The X1/9's purpose in life, just an observation

Dr.Jeff

True Classic
Preface: no real relevance to be found here, just sharing thoughts.....

I find it interesting how different owners view the purpose or intended utilization of their X's. Having owned countless vintage or classic vehicles of all types, to me they are all "hobby cars". Something for occasional enjoyment, a break from "normal" driving, and never my daily driver. Or what I might refer to as my "fourth car"; my 'first' one being the daily commuter, the "second" being another 'back up' for the first when it is being serviced, the "third" is something utilitarian such as a pickup truck, and finally the "fourth" (of which there are usually several) is strictly for fun....a "toy". That means mainly short drives along the coast on a nice afternoon, and no distance travel. [I suppose I also have a "fifth" category of recreational vehicles - offroad, race, travel, etc]. But I realize other owners have very different purposes for their X's.

Most of the vintage cars I've had were at least 40 or more years old, and most have had roughly 60 to 70,000 verifiable miles on them. Looking at service records it appears the majority of those miles were accumulated in the first few years from new. I suppose they were considered "modern" reliable cars at the time and the newness of them enticed the proud owner to drive them more. But as issues develop and the cars become less reliable they tend to get pushed aside. Often sitting unused for decades at a time. So very few miles are acquired as the years pass. And when viewed as I do, for occasional use only, they will still collect very little mileage over a period of many years to come.

A recent comment in another thread brought this to mind. It was in reference to how long a particular part may last on their X. While certain items will deteriorate over time regardless of the amount of use, most parts are primarily 'wear' dependant - the less they get used the longer they last. Therefore on my cars it is reasonable to assume many things can last the life of the car, at least as far as my lifetime matters. When you consider that many components had lasted for 40 years and 60,000 miles already, and the car will get used even less in the future, then that assumption seems valid.

Aside from those that use their X as a daily driver or long distance vacation traveler, I'm sure the same is true for a lot of X owners. Yet we (including myself) often like to replace everything with all new parts as we go through the vehicle. Minor repairs usually grow into major restorations. Simple services become complete overhauls. It's the adage, "while I'm in there I might as well...". In essence I suppose it might be considered a waste of money (or materials if viewed ecologically) to do so, considering it isn't necessary. But it seems to give a certain satisfaction to know everything is fresh and new.

The extreme version of this is the companies that are taking vintage cars and restoring them with all modern mechanicals and upgraded materials and engineering. Effectively turning them into new "modern" cars that look old. According to a recent article from SEMA this is becoming a rapidly growing trend in the automotive market. And the prices for these cars are staggering, with waiting lists to buy them. I'm not sure the X1/9 will make that list of such cars, but on a individual basis it could be a candidate. So long as it is realized going in that you will never recoup even a small percentage of your investment. And that may be the difference why those companies choose certain models over others for these remakes, there is more value to be had. The article included a list of some of the more popular models for this; Porsche, Jaguar, Mercedes, etc.

In a related article a new law was discussed, allowing companies like the ones described above to sell their vehicles as "newly" manufactured. And that opens the door to remake vehicles from all new materials, like aftermarket reproduction bodies. Now a car can be created from scratch and sold as a new car, not a kit car or restored old car or remanufactured or such. That may not sound like a big difference but in legal terms it is.

So is there a market for a "new" X1/9, made from all new components with all modern mechanicals and materials? Think full carbon fiber body over a 300 HP engine and performance suspension/brakes, all bespoke and new. Or would that be a failed business due to the resultant selling price?
 
I would use the stock body, no carbon fiber and go a more resto mod route. $70,000 modern X will have limited market.
My X is a true recreational vehicle, more in line with a Meyers Manx vision. It has no practical aspects but gives me a giant grin when I drive it. As close to getting back into motorcycles as I'll ever get, according to the wife.
 
Lots of companies have tried this route, and mainly without much success. Enthusiasts for a particular model of car/motorbike are very biased to ignore the failings, over appreciate the plus points and positively enjoy the challenges of keeping it on the road. Major manufacturers have to create a car for the widest customer base in any particular market sector to have a chance to recoup there investment. Recreating/remanufacturing a model of car risks howls of derision (and so the initial publicity available to the wider customer base ) from the die hard enthusiast (and not enough of them, even of they liked the car, to buy it in sufficient numbers) as it isn't 'original enough', and not appeal to a new audience as it is too old fashion, badly built, expensive, etc etc. Jensen are a good example of a company that several attempts have been made over the years to resurrect with much of the above results.
 
Lots of companies have tried this route, and mainly without much success. Enthusiasts for a particular model of car/motorbike are very biased to ignore the failings, over appreciate the plus points and positively enjoy the challenges of keeping it on the road. Major manufacturers have to create a car for the widest customer base in any particular market sector to have a chance to recoup there investment. Recreating/remanufacturing a model of car risks howls of derision (and so the initial publicity available to the wider customer base ) from the die hard enthusiast (and not enough of them, even of they liked the car, to buy it in sufficient numbers) as it isn't 'original enough', and not appeal to a new audience as it is too old fashion, badly built, expensive, etc etc. Jensen are a good example of a company that several attempts have been made over the years to resurrect with much of the above results.
Exactly. In fact I only know of a couple of companies that have been successful at this so far. For example "Singer" for old Porsche 911's, or "Eagle" for old E-type Jag's. But apparently the new law (in the US) allows them to include what used to be called "kit cars" (think things like the Cobra replicas) as new production cars. Another example is the GTO Engineering reproduction Ferrari 250. This will allow them to be sold more easily without all the legal hoops to jump through (for the buyers). I'm not sure how much it will improve the market, but there seems to be quite a bit of buzz about it in the industry. And given the selling prices they won't have to find a ton of buyers to make a lot of money.
 
Exactly. In fact I only know of a couple of companies that have been successful at this so far. For example "Singer" for old Porsche 911's, or "Eagle" for old E-type Jag's. But apparently the new law (in the US) allows them to include what used to be called "kit cars" (think things like the Cobra replicas) as new production cars. Another example is the GTO Engineering reproduction Ferrari 250. This will allow them to be sold more easily without all the legal hoops to jump through (for the buyers). I'm not sure how much it will improve the market, but there seems to be quite a bit of buzz about it in the industry. And given the selling prices they won't have to find a ton of buyers to make a lot of money.

As "new" production cars would they be required to meet current safety and emissions requirements?
Plus, it hasn't happened yet but we all might have to meet California (Los Angeles) emission rules fairly soon, that could be a problem for kit/new production cars.
 
As "new" production cars would they be required to meet current safety and emissions requirements?
Plus, it hasn't happened yet but we all might have to meet California (Los Angeles) emission rules fairly soon, that could be a problem for kit/new production cars.
No, there's a loophole with these vehicles. They are manufactured under a specified number so are exempt from some of the safety requirements (e.g. crash testing, etc). The engines used still have to meet certain emissions requirements, but there are options for that as well. So you can see why this is kind of a big deal in the automotive enthusiasts world, and why certain people are willing to pay so much to have them.
 
Preface: no real relevance to be found here, just sharing thoughts.....

I find it interesting how different owners view the purpose or intended utilization of their X's. Having owned countless vintage or classic vehicles of all types, to me they are all "hobby cars". Something for occasional enjoyment, a break from "normal" driving, and never my daily driver. Or what I might refer to as my "fourth car"; my 'first' one being the daily commuter, the "second" being another 'back up' for the first when it is being serviced, the "third" is something utilitarian such as a pickup truck, and finally the "fourth" (of which there are usually several) is strictly for fun....a "toy". That means mainly short drives along the coast on a nice afternoon, and no distance travel. [I suppose I also have a "fifth" category of recreational vehicles - offroad, race, travel, etc]. But I realize other owners have very different purposes for their X's.

Most of the vintage cars I've had were at least 40 or more years old, and most have had roughly 60 to 70,000 verifiable miles on them. Looking at service records it appears the majority of those miles were accumulated in the first few years from new. I suppose they were considered "modern" reliable cars at the time and the newness of them enticed the proud owner to drive them more. But as issues develop and the cars become less reliable they tend to get pushed aside. Often sitting unused for decades at a time. So very few miles are acquired as the years pass. And when viewed as I do, for occasional use only, they will still collect very little mileage over a period of many years to come.

A recent comment in another thread brought this to mind. It was in reference to how long a particular part may last on their X. While certain items will deteriorate over time regardless of the amount of use, most parts are primarily 'wear' dependant - the less they get used the longer they last. Therefore on my cars it is reasonable to assume many things can last the life of the car, at least as far as my lifetime matters. When you consider that many components had lasted for 40 years and 60,000 miles already, and the car will get used even less in the future, then that assumption seems valid.

Aside from those that use their X as a daily driver or long distance vacation traveler, I'm sure the same is true for a lot of X owners. Yet we (including myself) often like to replace everything with all new parts as we go through the vehicle. Minor repairs usually grow into major restorations. Simple services become complete overhauls. It's the adage, "while I'm in there I might as well...". In essence I suppose it might be considered a waste of money (or materials if viewed ecologically) to do so, considering it isn't necessary. But it seems to give a certain satisfaction to know everything is fresh and new.

The extreme version of this is the companies that are taking vintage cars and restoring them with all modern mechanicals and upgraded materials and engineering. Effectively turning them into new "modern" cars that look old. According to a recent article from SEMA this is becoming a rapidly growing trend in the automotive market. And the prices for these cars are staggering, with waiting lists to buy them. I'm not sure the X1/9 will make that list of such cars, but on a individual basis it could be a candidate. So long as it is realized going in that you will never recoup even a small percentage of your investment. And that may be the difference why those companies choose certain models over others for these remakes, there is more value to be had. The article included a list of some of the more popular models for this; Porsche, Jaguar, Mercedes, etc.

In a related article a new law was discussed, allowing companies like the ones described above to sell their vehicles as "newly" manufactured. And that opens the door to remake vehicles from all new materials, like aftermarket reproduction bodies. Now a car can be created from scratch and sold as a new car, not a kit car or restored old car or remanufactured or such. That may not sound like a big difference but in legal terms it is.

So is there a market for a "new" X1/9, made from all new components with all modern mechanicals and materials? Think full carbon fiber body over a 300 HP engine and performance suspension/brakes, all bespoke and new. Or would that be a failed business due to the resultant selling price?
The Alfa Romeo 4C was conceptually pretty much a modern X1/9, but the execution was much more of a hard core track car than the daily driver sports car that I think the original X1/9 is.

At the time of its release I though FIAT could have used the 4C form factor to build a companion car that would have used less exotic materials (for example, substitute aluminum for carbon fiber), a less powerful engine from the FIAT parts bin (say the 1.4 turbo), sent Marcello Gandini a blank check and a request for a modern take on his classic design, and if they were able to keep the base price under $27,500US, I think they would have had a decent worldwide seller on their hands.
 
As someone who tends to daily my X during the months that allow it (my car runs late April to Decemberish depending on salt), I tend to look at parts lasting a decent amount of time. I put under 5k on it per year so it should outlast me.

I am also a bit different than some in that I daily and autocross and hope to spend more time autocrossing as time goes on so my car tends to skew towards being good and reliable but not looking quite so nice. My red one may skew the other way.

I am with Dan in that a modern X or modern Fiat mid engine sports car would have been ideal, the 124 Miata really wasn’t for me and apparently not for the old 124 owners either as it has now gone out of production.

I would love to have a AR 4C, I don’t mind the compromises of it but was terribly disappointed with it only coming with a roboticized transmission. Yes it shifts better than I can but thats not the point.

I think the thing the 4C and replicating an X would fail at is the interior room. Few cars are as uncompromising as either of those two cars in terms of interior room. I am ok with it because I am still thin-ish and continuing to get shorter...

Would we buy an Alcan X? Oh yeah, sadly the tooling is long gone to make all the parts of an X. Could a Lotus Elise be rebodied into an X? Probably and avoid the ludicrous failures of the body of that car.
 
The Alfa Romeo 4C was conceptually pretty much a modern X1/9, but the execution was much more of a hard core track car than the daily driver sports car that I think the original X1/9 is.

At the time of its release I though FIAT could have used the 4C form factor to build a companion car that would have used less exotic materials (for example, substitute aluminum for carbon fiber), a less powerful engine from the FIAT parts bin (say the 1.4 turbo), sent Marcello Gandini a blank check and a request for a modern take on his classic design, and if they were able to keep the base price under $27,500US, I think they would have had a decent worldwide seller on their hands.
Agreed. As much as I love them, the factory "remakes" of older models (e.g. new Mini or new 500) is not what's being referred to here. I really wish more manufacturers would do remakes (slowly some are), as I like the retro styling. But the new law allowing "reproduction" vehicles is about making the same car as the old one (a clone), but with a modern drivetrain and various other upgrades (think "restomod"). There are some companies that actually start with an old car and build on it (typically this would retain the original VIN and therefore is not considered a "new" car), while others are making them completely from scratch and therefore they get a new/original VIN (as a new car). Those are what's covered by the new law.
 
I think if someone like MWB could come up with a "kit" to install a 500 drivetrain in an X we would be 80% there. Add 500 brakes and some LED headlights to replace the pop up lights and you would have a really nice X
 
I've had quite a few cars over the years, many Italian and most of the rest various VWs, and I'll just repeat here what I wrote on the old Mirafiori forum some years ago: The X1/9 is the one car I never want to be without. I think it's the best small sports car ever made. It's economical, practical, safe, and a blast to drive for drivers of all ages and skill levels. I do prefer the later Bertone cars as daily drivers, although the early 1300 cars might be better as weekend screamers (once all the smog crap is removed and non-emissions induction and exhaust are fitted, of course). No modern car can replace the X.
 
Carl, are you referring to our friend Johnny 0 and his 4C? Keep in mind that the 4C is very loud, has practically no luggage space, and is missing the essential third pedal (aka "clutch") and the stick shift lever associated with that pedal. Thus ruling out the 4C in my book as a personal utility daily-driver family sports car. If you gave me a 4C I'd drive it once just to see how it feels, then immediately sell it and buy three more X1/9s with the proceeds 😆
 
Not John O., two others one of whom doesn't even own one!
I'm surrounded by too many clowns who think a lacking clutch pedal and shifter makes a car not a sports car. My DCT GTI is living proof this is not true but understand everyone has their own idea of what makes a sports car. 100 years ago your car was probably not a sports model unless the shift lever was outside the body.
 
A modern Dino. :)

Replacement for the Dino (Ferrari?) was to be the Lancia MonteCarlo/Scorpion. Originally the x1/8 put on hold, then resurrected to x1/20. Originally designed for the Lampredi V6 and more... then the first OPEC crunch happened causing any performance car great grief, essentially no one wanted a gas gulper at that moment in time. Fiat/Lancia's answer was to install the first 2.0L version of the Lampredi TC into the MonteCarlo. USA got the only available USA smog approved 1.8L engine.. Power train was not the only change between MonteCarlo to Scorpion.. the list of alterations and changes is not small.

What is not appreciated, the Lancia Scorpiacarlo can be made equal to better than the Dino. The other unfinished design from that era.

Bernice
 
Replacement for the Dino (Ferrari?) was to be the Lancia MonteCarlo/Scorpion. Originally the x1/8 put on hold, then resurrected to x1/20. Originally designed for the Lampredi V6 and more... then the first OPEC crunch happened causing any performance car great grief, essentially no one wanted a gas gulper at that moment in time. Fiat/Lancia's answer was to install the first 2.0L version of the Lampredi TC into the MonteCarlo. USA got the only available USA smog approved 1.8L engine.. Power train was not the only change between MonteCarlo to Scorpion.. the list of alterations and changes is not small.

What is not appreciated, the Lancia Scorpiacarlo can be made equal to better than the Dino. The other unfinished design from that era.

Bernice

Yes, I owned #1019 for a long while 20 years ago, very familar with the Scorpion/Montecarlo.

My statement about the 4C still stands. The answer to the question, "What if Ferrari could produce a $70k car?"
 
I would be very interested in a "modern" X that it in keeping with the original X. I would like to see a bare bones, optional A/C, optional power windows, no power steering (maybe power brakes) somewhere around 130-140hp but handle like a roller-skate and come in maybe around the 20K price point.

IMO Honda had the tuner market almost to themselves with the civic up to about 2000 then they shot themselves in the foot with the FIT. It looked like it was designed by a cost concerned old guy who thought he could trick his son into liking something "reasonable". It was a tuner nightmare and the little wheels and little wheel wells made it visibly unappealing. The Civic got too big and too expensive but followed the trend of "growing up" with the generation it was aimed at. The problem is, not all of us grow up.

You can take the Mr2, the Miata and how sought after they are but priced out of what large enough numbers can afford. Mazda released their modern X and I can't afford one after buying the CX9 for the family car.

IMO the X sold well because it was a cheap second car. I think that is what the modern X would have to be. People need their people movers, the big trucks, SUVs, etc. They need to carry camping gear and groceries and goalie equipment and player gear (sometimes at the same time and sometimes at different arenas) so that is where their money is going. The second car can't be the price of the first car, not if they want to sell lots of them. Some 19 year old will have a hard time coming up with 40-70G's for a done to the 9's rocket but a fun sexy little car with a surprising amount of storage, maybe a used one for 10G, that he can do.

Add to that that he can throw some wheels on it, a CAI and a fart can and he's already sold.
 
Anyone who wants to make a new two seater sports car needs to seriously study how Mazda did it with the Miata. But in the end a new X would just be a halo car and would probably not make any significant profit for the manufacturer. The current generation of young drivers with money don't seem interested in cars. My thirty something son who grew up with a Fiat mad father is single and drives a Honda Accord and is totally happy with it (he has his mother's car gene). My daughters like driving my convertibles on a nice day and their husbands have no interest in cars.
 
Can I gently disagree? I'm not so sure all of the younguns are quite so uninterested in sports cars. Still in the realm of anecdote, but I seem to see plenty of younger people driving newer Challengers, Camaros, and Mustangs all over the country. Here in Miami, the ones with lots of cash are in two-seater Jags, Aston Martins, BMW/Merc/Audis, brand-new Corvettes (only the mid-engine ones, which seem super popular), and at the high end, Ferraris and Lambs. (And, to be fair, some enormous luxury SUVs, though even in that category the Lamb seems like a popular choice.)

I got curious and dug up this article, which reportedly summarizes actual data from back in 2015 on Millennials' car-buying habits from Edmunds.com. A lot of Millennials, especially back then, do/did not have the $$ to buy new cars, so it studies their used-car purchases. It is a wild ride--the most popular models are all over the map. But they do include:
  • Subaru WRX
  • Volkswagen Golf R32
  • Nissan GT-R
I bet if these data were updated, you'd see Camaros or Mustangs or both on that list. Here's my sense: most Millennials grew up in a household in which the parents were not actively interested in cars. Sure, the parents might've owned a cool muscle car or two back in the '60s, but by the time they had kids, they were ALL driving Ford Taurus station wagons, then switched to Chrysler-family minivans. So the kids who were so inclined were basically left to search out their own car culture, which they did by turning--where else?--to video games and movies. The most influential movie was The Fast and the Furious, which featured mostly imports (with a Supra as the Holy Grail). The single most important/formative driving video game was the Gran Turismo series, which heavily favored Japanese and European cars, hot hatches, rally-connected models, and the like. So when car-crazy Millennials first got into the car market, they looked for those types of cars. (See the findings above!)

But at this point, the $-for-performance mix offered by American muscle cars is just too good to ignore. Brand-new Mustangs with over 300 hp on tap can be had for well under $30k. So if anyone's ever wondering where all the car-nut young people have gone, that's where.
 
Back
Top