs and the top of the windscreen at eye level.
Only other thing that bugged me was the boot and bonnet release being in the left hand side door shut. I understand why, but it was still annoying
Interiors are very fragile on the gran finale.
Reason my ownership was a brief one was due to size. At 6ft I had the steering wheel rubbing my legs and the top of the windscreen at eye level.
Only other thing that bugged me was the boot and bonnet release being in the left hand side door shut. I understand why, but it was still annoying
4rephill said:
As a car for going out for a drive on a sunny day, with the roof off, and nowhere to be in a major hurry, the Fiat X1/9 is a great little car.
As a car for motorsport activity? - Personally, I wouldn't even consider it: Under powered engine, weak gearbox, too heavy, and needing a lot of modification to be competitive.
I'd agree with this summary completely.As a car for motorsport activity? - Personally, I wouldn't even consider it: Under powered engine, weak gearbox, too heavy, and needing a lot of modification to be competitive.
If I was looking for a classic as a step up/alternative to an MG Midget for light competition use, I'd probably look at something like a Clan or Ginetta G15.
4rephill said:
6' 1" and: "not tall" - Hillarious!
Average UK height for a man in the UK in 2021 is 5' 10"
Most people would say someone over 6' is tall.
over 6' 4" would be exceptionally tall.
If you're 6' 1" with a 36" inside leg, then I'd say your problem is less about your height, and more about your proportions.
I'm just under 6' 2", and people describe me as being tall.
My height is pretty much 50% body/50% legs (34" inside leg), and I fit in the X1/9 just fine (I would say though that I'm pretty much at the limit of comfortable in one)
People over simplify things when it comes to height and fitting in a car - They assume being over 6' tall, a person will not fit.
It's more complex than that though. You could have three people all 6' 2" but:
No.1's height is made up of 2/3rd's body and 1/3rd legs: Leg room okay/Headroom no good.
No. 2's height is made up of 1/2 body and 1/2 legs: Leg room okay/Headroom okay.
No.3's height is made up of 1/3rd body and 2/3rd's legs: Legroom no good/Headroom fine.
As a doctor I feel duty bound to put out that fitting into a Fiat is the last thing anyone in groups 1 & 3 should worry about. Hilarious.Average UK height for a man in the UK in 2021 is 5' 10"
Most people would say someone over 6' is tall.
over 6' 4" would be exceptionally tall.
If you're 6' 1" with a 36" inside leg, then I'd say your problem is less about your height, and more about your proportions.
I'm just under 6' 2", and people describe me as being tall.
My height is pretty much 50% body/50% legs (34" inside leg), and I fit in the X1/9 just fine (I would say though that I'm pretty much at the limit of comfortable in one)
People over simplify things when it comes to height and fitting in a car - They assume being over 6' tall, a person will not fit.
It's more complex than that though. You could have three people all 6' 2" but:
No.1's height is made up of 2/3rd's body and 1/3rd legs: Leg room okay/Headroom no good.
No. 2's height is made up of 1/2 body and 1/2 legs: Leg room okay/Headroom okay.
No.3's height is made up of 1/3rd body and 2/3rd's legs: Legroom no good/Headroom fine.
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 19th December 08:44
Thanks for all the replies. Some are brilliantly comprehensive. As mentioned in the original post, an X1/9 would be competitive enough for the level of events I do, despite the weight. Classic (Clubman's) and road rallying it doesn't make much difference what you are driving and my experience is that being small is probably more of an advantage than power to weight ratio. For trialling people carry extra weight, toward the rear so that should be fine. Bigger autotests then maybe light weight would help, but they are my least favourite type of event. As mentioned i already have a hillclimb car, but the classes I'd look at for any X1/9 events have a handicap system anyway.
But, the useful info about weak gearboxes and the luke warm reports about ownership have helped me refocus on Midgets, which I probably should always have done.
Thanks again
But, the useful info about weak gearboxes and the luke warm reports about ownership have helped me refocus on Midgets, which I probably should always have done.
Thanks again
Discombobulate said:
4rephill said:
6' 1" and: "not tall" - Hillarious!
Average UK height for a man in the UK in 2021 is 5' 10"
Most people would say someone over 6' is tall.
over 6' 4" would be exceptionally tall.
If you're 6' 1" with a 36" inside leg, then I'd say your problem is less about your height, and more about your proportions.
I'm just under 6' 2", and people describe me as being tall.
My height is pretty much 50% body/50% legs (34" inside leg), and I fit in the X1/9 just fine (I would say though that I'm pretty much at the limit of comfortable in one)
People over simplify things when it comes to height and fitting in a car - They assume being over 6' tall, a person will not fit.
It's more complex than that though. You could have three people all 6' 2" but:
No.1's height is made up of 2/3rd's body and 1/3rd legs: Leg room okay/Headroom no good.
No. 2's height is made up of 1/2 body and 1/2 legs: Leg room okay/Headroom okay.
No.3's height is made up of 1/3rd body and 2/3rd's legs: Legroom no good/Headroom fine.
As a doctor I feel duty bound to put out that fitting into a Fiat is the last thing anyone in groups 1 & 3 should worry about. Hilarious.Average UK height for a man in the UK in 2021 is 5' 10"
Most people would say someone over 6' is tall.
over 6' 4" would be exceptionally tall.
If you're 6' 1" with a 36" inside leg, then I'd say your problem is less about your height, and more about your proportions.
I'm just under 6' 2", and people describe me as being tall.
My height is pretty much 50% body/50% legs (34" inside leg), and I fit in the X1/9 just fine (I would say though that I'm pretty much at the limit of comfortable in one)
People over simplify things when it comes to height and fitting in a car - They assume being over 6' tall, a person will not fit.
It's more complex than that though. You could have three people all 6' 2" but:
No.1's height is made up of 2/3rd's body and 1/3rd legs: Leg room okay/Headroom no good.
No. 2's height is made up of 1/2 body and 1/2 legs: Leg room okay/Headroom okay.
No.3's height is made up of 1/3rd body and 2/3rd's legs: Legroom no good/Headroom fine.
Edited by Discombobulate on Sunday 19th December 08:44
His height ratio was pretty much 2/3rd's body, to 1/3rd legs.
If we walked side by side, our heads would be almost level, but his hips would be a lot lower than mine (which did look a bit weird)
He never had legroom problems in cars, but sometimes had headroom problems.
As a Doctor, I'm amazed that with all of your training, you've never noticed that people's height ratio is not uniform/standard, and that some people have longer legs, and some people have longer torso's, for the same overall height!
Gassing Station | Classic Cars and Yesterday's Heroes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff