Rupunzell
Bernice Loui
Not quite so simple on who assembled Bertone X1/9 bodies into complete X1/9 cars.
While Bertone made the body shells from the very start with the body shells being sent to a Fiat plant for final assembly, This did not hold true for the entire production life of the X1/9. Some time in the mid-1970's Fiat made a marketing decision to push the 128SL instead of the X1/9. This was another poke by Fiat management at the X1/9 and proving again Fiat management never wanted to produce or have anything to do with this Bertone design.
What Fiat management originally wanted to replace the 850 Spider was a FWD two seater, NOT a mid-engine two seater. This is why Fiat from that time promoted the 128SL over the X1/9 and why the FWD Fiat Barchetta
Became the Fiat two seater "sports car".. while Mazda introduced the MX-5, which is the Japanese effort to copy the Lotus Elan for the masses. The market success of the MX-5 proved how WRONG Fiat management was regarding the choice of a FWD two seater.
Ponder for a moment why Fiat never put forth any serious effort to create a racing brand identity for the X1/9? While Dallara used the X1/9 with help from the folks at Bertone to create his technical calling card as the Dallara X1/9. This was the car that got Dallara started in the race car business. One can find reference to it on the current Dallara web page history time line.
https://www.dallara.it/wps/portal/en/about/History#.VdGDfqY-D-Y
In contrast, British Leyland, Nissan (Datusn), Porsche promoted heavily in he USA using SCCA as their racing venue with full factory support for those interested and more. The US market was taken extremely seriously by these brands. This is why there is such a legacy following for these cars in the US to this very day.
In 1979 when the 1500cc version of the X1/9 appeared, it was a result of the Fiat Ritmo-Strada engine and related being federalized for the US market. If the 1500cc oily bits did not get US federalized, the 1500cc engine variant of the X1/9 would not have happened.
Noteworthy was the use of the rear suspension from the Lancia MonteCarlo-Scorpion in the 1500cc X1/9. When production went to a trickle then none- Fiat had to do something with all those rear suspension bits produced for the MontCarlo-Scorpion. This is why the rear suspension on the 1500cc X1/9 is so incredibly stout...as it was originally designed for about 300 hp V6. This is why the rear uprights, CV joints and related rear suspension bits are interchangeable between X1/9 and Lancia MonteCarlo-Scorpion. I'll save the story of this other under-reconized and appreciated and unfinished design maybe at a later time.
After the initial high demand for the 1500cc / 5 speed X1/9 died down, Fiat's interest in the X1/9 dropped significantly. By late 1981, Fiat was mostly out of the US car market. About that time, Fiat tossed the entire production of the X1/9 to Bertone. While Fiat continued to provide Bertone with oily bits and some related parts, that was when the X1/9 became a true Bertone product from start of the body shell to finished car.. even if Fiat continued to provide some bits.
By 1982, Fiat had pulled completely out of the USA car market.
The 1980's also marked the introduction of the Fiat Uno Turbo. Since Fiat decided to pull out of the US car market, the Uno Turbo oily bits never got US Federalization. If it did, there could have been a Uno Turbo variant of the X1/9.
1984, Bertone's X1/9 was marketed in the USA by IAI auto (Malcolm Bricklin) which IMO was one of the worst things to ever happen to the X1/9. This crook believed taking the X1/9 up market would be the answer for profitability and image. Most who know about X1/9 history knew what happened in the years after.
After the break up with IAI and Malcolm Bricklin, Bertone tried to go-it-alone in the US car market with the X1/9. That did not work out so well.
Friends who visited Bertone while the X1/9 was still in production asked the folks at Bertone why the X1/9 never got a more powerful drive train. Answer turned out to be Fiat's resistance to give Bertone access to anything other than the 1500cc / 5 speed. Fiat forced Bertone into a contract to accept a fixed number of engine-gearbox-axle-uprights with zero options. Fiat did not care if Bertone put them into cars or scrapped them, Bertone had to accept this fixed number with no exemptions. Beyond this Fiat had absolutely zero interest in spending any of their engineering and production resources on any redesign of the X1/9. Adding to this, Fiat was out of the US car market, any efforts to Federalize a more modern Fiat engine-gearbox was too expensive and pointless.
Proving again, Fiat was determined to kill off the X1/9 in any way they can.
Given this history of twist and turns... and how Fiat did what it could to kill of the X1/9 since day one.. Is the X1/9 really a Fiat?
Cadillac Allanté - Pininfarina was a very different deal. After Fiat ditched the 124 Spider, Pininfarina wanted access to the US car market beyond Ferrari. A deal with made with GM in a similar idea as the Bertone X1/9 bodies to GM assembly. Except Pininfarina did not assemble complete cars as Bertone did with the X1/9 and Pininfarina never tried to market Allanté independently from GM.
If one were to look at the personalities involved with the design, development and testing of the X1/9, this list consist of some of the very best and talented individuals from that time. Yet, their work on the X1/9 and it's resulting excellent design remains mostly unrecognized for a host of reasons politically and more.
Still think FCA would consider offering OEM x1/9 parts?
Bernice
While Bertone made the body shells from the very start with the body shells being sent to a Fiat plant for final assembly, This did not hold true for the entire production life of the X1/9. Some time in the mid-1970's Fiat made a marketing decision to push the 128SL instead of the X1/9. This was another poke by Fiat management at the X1/9 and proving again Fiat management never wanted to produce or have anything to do with this Bertone design.
What Fiat management originally wanted to replace the 850 Spider was a FWD two seater, NOT a mid-engine two seater. This is why Fiat from that time promoted the 128SL over the X1/9 and why the FWD Fiat Barchetta
Became the Fiat two seater "sports car".. while Mazda introduced the MX-5, which is the Japanese effort to copy the Lotus Elan for the masses. The market success of the MX-5 proved how WRONG Fiat management was regarding the choice of a FWD two seater.
Ponder for a moment why Fiat never put forth any serious effort to create a racing brand identity for the X1/9? While Dallara used the X1/9 with help from the folks at Bertone to create his technical calling card as the Dallara X1/9. This was the car that got Dallara started in the race car business. One can find reference to it on the current Dallara web page history time line.
https://www.dallara.it/wps/portal/en/about/History#.VdGDfqY-D-Y
In contrast, British Leyland, Nissan (Datusn), Porsche promoted heavily in he USA using SCCA as their racing venue with full factory support for those interested and more. The US market was taken extremely seriously by these brands. This is why there is such a legacy following for these cars in the US to this very day.
In 1979 when the 1500cc version of the X1/9 appeared, it was a result of the Fiat Ritmo-Strada engine and related being federalized for the US market. If the 1500cc oily bits did not get US federalized, the 1500cc engine variant of the X1/9 would not have happened.
Noteworthy was the use of the rear suspension from the Lancia MonteCarlo-Scorpion in the 1500cc X1/9. When production went to a trickle then none- Fiat had to do something with all those rear suspension bits produced for the MontCarlo-Scorpion. This is why the rear suspension on the 1500cc X1/9 is so incredibly stout...as it was originally designed for about 300 hp V6. This is why the rear uprights, CV joints and related rear suspension bits are interchangeable between X1/9 and Lancia MonteCarlo-Scorpion. I'll save the story of this other under-reconized and appreciated and unfinished design maybe at a later time.
After the initial high demand for the 1500cc / 5 speed X1/9 died down, Fiat's interest in the X1/9 dropped significantly. By late 1981, Fiat was mostly out of the US car market. About that time, Fiat tossed the entire production of the X1/9 to Bertone. While Fiat continued to provide Bertone with oily bits and some related parts, that was when the X1/9 became a true Bertone product from start of the body shell to finished car.. even if Fiat continued to provide some bits.
By 1982, Fiat had pulled completely out of the USA car market.
The 1980's also marked the introduction of the Fiat Uno Turbo. Since Fiat decided to pull out of the US car market, the Uno Turbo oily bits never got US Federalization. If it did, there could have been a Uno Turbo variant of the X1/9.
1984, Bertone's X1/9 was marketed in the USA by IAI auto (Malcolm Bricklin) which IMO was one of the worst things to ever happen to the X1/9. This crook believed taking the X1/9 up market would be the answer for profitability and image. Most who know about X1/9 history knew what happened in the years after.
After the break up with IAI and Malcolm Bricklin, Bertone tried to go-it-alone in the US car market with the X1/9. That did not work out so well.
Friends who visited Bertone while the X1/9 was still in production asked the folks at Bertone why the X1/9 never got a more powerful drive train. Answer turned out to be Fiat's resistance to give Bertone access to anything other than the 1500cc / 5 speed. Fiat forced Bertone into a contract to accept a fixed number of engine-gearbox-axle-uprights with zero options. Fiat did not care if Bertone put them into cars or scrapped them, Bertone had to accept this fixed number with no exemptions. Beyond this Fiat had absolutely zero interest in spending any of their engineering and production resources on any redesign of the X1/9. Adding to this, Fiat was out of the US car market, any efforts to Federalize a more modern Fiat engine-gearbox was too expensive and pointless.
Proving again, Fiat was determined to kill off the X1/9 in any way they can.
Given this history of twist and turns... and how Fiat did what it could to kill of the X1/9 since day one.. Is the X1/9 really a Fiat?
Cadillac Allanté - Pininfarina was a very different deal. After Fiat ditched the 124 Spider, Pininfarina wanted access to the US car market beyond Ferrari. A deal with made with GM in a similar idea as the Bertone X1/9 bodies to GM assembly. Except Pininfarina did not assemble complete cars as Bertone did with the X1/9 and Pininfarina never tried to market Allanté independently from GM.
If one were to look at the personalities involved with the design, development and testing of the X1/9, this list consist of some of the very best and talented individuals from that time. Yet, their work on the X1/9 and it's resulting excellent design remains mostly unrecognized for a host of reasons politically and more.
Still think FCA would consider offering OEM x1/9 parts?
Bernice