14k Mile 1 Owner '90 Xm 2.0 Sei

I think that is the point. Everyone has a different definition of what a classic is. Everyone has a different definition of what an exciting car is.

You have owned many far more exciting cars than most people ever will, so the bar is much higher for you. Yet you still drive and like the XM - so that must make it special in some way, but not necessarily a classic or exciting for you. For those of us that don't have the money or require the practicality in any car they own and so have mostly only been regular drivers of the Fords, Vaxhauls etc of the world, the XM is something quite exciting and special.

I think many peoples definition of a classic car is something that is old, but maintained and cherished despite it being past it's expected life/value. By that definition the XM is well on the way if not already there in the case of many Mk1s. But it does not put it in a group of 'special' cars, only a group of old cars that someone feels is worth keeping for some reason.

I certainly don't drive an XM because it is going to be a classic or any other reason. I need a cheep car that is reliable, large and practical for a family and I like a car to be comfy, luxurious, fairly fast and safe at the same time. The XM fits that criteria in a way that very few others do.

And maybe I should add my list of cars I have owned or driven on a regular basis

Jaguar
2 S1 MOD SWB XJ6, 3 XJ40s, series 1 1.5 2 and 3 E-types, XK120, Xk150,Mk2 3.8, D-Type (3CPF), XJ-SC V12 HE and XK8

BMW
2002, 320, 528iSE, 730, M3 (E30) (mostly junk)

Rover,
P4, P5, P6 3500 and 2000TC, Sterling, 827Si, vitesse (V6, and turbo), s1 to S3 landrover and range rover

Merc,
200, 200T, 280CE (w123), 350SL (w107), 500Sl

Fiat
128, 127, and uno

Austin
A40, Mini, Maxi

Morris
Minor

Yugo
513 (better than the BMWs)

Lotus
S3 elan Coupe (My first car!) and a type 14 elite (the pretty one) Both were fantastic the one day a year they worked properly!

Maserati
Indy 4700, 5 speed manual not the 3 speed sludgomatic america

Rolls Royce
1921 40/50 Springfeild pickwick, 1937 Wriath Park ward sports saloon, 1953 Silver Dawn Standard Steel (ex Dirk Bogarde as seen for 2 seconds in 'Dr at large')

Bentley
R-type Standard Steel, R type continental, 3 litre, 8 litre and 4.5 litre

VW
Beetle, Golf GTi mk1 and 2, Jetta GT mk2

Citoren
4 XMs, 1 SM (bought broken sold broken )

AC
Zephyer ACE, 289Mk3 Cobra (yes a real one), 428 and 3000ME

Alfa
2 suds, one 2000GTV 105

Ferrari
250TR, 250SWB, 308GT4, 400i (normally only working the same day as the lotus!)

Bugatti
Type 37

I have seen true automotive quality close up and lived with it most my life, trust me it's not present in any BMW post '76. As for racing.. can you tell me what happend to the BMWs last time rover seriously went racing? (unfortuntaly the final chapter of that story was in 2000)

I belive a classic should be technically intersting which the XM is, it will follow the DS and the CX and become a classic. The post '76 BMW's will not, as they have nothing to recomend them

Stewart

Seeing as we are all so keen on comparing things - is this the time to start measuring willies?

Seriously though, ultimately who cares if its a classic? I drive my XM because how ever many quirky faults it has, every time i get into a company provided hire car (which I do a lot) i realise how much more comfortable and interesting the XM is over almost anything else i've been given to drive... (admittedly mostly i get focii or vectras, but i've had a c class merc, BMW x-5 and most recently a Saab 9-5 estate)

I was amazed that the Saab (a petrol auto), while not even being as fast as my XM (2ltr CT Auto) was also less economic.

Also - driving my XM makes me feel special with out feeling like a wa**er!

My goodness i never new you could all be so passionate .
What a read that lot was

Also - driving my XM makes me feel special with out feeling like a wa**er![/QUOTE]

Thats exactly why i like my xm , i met a guy over here once by chance in tesco's car park (whilst guarding my car from people who cant park ) who had a mk1 hatch, and i think he sumed it up perfectly when he said "when you pull up in a Porche people think, prat, if you pull up in an old cit they cant seem to work out if your rich, accentric, mad or broke".....................and that suits me just fine

D

Or all 4 at once

, Maybe i misheard him and he meant you start off rich and accentric then owning one makes you poor and mad

D

Wow, id no idea a simple comment could get so much response!

Sorry about that

Actually i missed and that and if its only useful in the estate then its its must be useless in the saloon...............

emm, bit of a crap and wrong generalistaion their, you have seen the tiff needle / lotus elan / ford vid on youtube right?

must also be useless when 3 large drunken women on a hen night get out of the back of my cab also....

Yes I have seen the video, in fact I saw it on Top gear many years ago. Perhaps it's time to explode the myth.

First, the Elan in the first bit of the video is nowhere near the limit, no roll to speak of, no understeer, no roll-oversteer. It's going exactly where it's pointed.

Second, the XM is not being compared with the Elan. If you've ever driven an M100 Elan, you'd know that there is no way an XM, or any other big executive car, would even approach the levels of grip and agility that chassis has.

Third, what the video in fact says is that big executive cars with various types of electronic control of their suspension systems, whether they be adaptive damping, full Hydractive or any number of other systems, are more agile and controllable in extreme situations that those without. The XM was actually being compared with the Ford Granada, and absolutely anything could have come out looking good from that comparison!

All I was trying to say Lez, is that unless you need to carry large loads, Hydractive has very few advantages over a good coil and damper set-up. Apart from the extremes of high speed manoevres, when driver error probably causes more problems than the limitations of the car's suspension.

Opened the can of worms again, I know, but it's such fun!

3 large drunken women on a hen night

I often carry 5 people in my Xm hatch. The other day i had to collect 3 men who only just fitted into the back of the Xm. It hit the floor straight away, and luckily, being an xm, pumped up so i could clear the speed bumps out of the housing estate!

It also carries horse food for our horses, which with 6 heavy bags of feed and 4 people on board again im thankful of the self leveling.

So yes, i agree with you.

I also agree that comparing an XM with a lotus is a little much, although it does do a much better job than a lot of cars would.

However i feel the hydractive suspension does more than you give it credit for. Its not built for handling, but it will out handle a lot of cars from its time and even modern cars. You dont buy an Xm to have a sporty car, so there is little point talking of that. However it does offer a very good balance of ride and handling, which i feel can NOT be matched by a very simple coil and damper set up.

Most modern cars are either so stiff its uncomfortable but handle well, or are have too little body control but ride nicely.

Very few cars ride as soft as an XM, an XM/Xantia/ CX whatever, rides superbly - given that the spheres are up to pressure, everything is working as it should etc etc, than any other car in their class. It gives confidence to me that it can handle what i throw at it, and it does so with much more composure than any car with coil springs ive been in - ive been in a fair few cars! (again comparing it to like sized cars). Ok BWMs might hanlde better, but they lack the ride quality that the Xm can offer.

Its not perfect, but for what it is, i think its pretty awsome and i love driving it. May that be pottering about town, fast motorway driving or a country lane burst, it feels very composed and seems to change its character with the different conditions of roads and weather.

Ive been brought up on citroens, Im hooked on the Xm, so much so ive not been using my daily car for a while, i think ill sell it So nothing you say will change my mind.

Blinkers ....

This post has been edited by Citroenmad on October 31, 2008 02:08 am

Hi Neil

Ok I feel well awake so I'll bite the bait! (Before I go on, let me stress I'm not discussing if Citroens are fun cars to drive -that's another topic-.)

The Elan is of course used as a benchmark in this test, and the video is surprising *precisely* because the "big family saloon whale XM" is doing "almost as good at 55mph as the Elan", as the presenter says.

The fact that the soflty-soflty suspended XM can slalom *very near* an Elan is exactly what is *f...ing* unbelievable in this case, THIS is THE news!!! Of course I know that 9 out of 10 people in the street will be more impressed by the new Led-lights of the latest Audi, but what can u do...the comfort that knowledge brings was not meant for everybody!

Now, let's enter the hypotetical world to break down and compare a couple of the main variables of the problem:

Question: how would the Elan do in the same test if it was given a spring-rate equal to that of the XM? Would it do as good as the XM? I predict it'd naturally behave similar to the Ford, i.e. fishing around (is this a new verb I just created?!) while trying to see if it prefers life as a pendulum than as a car (the Ford is roughly AS SOFT as the XM on stop-standing equilibrium, but *on springs*). This is one of the top advantages of the hydropneumatic, that the car doesn't need to be *hard* to achieve results (even non-hydractive cars)! This is all because of the "progresive hardening of the spheres" effect (which the poor Ford doens't have, combined with non-existent damping)...

Question 2: what if the XM only had proportionally wide tyres as the Elan, adjusting for the weight of the car? The Elan's footing is in principle huuuugely in favour as the cars stand...I invite you to just wear 215/55 16" to your XM, *just* one dimension up, and come back and tell us about the absolute grip difference compared to it as is now (I've done it!). Be prepared for surprise. The thing is using its low profile tyres *more* efficiently than the Elan (again due to progresive hardening>> progressive loading of tyres)!
[just for the story: the Elan has 205/50R15 to change the direction of 997kgs, the XM 205/60R15 for about 1300kg. Fair?].

On another line: I wouldn't say with certitude that the Elan is not far from its limit, I really don't know how far it is. Hard as it is set, chances are the skidding will be relatively sudden (although I know this Elan is very well mannered), so I wouldn't expect to see much skidding or roll from the Elan before it totally looses grip. Further, the XM's roll-oversteer and intense tyre noise (much more elevated than both the Ford and the Elan) doesn't denote closeness to the limits: you sure know this is typical in Citroens, more so the earlier you go in time. I had an Axel that practically screetched its front tyres in any tight bend in the city! But what a roadholding it had!

Also, precisely in this case, some of the noise is caused by the XM's programmed passive rear steering. Look at the video carefully...look at the car's ass (sorry!). Is it not fabulous how it steers/slides exactly as needed as to manoeuvre the car around the poles !? Many people think passive steering was introduced with the ZX but in reality it was first applied on the XM. On the ZX though it is so much more stressed that when turning you'd think the rear wheels have turned as much as the front (I just sold my ZX, it steers easier than any car I've driven).

Finally, the XM in this video looks like it has more to give if u ask me, till it gets to a situation similar to the "Ford at 55mph", isn't it? I wouldn't say it's particularly/at all decomposed at 55mph...Just looks like it's reaching its tyres' limits. I wish they had tested both the Elan and XM to their limits so we knew...

OK, so you don't care if your car is soft & comfortable, you are a "born to be beaten" person (not u Neil!) ?? Yes? Ok, bring an Activa on the track.....End of discussion? [And, sadly for u (not u Neil!), it's still super comfortable on a straight line and most other everyday conditions!]. If u feel more cunning, just reduce the pressure in your XM's corner spheres by 20-30%: its middle spheres "locking", the XM will go flat on bends, just like the Elan. Still, annoyingly, it will remain comfortable on the straight due to its middle spheres asoring everything!! arrghghh!!!!

Neil, the superiority of the hydropneumatics over springed cars in slaloming is real, measured, and not neglectable at all as a quantity, EVEN WITH MODERN CARS (as opposed to what "the Press" want us to believe). I said it, I have hard data: the C6 passes the same slalom at about 5mph ABOVE the current 5-series BMW iX 530, where "X" means (I'm sure u know it) FOUR WHEEL DRIVE. "Let's explode the myth", you said? And it's not I'm obsessed with slaloms, but they *do* prove a car's composure and ability to remain in control...You sure *do* know what a huge difference in practice "5mph more" is when speaking of a car trying to change its direction at about 60mph!

The other thing though, which is far more important than all the above idealised tests, and this has never been tested in my knowledge, is the following: repeat this very test with an XM and an Elan on a REAL ROAD TARMAC, with random patches and potholes, something like a B-road, and let's see what the result will be...I predict the Elan will be very difficult to control, while the XM will score points close to the "idealised" test *with ease*.

And follows, a point re. driver-friendliness that you do touch, but I personally find you don't judge it as important as it is:

Even harder than above, do the very same test again (on the track or on real tarmac, doesn't matter), but with 10 randomly picked drivers from the street...WHICH car will score the highest average speeds in the hands of the average drivers? I think you see what I mean [although in this specific case I wouldn't be surprised if the Elan matched/surpassed the XM, such a good set up this Elan has; but do the test with ANY other spring-car?].

More: let's do the same test with me or you or whoever driving, but somehow induce an element of SURPRISE -i.e. *the* definition of "accident"!- to trigger the slaloming reaction; or, even more, let's add "driver being bit more tired", "driving being absorbed by the radio", "driver visibility is low", "driver has had a glass more"....WHICH of the two cars will help more? Again, we know the answer...

Not to mention a typical "holiday" scenario, where you drive on unknown roads, you drive a car that wil be *so* loaded that it really is dynamically *a different* car from the one you got used to drive everyday....But this doesn't happen that often, you'll shout.

Bottomline: as you turn the scenario closer and closer to "real life", the benefits of (hydropneumatic)+(Citroen XM) [because the Citroen suspension set-up is a thing that also adds up, distinctively from the hydropneumatics] become huuuuge. "Huge", as much as in: the few extra 3 mph you are "allowed" to effectively do your trick and avoid this kid that jumped on the road...to manage keeping the car on track on this bend that you took *a tad* faster than you thought....etc...etc...etc....

You, and me, on our best day, in the track...: the Elan scores...

You, me, on our everyday drive...: the XM helps us *this* little bit more than any other car save ourselves just if Gods's statistics decide today was our turn... The XM scores!

That's what I meant when I said Citroen is a firm that in reality has offered people SO much more than it is credited for in the collective memory. Think of how many not-rich families were able to drive safely with a GS, then a BX, when the automotive landscape was full of death-traps...Back then, and even more today, a few springed cars also *do* offer handling predictability of such refinement, accept sooo large margins of error inputs from the random driver, pass from grip to skid sooo progressively, but, what can u do, hydraulic Citroens do it even better! And this is with only the driver in! Start making the tarmac worse...Start adding 1 passenger...2 passengers...3 passengers..., and the distance becomes very-very serious indeed!

I just *wish* Citroen did all these test to put to shame all other manufacturers!

cheers
George

This post has been edited by jorgy9 on October 31, 2008 10:23 am

Wow, what a read!

I agree with you, all of it, a very good discussion, i like it!

I was searching around the web the other day, and found in a car review that the C6 is fastest through the slalom course than any of its close rivals. SO that includes BWMs, Mercs, Saabs etc. Pretty impressive really.

Its easy to drive the Xm fast through bad country roads, as it cushions you from the road you dont actually feel your going as fast as you are and you tend to leave behind the people following. Yet its still being composed and keeting fairly level around bends. On the same roads normals cars feel iffy and very uncontroled at similar speeds.

I agree George, i dont think Citroen played/play on the ability of its big citroens enough. Its been said on here before (maybe by you?) that Citroens current advertiseing compares it to being like a german car. Who wants that! You generally buy a Citroen because you like french cars, they are just as reliable as german cars anyway (which i dont thing are all that!). Howver they should be pointing out how their suspension helps in the real world. A lot of people wont even know about it.

It seems Citroen is slightly going away from its Hydropneumatic suspension, the C5 basics dont have it, the C4 picasso has (can have) air suspension on the back, its only the C6 which has it standard now.

I wish id have read about the tyres before, mine has 195/65/15, which are like big, fairly thin, baloons. Still, the tyres are great, so that makes up for it someway.