fiat vs K20 engine discussion

My 2c

Whilst I'd agree with Jim that this discussion should not devolve into anything nasty, I feel that a debate as to the merits of radical modifications to our cars (and which modifications are deemed ok) is reasonable.

I'll start by saying that when it comes to my Fiat I come from from a very purist perspective. In my opinion, a good, period correct, unmolested (or sympathetically restored) X1/9 will be more valuable in 20 years than one with any engine transplant or body modifications. People feel free to do anything they like with X1/9s because they are cheap (and don't get me wrong: this is not a bad thing). But as they become rarer (particularly ones that are relatively original) then the equation starts to change significantly.

With respect to the comments about the reliability of the Fiat mechanical components: I've owned my X1/9 since it had 20,000 KMs. It now had 220,000 KMs. I did have to rebuild the gearbox at 200,000 KMs, but that was my fault as I neglected a gearbox leak and the main bearing failed.

Other than that, it was just regular oil changes and typical problems at typical intervals (tie rod ends, wheel bearings, lower control arm ball joint, etc.). The Lampredi SOHC engine is a very solid design and has proven to be extremely reliable in a whole range of Fiats. I've seen many Unos with several hundred thousand KMs.

In terms of what sort of power can be extracted from this engine, we must compare apples with apples. I'd cite two examples:

Referring to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_128_SOHC_engine#Engine_specification

... you can see that the MK1 Punto GT was able to extract 136 BHP form the engine with a pretty mild Turbo set-up in what I would call a reliable configuration. The most extreme appication of the engine would be Graversen's X1/9 in Denmark who has been able to achieve 350 BHP (go to the 3 minute mark on this video). That said, this is not an every day application.

But here is the case in point: this is an engine designed in the late 60's. Is there any Honda designed engine, designed in the same period, that was used up until 2010 and was able to get 136 BHP in factory guise?

If we want to compare a Honda engine with a "modern" Fiat equivalent, I would propose the engine used in the new Alfa 4C as a benchmark. This is simply an evolution of the Fiat "multi air" system which is an ingenious system that uses a hydraulic intake system to implement a cam profile that is infinitely adjustable. This makes the Honda VTEC system (which has simply 2 cam profiles) look prehistoric.

This engine is used in pretty mundane Fiats like the MiTo and the 500 but is also used in the Alfa 4C, which is why I'd see this as the modern successor to an X1/9: standard Fiat mechanicals in an exceptional chassis.

In the 4C, the engine delivers 240 PS and powers the car to 100 KP/h in 4.5 seconds (in a car weighing only slightly less than an X1/9).

So if we want to compare apples with apples, I still feel that an X1/9 can remain a FIAT X1/9 and still trump Japanese engineering...

Dom.
 
Many years ago on Xweb, I posted about how the chassis is the soul of a car and the engine it's heart. Both must work well together and match each other in harmony to result in special motoring magic.

Consider for a moment Lotus road cars. Since their beginnings Lotus relied on various engine, gear box and other non Lotus oily bits for production of their famed road cars. For the vast majority of Lotus owners and fans, brand of engine, gear box and such mattered little, how they performed together as a match mattered.

Then we have the world of real race cars, Dallara, Swift, Ralt, Lola, Riley, Norma, Radical and... these are powered by various engines matched to various gear boxes and non-primary brand components. When properly done, these race cars work quite well. Honda Performance Development is powering more than a few spec racers today in the same way FORD (Pinto engine based) powered many spec racers back in the day. Fiat did this, Renault did this, BMW did this along with a host of other brands. Racing is much about promotion, brand identity creation in the public eye, ego building and trophy waving. It is very much a circus designed for amusement, entertainment and fiefdom building.

What matters far more is how well any given engine/gearbox and related has been integrated into the exxe chassis. There is a belief that the "Factory" is best at doing this.. Abarth, AMG, Alpina, MWB and many others have proven time and time again the "Factory" does not have a monopoly on how best to install and integrate alternative engines, gear boxes and related into a given chassis.

Consider for a moment the X1/9 was never a Fiat product it is a Bertone product powered by Fiat mechanicals and some related bits. In this light, what difference does it make if this Bertone chassis is powered by an Italian, German, French, Japanese, American, British or any Nationality engine-gearbox and related if it meets the requirement of what fits the Bertone chassis soul and personalty best?

What can be said of putting Judd (UK) engine into a BMW (Germany) E36 chassis that resulted in an excellent race car?

Beyond this alternative engine/gear box business, debate and all that. There is brand loyalty, Nationalism, ego, trophy waving, bragging rights, membership in that elite group and all that.. None of which I'm particularly interested in or care about... at all. Yet this is so very pervasive in the world of motor cars..

Realistically, how much power to weight is really needed for a road car? How fast does one really wanna go and how fast is possible on public roads without substantial risk to the driver and other motorist on these public roads? Quick search on YouTube reveals numerous videos of super car owners with too much dough, too much ego, too much want for attention, want for social status and such with totally inadequate driving skills and judgement that have completely totaled their ride in the public spot light.

There are more than a few over 500 Bhp, over 500lb/ft production cars on the road today capable of near or over 200 Mph with a 0-60 under four seconds. How long can any driver hold the throttle of these motor cars flat to the floor on public roads? Can the throttle be held at full for hour upon hour? What could possibly go wrong? All this reminds me of what has happened with racerized Japanese motorcycles and the growth of organ donations (stemmed by helmet laws).


Is this much about the individual driving experience and enjoyment or social status, ego building, trophy waving, elite group membership.. what is this really all about, it goes far beyond should a Honda K20 be installed into the X1/9 chassis.


Bernice



Ulix said:
...for me would be to not keep the "italian" spirit, if there is such a thing, but to keep the spirit of the car, the machine.
Meaning that the engine should go along with what makes the X special in character.
To me, that would be a small, light engine that loves to rev and sounds great. If that happens to be a Honda V-Tec, so be it. What I would definitely not want is a modern small displacement turbo with a bunch of torque, running out of steam at 5500rpm and sounding like an appliance.
No, turbo noises do not make this better.
And no, a Fiat badge on the engine also wouldn't make this better either.
Click to expand...
 
my 2c

Yes I am STILL putting a b16 in my X. that being said, if my car was near good condition when I started the project I probably would have kept it Fiat with as much of a build I could. If my car was in showroom condition, I would leave it %100 stock as being in great condition stock there really isnt a reason to change it.

There are reasons why people drive the cars they drive. What I love about this forum is we contain people all the way from purists to "I hate this car, please buy it" (which we usually talk them down and get their car running and they end up being an X lifer). With this variety of people we still do discuss, albeit passionately at times, but we discuss it.

LONG LIVE THE X! in its many forms!!!

Odie
 
I am torn on this one. The modern Honda K20 powerplant is fast, smooth, and reliable. Would make the X a faster and better car.

I'm hardly a purist and have changed a few things on my X but she's in very good condition and I don't want to change the overall look and character too much.

...and to Bernice's point, a little more power and speed would be fun, but I often cannot hold my foot the floor of my underpowered X for too long before I'm breaking the speed limit on many of the roads I travel. If I were racing like many others here, then I think there would be a greater desire for more substantial power.

Having said that, I've had more than a few hopped-up Civics and Subarus who think my car is fast and want to race from the stoplight. I don't even try. It would be fun to smoke them.
 
My .02¢

The K20 or even a B series engine is a great alternative to a SOHC Fiat. It’s not a boat anchor, makes decent power, and sound good with a decent exhaust; I might even go that route with my X.

Now as for a VW VR6 swap;
I think it would fit, but you might have to modify the trunk for exhaust clearance. It’s a heavy engine and like the SOHC Fait it can be costly to modify; cheapest most reliable way to make over 200 HP is a supercharger. If someone wants to try shoehorning a VR into an X let me know I’ve got one sitting on a stand in my shop that I’ll let go for cheap.

Whatever you choose to put into your X it all boils down to the enjoyment of driving.
 
The Fiat SOHC engine is very robust

If you take a good look at the bottom end of the SOHC engine you'll notice that it has lots of potential to deliver much more HP. What lets the SOHC engine down is the common 8V head.
The crank is a work of art, very nice fillets, very well machined, etc. Very overbuilt. The rod and main journals are as big as a small block chevy. It will support much more HP than it typically does. Yes, the 1300 rods are weak, but good rods are not too expensive, and the 1500 has good rods. Other than the head designed for an econo car, the number of head bolts are a limiting factor. 4 head bolts per cylinder is pretty weak. Yes, there are things you can do to seal things up, but more head bolts would sure help. That said, the bottom end of these engines screams to be blown. Add the boost, the lower end can take it! Boost helps cover up the poor head, but would really put some stress on the head gasket. One down side of boost is additional weight; you don't need more weight back there on an X.
But, unless you place a very high value on factory stock configurations any engine that deliver's the right specs should do just fine. Low weight, high revs, good torque, compact size, uncomplicated, inexpensive, etc. I think the Honda K fits most of these specs, but I wonder if it will rev and make the same sweet sounds as a Fiat SOHC?
 
suki101 said:
Now as for a VW VR6 swap;
I think it would fit, but you might have to modify the trunk for exhaust clearance. It’s a heavy engine and like the SOHC Fait it can be costly to modify; cheapest most reliable way to make over 200 HP is a supercharger. If someone wants to try shoehorning a VR into an X let me know I’ve got one sitting on a stand in my shop that I’ll let go for cheap.
Click to expand...

I measured it out, not practical IMO as it's a little too long (wide) and has much of the engine mass ahead of the drive axles. The VR is about 8 to 10" wider than an X. All of this can be handled, but the VR is not ideal IMO.

I have come across numerous Dodge 2.3/2.5 turbo swaps, that seems to go in with relatively minor modifications.

I digress though, I like Mikehynes response, the head itself lets the engine down and the packaging is silly, it could really benefit from 6" additional length in the engine compartment and better cooling.

If fiat bolted a 5-bolt 16V DOHC it would be one of the best engines ever :)

The fact that the slavs bought the tooling and made a YUGO should say a lot about the industrial / economical application potential of the Lampredy design. Engines usually get well deserved reputations over time.

Any replacement engine for the X should IMO be light, free revving, with better (short ratio) gearing just like the original with improvements
 
I love X1/9s and have owned 9 of them over the years...

...Most of them were stock 1500/5 speed cars, two 1300/4 speeds. I have always respected the chassis and design, however have thought for many moons that the acceleration in the stock form was borderline dangerous. Not quite as dangerous as my 1972 Mercedes 220D (0-60 in 20+ seconds)...however accelerating onto freeway speed, I don't think it is acceptable to have to look back about a 1/4 mile to find where I am going to be able to merge into traffic. That being said, a performance head/exhaust certainly gives enough to take care of that issue. I have gone that route on two of my X's and was very pleased. I have also had the opportunity to drive a few of the K20 X1/9s and the acceleration is nothing less than breathtaking. Yes, you can rev them high and yes...they can sound incredible. The weight difference is negligible, and the car feels just as nimble as does your stock X1/9, only with enough gusto to run with anything on the road. The six speed gear box with the linkage that Jonathon designed for this swap is a work of art, and would be swell in ANY modern vehicle application. Again, I love the X1/9, but never cared for the sloppy shifter, and was always searching for another gear. I can remember that being one of my biggest turn offs when I test drove new X1/9s back in 1985.
I feel "to each his own" when it comes to modifications. Enjoy what you have...how you want it. :)
 
Change also brings loss

When you change something on your car, you are always in danger of giving up something that you like about your car.
When "improving" your suspension, you usually give up ride quality. Maybe even some of the handling traits that you liked.

Some time ago, there was a discussion here about the inherent handling traits of the X. One X racer (sorry, forgot who it was) reported that with a full race suspension, the X becomes so neutral and stable that the steer-with-your-right-foot trait of the X is gone.
That trait happens to be THE most important aspect that makes a sports car fun to me.

I doubled the power and torque in my X. This makes the car much more fun, but it also gives up certain traits. For instance, when I used to throw my X into a tight turn and floor the throttle for a little slide, it now tends to just spin the inside rear tire.

So with every "improvement", you also lose something, even if it may be small.
The thing I am afaid of with any drivetrain swap is, what may I be giving up that I may miss later?
This is a question I cannot answer without spending a bunch of time in a K20 X1/9 (which do not exist in Europe unfortunately).

This to me is the most important question and the answer to this question would also tell me if a driveline swap would be the "right" thing to do or if I should rather buy a Super 7.
 
Great discussion

I have two quick thoughts about this:

1) To each his own! This is not a NART Ferrari - the X1/9 is a really cool car that can be had for a few grand and is amenable to tinkering and modification. We should embrace that spirit.

2) There are great cars and there are great engines. My other two cars are an Alfa Spider and a Mazda RX8. Those cars are largely defined by their engines, and swapping them would be blasphemous. Heck, the Mazda even has little triangles all over it! The SOHC FIAT engine is good but doesn't define our great little cars. I think it's similar to the Miata, an excellent car but one in which a little piece of you doesn't die when you hear someone swaps out the engine.

This is a fun discussion. Thanks, all!
 
More about Quad Al here...

https://www.google.com/search?q=qua...1Bsy5ogT7q4KwDw&ved=0CB8QsAQ&biw=1440&bih=751

And its not an Anglia Jim, its a Fiat Topolino (glass) body and radiator shell. Two Allisons were linked together on each side (butts and mussels) and powered the front axle, the other two powered the rear axle. The the front differential was flipped and was somewhat steerable, and the diffs were probably locked up so that all 8 tires would light up. Back in the 60's, I think it ran its best at about 180 mph in the quarter and the owners then were actually taking racing seriously! But it was a "show" car much like the (wheel-standers) before there were any real "show" cars in quarter-mile racing.

Pictured in the group is Big Al that is a single engined Allison powered '33 Ford Sedan (glass) with the extreme top-chop. The driver sat in the rear and his head peered up over the roof. More info about these cars and owners by googling. I knew one of the owners, Tex Collins, before he was shot and killed by a jealous husband (boyfriend?) and he had a fleet of Allisons in CRATES laying around his store (Cal Automotive) on Lankersheim in North Hollywood. His "company" built my glass T Bucket.

Alas... even though Quad Al and Big Al and even my Model T Bucket are powered by engines foreign to the shape of their bodies... and in FACT are not even REAL cars... They are still known as a '38 FIAT Topolino, a '33 FORD Sedan, and a '23 FORD Model T Roadster. Mine was even registered as a "Historical Vehicle"!

I guess ya gotta be from Milford, Somewhere... to appreciate these cars. I was born in Milford Connecticut...

HA!
 
This is one helluva GREAT DISCUSSION!!!

I see most are PASSIONATE with their FEELINGS as well as their PREFERENCES and FACTS and all done ASSERTIVELY and not necessarily AGGRESSIVELY.

Three Cheers for ALL the members of this forum... even the ones that own me $20 bucks...
 
Basic to why so many are looking for more power in the exxe has to do with it's excellent chassis. If the chassis had poor dynamics, fragile, difficult to control, un-responsive and all those common chassis faults few would have any interest in upping the power available from the engine or a better gear box.

What is often not appreciated by many, specially in America acceleration is one very limited aspect of motor vehicle performance yet it is by FAR the most easy for many drivers to experience and access. That old saying Horse Power sells cars is based on this. The lack of neck snapping, tire smoking, on the edge of death ride are reasons why so many car folks view the exxe as a POS, under powered and totally unworthy car to own or for consideration as a wave-able trophy to brag about.

Once enter more complex and sophisticated aspects of chassis performance and overall motor car performance, it all changes. As delivered the exxe has an excellent ride. It is soft, compliant, very well controlled and is why driving over rough roads for long distances is quite acceptable. Cornering hard results in body roll, but the levels of body roll is quite acceptable. Near and on the limits the chassis can be put into a very controllable slide with excellent control and response using the throttle. These are all the traits and signs of a very well designed and sorted chassis. I suspect those who are critical of the lack of power do not appreciate these aspects of what the exxe chassis offers and put their focus on straight line acceleration.

The brakes as delivered are good, very, very good.

These are the basic facts of why there is such a division between those who covet the exxe -vs- those who despise it. It is also very telling that more than a few famed racer car folks have owned or used the exxe chassis as the basis for their performance car.


Moving on to the much mis-understood Lampredi SOHC engine. It is one of the best engine designs from that era for it's displacement. Those who do not understand it consider a total POS that does not produce proper power, fragile and should have never been born or produced.

With this in mind let's look at the basic design and why certain aspects were done the way it was. Know Lampredi is one of the best engine designers from that era, equal in talent and vision to many of the very best engine designers from that era.

The bore size is 86-87 (88 for those nuts enough to try this) mm. Turns out, most race engines to this day or any high performance engine has this range of bore size.. It is not accidental, it comes from flame rate propagation within a cylinder. The flame front does not want to travel down-ward, it wants to travel across the surface. There is also a time limit to how fast the burn cycle can take place. It happens to be that if one sets an engine rpm limit to about 8,000 rpm 86-88mm bore is good.

In the UK, engines were once taxed by bore diameter and displacement which is why British engines from that era had small bores with long strokes. This resulted in low RPM engines with low burn efficiency. Their chamber design was not ideal adding to this problem.

In America, there was zero penalty for displacement, engine size, stroke or.. Making more power was not too difficult as increasing engine size, displacement, keeping the max RPMs low all reduced stress within the engine. Beyond this, American drivers do not run these engines at 100% output for very long. This mean making a engine with big power for very short durations pleased their customers much and the big engine with big horse power numbers made them very, very marketable.

Back to the Lampredi SOHC engine. The stroke was short, it varied between 55.5mm to 67.4mm which is pretty short relative to it's bore. This is just one of the reasons why it is so capable at high RPM. Adding to this, the con rod length is in the 130mm area, giving a stroke to con rod ratio of about 2:1. This means there is a good dwell time for the compression to power cycle resulting in effective and efficient burn. Short stroke also reduces frictional losses, and reduces effective piston speeds and lowers mechanical stress on rotating parts.

Moving on to the block, it is thin wall cast iron technology. This allowed for lower weight. In the non-tubo versions of this block, the cylinder are siamesed or cast as a solid section to increase rigidity. The closed deck adds to the block's rigidity and stability. It has five main bearings and a very good oiling system (except when it is oil starved in hard cornering). Oil return is on the side of the block to reduce the crank's ability to foam up the retuning oil back to the pan. The crank journals are sized for strength -vs- friction. This stout and well designed bottom end is why the Lampredi engine is so durable, reliable and able to be produce a LOT more power than it was delivered with.

The cylinder head chamber design is a reasonable wedge shape which has a modest flame path and squish area. While Hemi heads are often coveted, Hemi combustion chambers have a problem of flame propagation length. That Pent roof and wedge chambers do not have. One of the most common solutions to the Hemi chamber problem is to install two spark plugs. Alfa Romeo did this, Jaugar did this and so did others. The limitation of the wedge head is valve size, port shape and flow rate-vs- flow velocity. Still, it is a very reasonable set of trade offs for a pass production design. If one takes a look at the majority of cylinder head combustion chambers today, they are of the Pent roof design using four valves. There are very good reasons for this and why engine design evolution has chosen this design. If one takes a look at the Lampredi twin cam, one will find a Pent roof combustion chamber with BIG valves, not a Hemi.

The cam and valve system allows stability and enough rigidity to operate at high RPM with excellent reliability and durability. The large cam actuation area and shape helps reduce the valve actuation rate. That cam box rounds out the system by providing a rigid and stable foundation for the cam and valves.

Few petro engines has the ability to shear six M10, grade 12.9 flywheel bolts due to power delivery rate. This Lampredi engine is one of them. It is also why this engine is so very responsive when properly built and tuned up.

All these design elements and more are why the Lampredi SOHC fiat engine is excellent. These ideas are often taken for granted and not appreciated in modern engines like the Honda K20 and many others. Yet, their origins are not often appreciated.

Steve did an nice write up on the Lampredi SOHC..
http://xwebforums.com/forum/index.php?threads/22546/


It should be well understood that engine displacement taxes in Italy resulted in small displacement engines. Ferrari build a 2 liter turbo version of the 308 due to taxes for the Italian market. This is just one of the reasons why the exxe was produced with the engine it has.

Mostly forgotten today, American regulations on emissions also took a bit out of engine performance.

For those who obsessed with BIG engine power, watch this video about ten cars that wanna kill you. Most are over powered for their chassis or the chassis dynamics are poor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f--jqaYU-mg

Still, the obsession with fast and over powered cars remains. Racer folks figured out years ago to properly use power means converting the excess into down force using aerodynamics. Most production car folks have not embraced this concept or idea.. yet.

If motivation and time permits, I'll write something about that "Glass" transaxle.

Bernice
 
Last edited by a moderator:
How would a given driver like their exxe chassis to behave?

Turns out, there are many. many ways this chassis can be set up depending on driver needs and goals. As delivered even with stock 145 tires, it is a nice set of trade offs consisting of ride quality, grip, controllability and response at the limit.

Every exxe owner should experience a pre 1500cc car on stock steel wheels with 145 x 13" tires on a wet road which makes it easier to reach adhesion limits. One will discover, the chassis is very predictable, quick to respond to throttle changes and steering inputs with good feel of what is going on at the front wheels.

The CG is located at the lower back of the driver which is where human beings sense their balance. This is critical input for the driver to gain a sense of precisely what the chassis is doing. It is one of the reasons why driving the exxe feels much like an extension of one's body. Couple this with low polar moment of inertia (mid-egine layout) are significant elements of why the exxe feels the way it does.

Moving beyond the stock wheels, tires and chassis set up, it can be tailored in many ways. As a track race car chassis, the spring and damper rates can be significantly increased, alignment settings, and more can be adjusted to produce a very, very neutral chassis for a given set of wheels and tires. Once this is done, the chassis becomes more difficult to control as the transition from stick to slide is smaller and more abrupt. This is true for most track race cars that produce good lap times.

Again, it comes down to what a given driver wants and needs from the exxe chassis. I do not believe there is one ideal best set up for the exxe chassis due to the sheer number of factors involved.

As for the Lotus 7 or it's later variant. It is a front engine, solid rear axle chassis so very different from the exxe. What makes this chassis appealing is low weight. Front engine chassis are inherently understeering at the limit. What any front engine chassis go out of control and note the position if it's nose. There are very good reasons why Colin Chapman sold the production rights to this design.. he considered it old, obsolete and in the way...

There is another problem with front engine chassis that is not often discussed or considered. Forward visibility for the driver. To optimize weight distribution for a front engine layout means putting the driver towards the rear wheels and putting the engine behind the line of the front axle. This results in looking over a long bonnet. Consider or a moment what this does to the driver look for the apex of a corner and the ability to see the road ahead.. This is one of the prime factors I consider in any car. If the forward visibility is poor, it is an automatic fail on the spot. This is another aspect of the exxe that is not always appreciated to considered importing.


Bernice



Ulix said:
When you change something on your car, you are always in danger of giving up something that you like about your car.
When "improving" your suspension, you usually give up ride quality. Maybe even some of the handling traits that you liked.

Some time ago, there was a discussion here about the inherent handling traits of the X. One X racer (sorry, forgot who it was) reported that with a full race suspension, the X becomes so neutral and stable that the steer-with-your-right-foot trait of the X is gone.
That trait happens to be THE most important aspect that makes a sports car fun to me.

I doubled the power and torque in my X. This makes the car much more fun, but it also gives up certain traits. For instance, when I used to throw my X into a tight turn and floor the throttle for a little slide, it now tends to just spin the inside rear tire.

So with every "improvement", you also lose something, even if it may be small.
The thing I am afaid of with any drivetrain swap is, what may I be giving up that I may miss later?
This is a question I cannot answer without spending a bunch of time in a K20 X1/9 (which do not exist in Europe unfortunately).

This to me is the most important question and the answer to this question would also tell me if a driveline swap would be the "right" thing to do or if I should rather buy a Super 7.
Click to expand...
 
Ital design

A couple of years ago, the Peterson Museum hosted a show on Italian Design - something I noticed was that the Italian design houses had a history going back forever of making a car on order for a foreign manufacturer - Ford, Chrsyler, whatever, with that maker's drivetrain. So it could be said there's a tradition of putting non-Italian engines in a great Italian body.
 
neck snapping

totally agree with the first part. awhile back on this forum I pondered how well a exxe would do in a 1/4 mile if there were corners. i.e spectator drags at a 1/4 mile over. Steve H. replied with:

Ovals
I have run a number of my X's on ovals. And have done the "spectator drag" as well. Huntsville Speedway used to do this. They are a 1/4 mile banked asphalt oval. Our sports car club used to run an anual event there and I had made lots lap before I heard about the spectator drags.

So a group of us went one saturday night and I entered my '77 1300 X autocross car, on DOT race tires. I drew a big block Chevelle on some kind of "white letter" tires. We were supposed to draw for lane choice but I passed and gave the Chevelle driver choice and therefore the inside lane. We started side by side on the start/finish line and he killed me to turn 1, where he promptly understeered right up the banking to the wall. I then drove right under him and won easily.

I have also run my old DSP autocrosser at a number of "short tracks" including the half mile at Nashville where I was two seconds under the mini-stock track record. And at Huntsville I was under a second off the Late Model track record.

Ovals are a lot of fun but the walls are quite intimidating. And the spectator races can be fun but the 2000 lbs X is no match for most of the other cars that weight well over 3000 lbs if one of them decides to push you around.



Odie
 
girl, if that's proper, are the BOMB. I have only met a few people, men, and women that have the knowledge that you possess.
you rock!!
mikemo90*aol.com
gas cap there yet???
 
xunonove said:
I have two quick thoughts about this:

1) To each his own! This is not a NART Ferrari - the X1/9 is a really cool car that can be had for a few grand and is amenable to tinkering and modification. We should embrace that spirit.

2) There are great cars and there are great engines. My other two cars are an Alfa Spider and a Mazda RX8. Those cars are largely defined by their engines, and swapping them would be blasphemous....

This is a fun discussion. Thanks, all!
Click to expand...

Well said.

Fun discussion.
I like my X because it's
1) cool design; handeling/mid engine/targa/storage and design pedigree: Bertone, Gandini.....it's specific power plant is largely irrelevant to me
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top