eBay Find of the Day: Hyundai-based X-4 "concept car"
X-4 "concept car" - click above for image gallery
Here's what to do with that Elantra GT you couldn't flip for Cash for Clunkers money. The seller is listing this "X4" as a Hyundai-based concept car, though it's unlike anything we've seen on the show circuit. A lot of work went into making this a conversation piece from what looks like parts of a leftover Hyundai, some VW Type 1 bits, and a whole lot of wackiness.
The build quality, while displaying care and attention to detail, looks to lean toward the late-1970s kit-car end of the spectrum. That's not to say that this vehicular oddity doesn't display ingeniuity, it's sure to draw a crowd of curious bystanders wherever you go with its odd styling and close-set rear wheels. The open design is well suited to cruising golf courses in fair climates, but it's unclear whether you'd have a hassle trying to legally register and drive such a contraption. There's about a day left, and the reserve hasn't been met by the current $5,100 bid for this unique bit of creativity with its matching trailer.
Gallery: X4 Hyundai based concept car
[Source: eBay]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
stewartcmorse 7:45PM (9/24/2009)
U.G.L.Y . Drives like a Porsche!? Must be the long winters in Idaho.
Reply
Kaveh 7:55PM (9/24/2009)
Is it weird that I like it?
Reply
TimO 8:24PM (9/24/2009)
This vehicle by itself = super lame.
This vehicle *with matching trailer* = super bitchin'.
Reply
Scott K. 9:08PM (9/24/2009)
If this is based on the Elantra GT, why does it have a Hyundai Excel motor and steering wheel? My family owned an Excel for six years, and I have seen its engine many, many times.
Reply
summazooma 7:17AM (9/25/2009)
In order to post it on eBay, the seller had to list it as an '80 so as to avoid listing a VIN... not a good sign.
Wondering why they went with 4 wheels, given the narrow rear track; If this had been a 3-wheeler, they would have avoided a lot of headache (hell, put a super wide tire or even a duallie, on a single combo rim, back there).
Reply