2.5s, Autos, Etc..., General ramblings, ignore me...

Morning folks.

Well just a general XM ramble and some thoughts, not a problem for once.
I had my first proper long drive (about 120 miles) in a 2.5TD yesterday. I was down with Willie Johnston leaving my S1 there (he's going to change the pinion in the rack for me), and I brought home another customer's 2.5TD for him.

I have to say the smoothness of power delivery on that engine is impressive. My 2.1 has the pump screwed out a little and has phenomenal acceleration (at the expense of economy obviously). I would actually say that in this state its as fast as the 2.5, BUT, the way the 2.5 dishes out the power is incredibly smooth. With the 2.1 when you floor it its like being kicked in the ass, a huge heaving forward from behind. With the 2.5, its just a steady... I dunno, dull, torquey rumble, and suddenly you're doing the ton, its like a big freight train. Its much quieter at idle and driving than the 2.1 too, but maybe it had the dreaded lower engine / subframe cover, I never thought to check. There's a lovely distinctive turbo whistle off it from low revs too.
Nice engine, could be tempted for one...

Which brings me to the next thing, I dropped the 2.5 off to the guy that owned it, and took away a 2.0 TCT auto he'd been loaned, which I'll drive for the next few days.
This again, was my first proper drive in an auto XM, and I must say I'm impressed. The box is smooth as silk, kickdown works perfectly, and the acceleration combined with that TCT engine is supurb.
After taking it to work in rush hour traffic this morning, I have a new found respect for the autos. None of this stop-start, changing gear every two seconds crap, just stop, and go at leisure!
Its a pity these boxes are a real achilles heal in some cases, because I've come to the conclusion that they suit the character of the XM very well, lazy and relaxed, but capable when you need it.

Sorry, just general musings and thinking out loud really, comment / disagree / slate if you wish!


Ciarán

This post has been edited by Ciaran on February 14, 2009 12:47 am

It is surprising how different the character of the the PSA diesels are. I think a main thing that's noticeable with the 2.5 is how smoothly it revs up compared to a 2.0 8v HDi. Obviously the balance shafts work well. How these pan out in the newer HDi's I don't know.

As for the TCT I've just started driving on with LPG fitted. It seems a bit unusual after a diesel that power just keeps climbing with the revs. How thirsty is the TCT auto Ciaran?

I've never driven an auto XM but I would think that a 2.5 with an autobox would have been a good combination.

Steve.

Yep, you'd almost think they were different engines.

As for the TCT MPG, I've only driven it about 20 miles so far, but last night on the way home it reckoned it was getting 53, then 79 MPG, I was like .

I'll monitor it today and tomorrow and see if I can get a more realistic figure.

I'd be interested in one with LPG...

Ciarán

Hi Ciaran, I GOT ONE I GOT ONE! For sale soon too!!!!

TCT MPG is awfull!! it needs to be on LPG to be anygood!!

I know this becaue I just finished driving one for 6 months on LPG!

Petrol consumption was about 28mpg However, with having injection LPG it was about 43mpg (equvilent)

I DON'T rate the 2.oi 8v Turbo engine unfortunally! Im yet to sample the 2.oi 16v unit, but that means haveing a Series 2 car.... eeekkk...

In the mean time, my 2.oi Turbo Onyx, WITH LPG will be up for grabs soon...

My preference! V6, then 2.1td, then 2.5td.. then 2.oi Turbo, then walking...

UNFORTUNALLY the useless ZF auto boxes were NEVER strong enough for eith S1 24v V6 or the 2.5td... ! The other engines make enough of a job killing them!

If that 2.oi turbo has a smooth auto box and you do get it GET THE FLUID in the box changed straight away!!!!



Rgds
PAul

This post has been edited by citroenxm on February 12, 2009 01:53 pm

A nice interesting read, its good to have an idea of how each engine compares.

The auto is a suited fit to the Xm i think, i usually go for manual cars but in the Xm it just fits its character very well. Not to mention the ease of driving!

I wouldnt say 28 MPG is too bad from a TCT? My 2.0 16v Auto gets 32-36MPG, a little more if your careful.

Regular gearbox oil changes is the key to maintaining the autobox, i use an auto gear treatment in mine too.

Its impressive the Turbos box is still goot at almost 170K, although i suspect it might have had something done to it by now.

Paul 28MPG isn't all that horrible TBH, I could live with that, the 2.0i gets that or less the way I drive it most of the time.

How...falling to bits is the Onyx?
I think I'd have to at least put leather and electric seats in it...

Wheres the LPG tank, in the boot?

Christ what am I doing, I have nowhere to put another, not to mention I need to get that CX from Scotland over to here somehow.
You don't want a '76 CX Pallas do you?....

Ciarán

My vsx has 170mls on it and the autobox is fine too, i think it all comes down to oil changes, if you dont change the oil regularly you will kill it, same with the engine.
My Saab 9000 had the same box which put out more power than a 24v (240bhp) and that had done around the 200k mark, ok 4th was a little rough on the upshift but come on, it had 200k

D

It ALREADY HAS got Leather and elctric Arm rest! Ah la a post else where I WONT drive an XM without leather in it!!


The LPG tank is IN the spare wheel cradle, leaving the whole of the boot FREE!!!

Ill be needing to put 4x tyres on it, she will come with a spare turbo, and possible a spare engine too...

Rgds
Paul

Right, you've got my interest

Are the seats electric?

Ciarán

Lots of round town driving, with lots of cold starts, I reckont he 2L CT turbo with slugomatic would probably be closer to 22mpg... Maybe upto 28 on the highway. There someone out here with that motor in a Xantia. He reckons it averages overall about 24mpg from memory (most people must not do "fill to fill" economy checks and believe computers where fuel economy is concerned).

An XM worth owning would be 24valve 5spd manual with daravi steering (2.5 turns lock to lock maximum, so it would need CX rack fitted). It would also need brake pedal spring removed, and hydraulic clutch from Poogoe (or CX prestige prefably) fitted.... Um while your fitting the steering, you might as well fit a CX subframe under the nose and get some decent suspension with proper wishbones as well rather than sh!tful struts too.

seeya,
Shane L.

As far as I can remember Adrian Chapman used to quote about low to mid 20s on that XM. Other TCT drivers agreed.

Steve.

This post has been edited by steelcityuk on February 13, 2009 02:19 am

Quoted for truth! Most people I see in their cars are plodding about. Of the friends I managed to convince they should try an automatic, all have stuck with the box.

I'm still fine with manuals, and particularly if you're going for economy, but for ordinary, trudging around kind of motoring - the stuff you do every day on the way to work and back - there is no alternative to an automatic. And the XM ain't even a good automatic!

There's still time to track down a nice late V6 with auto and fit a LPG kit to it.

Steve.

I would concur with the MPG, mid - late 20s if I'm being optimistic.
I don't trust the computer though, just basing the assumption on the fact it had just under half a tank of fuel when I picked it up, how many miles I've done since, and how much fuel is left.

The computer yesterday was quoting 30 odd MPG on a run, then 42, then 20 odd depending on speed. 42 is a bit wishful, but it seemed to report 20-30 more regularly. BUT... on top of that calculation, it estimates only 80 miles left in the tank, even though its got a good 30 litres left...

I'll be taking it back tonight, a run of around 100 miles, so will try and get a decent MPG figure from it then.

Ciarán

This post has been edited by Ciaran on February 13, 2009 12:19 pm

Quoted for truth! Most people I see in their cars are plodding about. Of the friends I managed to convince they should try an automatic, all have stuck with the box.

I'm still fine with manuals, and particularly if you're going for economy, but for ordinary, trudging around kind of motoring - the stuff you do every day on the way to work and back - there is no alternative to an automatic. And the XM ain't even a good automatic!

Yep.
Though I had no proper experience of autos before now, my only misgiving about them in the XM was the occasional case of boxes dying, not because I'm against autoboxes per se.

I was over at my parents collecting my daughter last night and brought the TCT with me. My dad said 'Christ have you bought another one??' and I said that it was one I was borrowing, and that it was a lovely drive, and that I had been far more relaxed than usual driving into the city in the stop-start traffic as it was an automatic, and that kickdown was nice etc.
My sister, who's driving experience consists of a shonky as hell rover 220D manual, said "Ugh... I would hate to drive an automatic!"
"Have you ever driven one before?"
"No, but I wouldn't want to"
"..."

But that says it all about some manual drivers perceptions of autoboxes, they see them as inefficient fuel guzzlers that take away control and driving pleasure, not as something which can make the driving experience more pleasurable in the likes of city traffic etc.

Ciarán