14k Mile 1 Owner '90 Xm 2.0 Sei

.

like the almost german campaign, thankfully now not showing on a tv near me..

Another one who didn't read what I wrote! I agree with you entirely on the technical merits of gas sprung systems in general, and the Citroen system is undoubtedly the most sophisticated of these. I'm not sure I'm keen on the implied insult to my abilities as a technician, perhaps you should stick to what you know about. I'm expressing an opinion, and my opinion is that while the XM's suspension may be very effective, it doesn't make the car a classic. I wonder what would have happened had the Top Gear slalom test been done with a car that had a modicum of grip and handling finesse instead of a Ford Granada. The cars were chosen to emphasise the difference. Of course the XM is good, but grip and neutrality are not all that is needed to make entertaining motoring. If you want a car to entertain you on the back roads, buy a illman Imp. Huge fun at very modest speeds. An XM is not, in my opinion, a particularly entertaining car to drive.

Again, I'm not saying I hate XM's, or that they are in some way bad cars. What I'm tyring to get across, without insulting anyone, is that the word "classic" is overused and should not be applied to the XM because it's not special enough. If you want a genuine gas-sprung classic, try a merc 450 SEL 6.9. There's a car I should never have sold!

Neil

Hey Neil

Totally agree about the entertainment factor, but I only refered to effectiveness.

Personally though (my opinion), I find that, nowadays, the "entertainment is fun Vs. effectiveness is boring" hype has gone many steps too far...You prob. know what I mean...

Personally I didn't discuss whether the XM will be a classic because of its suspension, was only interested in the system's effectiveness. Of course u r right that it won't become widely classic because of that...

Now, the Merc 450 6.9 being your favorite, this is an example of a "taste", an "opinion". One might prefer a CX, or something else, but at least since they both carry a hydropneumatic set up, they initially become comparable, true.

How did it drive drive BTW??? Compared to a Citreon set up??? Not many people must have driven one!!! Are the wheels at each axis hydraulically linked like in Cits or is each wheel independent like the Princess?

cheers
G

I guess everyone has their opinion, but I personally find it entertaining to drive. I'm sure a Ferrari etc would be more entertaining, but I am not ever likely to own one of them. It is certainly more entertaining than most cars I am likely to ever own, and if you drive it fast it certainly gives what I want it to. It can also be a relaxing car to drive - it all depends how you want to drive it that day.

I am interested to know if you consider the earlier Citroens to be classic cars or not - especially the CX, DS and SM. Many people do, but I'm not sure if you would with your criteria.

I think the fact that many people consider it's predecessors as classic cars is probably part of the reason that they consider the XM a future classic. However, there are those that feel the XM does not follow in it's predecessors footsteps but is merely an 'overgrown BX' due to it loosing a lot of the Citroen quirkiness.

The set-up was very similar in concept to a CX, and ended up surprisingly similar in feel, leaving aside the steering, which was coventional. It was much firmer than a CX, obviously, but had the same "supple" feel, as if nothing in the road surface ever surprised it, if you see what I mean. Add to that rear wheel drive, 285BHP and 300+ lbft of torque and probably the best build quality ever. It was a great car.

Neil

Ah a 6.9, now thats something surely we can all agree on, a very, very nice car.
Used a proper hydraulic suspension system not horrible rubbery air suspension, and because it was produced when mercs where built well they even thought of providing massive rubber bump stops so the car could still be driven if the hydraulics gave up ................i bet you do regret selling that!

D

Let me chip in...

XM...a classic or, maybe, a future classic.
Mercedes...expensive cab

XM...very entertaining to drive
Mercedes...punters always sick in the back

XM...dirt cheap
Mercedes...dirt cheap

XM...bought by individuals, technicians, pilots and professionals.
Mercedes...bought by people you don't really want as a neighbour

Goodnight

I just re read my previous post, above, and had better clarify my car owning credentials...

Owned and run by me over the past 31 years in addition to the 50 odd cars I have now: RR Silver Shadows, a couple of nice Lambos, 4 consecutive new Esprit and Esprit Turbos, a couple of S Class Mercs, BMW 735, 928S4, 928GT, Rover Metros, 2CVs, Dyane, Escort Van, Imp Super...da da da...so I am experienced to know what I like and think. However, what suits me won't suit you. I like comfort and space (I'm 6 feet 8 tall) and a bit of anonymity nowadays. Hence, I drive Renault and Lexus as everyday cars. That's it, really.

The reason why the rest of the motor manufacturers didn't follow the hydropneumatic route is simple, Citroen tied it up with patents so that none could copy it without paying hefty royalties. Its inherent superiority is evident by Rolls being prepared to pay for the privilege of using it.

Of course the mini wasn't built down to a price. That's why they had sliding windows and wire pull door openers.

Derek

A lot of people seem to be getting very upset by all this, which was not my intention, so perhaps i should clarify my credentials and position. I too have owned and enjoyed many cars in addition to the Citroens, such as 3 S1/2 XJ6s, Porsche 928S2, Lotus Elite and Esprit, Lancia Fulvia Zagato, Flaminia 2.8 Sedan, Reliant Scimitar, Triumph 2500PI, Mini Cooper 970, NSU Ro80, Mazda RX7, BMW 520i and 730, Lamborghini Espada, Maserati Indy America.

The above are the highlights, but several of them would not qualify as "classics" by my own definition. Please understand I'm not saying that makes them bad cars, just not quite special enough for the accolade of "classic" in my opinion. Until recently I made a living restoring Italian exotics, and maybe that's why I have a slightly jaded view of the classic car scene. If you'd scene the way a Ferrari 400 is nailed together, you might feel the same way. Most people would regard that as a classic, I just see poor engineering and trouble waiting to happen. Not waiting very long, either!

One last point. If Citroen had ever learnt to build cars the way the manufacturer of "expensive taxis" built them, there might be more XMs left for us to buy! I had a 1979 280TE for many years, bought with 55,000 miles on it, which I sold with 265,000 miles on it. The only major work it had in all those miles was a new diff at 250,000.

I don't think the XM is a bad car, I'm now on my third, for God's sake! But if you think the XM is such a marvel, drive a good Lancia Fulvia or Flavia and discover what proper engineers can do with cart springs - both ends. That is a truly remarkable car.

Whether or not some else decides the XM is a "classic" or not doesn't concern me in the slightest. Whether or not any other cars are better or worse in any respect also doesn't concern me. Running an XM is my decision, my choice and has nothing to do with other peoples opinions or values.

The XM is an odd. eccentric, car that requires fairly constant nurturing if you're going to use it as a daily car. Not as odd as its wonderful predecessors the CX, DS or even the GS were for their time (why did I ever sell mine?) but never the less definitely not a mainstream car.

Now...... is that the car I'm describing or XM owners?

Andy

This post has been edited by Boris on October 23, 2008 12:38 am

Have the handbags (and chairs) stopped flying about the place yet?

What is the upshot of an Xm (or a CX, GS etc) being deemed a 'Classic' anyhow?
Does it get you free entry into Amusement Parks, or a letter from the Queen or a gaggle
of Paparazzi following you everywhere on your trips to Sainsbury's!!??

What does it 'do' for the owner or the car? "NOW everyone will see why I'm daft enough
to be dedicated to this weird vehicle; finally = vindication!! This'll show them in the office..."
Does it matter? Does it hell! We all like these cars for a 101 different reasons and the main
thing is the commitment to keep the useful life extended as far as it's feasibly possible to
is a common objective amongst us all...

...whether it's labeled a Classic or not is just a red herring!!

Andrew

Hi all

In my case, Neil's statement...

"Now the XM. The Hydractive issue is a complete red herring unless you're talking about estate cars, when the self-levelling becomes useful."

...was what caused me to..revolt. C'mmon Neil, you have to admit it was a bit....how can I say it....hmmm...."not right at all" ?? Especially from an expert like you?! Of course I now understand that you meant it in conjunction with the car becoming a classic, but I thought you just opined this about the suspension as an engineering solution alone!

Neil, as much as a Fulvia or Flavia, or an Alfasud, or even a S1 Delta, even in a "poor" 1.6cc disguise, were marvellous drives, I'm not sure any of the 3 old ones would achieve any respectable results in any kind of handling test if compared with average modern cars? Do you think they would? If equipped with fatter tyres perhaps? Possibly, who knows, their set up was technically great even by modern standards. I wish somebody tried it so we all know, and urban myths fall for good! I still wonder today how the very same people managed to screw it up so bad with the 164's handling? Anybody knows??

What has come to my attention (hard data again) is that modern Alfas (eg 156), although equipped with steering that "is a dream" etc, surprising do not achieve anything more that average results in typical handling tests, be it for absolute lateral acceleration, or slaloming, or braking. I was also very-very surpised after I spent some time watching these Japanese videos on Youtube where they put a number of similar sports cars in a track and run them many laps all together: Ferraris where just average, often beaten by cars that we see around us "every day" (M3, 911, Japs). Was very suprised, I'm telling you. A kind of solid hierarchy I had in my mind, just collapsed to pieces!

Re. the fun factor, having driven myself plenty of miles in very mountainous terrain (the opposite of the UK, I miss it so much), I'd say those 2 schools provide a different kind of fun: the Italians have great steering, engines etc...You feel something every second you drive an Italian, no matter if you want or not [that's a problem for me, now]...It shouts: "floor the throttle and lets go!". Even the humblest Uno 903cc... Hydraulic Cits don't provide much feedback so appear "dead" but..the fun starts when you start throwing them about. The fun of driving a humble GS downhill through a series of 180deg pins at a 10/10 pace is just unearthly: the smile on your face comes from the fact that you just can't believe how the car doesn't move 1cm from the trajectory you precisely want it to go. This car is better than you, in reality. Only gas can achieve this composure....(and the GS can no problem kick the Alfasud's ass in this setting...trust me!).

In the meanwhile, I'm getting reports from a couple of mad C6 owners that assure me that Germans with their BMWs etc. can only back off at Autobahn bends when the speed is above 120mph....this is when the C6 says..."bye-bye, cu later!". This feeling of serenity+control at any speed is again another charateristic no coil-set up can ever beat...

Italian built quality: sadly not good, even the late ones, a pitty! My girlfriend just bought a 1998 Fiat Coupe 20v atmo (*I* advised her so)...Great engine, great gearbox. You want to floor it and go up the gears at every bend exit, just to take that feeling you're driving a little F1! But: the suspension is so hard and "dry" that I was asking the seller if the car had received aftermarket springs. No. I still wonder if they've replaced the bushes with polyurethane...Then: 1 week after buying it, passenger window refused to come up. I found myself in the supermarket car park taking the door trim off while my gf did the shopping, and found both of the slider's screws had gone loose and fallen in the door bottom! Sadly also, the dash, one of the most beautiful designs in my opinion, is noisy like a thousand bells when going over any bump! And it only has 78,000mls!! I noticed the body is full of small depressions, as if one had pushed his finger in 10ths of areas over the car. Have never remarked similar to other cars. "Thin as possible" metal sheet you said? At least Ladas were built like tanks! Bottomline, I don't like to drive that car. It just doesn't allow me to be calm. I told her: for a day per week perhaps it'd be good, but I'm now even more certain that before, I'm not changing my XM for anything. This genuine limo, that manages to soothe me as if I had already stepped into my living room, when I drive back 20 miles to my smalltown from work, tired, late at night in winter, while the gales and rain pester everything outside. (I didn't expect this, you know, I thought I'd be jealous of the Coupe).

cheers
George

This post has been edited by jorgy9 on October 23, 2008 02:23 am

Oh dear, have I upset you? I guess you must be right and the rest ogf the world wrong. Whether you like them or not, BMW's are certainly not bad cars, and saying it very loud don't make it so.

Not realy, but I've owned a few BMWs, and they were allmost all junk. 320, 528iSE and a 730 oh and a 2002. The 2002 was the only one that had any true quality to it, seems BMW have been trading on that reputation since. The 320, 528iSE and 730 were total junk, unlike my rovers (2 P6's and 4 827's)I might add which were light years ahead in quality where it counted (like engines and gearboxes)

And yes the rest of the world is possibly wrong.. if I stood up 500 years ago and said the world was a sphere, would the rest of the world be right in saying I was wrong and it was in fact flat? (Just because the majority think somthing does not make then right)

Stewart

I agree with a lot of what you've said George, but for me classics are about the excitement of owning and driving something really special. I derive a great deal of satisfaction from the way my XM goes about doing its job, but in a special occasion or if I want to drive for the pleasure of driving, I wouild not choose to drive it. I take the Daimler if I'm going somewhere special, and my Clan Crusader if I want to have fun driving. Neither of these will do the everyday job of the XM, but they are special in other ways. The bald figures of slalom speeds or cornering G do not tell the whole story as far as the sensation of driving the car goes. A Lamborghini Espada is undoubtedly not the fastest car around a track, and I'd think that point to point my old XM 24V - now owned by Paul - would be quicker - but the sense of occasion opening the garage door and seeing it sitting there, the sound of the V12 and the feel of it bulldozing the road in front made me feel glad to be alive. I had no need of it, it did nothing in a practical sense, but it made life better. The XM does a fine job, life would be more difficult without it, but its purpose in my life is to make everyday life easier and enjoyable activities possible and pain-free. It's a tool and a very good one, but I'm not blind to its faults. It's not all that well-built, the steering is very accurate but numb and lifeless, the plastics used in the cabin are just plain bad, access under the bonnet is just awful (even compared to the Lamborghini!) and it rivals any Italian car I've had or looked after for niggling electrical faults. Oh, except the Ferrari 400, but that was in a different league! I'm willing to put up with the faults because there isn't anything better at the job I need it to do, but only because nobody builds big estate cars any more. I appreciate the smooth ride and sure-footedness and load-carrying ability but it doesn't excite me.

Again, I'm not trying to say anyone is wrong about the XM, it's a very technically impressive car, but for me that's not enough for classic status. What good does it do those of us who want to run them as everyday transport if it becomes worth people's while to bodge them, hide a multitude of sins under a shiny coat of paint and sell for £3500? By all means enjoy your XM for whatever reasons you like, your reasons are no more or less valid than mine. I don't think I'm some kind of superior being because I run an XM, and personally wouldn't want to have someone who judges people on what car they drive as a neightbour! Some of my best friends drive mdern Mercs, one even has a Vectra! Doesn't make them bad people! Misguided in that particular area, granted, but not bad people.

I'm a petrolhead, I admit it, but I have no strong affiliation to any one marque. I judge a car by what it does for me, not what the world thinks of it. I personally can't understand why anyone would pay more than about £1000 for an MGB - 2 door Morris Oxford, anyone? - but they do, and many, many people seem to love them. They're not wrong, I just don't agree.

I'm going to go and fix the reverse light switch on the XM now, latest thing to pack up!

Neil