Fiat X 1/9: which version to buy
If you are choosing a Fiat X 1/9 from this catalogue, the decision is between four Targa versions in 1 generation (1972-01-01 to 1985-01-31). There is no second generation here, so you are not choosing an era of the car — you are choosing engine size, gearbox count, fuel system, and the numbers that actually differ.
If you are choosing a Fiat X 1/9 from this catalogue, the decision is between four Targa versions in 1 generation (1972-01-01 to 1985-01-31). There is no second generation here, so you are not choosing an era of the car — you are choosing engine size, gearbox count, fuel system, and the numbers that actually differ.
The four names in the data are not four unique labels. Two are both called 1.3 MT and two are both called 1.5 MT. Distinguish them by power: 1.3 MT 75 hp versus 1.3 MT 73 hp, and 1.5 MT 85 hp versus 1.5 MT 76 hp. Buy against those figures, not against the shared name.
Fiat X 1/9 generations — what actually changed
1 generation ran from 1972-01-01 to 1985-01-31. Body type is Targa. The catalogue lists 4 versions, all with the same production window, the same 125 mm ground clearance, the same Independent, spring front suspension, the same Ventilated disc front brakes, the same RWD layout, the same Gasoline fuel type, 95 fuel, 4 Inline cylinders, 2 valves per cylinder, and No boost.
Nothing in the data splits this generation into a restyle with its own years. All four versions share start 1972-01-01 and stop 1985-01-31. What changed between them is not a new generation: it is displacement (1300, 1301, 1481, 1499 cc), peak power (73, 75, 76, 85 hp), gearbox (4 or 5 Manual), fuel system (Distributed injection (multi-point) versus Carburetor), and the few measured performance numbers.
If you came looking for “which generation of X 1/9 to buy,” the honest answer from this file is: there is one generation. Spend the comparison budget on the four versions below.
Fiat X 1/9 specs by version (what you are actually choosing)
| Version | Power | Torque | Displacement | Fuel | Cylinders / layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.3 MT (75 hp) | 75 hp / 55 kW | 103 Nm | 1301 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 4 | RWD |
| 1.5 MT (85 hp) | 85 hp / 63 kW at 5500 rpm | not measured | 1481 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | RWD |
| 1.3 MT (73 hp) | 73 hp / 54 kW | not measured | 1300 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 4 | RWD |
| 1.5 MT (76 hp) | 76 hp / 56 kW at 5600 rpm | 113 Nm at 3000 rpm | 1499 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 4, Inline | No | Manual, 5 | RWD |
All four use No turbocharging. Three of four use Distributed injection (multi-point). Only 1.5 MT 76 hp uses Carburetor. Compression ratio is measured only on that carbureted 1.5 MT: 9.2. Bore and stroke is measured only there: 86.4 × 63.9. Engine position is not measured on any version.
Engines compared: power per litre and what the extra displacement buys
There is no price field in this dataset, so “what the extra money buys” cannot be stated in currency. What the extra cubic centimetres buy can be stated in horsepower and, where measured, in speed.
1.3 MT 75 hp on 1301 cc is 75 ÷ 1.301 ≈ 57.6 hp per litre. 1.5 MT 85 hp on 1481 cc is 85 ÷ 1.481 ≈ 57.4 hp per litre. 1.3 MT 73 hp on 1300 cc is 73 ÷ 1.300 ≈ 56.2 hp per litre. 1.5 MT 76 hp on 1499 cc is 76 ÷ 1.499 ≈ 50.7 hp per litre.
The two injected versions sit almost on the same specific output: 1.3 MT 75 hp and 1.5 MT 85 hp differ by about 0.2 hp/L. The larger engine is not “more efficient per litre”; it is simply larger. 1481 − 1301 = 180 cc extra, and 85 − 75 = 10 hp extra. That is about 10 hp for 180 cc, or roughly 1 hp per 18 cc between those two injected cars.
The two 1.3-litre cars are close: 1301 versus 1300 cc (1 cc), 75 versus 73 hp (2 hp), 55 versus 54 kW (1 kW). 1.3 MT 75 hp also has the only measured torque in the 1.3 pair: 103 Nm. 1.3 MT 73 hp torque is not measured. Both are Manual 4, RWD, Distributed injection (multi-point), Gasoline, 95.
The two 1.5-litre cars are not close in specific output. 1.5 MT 85 hp (1481 cc, injected, Manual 5) makes 9 hp more than 1.5 MT 76 hp (1499 cc, Carburetor, Manual 5): 85 − 76 = 9. The carbureted car has 18 cc more displacement (1499 − 1481) and still less peak power. It does have the only measured torque in the 1.5 pair: 113 Nm at 3000 rpm. The 85 hp 1.5 MT torque is not measured, so you cannot claim it has more or less twist — only that its peak power is 9 hp higher and arrives at 5500 rpm versus 5600 rpm on the 76 hp car (100 rpm lower).
If you want the highest measured specific output, take 1.3 MT 75 hp (≈57.6 hp/L). If you want the highest absolute power, take 1.5 MT 85 hp (85 hp / 63 kW). If you want the only fully documented torque curve point, take 1.5 MT 76 hp (113 Nm at 3000 rpm). If you want the smallest engine in the file, take 1.3 MT 73 hp (1300 cc, 73 hp).
Performance and economy: 0-100, top speed, mpg
0–100 km/h is measured on one version: 1.5 MT 85 hp does it in 11.7 s. For 1.3 MT 75 hp, 1.3 MT 73 hp, and 1.5 MT 76 hp, 0–100 is not measured.
Top speed is measured on two versions: 1.3 MT 75 hp 150 km/h, 1.5 MT 85 hp 180 km/h. That is 30 km/h more on the 85 hp car (180 − 150). For 1.3 MT 73 hp and 1.5 MT 76 hp, top speed is not measured.
City, highway, and combined fuel consumption are not measured on any of the four versions. Tank capacity is not measured. CO2 is not measured. Eco class is not measured. There is no mpg figure in this file to rank the cars on economy. Anyone ranking X 1/9 versions by fuel use from this catalogue is inventing the ranking.
What you can rank on performance is narrow and should stay that way: the only timed sprint is 1.5 MT 85 hp at 11.7 s; the only two top speeds favour that same 1.5 MT 85 hp over 1.3 MT 75 hp by 30 km/h, alongside 10 hp and one extra Manual ratio (5 versus 4).
Dimensions and weight (and why kg/hp is not a buying metric here)
Kerb weight is not measured on any version. Gross weight is not measured. Wheel sizes are not measured. Fuel tank is not measured. Ground clearance is 125 mm on all four.
Weight per horsepower cannot be calculated: there is no mass to divide. Do not treat the 85 hp 1.5 MT as “lighter per hp” or the 73 hp 1.3 MT as “heavier per hp” — those statements need a kerb figure that is not in the data.
What is shared and therefore not a differentiator: 125 mm clearance; Independent, spring front suspension; Ventilated disc front brakes; rear suspension not measured; rear brakes not measured. You cannot pick a version for a different chassis spec from this file. You pick it for engine, gearbox, and the few speed numbers.
Which Fiat X 1/9 version to buy
Buy 1.5 MT 85 hp if you want the only version with a complete performance pair in this catalogue. It is the peak of the file: 85 hp / 63 kW at 5500 rpm, 1481 cc, Gasoline, 4 Inline, 2 valves per cylinder, No boost, Distributed injection (multi-point), Manual 5, RWD. It is the only version with 0–100 measured (11.7 s) and the highest measured top speed (180 km/h). Versus 1.3 MT 75 hp it adds 10 hp, 180 cc, one extra Manual gear (5 vs 4), and 30 km/h of measured top speed. Torque on this version is not measured, so do not buy it for a Newton-metre claim.
Buy 1.3 MT 75 hp if you want the strongest 1.3 and the best measured specific output. 75 hp / 55 kW, 103 Nm, 1301 cc, Distributed injection (multi-point), Manual 4, RWD, top speed 150 km/h. Versus the other 1.3 MT it is +2 hp and +1 cc, and it is the only 1.3 with torque measured (103 Nm). Versus 1.5 MT 85 hp you give up 10 hp, the fifth gear, 11.7 s 0–100 (not measured on this 1.3), and 30 km/h of measured top speed. You keep almost the same hp per litre (57.6 vs 57.4).
Do not treat 1.3 MT 73 hp as the same car as 1.3 MT 75 hp. Same name, 2 hp less (73 vs 75), 1 kW less (54 vs 55), 1300 vs 1301 cc, torque not measured, top speed not measured, 0–100 not measured. Same Manual 4, same RWD, same injection, same 125 mm clearance. Unless you have a reason outside this file, the 75 hp 1.3 MT dominates the 73 hp 1.3 MT on every measured engine number they share.
Buy 1.5 MT 76 hp only if the carburetor and the torque figure are the point. This is the odd one out: Carburetor rather than Distributed injection (multi-point), 1499 cc (largest displacement), 76 hp / 56 kW at 5600 rpm, 113 Nm at 3000 rpm, compression 9.2, bore × stroke 86.4 × 63.9, Manual 5, RWD. It has more displacement than 1.5 MT 85 hp but 9 hp less, and the lowest specific output of the four (≈50.7 hp/L). 0–100 and top speed are not measured, so it cannot beat the 85 hp 1.5 MT on a sprint or a speed claim from this data. What it uniquely documents is torque at a given rpm, compression, and bore × stroke.
Gearbox as a filter: both 1.3 versions are Manual 4; both 1.5 versions are Manual 5. If you want five ratios, you are in the 1.5 pair. If you want four, you are in the 1.3 pair. Drive does not filter anything: all four are RWD. Fuel type does not filter anything: all four are Gasoline on 95. Boost does not filter anything: all four are No.
Generation as a filter: there is one generation. No later X 1/9 in this dataset adds power, weight, or a different body. The buying question is version, not generation.
What you cannot choose on: mpg and consumption (not measured), tank (not measured), kerb and gross weight (not measured), wheels (not measured), rear suspension and rear brakes (not measured), price (not in the data). Reliability and common problems are not in this specification file; this article does not invent them.
Short list: 1.5 MT 85 hp for the only timed 0–100 and the 180 km/h top speed; 1.3 MT 75 hp for the densest 1.3 with 103 Nm; 1.5 MT 76 hp for Carburetor, 113 Nm at 3000 rpm, and 9.2 compression; 1.3 MT 73 hp only if you specifically need that 73 hp / 1300 cc row and accept that speed, torque, and 0–100 are not measured.