veedubnoodle
RMS Regular
This is awesome!!!! More pictures please 
The Ultimate X - Fiat X1/9
- Thread starter Mark Bowden
- Start date
Mark Bowden
RMS Regular
OP
- Messages
- 217
- Thread Starter
- #27
Hello everyone who's back for more ... lol
Everything I say, I say with conviction but it is of course my opinion - imo.
It's off the back of nearly 3 years research and I know these cars quite well.
It's very important that anyone who knows better, corrects me along the way because it's all about learning.
I think it's important I make some statements early on, about the market and about prices, and what types of direction it's possible to take a build in.
At the very top of the tree, would be a genuine and original late seventies Gp.5 Dallara Sil (a silhouette racer) like this -
These cars are very rare, under 30 examples I think. Most of them belong to a tiny clique of enthusiasts in Italy, most are still raced regularly and are very competitive in class.
An unrestored original car, would be worth say £130,000 but they almost never come up for public sale, they change hands by word of mouth I expect.
A restoration of any car, done professionally is in the region of £60-90,000. A tip-top Dallara with competition history would therefore be worth in the region of £250,000, which sounds right to me. The cylinder head alone costing £18,000.
At least these cars dispel the 'too rare to race' myth !
I mean, even a bog-standard X1/9 these days is arguably 'too rare to drive' haha - there's only 245 rhd cars left, of which ONLY 12 are pre-1978 (Series 1.)
Anybody wanting to build a replica Dallara would have to use a Series 1 shell as the base, then cut away the outer monocoque, build an integral safety cell, then attach a GRP Dallara bodykit, and build a 16V motor from scratch. I reckon you'll have chewed through the best part of £70,000 by now, and the car will never be an original so arguably is there any point ?
I posted a couple of pics of a bare shell, have a look - that's a late 70's X1/9 shell cut down with the safety cell done already. That car is in the Midlands, it's for sale for under £10,000 so in my opinion somebody should (bloody well) buy it right away and build a 1300cc naturally aspirated sprint/hillclimb car using a Dallara 16V motor - it would be eligible to compete as a modified production car and my guess is it would be really competitive.
Next level below the genuine Dallara would be something like either Thomas Kohler's car or Robert Frick's car, both are very interesting, radically different, and are probably worth £70,000-100,000 ie less than half the price/cost of a genuine Dallara.
Thomas Kohler's - uses the original 1300cc iron-block (Lampredi) with the Dallara 16v head. It has the square style Schult bodykit and Bacci Romano dog-gearbox. It sounds like a Dallara, and to all intents is almost as quick. The engine is very oversquare on these, and revs to 11,000. The under-load rasp is distinctive of all Dallaras -
Robert Frick's - uses a supercharged Honda K20 with a Quaife sequential and has the Dallara style bodykit, it's way more powerful and less revvy, probably won't appeal so much to the purists, and I'm not sure what classes it could race in here, being ineligible as a modified production car for starters - but also a great drive -
Next level below would be bike-engined (Yamaha R1, Suzuki Hayabusa) variants which use the bike's sequential 'boxes (with electric reverse) and are eligible to compete in Sport Libre. The advantages are (comparitively) low cost. You could build an X with 200bhp for about £40,000-60,000. They have the lowest C of G, and more mass towards the centre of the wheelbase than any other option. The performance and agility of these cars is exceptional. I considered going down this route but decided against because as a purist I am committed to retaining the Lampredi SOHC in my build. However you might enjoy -
The next level below is the level that interests me the most. Although I am building a modified fast road X, I wish to remain firmly in the sub £40,000 region. Actually, as low as £25,000 but that is really a shoestring budget and you have to be really careful finding a donor car, because if it's got hidden rust deep within the shell, basically it'll be weaker and cost an arm and a leg to put right. In fact, you can chew through £25,000 easily on paint and body alone. You've heard it before many times - find a car that's good enough to begin with. This makes perfect sense of course - you can't deny the logic - but if someone said to me 'I'm looking for an X that's never rusted' I'd say 'yeah, good luck with that'.
So you'd have to be prepared to look at several, risk walking away from the car you SHOULD have bought, spend a year, drive up and down the country a few times, and maybe still buy a car that's not as good as you would have hoped.
Very important therefore to recognise the £30,000 value of a genuine rot-free example. They very occasionally come up, but realistically these are the cars which might as well remain original and unrestored, if they are that good not to need any restoration. The basic issue is the car itself, of course. Don't forget that apart from being tagged 'a hairdresser's car' it was also known as 'a proper scale supercar', or the 'baby Ferrari', or perhaps most tellingly - 'the poor man's Ferrari'. Well that's the problem, right there. The people buying new Ferraris at the end of the 80's, had money, had garages, and could afford to have their cars professionally cared for. Mostly.
On the other hand, your average X owner was left with no choice but to use theirs as their daily, probably kept it on the street, drove it all year round, and within 10 years it was game over. So the concept itself was arguably flawed, and that's why there are so few left. An X should never be used as a daily, not least in salty damp Ireland or Wales or England, let alone Scotland.
The good news is you can find good to average examples sometimes for £8,000-10,000.
I bought three. None are exactly as I hoped for in my wildest dreams. They all have issues. Different issues !
The first was the D-reg (pics at the top of this thread) which I bought off eBay for £3,999 - because... I don't know, there was something about it. It looked so good in the pictures, I decided to buy it regardless. Big mistake, almost. The reason was something to do with the colour - it looked more like a Ferrari, somehow. It was factory dechromed like all Bertones, it had red carpets, white on black Veglia Borletti instruments (but they all do) - no it was the colour and the colour alone because it was Rosso Corsa, which was wrong (I didn't know at the time, it should have been and was originally Red886)- so I bought it on the spot. So yes, Rosso Corsa is THE colour, for the poor man's Ferrari and so you'd have to add the cost of a full respray to your build if that's what you want. Other good colours would be black, or white, or possibly a retro colour as per the nuovo FIAT 500. Rosso Corsa is what does it for me - no way would the board of FIAT have agreed that colour on the X because even though they OWNED Ferrari, it would have confused the brand identity too much.
I'd had the D-reg for a few weeks and after an initial period of reliability, lots of things started packing up. I noticed one day, admiring the rear end, something didn't look right. I got the tape measure out. The back of the OS quarter panel was 3/4'' LOWER than the NS - wtf?? I took the back bumper off, revealing a dented rear panel, deformed below the bumper, a crumpled OS bumper iron, and deformation of the chassis leg going all the way through the boot, into the engine compartment and stopping directly below the turret. Despair. The OS lower wishbone was also bent, and the front wishbone body mount. More Despair. Then, uneven wear on the OS rear tyre, geometry way out. Total despair - it looked as though the car could never be made to drive well and would have to be written off. That's 'sold as seen'.
I carried on looking, I bought an E reg, for even less. It was way better, but hadn't been driven for years. At least the D-reg was driveable. Then I found another E reg - which was really exceptional by comparison. It was on a private plate A19 PEW but had security etched glass so I returned it to its original plate E708GJF. Both are Red886 - a sort of nasty, orangey shade which plays havoc with my camera settings, usually appearing sort of mauve, or pink, purple even like this -
Meanwhile, and because I couldn't bear to scrap the D-reg, I decided to tear down the suspension completely. I did a nut and bolt rebuild on coilovers, changed all the ball joints, polybushed everything, did the brakes, put an arb on the front, lowered the car A LOT, changed the wheels and tyres (see pics at top of thread). During the final build up, the new OS rear wishbone would not align with the front hookup. To cut a long story short, two blokes (me, one) some sweat, big hammers, some blood, forced the hookup to conform to the wishbone and everything was back on the car.
Then I went on a Hunter alignment computer, and shimmed the rear wishbones. As luck would have it, any deformation in the shell was effectively adjusted out on the shims and on the drop-links, back to the factory settings albeit at a radically lower height.
Following on from this and battling reliability issues - fan belts, electrical gremlins, pop-up headlamp hell, and driving on 300 (yes 300) lb/in springs front and rear, I was having difficulty according to my level of bravery / stupidity in finding out where the cornering limits were.
There are two corners in West Dorset, somewhere, that are identical in terms of approach speed and entry. One is a short double apex, the other continues and has three further apices, tightens slightly all the way, and goes into adverse camber immediately after the third. I was dog tired, it was dark, I must have thought it was the OTHER one. I was going too fast, tried to change down, 'box baulked third - too late to brake and only one thing to do, crash third, throttle flat and keep turning in and in and expecting to off, badly, sideways in to god knows what.
The X, didn't flinch, went round like it was on rails, and omg I was way way off the limit in reality.
That woke me up ! I recalibrated my inputs - started attacking more, and more - and eventually all I can say is this - you have to be nuts to get the back end to do anything on these with stock power. At the very limit, you can cause a beautiful 4-wheel slide at best - it'll run wide and that's a little scary but to compensate, get in early, trailbrake, and it's all in the runout ultimately. Very quick these cars, perfectly balanced - you can lift off halfway through a tight bend and there's no discernible attitude change, yes really remarkable for an old cheap car and I absolutely agree with the saying 'nothing holds on like an X'.
This is why I am selling both the E reg projects at the moment. I've formed a bond with the D-reg even though it's a battle scarred dented old ratbag full of fibreglass and hand painted (with a brush) below the plimsoll line, it has a worn out used quality that I like. It's got character, whereas the other two are blank canvasses. I am on the point of committing to the next chapter. The new engine has to go in one and I'm going to put it in the D-reg unless someone offers me a sensible price for it.
To be continued...
Everything I say, I say with conviction but it is of course my opinion - imo.
It's off the back of nearly 3 years research and I know these cars quite well.
It's very important that anyone who knows better, corrects me along the way because it's all about learning.
I think it's important I make some statements early on, about the market and about prices, and what types of direction it's possible to take a build in.
At the very top of the tree, would be a genuine and original late seventies Gp.5 Dallara Sil (a silhouette racer) like this -
These cars are very rare, under 30 examples I think. Most of them belong to a tiny clique of enthusiasts in Italy, most are still raced regularly and are very competitive in class.
An unrestored original car, would be worth say £130,000 but they almost never come up for public sale, they change hands by word of mouth I expect.
A restoration of any car, done professionally is in the region of £60-90,000. A tip-top Dallara with competition history would therefore be worth in the region of £250,000, which sounds right to me. The cylinder head alone costing £18,000.
At least these cars dispel the 'too rare to race' myth !
I mean, even a bog-standard X1/9 these days is arguably 'too rare to drive' haha - there's only 245 rhd cars left, of which ONLY 12 are pre-1978 (Series 1.)
Anybody wanting to build a replica Dallara would have to use a Series 1 shell as the base, then cut away the outer monocoque, build an integral safety cell, then attach a GRP Dallara bodykit, and build a 16V motor from scratch. I reckon you'll have chewed through the best part of £70,000 by now, and the car will never be an original so arguably is there any point ?
I posted a couple of pics of a bare shell, have a look - that's a late 70's X1/9 shell cut down with the safety cell done already. That car is in the Midlands, it's for sale for under £10,000 so in my opinion somebody should (bloody well) buy it right away and build a 1300cc naturally aspirated sprint/hillclimb car using a Dallara 16V motor - it would be eligible to compete as a modified production car and my guess is it would be really competitive.
Next level below the genuine Dallara would be something like either Thomas Kohler's car or Robert Frick's car, both are very interesting, radically different, and are probably worth £70,000-100,000 ie less than half the price/cost of a genuine Dallara.
Thomas Kohler's - uses the original 1300cc iron-block (Lampredi) with the Dallara 16v head. It has the square style Schult bodykit and Bacci Romano dog-gearbox. It sounds like a Dallara, and to all intents is almost as quick. The engine is very oversquare on these, and revs to 11,000. The under-load rasp is distinctive of all Dallaras -
Robert Frick's - uses a supercharged Honda K20 with a Quaife sequential and has the Dallara style bodykit, it's way more powerful and less revvy, probably won't appeal so much to the purists, and I'm not sure what classes it could race in here, being ineligible as a modified production car for starters - but also a great drive -
Next level below would be bike-engined (Yamaha R1, Suzuki Hayabusa) variants which use the bike's sequential 'boxes (with electric reverse) and are eligible to compete in Sport Libre. The advantages are (comparitively) low cost. You could build an X with 200bhp for about £40,000-60,000. They have the lowest C of G, and more mass towards the centre of the wheelbase than any other option. The performance and agility of these cars is exceptional. I considered going down this route but decided against because as a purist I am committed to retaining the Lampredi SOHC in my build. However you might enjoy -
The next level below is the level that interests me the most. Although I am building a modified fast road X, I wish to remain firmly in the sub £40,000 region. Actually, as low as £25,000 but that is really a shoestring budget and you have to be really careful finding a donor car, because if it's got hidden rust deep within the shell, basically it'll be weaker and cost an arm and a leg to put right. In fact, you can chew through £25,000 easily on paint and body alone. You've heard it before many times - find a car that's good enough to begin with. This makes perfect sense of course - you can't deny the logic - but if someone said to me 'I'm looking for an X that's never rusted' I'd say 'yeah, good luck with that'.
So you'd have to be prepared to look at several, risk walking away from the car you SHOULD have bought, spend a year, drive up and down the country a few times, and maybe still buy a car that's not as good as you would have hoped.
Very important therefore to recognise the £30,000 value of a genuine rot-free example. They very occasionally come up, but realistically these are the cars which might as well remain original and unrestored, if they are that good not to need any restoration. The basic issue is the car itself, of course. Don't forget that apart from being tagged 'a hairdresser's car' it was also known as 'a proper scale supercar', or the 'baby Ferrari', or perhaps most tellingly - 'the poor man's Ferrari'. Well that's the problem, right there. The people buying new Ferraris at the end of the 80's, had money, had garages, and could afford to have their cars professionally cared for. Mostly.
On the other hand, your average X owner was left with no choice but to use theirs as their daily, probably kept it on the street, drove it all year round, and within 10 years it was game over. So the concept itself was arguably flawed, and that's why there are so few left. An X should never be used as a daily, not least in salty damp Ireland or Wales or England, let alone Scotland.
The good news is you can find good to average examples sometimes for £8,000-10,000.
I bought three. None are exactly as I hoped for in my wildest dreams. They all have issues. Different issues !
The first was the D-reg (pics at the top of this thread) which I bought off eBay for £3,999 - because... I don't know, there was something about it. It looked so good in the pictures, I decided to buy it regardless. Big mistake, almost. The reason was something to do with the colour - it looked more like a Ferrari, somehow. It was factory dechromed like all Bertones, it had red carpets, white on black Veglia Borletti instruments (but they all do) - no it was the colour and the colour alone because it was Rosso Corsa, which was wrong (I didn't know at the time, it should have been and was originally Red886)- so I bought it on the spot. So yes, Rosso Corsa is THE colour, for the poor man's Ferrari and so you'd have to add the cost of a full respray to your build if that's what you want. Other good colours would be black, or white, or possibly a retro colour as per the nuovo FIAT 500. Rosso Corsa is what does it for me - no way would the board of FIAT have agreed that colour on the X because even though they OWNED Ferrari, it would have confused the brand identity too much.
I'd had the D-reg for a few weeks and after an initial period of reliability, lots of things started packing up. I noticed one day, admiring the rear end, something didn't look right. I got the tape measure out. The back of the OS quarter panel was 3/4'' LOWER than the NS - wtf?? I took the back bumper off, revealing a dented rear panel, deformed below the bumper, a crumpled OS bumper iron, and deformation of the chassis leg going all the way through the boot, into the engine compartment and stopping directly below the turret. Despair. The OS lower wishbone was also bent, and the front wishbone body mount. More Despair. Then, uneven wear on the OS rear tyre, geometry way out. Total despair - it looked as though the car could never be made to drive well and would have to be written off. That's 'sold as seen'.
I carried on looking, I bought an E reg, for even less. It was way better, but hadn't been driven for years. At least the D-reg was driveable. Then I found another E reg - which was really exceptional by comparison. It was on a private plate A19 PEW but had security etched glass so I returned it to its original plate E708GJF. Both are Red886 - a sort of nasty, orangey shade which plays havoc with my camera settings, usually appearing sort of mauve, or pink, purple even like this -
Meanwhile, and because I couldn't bear to scrap the D-reg, I decided to tear down the suspension completely. I did a nut and bolt rebuild on coilovers, changed all the ball joints, polybushed everything, did the brakes, put an arb on the front, lowered the car A LOT, changed the wheels and tyres (see pics at top of thread). During the final build up, the new OS rear wishbone would not align with the front hookup. To cut a long story short, two blokes (me, one) some sweat, big hammers, some blood, forced the hookup to conform to the wishbone and everything was back on the car.
Then I went on a Hunter alignment computer, and shimmed the rear wishbones. As luck would have it, any deformation in the shell was effectively adjusted out on the shims and on the drop-links, back to the factory settings albeit at a radically lower height.
Following on from this and battling reliability issues - fan belts, electrical gremlins, pop-up headlamp hell, and driving on 300 (yes 300) lb/in springs front and rear, I was having difficulty according to my level of bravery / stupidity in finding out where the cornering limits were.
There are two corners in West Dorset, somewhere, that are identical in terms of approach speed and entry. One is a short double apex, the other continues and has three further apices, tightens slightly all the way, and goes into adverse camber immediately after the third. I was dog tired, it was dark, I must have thought it was the OTHER one. I was going too fast, tried to change down, 'box baulked third - too late to brake and only one thing to do, crash third, throttle flat and keep turning in and in and expecting to off, badly, sideways in to god knows what.
The X, didn't flinch, went round like it was on rails, and omg I was way way off the limit in reality.
That woke me up ! I recalibrated my inputs - started attacking more, and more - and eventually all I can say is this - you have to be nuts to get the back end to do anything on these with stock power. At the very limit, you can cause a beautiful 4-wheel slide at best - it'll run wide and that's a little scary but to compensate, get in early, trailbrake, and it's all in the runout ultimately. Very quick these cars, perfectly balanced - you can lift off halfway through a tight bend and there's no discernible attitude change, yes really remarkable for an old cheap car and I absolutely agree with the saying 'nothing holds on like an X'.
This is why I am selling both the E reg projects at the moment. I've formed a bond with the D-reg even though it's a battle scarred dented old ratbag full of fibreglass and hand painted (with a brush) below the plimsoll line, it has a worn out used quality that I like. It's got character, whereas the other two are blank canvasses. I am on the point of committing to the next chapter. The new engine has to go in one and I'm going to put it in the D-reg unless someone offers me a sensible price for it.
To be continued...
Mark Bowden
RMS Regular
OP
- Messages
- 217
- Thread Starter
- #28
Yes, mid 70's Gp.5 silhouette racer - safety cell, front and rear spaceframes, wider track, GRP outer body, Dallara 16V head with Kugelfischer MFI (200/230bhp), fully rose jointed suspension, wheelbase 1'' longer over stock. Almost everything original modified or deleted.More like a spaceframe job. It appears they kept the cockpit and driver cell, bolted on bespoke front and rear subframes, bespoke bodywork on top, and some basic aero more to clean up the air flow than actually produce downforce.
They kept the basic suspension setup (McPherson) but with bespoke geometry and slightly longer wheel base. And much lower obviously.
Roll cage etc. Full race car conversion.
Then tuned the heck out of the wee Fiat engines
svensktoppen
RMS Regular
- Messages
- 32,781
- Drives
- FK2 CTR
I honestly had no idea those things existed, very cool wee things
FM155
RMS Regular
- Messages
- 8,715
- Drives
- Alfa 155
Very nice, sort of fancied an X1/9 back in the early 80's when I started driving but the fearsome reputation for rusting and total lack of budget sent me towards more traditional fayre. I wimped out on a 131 Sport due to insurance reasons too ffs. I ended up getting into Alfa 155's during the late 90's and still have 4 of them although I'm working towards reducing that to 2 or 1. Too many cars, too little time.
Your X is lovely, looks great on those wheels! 150bhp should make it move along rightly
Did you ever think about using the modern 1.4 alloy blocked 16V out of the 500/Panda/Bravo? Fantastic engine, I am running a 1.4T-jet Bravo as a daily at the moment and it can move along very briskly for a 1250kg car.
Good luck with the rest of your build and keep us updated.
I ended up getting into Alfa 155's during the late 90's and still have 4 of them although I'm working towards reducing that to 2 or 1. Too many cars, too little time.Your X is lovely, looks great on those wheels! 150bhp should make it move along rightly
Did you ever think about using the modern 1.4 alloy blocked 16V out of the 500/Panda/Bravo? Fantastic engine, I am running a 1.4T-jet Bravo as a daily at the moment and it can move along very briskly for a 1250kg car.
Good luck with the rest of your build and keep us updated.
svensktoppen
RMS Regular
- Messages
- 32,781
- Drives
- FK2 CTR
Just went through the last longer update there. Know exactly what you mean when you bond with a car like that, you get to know all the wee foibles, it's got character and personality. Before you know it you give it a name and start taking to it like an old friend
My wee Elise is called Princess and we have far too close a relationship by now
That first video is brilliant, that's some going from an old Fiat 1.3!
You're probably the first person on the planet to call a K20 "low revving" though
My wee Elise is called Princess and we have far too close a relationship by now
That first video is brilliant, that's some going from an old Fiat 1.3!
You're probably the first person on the planet to call a K20 "low revving" though
Mark Bowden
RMS Regular
OP
- Messages
- 217
- Thread Starter
- #32
Not sure where you are Graham, but seeing as this board started (I think) in Ireland, possibly could be Gordon Fogarty's ? - the black one -
Graham
RMS Photographer
the very man. he and the car are a fast combination!
Mark Bowden
RMS Regular
OP
- Messages
- 217
- Thread Starter
- #34
Ha! Excellent response - yes, fantastic engine and the final evolution of the Lampredi SOHC, with a DOHC 16V head.Very nice, sort of fancied an X1/9 back in the early 80's when I started driving but the fearsome reputation for rusting and total lack of budget sent me towards more traditional fayre. I wimped out on a 131 Sport due to insurance reasons too ffs.
Your X is lovely, looks great on those wheels! 150bhp should make it move along rightly
Did you ever think about using the modern 1.4 alloy blocked 16V out of the 500/Panda/Bravo? Fantastic engine, I am running a 1.4T-jet Bravo as a daily at the moment and it can move along very briskly for a 1250kg car.
Good luck with the rest of your build and keep us updated.
I'd refer you back to the initial post on this thread where I go in to this in some detail, as to why it's not the best option in an X.
Very interesting you mention the 131 - you're right, that's the car you should have bought !
I'm particularly interested in the iron-blocked Lampredi SOHC & DOHC motors.
The DOHC is of course famous in applications such as the Mirafiori Sport, 131 Abarth Rally (with the 16V head), Lancia Beta Volumex and 037 (supercharged) and the Abarth 130TC Strada (with twin 40 Solex or DellOrto carbs).
The final evolution was the legendary - also all-aluminium - WRC winning engine in the Delta Integrale and ideal capacity is 2000-2200cc.
The SOHC was never meant to be a performance engine but because it's smaller and lighter, is arguably better, ideally at 1300-1400cc, in lighter smaller cars like the 128 Sport or the X1/9.
Please have a look at the post below about how the engine build is progressing...
Thanks pal.This is awesome!!!! More pictures please
Mark Bowden
RMS Regular
OP
- Messages
- 217
- Thread Starter
- #35
He's the man...
who inspired me to write this.
FM155
RMS Regular
- Messages
- 8,715
- Drives
- Alfa 155
Yep, I have a Lampredi 2.0 turbo 16V in my 155Q4. It's still very much iron blocked in the production cars and the Deltas used the same engine too. I'm pretty certain that the Deltas had the Iron block in the group A integrale but the 131 got an alloy block in it's 16v homologated group 4 / group B form.
I'm always torn between using an original engine or a lighter, more efficient 16v version. I really like a tuned 8v motor but there's just so much potential for the alloy 16v in an X1/9. It would be the right engine for that replica race car shell.
I'm always torn between using an original engine or a lighter, more efficient 16v version. I really like a tuned 8v motor but there's just so much potential for the alloy 16v in an X1/9. It would be the right engine for that replica race car shell.
Mark Bowden
RMS Regular
OP
- Messages
- 217
- Thread Starter
- #37
Yeah, spot on there! I don't know much about the K20, but I guess high rpm's is kinda relative and I'm not sure what HIGH is... better say that before we get any Mazda freaks weighing in...Just went through the last longer update there. Know exactly what you mean when you bond with a car like that, you get to know all the wee foibles, it's got character and personality. Before you know it you give it a name and start taking to it like an old friend
My wee Elise is called Princess and we have far too close a relationship by now
That first video is brilliant, that's some going from an old Fiat 1.3!
You're probably the first person on the planet to call a K20 "low revving" though
Oh and incidentally, seeing as you're an Elise guy, all my friends said 'get an Elise' blabla but the X1/9 blala 'just get an Elise' BUT THE X... etc etc until finally I didn't (get an Elise).
Midwest Bayless in Ohio do a K20 conversion kit with a custom subframe.
Robert Nelson's car uses a K24 with a supercharger, and is really pushing it.
The whole point is HOW the X can take the load without ending up like a crumpled Coke tin, is in its massive inherent strength - the all steel monocoque is a phenomenal piece of engineering - it doesn't even have a roof ffs.
Mark Bowden
RMS Regular
OP
- Messages
- 217
- Thread Starter
- #38
Crikey... the more one goes in to it the more one realises there is so much to know, and so little time.Yep, I have a Lampredi 2.0 turbo 16V in my 155Q4. It's still very much iron blocked in the production cars and the Deltas used the same engine too. I'm pretty certain that the Deltas had the Iron block in the group A integrale but the 131 got an alloy block in it's 16v homologated group 4 / group B form.
I'm always torn between using an original engine or a lighter, more efficient 16v version. I really like a tuned 8v motor but there's just so much potential for the alloy 16v in an X1/9. It would be the right engine for that replica race car shell.
I don't know much about engine swaps.
I always thought Alfa Romeo had their own twin cam (Puliga or Busso) design ?
I think you are right about the potential of the all-alu (Lampredi) 16V in the X - at least theoretically and certainly in terms of power to weight.
That racecar shell was going to use a Turbocharged Uno engine. I am still not a fan of forced induction, call me old school.
An X with even 150 bhp puts the OE transmission and brake components under a lot of extra load.
The best brake upgrade kit I've found would be something like this -
Kit pedaliere con doppie pompe separate + regolazione - Di Fulvio Racing
You need one of those kits plus two of these kits per car...
kit freni maggiorati anteriori con pinze 4 pistoncini - Di Fulvio Racing
kit freni maggiorati X1/9 anteriori e posteriori ( adattabili anche ad altre vetture Fiat con stessi attacchi fuselli con cerchi da 13' ) )il kit composto da : 2 pinze a 4 pistoncini - 1 serie pastiglie Ferodo Racing - 2 staffe in ergal - 2 dischi ventilati compositi maggiorati Prezzo del...
Which means the total budget based on a tuned 8V Fiat (as opposed to an engine swap) is already close to my budget of £25,000.
I'll continue this in the main thread ...
brocks
RMS Regular
Excellent thread..... full of info!
Welcome to RMS!
Welcome to RMS!
Mark Bowden
RMS Regular
OP
- Messages
- 217
- Thread Starter
- #40
To add, the Dallara does not use a clamshell design on the rear body, nor on the front where variants had either a complete lift-off front end, or semi-fixed with the bonnet on Dzus clips -
Mark Bowden
RMS Regular
OP
- Messages
- 217
- Thread Starter
- #41
Back in the day (88-97) I had a FIAT Abarth 130TC Strada - a hot hatch - and you could probably call me an idiot, or a boy racer. I was always getting busted, something about those cars that attracted tickets like flies to ---t. Those were the days, haha, before speed cameras but you could expect to be chased down by all manner of fast unmarked kit from Jags to M5's to Lotus Carlton's. I remember going to an engineering firm, saying 'get as much as you can from this' - and ended up with a really thirsty, cammy engine which was worse below 4000 than it was when I brought it in. The other side of the coin was the delivery from 4,200 all the way to the limiter at 7,500 which can only be described as bonkers. The throttle reponse beyond 5,000 was unbelievable - telepathic. It dyno'd at 168 fwhp, but you had to be on it all the time. Get caught in too high a gear and the 1.9 205 GTi or the Mr.2 would have you. It weighed about 1,100kg and was poorly balanced, actually treacherous in the wet where it would plough on in a straight line once front traction was lost. I've driven many other faster cars, but the 130TC remains my benchmark.
How the decades roll by, but I maintained an interest and studied designs. It's complicated - it's not just about max bhp, it's the entire power curve, and the entire torque curve, and weight, and weight distribution, and diffs, and throttle response, and C of G, and brakes, and structure, and on and on because EVERYTHING relates.
In some ways, building a racecar is easy - if you've got lots of money - you just fit the best, everywhere, for the intended use eg track, rally, slalom, hillclimb.
Building a fast road car is different. You need to think about economy, driveability, reliability, and longevity and service intervals.
By the time I got to 50 I thought I'd got the core knowledge down, or at least to the point where I had a better understanding of what I wanted. This was two years ago, when I joined the queue at Auto Engineering and waited my turn.
Yesterday (and I'm sorry not to have pics but expect those in a few weeks before the final assembly) I had another fascinating meeting with Marc. He showed me pages of flow-tests resulting from porting the head, fitting bigger valves, matching the inlet manifold etc. He was quite excited about the significant increases in flow he'd achieved. He explained about air speed and how it's important to keep this high at lower rpm's for a road car, for the driveability. He had decked the block and was in the process of calculating the amount to take off the head, relative to the tiny clearance between a fully open valve and the piston crown at TDC, and making tiny incremental increases to fly-cuts in the piston crowns. He was absolutely adamant that he would be aiming for a minimum CR of 11:1, and that the mapping of the engine and all the lightening and balancing work on the internals would allow the limiter to be set at about 7,500 rpm which will be 800 rpm past peak power which will be at 6,700 rpm. Why, I asked, surely the limiter is set at peak power ? No, he said. He explained the importance of using a proportion of the down-side of the power curve, such as when you need to keep at full throttle between corners, to avoid having to change up, then down again. The flow curve was really interesting, the way it goes up and up with each test, but how the shape of the curve remains exactly the same as the initial test, eg the head as it left the factory. He calculated that peak power could only be upped to 150 bhp to the detriment of the shapes of the power and torque curves, and how this would mean a less progressive delivery, and ultimately a slower and less driveable car. The best compromise will be something like 130 bhp but retaining low-down grunt as well as a significant increases in both top end power and mid-range torque. It's a compromise at the end of the day, and this is the best compromise - a naturally aspirated, well balanced and free-revving engine that won't destroy the original 5-speed gearbox or break driveshafts, and with a responsive throttle. AND it will stay in tune.
I've been thinking about how to 'label' this build, in terms of naming the model, from day one. Various ideas have been and gone, like '795' (a development of the Fiat 500 '595' or '695') - based on achieving a weight of 795 kg - which is a silly idea. Or the X1/9 'Streetsport' - another silly idea, or a logo which says 'lil' wheels' - because the 13'' wheel is an integral part of the X1/9, and was also used on the Dallara, and so on and so on.
Going back to my benchmark car, these had a small black-on-white '130TC' badge on the rear bootlid, denoting 130 bhp, twin cam.
So it seems logical in the light of the nominal peak power calcs, to remake this badge using the same late 80's script, to read '130SC'.
Seeing as I've still got the (chipped and faded) enamelled 'Abarth' badges from my 130TC - by the time all this work is done, I sort of feel that Carlo Abarth himself might not necessarily have altogether disapproved. I'm sure he would have been mapping engines, if he were alive today.
How the decades roll by, but I maintained an interest and studied designs. It's complicated - it's not just about max bhp, it's the entire power curve, and the entire torque curve, and weight, and weight distribution, and diffs, and throttle response, and C of G, and brakes, and structure, and on and on because EVERYTHING relates.
In some ways, building a racecar is easy - if you've got lots of money - you just fit the best, everywhere, for the intended use eg track, rally, slalom, hillclimb.
Building a fast road car is different. You need to think about economy, driveability, reliability, and longevity and service intervals.
By the time I got to 50 I thought I'd got the core knowledge down, or at least to the point where I had a better understanding of what I wanted. This was two years ago, when I joined the queue at Auto Engineering and waited my turn.
Yesterday (and I'm sorry not to have pics but expect those in a few weeks before the final assembly) I had another fascinating meeting with Marc. He showed me pages of flow-tests resulting from porting the head, fitting bigger valves, matching the inlet manifold etc. He was quite excited about the significant increases in flow he'd achieved. He explained about air speed and how it's important to keep this high at lower rpm's for a road car, for the driveability. He had decked the block and was in the process of calculating the amount to take off the head, relative to the tiny clearance between a fully open valve and the piston crown at TDC, and making tiny incremental increases to fly-cuts in the piston crowns. He was absolutely adamant that he would be aiming for a minimum CR of 11:1, and that the mapping of the engine and all the lightening and balancing work on the internals would allow the limiter to be set at about 7,500 rpm which will be 800 rpm past peak power which will be at 6,700 rpm. Why, I asked, surely the limiter is set at peak power ? No, he said. He explained the importance of using a proportion of the down-side of the power curve, such as when you need to keep at full throttle between corners, to avoid having to change up, then down again. The flow curve was really interesting, the way it goes up and up with each test, but how the shape of the curve remains exactly the same as the initial test, eg the head as it left the factory. He calculated that peak power could only be upped to 150 bhp to the detriment of the shapes of the power and torque curves, and how this would mean a less progressive delivery, and ultimately a slower and less driveable car. The best compromise will be something like 130 bhp but retaining low-down grunt as well as a significant increases in both top end power and mid-range torque. It's a compromise at the end of the day, and this is the best compromise - a naturally aspirated, well balanced and free-revving engine that won't destroy the original 5-speed gearbox or break driveshafts, and with a responsive throttle. AND it will stay in tune.
I've been thinking about how to 'label' this build, in terms of naming the model, from day one. Various ideas have been and gone, like '795' (a development of the Fiat 500 '595' or '695') - based on achieving a weight of 795 kg - which is a silly idea. Or the X1/9 'Streetsport' - another silly idea, or a logo which says 'lil' wheels' - because the 13'' wheel is an integral part of the X1/9, and was also used on the Dallara, and so on and so on.
Going back to my benchmark car, these had a small black-on-white '130TC' badge on the rear bootlid, denoting 130 bhp, twin cam.
So it seems logical in the light of the nominal peak power calcs, to remake this badge using the same late 80's script, to read '130SC'.
Seeing as I've still got the (chipped and faded) enamelled 'Abarth' badges from my 130TC - by the time all this work is done, I sort of feel that Carlo Abarth himself might not necessarily have altogether disapproved. I'm sure he would have been mapping engines, if he were alive today.
Gordon Fogarty
RMS Member
Here is my hillclimb car. It has just won the 2019 class 6a Production modified class in the NI hillclimb championship.
1.9l stroked sohc engine, mapped ignition, mikuni bike carbs, Bacci Romano close ratio gearset with low final drive, LSD. Leda Coilovers, high ratio steering rack, uno turbo brakes. Kirkley seat, fiberglass doors and other panels. Etc etc.
1.9l stroked sohc engine, mapped ignition, mikuni bike carbs, Bacci Romano close ratio gearset with low final drive, LSD. Leda Coilovers, high ratio steering rack, uno turbo brakes. Kirkley seat, fiberglass doors and other panels. Etc etc.
Attachments
svensktoppen
RMS Regular
- Messages
- 32,781
- Drives
- FK2 CTR
Mark Bowden
RMS Regular
OP
- Messages
- 217
- Thread Starter
- #44
Hello Gordon, very modest of you not to say 'I've just won' - but you have, and in your X1/9 - so I can only offer my congratulations. Good job.
You might have read my opening post, if not , I should say again it was your recent youtube upload that prompted me to write in the first place.
1900cc - wow, is that even possible ? Yes, obviously but I've never heard of anyone who's done it.
I suppose you are 100% happy with your car, but if you are still looking to improve it what would you change ?
You might have read my opening post, if not , I should say again it was your recent youtube upload that prompted me to write in the first place.
1900cc - wow, is that even possible ? Yes, obviously but I've never heard of anyone who's done it.
I suppose you are 100% happy with your car, but if you are still looking to improve it what would you change ?
Gordon Fogarty
RMS Member
Next iteration is move to fully mapped fuel injection.
Probably won't get more power but should be more driveable at all revs. In car from Eaglesrock hill climb as below.
1.9 litre is possible using Tipo SOHC block with 14-bolt head .
Externally engine is identical to stock but internally oil gallery is in different place allowing longer stroke crank.
Current estimates around 180BHP. max revs 9K .
Also considering better brakes , but solution needs to be light and work from cold.
Other shots from outside can be found in videos from TJ Vision on facebo0k.
Probably won't get more power but should be more driveable at all revs. In car from Eaglesrock hill climb as below.
1.9 litre is possible using Tipo SOHC block with 14-bolt head .
Externally engine is identical to stock but internally oil gallery is in different place allowing longer stroke crank.
Current estimates around 180BHP. max revs 9K .
Also considering better brakes , but solution needs to be light and work from cold.
Other shots from outside can be found in videos from TJ Vision on facebo0k.
Mark Bowden
RMS Regular
OP
- Messages
- 217
- Thread Starter
- #46
Gordon, now we're talking ! I can't tell from the picture of your engine - is the block iron or aluminium ?
Perhaps that is THE question that needs to be answered first, before I write any more.
Never mind, I'll forge on anyway and you can correct me. It'll all come out in the wash.
First up and to anyone joining this thread, I am researching and defining an ultimate spec for 'the ultimate X', according to a criteria which for the time being is -
1. It can be a fast road car (like my build), or a more specialised car like Gordon's. (Gordon is your car road legal ?)
2. It is (or can be) road legal (not a race car).
3. It is naturally aspirated.
4. It does not have flared arches.
5. It uses the iron (or possibly aluminium) block Lampredi SOHC but could be DOHC, 8V or 16V (disambiguation required).
6. The block must fit the X1/9's engine mounts.
7. Maximum capacity is limited by 5.
FM155 said -
''Yep, I have a Lampredi 2.0 turbo 16V in my 155Q4. It's still very much iron blocked in the production cars and the Deltas used the same engine too. I'm pretty certain that the Deltas had the Iron block in the group A Integrale. I'm always torn between using an original engine or a lighter, more efficient 16v version. I really like a tuned 8v motor but there's just so much potential for the alloy 16v in an X1/9.'' (edited)
Gordon said -
''1.9 litre is possible using Tipo SOHC block with 14-bolt head .
Externally engine is identical to stock but internally oil gallery is in different place allowing longer stroke crank.''
I'm saying -
''I'm flagging myself up for having missed a trick and I'm a bit gutted because maybe I chose the wrong engine for my build. I had a closer look at the blue Dallara (above) - come on guys, I should have noticed and maybe you should have noticed - it's not got a Dallara head it's got an Alfa Romeo head, but the crossflow is in the same direction as the Dallara - the head is not on back to front.''
Gordon, please let us in to the secret - because the Tipo engine (according to Wiki, which is not always correct) comes in many sizes -
Petrol[edit]
1. Do these engines have iron or aluminium blocks ?
2. Are the blocks all the same or is there a 'small block' up to say 1600cc, and a 'big block' say for 1600cc and over ?
3. Therefore which of these blocks will fit the X1/9's engine mounts ?
You can see where this is leading -
Gordon, why are you still using a SOHC 8V head when it appears you could (maybe) be using a DOHC 8V or a DOHC 16V head ?
The gearbox - OK so we know that at least one version of the Tipo engine fits the X1/9's mounts, and that this engine fits the X1/9's gearbox casing, and that the Bacci Romano dog-gear set fits inside this casing, and that (because it was developed for competition use in the Gp5. Dallara) it can handle at least 230 bhp.
Also we know that with ITB's and programmable injection and a properly mapped ECU, 180 bhp off 1900 cc is possible even with the SOHC 8V head.
If the DOHC 16V head fits the Tipo block, then I guess it will make quite a bit more, about as much as the Gp5. Dallara, but it will be much more flexible, and still be correctly rated for the Bacci gearbox.
Wow. Stupendous. Way to go. There is no substitute for cc's, as the saying goes. Please can we therefore define -
1. What's the best block
2. What's the best head
3. What's the best crank
4 What's the best piston set
5. What's the best rod set
Next thing, apart from getting Gordon's car to go even faster, is to make it safer and make it stop faster. Gordon you've already mentioned 'the brakes' and you're right to do so.
The absolute best I've come across to date (and it's not cheap so grab on to something solid) - would be to replace the entire system. Wilwood 4-piston sliding calipers on Ergal brackets all round, Wilwood 257mm ventilated, slotted and drilled discs all round, Wilwood pedal box, Wilwood brake bias adjuster, Wilwood 2-piston brake master cylinder, Wilwood single piston clutch master cylinder, Wilwood reservoirs on all three cylinders, Aeroqiup high pressure hydraulic lines. Complete kit is available from Di Fulvio Racing -
www.difulvioracing.it
www.difulvioracing.it
You might also consider (but not for road use) rose-jointed front wishbones like this -
www.difulvioracing.it
...and aluminium / copper alloy front hubs like this -
Also, I don't know what your wheels are (Revolution 4-Spoke?) or how much they weigh, but I'm sure these are the lightest 13'' wheels available at the moment -
www.imagewheels.co.uk
My reason for getting in to this in the first place - the argument against ''just get an Elise'', is still valid.
If a DOHC 2.0L 16V (Tipo) engine fits the X1/9's engine mounts, just add a turbo and it won't be long before someone starts saying 'just get an Integrale' - which would be funny because I would have to agree. But then I'd come back at you and say - I would want both.
Perhaps that is THE question that needs to be answered first, before I write any more.
Never mind, I'll forge on anyway and you can correct me. It'll all come out in the wash.
First up and to anyone joining this thread, I am researching and defining an ultimate spec for 'the ultimate X', according to a criteria which for the time being is -
1. It can be a fast road car (like my build), or a more specialised car like Gordon's. (Gordon is your car road legal ?)
2. It is (or can be) road legal (not a race car).
3. It is naturally aspirated.
4. It does not have flared arches.
5. It uses the iron (or possibly aluminium) block Lampredi SOHC but could be DOHC, 8V or 16V (disambiguation required).
6. The block must fit the X1/9's engine mounts.
7. Maximum capacity is limited by 5.
FM155 said -
''Yep, I have a Lampredi 2.0 turbo 16V in my 155Q4. It's still very much iron blocked in the production cars and the Deltas used the same engine too. I'm pretty certain that the Deltas had the Iron block in the group A Integrale. I'm always torn between using an original engine or a lighter, more efficient 16v version. I really like a tuned 8v motor but there's just so much potential for the alloy 16v in an X1/9.'' (edited)
Gordon said -
''1.9 litre is possible using Tipo SOHC block with 14-bolt head .
Externally engine is identical to stock but internally oil gallery is in different place allowing longer stroke crank.''
I'm saying -
''I'm flagging myself up for having missed a trick and I'm a bit gutted because maybe I chose the wrong engine for my build. I had a closer look at the blue Dallara (above) - come on guys, I should have noticed and maybe you should have noticed - it's not got a Dallara head it's got an Alfa Romeo head, but the crossflow is in the same direction as the Dallara - the head is not on back to front.''
Gordon, please let us in to the secret - because the Tipo engine (according to Wiki, which is not always correct) comes in many sizes -
Petrol[edit]
| Model | Engine | Cat | Displ | Power | Torque |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1 FIRE | 160A3.000 | — | 1,108 cc | 56 PS (41 kW; 55 hp) at 5,500 rpm | 89 N⋅m (66 lb⋅ft) at 2,900 rpm |
| 1.4 i.e., S | 160A1.046 | 
| 1,372 cc | 70 PS (51 kW; 69 hp) at 6,000 rpm | 106 N⋅m (78 lb⋅ft) at 3,000 rpm |
| 159A2.000 | — | 78 PS (57 kW; 77 hp) at 6,000 rpm | 108 N⋅m (80 lb⋅ft) at 2,900 rpm | ||
| 1.4, DGT[7] | 160A1.000 | — | 1,372 cc | 71 PS (52 kW; 70 hp) at 6,000 rpm | 105 N⋅m (77 lb⋅ft) at 3,750 rpm |
| 160A1.048 |
| 72 PS (53 kW; 71 hp) at 6,000 rpm | 105 N⋅m (77 lb⋅ft) at 3,750 rpm | ||
| 1.6 i.e.[7] | 159A3.046 |
| 1,581 cc | 80 PS (59 kW; 79 hp) at 6,000 rpm | 128 N⋅m (94 lb⋅ft) at 3,000 rpm |
| 159A3.048 | 76 PS (56 kW; 75 hp) at 6,000 rpm (ECE) | 124 N⋅m (91 lb⋅ft) at 3,000 rpm | |||
| 1.6 DGT[7] | 160A2.000 | — | 1,581 cc | 86 PS (63 kW; 85 hp) at 5,800 rpm | 132 N⋅m (97 lb⋅ft) at 2,900 rpm |
| 82 PS (60 kW; 81 hp) at 6,000 rpm (ECE) | 130 N⋅m (96 lb⋅ft) at 2,900 rpm | ||||
| 1.6 i.e. | 149.C2.046 |
| 1,585 cc | 90 PS (66 kW; 89 hp) at 6,250 rpm | 122 N⋅m (90 lb⋅ft) at 4,250 rpm |
| 1.7 i.e. or 1.6 S i.e. 1994-1996: Export model Germany, Greece, Brazil (17 sold), Turkey |
| 1,676 cc | 90 PS (66 kW; 89 hp) at 5,900 rpm | 130 N⋅m (96 lb⋅ft) at 3,000 rpm | |
| 1.8 i.e. | 159A4.000 | — | 1,756 cc | 110 PS (81 kW; 108 hp) at 6,000 rpm | 142 N⋅m (105 lb⋅ft) at 2,500 rpm |
| 1.8 i.e. 16V Sedicivalvole | 160A5.000 | — | 1,756 cc | 138 PS (101 kW; 136 hp) at 6,250 rpm | 167 N⋅m (123 lb⋅ft) at 4,600 rpm[8] |
| 2.0 i.e. | 159A6.046 |
| 1,995 cc | 115 PS (85 kW; 113 hp) at 5,750 rpm | 159 N⋅m (117 lb⋅ft) at 3,300 rpm[8] |
| 159A5.046 | 109 PS (80 kW; 108 hp) at ? rpm | ? at ? rpm | |||
| 2.0 i.e. 16V Sedicivalvole | 160A8.046 |
| 1,995 cc | 148 PS (109 kW; 146 hp) at 6,250 rpm | 173 N⋅m (128 lb⋅ft) at 5,000 rpm[8] |
| 2.0 i.e. 16V Sport | 836A3.000 |
| 1,995 cc | 142 PS (104 kW; 140 hp) at 6,000 rpm | 180 N⋅m (133 lb⋅ft) at 4,500 rpm (CEE) |
1. Do these engines have iron or aluminium blocks ?
2. Are the blocks all the same or is there a 'small block' up to say 1600cc, and a 'big block' say for 1600cc and over ?
3. Therefore which of these blocks will fit the X1/9's engine mounts ?
You can see where this is leading -
Gordon, why are you still using a SOHC 8V head when it appears you could (maybe) be using a DOHC 8V or a DOHC 16V head ?
The gearbox - OK so we know that at least one version of the Tipo engine fits the X1/9's mounts, and that this engine fits the X1/9's gearbox casing, and that the Bacci Romano dog-gear set fits inside this casing, and that (because it was developed for competition use in the Gp5. Dallara) it can handle at least 230 bhp.
Also we know that with ITB's and programmable injection and a properly mapped ECU, 180 bhp off 1900 cc is possible even with the SOHC 8V head.
If the DOHC 16V head fits the Tipo block, then I guess it will make quite a bit more, about as much as the Gp5. Dallara, but it will be much more flexible, and still be correctly rated for the Bacci gearbox.
Wow. Stupendous. Way to go. There is no substitute for cc's, as the saying goes. Please can we therefore define -
1. What's the best block
2. What's the best head
3. What's the best crank
4 What's the best piston set
5. What's the best rod set
Next thing, apart from getting Gordon's car to go even faster, is to make it safer and make it stop faster. Gordon you've already mentioned 'the brakes' and you're right to do so.
The absolute best I've come across to date (and it's not cheap so grab on to something solid) - would be to replace the entire system. Wilwood 4-piston sliding calipers on Ergal brackets all round, Wilwood 257mm ventilated, slotted and drilled discs all round, Wilwood pedal box, Wilwood brake bias adjuster, Wilwood 2-piston brake master cylinder, Wilwood single piston clutch master cylinder, Wilwood reservoirs on all three cylinders, Aeroqiup high pressure hydraulic lines. Complete kit is available from Di Fulvio Racing -
kit freni maggiorati anteriori con pinze 4 pistoncini - Di Fulvio Racing
kit freni maggiorati X1/9 anteriori e posteriori ( adattabili anche ad altre vetture Fiat con stessi attacchi fuselli con cerchi da 13' ) )il kit composto da : 2 pinze a 4 pistoncini - 1 serie pastiglie Ferodo Racing - 2 staffe in ergal - 2 dischi ventilati compositi maggiorati Prezzo del...
Kit pedaliere con doppie pompe separate + regolazione - Di Fulvio Racing
You might also consider (but not for road use) rose-jointed front wishbones like this -
Kit bracci anteriori - Di Fulvio Racing
...and aluminium / copper alloy front hubs like this -
Also, I don't know what your wheels are (Revolution 4-Spoke?) or how much they weigh, but I'm sure these are the lightest 13'' wheels available at the moment -
UltraLite Alloy Wheel - Image Wheels Bespoke Alloys
The Ultralite has evolved from the Billet 93 with improved strength and weight savings making this our lightest alloy wheel to date! Custom made in England.
www.imagewheels.co.uk
My reason for getting in to this in the first place - the argument against ''just get an Elise'', is still valid.
If a DOHC 2.0L 16V (Tipo) engine fits the X1/9's engine mounts, just add a turbo and it won't be long before someone starts saying 'just get an Integrale' - which would be funny because I would have to agree. But then I'd come back at you and say - I would want both.
svensktoppen
RMS Regular
- Messages
- 32,781
- Drives
- FK2 CTR
Just get an Elise 
This is all good stuff Mark and all part of the journey. It's the journey that matters, not the destination, keep it up
Trust me, you would be on the same journey with the Elise as well!
This is all good stuff Mark and all part of the journey. It's the journey that matters, not the destination, keep it up
Trust me, you would be on the same journey with the Elise as well!
FM155
RMS Regular
- Messages
- 8,715
- Drives
- Alfa 155
If you want to use an original looking engine, then a large capacity version like Gordon has done in his, is definitely the most straightforward option. If you are using it as a road car, having torque is important for driveability so high capacity is always a good thing to get the torque. From memory, there were a few X1/9's that were converted to Strada 130 T/C engines but a lot of bulkhead cutting was required to make room so it maybe wouldn't be what you would want if you want to retain as much of the original car's character as possible.
Having said that, the last 1.4 16V's have a very compact head in comparison to the larger twin cam units in the tipo and stilo. I've had a 1.6 16V Stilo head off for a top end reconditioning and head gasket change and it was a wide head. The cam carriers were separate units that sat on top of the head at an angle of something like 15 degrees which made the top of the head very wide.
Having said that, the last 1.4 16V's have a very compact head in comparison to the larger twin cam units in the tipo and stilo. I've had a 1.6 16V Stilo head off for a top end reconditioning and head gasket change and it was a wide head. The cam carriers were separate units that sat on top of the head at an angle of something like 15 degrees which made the top of the head very wide.
Mark Bowden
RMS Regular
OP
- Messages
- 217
- Thread Starter
- #49
Haha, funny guy... you're right. I haven't got an Elise, sigh.
The WOSP race alternator and reduction-gear starter just arrived - time to dash off to the engineers...
Think I'll take the Focus !
The WOSP race alternator and reduction-gear starter just arrived - time to dash off to the engineers...
Think I'll take the Focus !
svensktoppen
RMS Regular
- Messages
- 32,781
- Drives
- FK2 CTR
Another random video that popped up, some good racing in there and a totally bonkers aero car too