Silence! We're at the Opera...

This is the Forum for all your Citroen Technical Questions, Problems or Advice.

Moderator: RichardW

Post Reply
Thunderbird

Silence! We're at the Opera...

Post by Thunderbird »

The best car in the 20th century...
Only for exposition - not to be touched! [:D]
Image
User avatar
AndersDK
Posts: 6060
Joined: 21 Feb 2003, 04:56
Location: Denmark
My Cars:
x 1

Post by AndersDK »

You never told us what model spefication of your rusty SM ?
Thunderbird

Post by Thunderbird »

Anders,
At the last minute I've decided to cancel the deal. I couldn't fix it myself and it would cost a fortune to make it return to life.
I'll keep looking for a model in better shape (not in perfect shape, as it would be very expensive).
Rust all over. Suspension didn't work. Engine malfunction.
'71 model. Engine was a 2670cc V6 carbs with 172HP (when new, since most horses ran away [:D]).
It would be easier to buy a new engine than rebuild that one.
Do you know if the old PRV V6 engine of XM mk1 or the Renault-PSA V6 found on the Xantia are compatible with the SM?
User avatar
AndersDK
Posts: 6060
Joined: 21 Feb 2003, 04:56
Location: Denmark
My Cars:
x 1

Post by AndersDK »

Citroen SM = Citroen Series Maserati
Meaning the SM was fitted with Maserati engine.
Later generation Citroen engines are a completely different construction. Would not fit the SM without serious modifications.
And then in fact the SM would no longer be an SM - without the Maserati engine [B)]
jeremy
Posts: 3959
Joined: 20 Oct 2002, 16:00
Location: Hampshire, UK
My Cars:
x 2

Post by jeremy »

The problem here is transverse and in line engine installations and engines ahead or behind the gearbox. I think DS and SM have the engine behind the gearbox, whereas all other V6's (XM and Xantia) are transverse.
The interesting one is the Renault 25 / 30 which I believe had an in line installation but I don't know if the gearbox was ahead or behind the engine.
I believe Lotus uses the Citroen 5 speed gearbox in the late Europas and the reason I mention that is that the transmission went the other way as it were due to the mid engine layout. (Earlier engines were Renault - and Renault were so surprised that Lotus wanted their gearbox they offered the engine for an additional £10!)
Jeremy
Thunderbird

Post by Thunderbird »

The Maserati engine found on the SM is not really a pure Maserati engine, as it was deeply transformed to fit the SM, with some concessions made along the way. The true Maserati V6 and V8 haven't these limitations but won't fit it... [:(!]
Also read somewhere that the high price and engine reliability problems were the major factors that ended with its carreer.
With the original engine (unless it is deeply transformed), the SM won't ever be a car for daily use...
tomsheppard
Posts: 1801
Joined: 19 Dec 2002, 14:46
Location: United Kingdom
My Cars:

Post by tomsheppard »

If it isn't a proper Maserati engine, then what is it doing in the Merak?
It was running in 3 weeks as a cut down 3500V8 which suggests not a lot of time to make compromises.
Sorry, this has gone through the twaddle filter and come out the other side. The only problem on the V6 was that the cam drive sprocket on the crank was a press fit and came loose occasionally when the a/c was engaged, retiming the valves (The most expensive form of VVT!). They have almost all been welded to the crank nowadays. Many of them have run huge mileages of 150,000+
Thunderbird

Post by Thunderbird »

Merak?! Merak is a sort of black sheep of Maserati. Low value, low power, no prestige, no interest for collectors. Check the Classics bibles.
It was a re-engined (low-engined) and restyled Bora with the inferior engine used in the SM. It was a Bora a la Citroen.
Amongst other differences, the Bora had a royale V8 engine with 310bhp. 160mph against 135mph on the Merak. 135mph?! I'm glad Maserati got rid of Citroen. In the next Maserati model, Citroen would use the 4 cilinder CX GTi engine... [xx(]
tomsheppard
Posts: 1801
Joined: 19 Dec 2002, 14:46
Location: United Kingdom
My Cars:

Post by tomsheppard »

1: the Royale was a Bugatti engine, not a V8 either
2: Easier to drive than a 308 Dino and easier to drive fast (Classic and sportscar, March '05)
3: Citroen got rid of Maserati.
4: If anybody has a black sheep, low value, low power, unprestigious and uninteresting Merak to give away, there will only be one person on this forum who won't crawl over broken glass to get it and that is because Bernie's already got a full garage.
Thunderbird

Post by Thunderbird »

Merak was to Maserati as the 924 was to Porsche. [xx(]
Yet, I respect your passion with Meraks.
Twingo's and R5's also sparkled enthusiastic passions... [:D]
tomsheppard
Posts: 1801
Joined: 19 Dec 2002, 14:46
Location: United Kingdom
My Cars:

Post by tomsheppard »

No, Merak had a Maserati engine, 924, a Volkswagen van's.
Merak built at Modena by Maserati, 924 by Audi (nee DKW)
924 slow. Merak, faster than even an SM.
Around here, early Biters come up for next to no money. One sold last week for less than £600.
You won't find a Merak for much under £20,000 That's Ferrari 308 money. A little more than a 924.
For comparison, a good Ghibli (4.9SS, no less)only makes £29,000.
And anyway, when did you ever see a Merak, let alone drive one?
Thunderbird

Post by Thunderbird »

In that case, the 924 was much better than the Merak. The VW van's engines were quite tough! [8D]
A friend of my father has one Merak (Please don't let him know I think the car isn't worth a dime). [:I]
Now Tom, nautty boy, it is ugly to lie [V] - let's put here the real numbers:
Ghibli SS 4.9 (1967-73) Show: 27,500 Average: 15,950
- 4930 cc / V8-cyl 154 mph
Ghibli Spyder 4.7 (1967-73) Show: 55,000 Average: 30,000
- 4719 cc / V8-cyl 154 mph
Bora 4.7 / 4.9 (1971-78) Show: 32,500 Exposition: 14,500
- 4930 cc / V8-cyl 160 mph
Merak & Merak SS (1972-83) Show: 23,500 Average: 9,500
- 2965 cc / V6-cyl 135 mph
tomsheppard
Posts: 1801
Joined: 19 Dec 2002, 14:46
Location: United Kingdom
My Cars:

Post by tomsheppard »

The real numbers were plucked out of thin air at random from Last month's Classic and Sportscar(March 2005), real cars on real sale.
They are therefore verifiable. (I may be a fool but I am not a Liar)
The Merak was rated at 20,000 and the 4.9SS (With engine rebuild by Bill McGrath, no less; a man who knows even more about Maseratis than you do,) £29,000. (I remember because I was tempted.)
Current guide prices from the same source:(Page 170)
Ghibli 4.7 (4.9SS add 10%) 14,500 to 25,000 pounds
Merak and SS 9,500 to 23,500 pounds
Thunderbird

Post by Thunderbird »

Well I am glad to know you're not a liar, only a fool. [8D]
Then again, fools don't really know when they're not telling the truth, do they?! [}:)]
tomsheppard
Posts: 1801
Joined: 19 Dec 2002, 14:46
Location: United Kingdom
My Cars:

Post by tomsheppard »

I wouldn't know. In the last few hours, I've been told that the SM doesn't have a pure Maserati engine, that the Merak is a dog and not a proper Maser anyway and that I tell lies despite us both having access to the same data from which I had quoted.
As you assert that the SM's engine is a flop, I'll refer you to the opening posting of this thread. You have dug yourself into a deep hole[8]. Put the shovel down[:o)].
I really ought to buy you a membership of the Citroen Car Club. I'm sure that you would feel right at home.
Post Reply