X1/9 style/design custom modifications

Dr.Jeff said:
I agree. To me 15" wheels still allow for enough tire sidewall to fulfill that preference, although that puts their overall circumference slightly greater than the stock tires. However I consider that to be a good thing as it improves the final drive ratio for a street driven X. I don't worry about any effect that has on speedo accuracy, especially since it was not accurate to begin with. :D Also 15" wheels/tires allows the fender well openings to be 'filled', which cannot be achieved with smaller ones. This, combined with some added width and a bit of lowering, achieves the flush fit Karl described. ;)
Click to expand...
If you want to fill the wheel wells and have significant sidewall, 185/70-13 does a good job of it. I used them before there were 60 series choices available. The CN36 tires I used raised the height about 0.3" over the 145/82-13 XAS tires that came with the car. The slight decrease in numerical gear ratio was actually an improvement and I find that with the 185/60-13 tires the numerical gear ratio is a bit much.
 
I think the X being a 70s design is more suited to a simpler overall look. The entire reason I bought an X over an AW11 MR2 was because the X looks like a sleek Italian sportscar and the AW11 looks like a robot. Which I actually also like, but the X's aesthetic is more romantic and less attainable feeling that the boxy MR2. If you want something that has box flares and is more harshly angled, there are dozens of cars from the 80s that achieve that look, but very few of them have the simple flair of the X.
The downward sloping trunk of the X is maybe a little soft in the side profile view, but it gives that main highlight line a strong continuation of curvature down to the nose. I think if you raise the rear decklid, you will find the car looks a bit jacked up in the air from the rear view. The sloping rear decklid makes the car look like it's squatting a bit more from the rear perspective, which to me makes it feel like it's hunkered down and putting power down better.

I think putting box flares and a stub nose on the X sort of ruins all the simple beauty of the car, as cool as box flares and big chunky splitters are on other cars. The red X posted that has the long wheel base looks like a stack of post-it notes with the X's cockpit glued on top.
When it comes to cars (or anything) penned by extremely good designers (like Gandini), it's best to subtly emphasize the existing aesthetic, rather than cover it up with a totally different vibe. Personally, with a car like the X, the ethos is simplicity, fun, and connected Italian motoring. So from that standpoint, I want the car to feel simple and nimble. The body kits make it feel chunky and decorative to me. The original design is purposeful and minimal. I think small details make or break an aesthetically pleasing X build. Think Singer instead of Liberty Walk. For mine I will be spending the most time on the exterior paint color, unique/subtle interior materials/finishes and color palettes, and very minor exterior mods.
It might sound weird but I wouldn't want all the extra fluff of a bodykit on my X. I want to see things like the tire tread and not have it covered by a big front lip. I don't want a non-functional wing on the rear that interrupts the original lines. Stuff like that.
BUT ALL THAT BEING SAID... it is YOUR car and I completely understand people's preferences when it comes to design aesthetics. I love a lot of the mods I just mentioned on other cars and I've done my fair share of "ruining" vehicles for "purists", because I had a different vision for the design. So do what you want! I love when people execute their own idea properly and come up with a totally unique vision for their car.
 
visualistics said:
I think the X being a 70s design is more suited to a simpler overall look. The entire reason I bought an X over an AW11 MR2 was because the X looks like a sleek Italian sportscar and the AW11 looks like a robot. Which I actually also like, but the X's aesthetic is more romantic and less attainable feeling that the boxy MR2. If you want something that has box flares and is more harshly angled, there are dozens of cars from the 80s that achieve that look, but very few of them have the simple flair of the X.
The downward sloping trunk of the X is maybe a little soft in the side profile view, but it gives that main highlight line a strong continuation of curvature down to the nose. I think if you raise the rear decklid, you will find the car looks a bit jacked up in the air from the rear view. The sloping rear decklid makes the car look like it's squatting a bit more from the rear perspective, which to me makes it feel like it's hunkered down and putting power down better.

I think putting box flares and a stub nose on the X sort of ruins all the simple beauty of the car, as cool as box flares and big chunky splitters are on other cars. The red X posted that has the long wheel base looks like a stack of post-it notes with the X's cockpit glued on top.
When it comes to cars (or anything) penned by extremely good designers (like Gandini), it's best to subtly emphasize the existing aesthetic, rather than cover it up with a totally different vibe. Personally, with a car like the X, the ethos is simplicity, fun, and connected Italian motoring. So from that standpoint, I want the car to feel simple and nimble. The body kits make it feel chunky and decorative to me. The original design is purposeful and minimal. I think small details make or break an aesthetically pleasing X build. Think Singer instead of Liberty Walk. For mine I will be spending the most time on the exterior paint color, unique/subtle interior materials/finishes and color palettes, and very minor exterior mods.
It might sound weird but I wouldn't want all the extra fluff of a bodykit on my X. I want to see things like the tire tread and not have it covered by a big front lip. I don't want a non-functional wing on the rear that interrupts the original lines. Stuff like that.
BUT ALL THAT BEING SAID... it is YOUR car and I completely understand people's preferences when it comes to design aesthetics. I love a lot of the mods I just mentioned on other cars and I've done my fair share of "ruining" vehicles for "purists", because I had a different vision for the design. So do what you want! I love when people execute their own idea properly and come up with a totally unique vision for their car.
Click to expand...
Well stated.

Some time ago I opened a discussion somewhere on Xweb (perhaps earlier in this thread) about what defines "stock" vs "modified" vs "fully customized". Obviously in reality there is a full continuum all along that spectrum, with no real definition points set anywhere. Over the decades and countless builds I think I've pretty much touched every aspect of that continuum. And I agree, some vehicles tend to lend themselves more to one end of the spectrum or the other. However I also think every vehicle can be made to fit anywhere along it if done correctly. For example in the case of the X1/9 I feel it can be well styled as either a very mild modified-stock design, or a fully customized-racer design. And both look great.

As for a totally stock, originally styled, completely untouched design as it came off the assembly line, I have to say there hasn't been a vehicle ever made that couldn't benefit from some alterations. But that's not to say the original designer got it wrong; it is the changes that take place after his initial design - to fulfill safety, regulation, production, and cost requirements - that ruined the design as it was first intended. So at the very least the production model needs to be modified to remove those compromises and more closely match the intended styling of the designer. In that respect, in my opinion, every car will benefit from at least some customization. Personally I like to take it at least one step further and add my own "personalization" touches as well....having a stock car like everyone else is boring. But as @visualistics said, everyone has their individual preferences and should do as they wish to their own vehicle. :)

By the way, I was wondering when someone would get around to using the word "ethos" in this thread. :p
 
Dr.Jeff said:
Well stated.

Some time ago I opened a discussion somewhere on Xweb (perhaps earlier in this thread) about what defines "stock" vs "modified" vs "fully customized". Obviously in reality there is a full continuum all along that spectrum, with no real definition points set anywhere. Over the decades and countless builds I think I've pretty much touched every aspect of that continuum. And I agree, some vehicles tend to lend themselves more to one end of the spectrum or the other. However I also think every vehicle can be made to fit anywhere along it if done correctly. For example in the case of the X1/9 I feel it can be well styled as either a very mild modified-stock design, or a fully customized-racer design. And both look great.

As for a totally stock, originally styled, completely untouched design as it came off the assembly line, I have to say there hasn't been a vehicle ever made that couldn't benefit from some alterations. But that's not to say the original designer got it wrong; it is the changes that take place after his initial design - to fulfill safety, regulation, production, and cost requirements - that ruined the design as it was first intended. So at the very least the production model needs to be modified to remove those compromises and more closely match the intended styling of the designer. In that respect, in my opinion, every car will benefit from at least some customization. Personally I like to take it at least one step further and add my own "personalization" touches as well....having a stock car like everyone else is boring. But as @visualistics said, everyone has their individual preferences and should do as they wish to their own vehicle. :)

By the way, I was wondering when someone would get around to using the word "ethos" in this thread. :p
Click to expand...
Gestalt has to be not far behind.
 
Remember with all this talk of style and wheel size etc. The best looking non-stock X is [in my opinion] the Dallara. Yes, its a pure race variant but it remains beautiful and has 13 inch wheels. The wheel arch centres move and the car is lowered.

1702343090327.jpeg
 
dirtywaterfab said:
Has this render been posted? Am I late to the party?

View attachment 79551

View attachment 79549

View attachment 79550
Click to expand...
That's sick, though the rear fender isn't integrated very well. I get it is just render, but the inlets on the rear fender and the buttress on the roll hoop don't seem to correlate to anything else on the car and don't look particularly considered.
This style of car is cool but IMHO it doesn't fit the X. But if someone made this for real I would love to take a look.
 
Its a lazy render - more copy/paste/drag than design. Literally drag the guards [fenders] out. Which is why the result does not look integrated - it isn't. No effort on the details. Look at the rear - somebody hold my hair...
 
Steve Thomas said:
Literally drag the guards [fenders] out.
Click to expand...
I actually like this aspect - the extrusion presrves all the original design features, as opposed to the Dallara wide body kit where all these features are lost. The chin spoiler should be better integrated though I like the deep splitter look. I've always liked this type of bullet rear view mirror, and their placement is cool. I hope to make front fenders very similar to these except I would want to preserve the original width of the nose and have the flares get progressively wider as they approach the wheel arch.

The rear quarters are a mess, IMHO. too much going on, poorly integrated as @visualistics noted, and it also really emphasizes the downward slope of the rear deck which I really dislike, though the original design features are once again preserved via extrusion. The rear deck spoiler is a cool idea but with everything else going on it could be a bolder. A Stratos-style spoiler, maybe?

And yes, it's an incomplete render so no cooling/air flow features.

Somewhat similar, I'm guessing everyone has seen this LS-swapped 914? The use of rod ends/turnbuckles to stabilize the extreme rear of the flares is interesting, as is the "step" between the front and rear flares.

1702512063084.jpeg


1702512137936.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Depending on the specific car, I also like fenders that have been widened by moving the entire shape outward like that. It was more common on some purpose built race cars back in the day, but I've seen some more recent builds on vintage cars that pulled it off nicely. I think this technique may have originated as a easier method to widen the fenders than making custom flares from scratch.

The 914 styling is remessent of some racing 911s. Like the one Steve showed back in post #229:

7110.png


Back when we were discussing fender flares there was several examples posted with various takes on this theme.
 
Dr.Jeff said:
also like fenders that have been widened by moving the entire shape outward like that
Click to expand...
yeah, but if you look closely, they only appear to in pure side elevation. Simple, silhouette class rules. But actually the new guards are properly shaped to match the retained bodywork - unlike in this X parody.
 
This example of a BMW did it a little differently, pulling out part of the fender rather than the entire panel. The separation at the top of the pulled section is at a stock body line. I think the nose end of the front fender is blended more like @dirtywaterfab described in post #275; "I hope to make front fenders very similar to these except I would want to preserve the original width of the nose and have the flares get progressively wider as they approach the wheel arch."
Monterey 09 136 - Copy.JPG
 
Steve Thomas said:
yeah, but if you look closely, they only appear to in pure side elevation. Simple, silhouette class rules. But actually the new guards are properly shaped to match the retained bodywork - unlike in this X parody.
Click to expand...
I view the illustrated X1/9 as nothing more than a quick "photoshop" type cut-and-paste for the fun of it. Frankly that is more than I am capable of doing on a computer. Therefore I don't take the details too seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top