Chosing An Xm

Hi All

Under topic "Alloy Wheels" Beachcomber asked for an opinion on the 2.5TD vs V6 Auto as I currently drive both. I rate the 2.5TD overall as the best XM with a very good performance combined with economy. The V6 Auto has surprised me and is the easiest drive of all the XM's I have had with very good performance. It is only the high fuel consumption that marks it down. A gas conversion would solve the economy but the kit takes valuable load space and I am not willing to give this up particularly in an estate.
If there was an Auto version of the 2.5TD this would be my ideal XM.
I drive only in the UK, generally close to the permitted speeds so this is considerably slower than the use Beachcomber intends on the German Auto bahns. So I cannot comment on the 2.5 performance or economy at sustained high speed.
Most 2.5's are VSX's without aircon and no Exclusive 2.5 estates were produced for the UK so I bought my V6's to strip the trim and put in my 2.5's. Any good high spec 2.5 fetches a premium price.
The V6's proved so good a drive that so far they have escaped that fate and I am driving one regularly.

Regards

XMexc

Hi XMexc

Well, it depends on what your requirements are. I agree that the 2.5 td is better than the 2.1 to drive, but not to work on or find spares for! Even though I am retired I still do a fairly high mileage, about 20k, (4,300 miles of that to Scotland and back this year) and my requirements are for something comfortable with a good ride, roomy, economical and reasonably easy to maintain. I say 'reasonably' because I used to think XMs were diabolical to work on, but have you seen some of the new cars! The 2.1 td estate fits these criteria probably better than any other car made today. I dont like auto's primeraly because they are inefficient and failure usually writes the car off. I also dont like the way they drive, to many revs before they change up, which makes them noisey, but I can see the case for one if you live in a city, thankfully I dont!

Peter.N.

Can I second Peter's comments. Only area I disagree with is regarding the auto. I think it is exactly right for the XMs general character (I've had a variety of both) and generally enhances the driving experience. Then again, I do live in a city (roads, street lighting, shops, Citroen parts suppliers, restaurants, theatres, hospitals, railway stations, airport etc. etc. etc. ---- gosh, it's tough !)
Joking aside, I do believe this fear of repairing autos is overplayed with the XM. Once the power unit is out (and I don't hear people moaning about the 2.5 clutch change), it may actually cost less to repair an auto than a manual box. Let's be honest. apart from late, top spec diesel XMs (sorry all you petrolheads), we are at a point where any significant engine or gearbox repair, strictly speaking, will exceed the likely realisable value of the car.

MIke.

Horses for courses Mike. But how often does a manual box go wrong, my previous XM had covered 292k miles and the box was still good (as was the rest of it) and if a munual box does develop a fault you can usually still drive it! Does anyone know of an auto box that's lasted that long?

I know I am outnumbered on this subject, its probably due to starting my car ownership in the '50s when you had to save every penny that you could.

Peter.N.

Thanx for the info guys - seems you're just making my choices harder!

The ONLY drawback I can forsee with the V6 / LPG route is the loss of load space, which is important to me as it will be a working car. That, I think is my first choice [ tank sighting apart ]

As for the 2.5TD, access to fiddly bits under the bonnet is not a concern, as I have the facilities of a large German auto workshop to hand. Actually with ALL my XM's, I've had very little cause to open the bonnet anyway! As previously posted, I thought my 2.1TD was underpowered.

Ah, didn't know the 2.5TD was only available in manual - bummer.

I've been a lifelong auto devotee - and can honestly say [ PeterN.] that ALL of my auto Citroens have performed faultlessly in their operation - changing smoothly and without the high revs you mentioned. Maybe the one[s] you drove were faulty? My useage was sometimes towing a trailer with an all up weight of around 2 tons.

Similarly the "inneficiency" myth. All later [ 4 speed ] Citroen auto boxes have partial lock up in 3rd. and full lock up in top. That means there is a direct drive with none of the usual [ old style boxes ] loss of transmitted power. Actually then with the torque multiplication you end up with a better performance pro-rata. That's another reason I suspect that Citroen have never been keen on autos behind a powerful Diesel, as it's the torque that will ultimately destroy an auto trans. [ any trans come to that ]. There is an overall deficit in fuel consumption of course with auto.

All my CX autos had at least 190K miles on them when sold and most went on to complete many more thousands - all on original trans. My first XM [ saloon ] is still going strong on it's original auto box [ 242K miles now ] and my last XM Estate [ 2.1 TD ] DID have a trans failure at 165K miles - but that was my own stupid fault as I had misread the oil dipstick. And yes, that was enough to write a perfectly good car off as an uneconomical repair. Very sad as the car was MINT. As a direct like for like comparison - were all your high milage XM manuals on their original clutches? Like everything else, reasonable servicing is the key to a long life auto. I have my auto trans fluid [ and LHM ] changed every 2 years, more frequently if high miles are used.

So it seems that both models have their virtues - and vices.

Do any of you LPG / V6 guys have an alternative placement for a reasonable sized tank? The one I recently saw took up about 1/4 of the seat upright load space - mounted longtitudinally on the driver side.
Beachcomber

It's a fair cop, Guv ! No, I don't know of an auto box that's lasted that long in a car --- maybe because most ordinary cars don't last that long altogether! The keys to longevity with auto boxes are regular fluid changes (more often than suggested in my opinion) and ensuring the relevant cooling arrangements for the ' box fluid are functioning correctly.
The only gearbox trouble I've had with any of my XMs has been on a couple of 2.5s (no fifth, stuck in fifth, or jumping out, depending on its mood). I do think though that the actual change quality on the XM is pretty woolly, but that's the curse of a transverse engine. Coincidentally, 292k was the exact mileage the first clutch gave out on my last manual 2.1 -- not bad.
Anyway, I'm taking my chance with my present auto 2.1 -- 130k with 100% auto box. If it goes bang tomorrow, I'l let you know and you can have a laugh at me !!!

Mike.

Hi everyone, I too am a fan of automatic transmissions. I think the auto box perfectly suits the style of the XM together with the foot operated parking brake, how do you manual chaps manage to manouvre on a slope etc?

With all that automotive expertise out there perhaps someone will be able to answer my question regarding the CT turbo.
When reading about the MG Metro turbo engine (my hobby car is a Morris Minor) it transpires that Leyland deliberately limited the maximum torque to protect the transmission. This resulted in a 'flat' torque curve or some would say Constant Torque.

Do you think that this was what Citroen did with the CT Turbo to save the transmission, especially the auto, from the worst excesses of the turbocharged engine's torque? I like the power delivery of the Turbo 2.0 so don't want to change mine but there is a possibility that if this reduction in torque was dialled out by clever tuning then a fierce monster could be unleashed.

Of course the downside would be that it would eat transmissions and could upset the whole dynamic of the car.

John

All right, I submit, I am outnumbered! I think that part of my loathing for auto's is that it is the only part of a car I have never repaired, not having had one, so dont really understand them.

John - Morris Minor, now theres a proper car, one screw to remove a halfshaft, and you can take the diff out in one piece, doddle to work on except for the oil pump! Unless yours is side valve.

Beachcomber - I have never had to change a clutch in an XM and they had all done 150 - 200k, but the 292k one would slip if pushed hard, and It could well have been changed before I had it. I did change the clutch in my CX 2.1 td Safari at 190k as I had to take the engine out and have the block surface machined because of repeated head gasket failure, didnt make any difference though, apparantly the block was pourous. The clutch wasn't worn out but the fingers were so thin that I think they would have broken off if I hadn't changed it!

Peter.N.

Hi All

First I forgot to tell Beachcomber that I do not tow so cannot comment on that aspect. Noz does with his 2.5 so maybe he will pick up on this thread.
On the concerns about inability to work on the engine I recon that the 2.5 and the V6 auto are both about the same in needing the engine out for major work.
On auto box life the V6 I have SORN is close to 180k and the box was fine last time I drove round. The current V6 is approaching 130k and also fine. I have a SORN 2.5 with a worn out clutch at 112k but this is very unusual in a 2.5TD.

I am convinced that the earlier auto box version is the best form of XM for relaxed driving. The intelligent boxes in the later V6's need a slightly more agressive driving style than I provide. The 2.5 with its gear changes is a little more effort to drive and makes cruise keep switching out.

Regards

XMexc

I believe the reason why the 2.5D is not fitted with the auto box is its high maximum torque, quoted in the workshop manual as 285Nm at 2000 rpm and dropping to 200 at 4300 rpm.

That's an interesting suggestion that bigjohnh makes about deliberately limiting max torque to protect the auto box; the late model V6 has an almost flat torque curve at or slightly above 250Nm from 2500 rpm to 5600 rpm, peaking at 270Nm and dropping to 235 at 2000 and 6000 rpm. Incidentally, the power available/power required curves cross at 143 mph.

Of course the important figure as far as performance is concerned is the push that the front wheels give to the road and this is a function of overall gearing. The diesel, being a lower revving engine, has higher overall gearing and this has the effect of reducing the torque at the wheels and the push on the road.

As far as exceeding economic repair is concerned, I have driven a number of later cars recently and have yet to find one that I enjoy as much, or which suits my purpose so well as the XM. So it looks as if any necessary repairs will be economic for me.

This post has been edited by DerekW on October 26, 2006 05:00 pm

I was quoted £800 TRADE to repair / overhaul my 2.1TD auto box. At the time the cheapest s/h one was £400, and guaranteed for "3 months".

I bought my then [80K odd mile ] VSX AUTO Turbo estate in mint condition for £750!

It was only 2 months ago that I finally ran out of storage for it and it had to go to the scrappies - what a waste.

What's this SORN V6 XMX? Is it for sale, a scrappy or do you just hoarde them?!

Beachcomber

Hi Beachcomber

Hoarde rather than scrap or sell. I think it still has a current MOT and runs but the bits are worth more than the whole car. The other half mentioned she did not like the grey half leather seats and the tempest bronze paint. So it just got overtaken by a slightly newer lower mileage one that had a georgous black leather interior and emerald green paint. It too cost less than the value of the bits and had 3 months tax and half a tank of fuel. I do not think my choice of cars will be criticised again in case I go and buy more XM's.

In the long term I hope to end up with a pair of relatively low mileage 2.5's. A car and an estate both upgraded to exclusive trim levels.

Regards

XMexc

Hi XMExclusive. Did I hear the words 'grey half leather seats' on a car you're hoarding ??????? I'm guessing these are the leather / suede type. Don't suppose by any chance you want to sell the driver's seat (assuming it's in good nick). It's the only bit of the interior that lets mine down; the belt has rubbed at it over time and there's a tear in the same area.

Mike.

Oops --- forgot to log in for above post.

Mike.

Hi Mike

Thinking about it the drivers seat is in the unit as I took it out to investigate how the Mk2 heated seats are wired. I suspect that at 175k it will have the same belt wear marks as yours but I will have a look next time I get over there.

Regards

XMexc