Some X History From Phil Ward's Book

[Rupunzell]

There has been much discussion, debate and dis-agreement over the new FIAT roadster. I think it would be good to share this chapter from Phil Ward's book on the X. It gives some perspective on what happened and how the X came into production. The seeds of the X's future are also in it's beginnings. FIAT and Bertone's disagreement over this design started from day one. IMO, based what I heard (from friends that visited Bertone and well connected with Abarth) and observed that happened between Mr. Agnelli and Mr. Bertone, they had a "falling out" which resulted in end of production for the X. I suspect Mr. Bertone wanted to update the design of the X so Bertone could continue to build a car of their own, Mr. Agnelli did not agree and the X died in this process.

Bertone as a coach builder under FIAT's command was limited to what they could do with the X chassis, even if they built it and designed a good part of this chassis. Bertone was simply not in a position to take this chassis into competitive racing for promotion.
FIAT never really supported any Bertone effort to race promo the X in the US market, even if this could have dramatically changed the public image of the X in the US market.

Just Imagine if FIAT put together a group of Abarth racer folks and promoted a serious X1/9 race car effort and promoted a race series like Spec Miata back in the day by offered go-fast parts over the FIAT parts counter on demand.

Regardless, all this is history today, and we are left with a rather unique inexpensive small mid-engine car that is a quirk of Italian sports car history. We should all simply appreciate what Bertone, FIAT and all the designers, engineers, production folks and many other individuals involved that made the X1/9 possible.

I do believe another car like this is not very likely in the near future due to how much the automotive world and the world in general has changed since the times when the X was done and built.

Keep in mind the other mid-engine car that received similar mis-treatment was the Lancia MonteCarlo. It was equally neglected and mis-treated by FIAT, both have much designed in capabilities that are usually never explored, appreciated or realized by their owners. I do believe FIAT had too many mid-engine cars under one roof at the time and they had to be market separated in one way or another. There is no marketing sense to offer a mid-engine car that out performs a Ferrari for a fraction of the cost, specially when they are all in the family. each had be put and held in it's place. Another reason why the X1/9 and MonteCarlo (too much like a Ferrari Dino) was never allowed to be fully developed for market consumption.

 

[User1]

thank you

Yep, I have that book somewhere, been a while since I sat and read it again though (too long maybe)

Regardless, all this is history today, and we are left with a rather unique inexpensive small mid-engine car that is a quirk of Italian sports car history. We should all simply appreciate what Bertone, FIAT and all the designers, engineers, production folks and many other individuals involved that made the X1/9 possible.

I do believe another car like this is not very likely in the near future due to how much the automotive world and the world in general has changed

I have to agree with you there, which just makes it all the more important to try to keep as many of these alive (and driveable) as we can

 

[austindad]

Ironic and illustrative..

of the law of unintended consequences that it was primarily the ESV regulations that tipped the balance in favor of the mid-engine-targa top design. Here is where the designer turned a restriction into an opportunity to produce something unique. Also it may explain why in the absence of follow through by the Feds on the convertible ban that it took so long for other companies (Toyota and Pontiac) to get interested in the mid-engine alternative.
Ing. Puelo(?) should definitely be in our pantheon of heros for adopting the Stratos structural scheme. Of allthe X qualities it is its rigid structure that impresses me the most.

 

[Jim W]

Very True...

"I do believe another car like this is not very likely in the near future due to how much the automotive world and the world in general has changed since the times when the X was done and built."

Unfortunately this is quite true... between changes in the economies of manufacturing and the burdens of government regulation, it is unlikely that we will see relatively low volume, *affordable* special interest cars such as the X in the future unless they are are heavily leveraged off a high volume package intended for the masses.

I don't believe we will see another "golden era" for sports cars as it existed in the '50s and '60s... So buy a nice example from that period and drive it as long as you can...

 

[Jimbro1000]

Strangely just this morning I was reading an interview with Al Melling - a man in the industry who has been there, done it worn the T-shirt and sold it on for millions.

He is first and foremost an engine designer but has his fingers in many pies - at the moment his interest lies with his own car design, the Wildcat which he is trying to push into production.

His approach to the problem is one that mimics car design from the pre-70s monocoque era. He has designed a chassis that can have pretty much any body design fitted and more importantly pretty much any engine. He of course touts his own engine for this but accepts that you could use anything from a humble Ford V6 like I have in my Explorer upto the monstrous Mercedes V12.

Even with all the bespoke work this method of engineering has entailed he estimates the cost as low as £40,000 for such a car. To put that in context that is basically in line with what "cheap" sportscars cost 30 years ago, taking inflation into account. On the downside, cars have not increased in market value in accordance with inflation so it still isn't cheap. £30,000 would be about right but what it does prove is that there is still a way to achieve such things despite the huge landscape changes in the motor industry.

If anyone is interested the interview is here: http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/doc.asp?c=52&i=19281

 

[DuaneEstill]

That is...

A fascinating read. I've never read that book, but it does corroborate the traditional story (also reported numerous places by W. Goodfellow) that Fiat's management told Bertone that he 'just wanted to build a poor man's Miura." It makes a little more sense now why they would say that, given the rather significant differences in the viewpoints represented, they would have seen the advantages of a 'poor man's Miura' (but people still call it a baby Ferrari) accruing more benefit to Bertone than to them; and this at the risk of conflicting with their rather regimented model structure and placement. As a side note to this regimentation, Italian car companies used type or "tipo" to designate their models.

I think the best feasible possibility would have been to make the Stratos move with the X1/9. They obviously treated the Stratos as a full blown sports car. No other way would Fiat have alowed Lancia to get their hands on the Ferrari 2.4 liter V6 and to do that elaborate, world-beating, chassis work on it. If they had done that, the X1/9 would not have been the 'baby Stratos'.....the Stratos and the X1/9 would have merely been highly comparable, or else the Stratos never would have even existed. I beleive exactly the same thing applies to the Beta Monte Carlo, it would have been fantastic, and already had the room, for the Ferari V6. But moreover, the Stratos and Monte Carlo are essentially alternative contemporary interpretations right along side the X1/9, and that, is fascinating. Fiat with their modest and regimented, yet cult-inspiring X, Lancia with the uber alles Stratos, and Lancia ,too, with the elegant, great handling, yet hopelessly underpowered Beta Monte Carlo. All three are great cars with astoundingly great potential.

It shows too that the X1/9 development came during the time of what was possibly Nuccio Bertone's greatest market success, the Miura, soon to be followed by the Countache, then followed by the Ferrari 308 GT4. Bertone has never had that level of success in the marketplace again, even now, it is a mere shell of it's former self. One of the finest car design houses in the world.

 

[austindad]

Sad but true...

if the on again off again fortunes of ther MR2 are any indication.

Never know though, maybe the push for fuel efficiency and a new generation of drivers and designers will spawn a truly lightweight platform that can suppot a sport runabout for essentialy one person and occasional passenger (isn't that what an X is?)
I think the weight issue more than any other is what makes true sports cars hard to pull off these days. Once a car gets to 3000# it is pretty difficult to make it do what a 2000# car could do 40 years ago. Maybe composites will eventually show some economy of scale and get into mainstream manufacturing.

 

[bb4re]

Just out of curiosity, I just went outside and checked...

...the weight of my Jaguar XJS coupe. I could not believe it weighs 5500 lbs. I always thought my X was a heavy car. The X feels safer to me, though. It is almost like a glove-like fit. The X just "feels right". It is certainly a special car.

 

[austindad]

Remember when OJ

tried on the glove? Unfortunately that is how the X fits me-but I don't care, it is worth every contortion to get comfortable. I am looking forward to shrinking with age for this reason Hoping to get down to good fighting height like Herzel!:excited: