dcioccarelli
Dominic Cioccarelli
My 2c
Whilst I'd agree with Jim that this discussion should not devolve into anything nasty, I feel that a debate as to the merits of radical modifications to our cars (and which modifications are deemed ok) is reasonable.
I'll start by saying that when it comes to my Fiat I come from from a very purist perspective. In my opinion, a good, period correct, unmolested (or sympathetically restored) X1/9 will be more valuable in 20 years than one with any engine transplant or body modifications. People feel free to do anything they like with X1/9s because they are cheap (and don't get me wrong: this is not a bad thing). But as they become rarer (particularly ones that are relatively original) then the equation starts to change significantly.
With respect to the comments about the reliability of the Fiat mechanical components: I've owned my X1/9 since it had 20,000 KMs. It now had 220,000 KMs. I did have to rebuild the gearbox at 200,000 KMs, but that was my fault as I neglected a gearbox leak and the main bearing failed.
Other than that, it was just regular oil changes and typical problems at typical intervals (tie rod ends, wheel bearings, lower control arm ball joint, etc.). The Lampredi SOHC engine is a very solid design and has proven to be extremely reliable in a whole range of Fiats. I've seen many Unos with several hundred thousand KMs.
In terms of what sort of power can be extracted from this engine, we must compare apples with apples. I'd cite two examples:
Referring to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_128_SOHC_engine#Engine_specification
... you can see that the MK1 Punto GT was able to extract 136 BHP form the engine with a pretty mild Turbo set-up in what I would call a reliable configuration. The most extreme appication of the engine would be Graversen's X1/9 in Denmark who has been able to achieve 350 BHP (go to the 3 minute mark on this video). That said, this is not an every day application.
But here is the case in point: this is an engine designed in the late 60's. Is there any Honda designed engine, designed in the same period, that was used up until 2010 and was able to get 136 BHP in factory guise?
If we want to compare a Honda engine with a "modern" Fiat equivalent, I would propose the engine used in the new Alfa 4C as a benchmark. This is simply an evolution of the Fiat "multi air" system which is an ingenious system that uses a hydraulic intake system to implement a cam profile that is infinitely adjustable. This makes the Honda VTEC system (which has simply 2 cam profiles) look prehistoric.
This engine is used in pretty mundane Fiats like the MiTo and the 500 but is also used in the Alfa 4C, which is why I'd see this as the modern successor to an X1/9: standard Fiat mechanicals in an exceptional chassis.
In the 4C, the engine delivers 240 PS and powers the car to 100 KP/h in 4.5 seconds (in a car weighing only slightly less than an X1/9).
So if we want to compare apples with apples, I still feel that an X1/9 can remain a FIAT X1/9 and still trump Japanese engineering...
Dom.
Whilst I'd agree with Jim that this discussion should not devolve into anything nasty, I feel that a debate as to the merits of radical modifications to our cars (and which modifications are deemed ok) is reasonable.
I'll start by saying that when it comes to my Fiat I come from from a very purist perspective. In my opinion, a good, period correct, unmolested (or sympathetically restored) X1/9 will be more valuable in 20 years than one with any engine transplant or body modifications. People feel free to do anything they like with X1/9s because they are cheap (and don't get me wrong: this is not a bad thing). But as they become rarer (particularly ones that are relatively original) then the equation starts to change significantly.
With respect to the comments about the reliability of the Fiat mechanical components: I've owned my X1/9 since it had 20,000 KMs. It now had 220,000 KMs. I did have to rebuild the gearbox at 200,000 KMs, but that was my fault as I neglected a gearbox leak and the main bearing failed.
Other than that, it was just regular oil changes and typical problems at typical intervals (tie rod ends, wheel bearings, lower control arm ball joint, etc.). The Lampredi SOHC engine is a very solid design and has proven to be extremely reliable in a whole range of Fiats. I've seen many Unos with several hundred thousand KMs.
In terms of what sort of power can be extracted from this engine, we must compare apples with apples. I'd cite two examples:
Referring to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_128_SOHC_engine#Engine_specification
... you can see that the MK1 Punto GT was able to extract 136 BHP form the engine with a pretty mild Turbo set-up in what I would call a reliable configuration. The most extreme appication of the engine would be Graversen's X1/9 in Denmark who has been able to achieve 350 BHP (go to the 3 minute mark on this video). That said, this is not an every day application.
But here is the case in point: this is an engine designed in the late 60's. Is there any Honda designed engine, designed in the same period, that was used up until 2010 and was able to get 136 BHP in factory guise?
If we want to compare a Honda engine with a "modern" Fiat equivalent, I would propose the engine used in the new Alfa 4C as a benchmark. This is simply an evolution of the Fiat "multi air" system which is an ingenious system that uses a hydraulic intake system to implement a cam profile that is infinitely adjustable. This makes the Honda VTEC system (which has simply 2 cam profiles) look prehistoric.
This engine is used in pretty mundane Fiats like the MiTo and the 500 but is also used in the Alfa 4C, which is why I'd see this as the modern successor to an X1/9: standard Fiat mechanicals in an exceptional chassis.
In the 4C, the engine delivers 240 PS and powers the car to 100 KP/h in 4.5 seconds (in a car weighing only slightly less than an X1/9).
So if we want to compare apples with apples, I still feel that an X1/9 can remain a FIAT X1/9 and still trump Japanese engineering...
Dom.