Xantia HDi faster than CX 2.5 GTi

bxbodger · Post by **bxbodger** » 06 Apr 2005, 21:52

You can't possibly compare a car from 1984 to one from 1999 in these terms-you would have to compare it with something of similar age and size, say a Lancia Beta saloon.
A current housewifes shopping Fiesta turns in better figures than the RS1600 Mexico, which when I was a lad was king of the schoolboy dreamers performance heap!!
I recently read a buying guide for DB1 and 2 Aston Martins, and the final line was something in the vein of ' but do remember, your diesel Astra will comfortably out perform it..... '

tomsheppard · Post by **tomsheppard** » 06 Apr 2005, 22:25

Neither is probably as quick as a Merak, though[:D][:D][:D]

ActivaV6uk · Post by **ActivaV6uk** » 06 Apr 2005, 22:50

I was thinking about the age on the way home. i mean 136 bhp by todays figures is pretty pants in 15 years i'm sure that we will look at the 136 bhp 16v engine and ask what they were playing at when at least 4 manufactures have better engines around right now!
Andy

weety · Post by **weety** » 06 Apr 2005, 22:56

one of my friends has a bog standard litre yaris that has much the same bhp as a MK2 XR2..... and people wonder why everyone drives faster!

Post by **Thunderbird** » 06 Apr 2005, 23:07

Because they're in a hurry? [:o)]
I have another explanation - is the stress provoked by caffeine... [8D]
Please note that is much safer to drive in a Porsche GT at 120mph than in a ZX or a 306 at the same speed...
Another note: Porsche GT owners usually never achieve half ot the top speed, while many 1.0/1.2 liters cars owners usually drive at the top speed...

tomsheppard · Post by **tomsheppard** » 06 Apr 2005, 23:17

Not in the wet it isn't.

Post by **Jon** » 07 Apr 2005, 00:15

An interesting comparison would be the CX DTR Turbo2 against the C5 HDi, a far more realistic test than comparing hi-tech HDi to a "GTi" that really wasn't that quick due to its weight...........would be interesting to see how what was one of the fastest Turbo D's in its day compares, now almost 20 years on.
From memory, CX DTR Turbo2 had 120BHP with 192lb torque?

Post by **Thunderbird** » 07 Apr 2005, 00:49

Jon, here are the numbers:
CX 2.5 Diesel - 75bhp :: 150Nm :: 147 Km/h [V]
CX 2.5 Turbo - 95bhp :: 216Nm :: 174 km/h [|)]
CX 2.5 Turbo 2 - 120PS :: 258Nm :: 195Km/h [}:)]
Xantia 2.0HDi - 110PS :: 250Nm :: 191Km/h [:)]
Xantia 2.0HDi mod - 136PS :: 293Nm :: 202Km/h
The CX 2.5 Turbo 2 performances remain actual.
Now, the 2.7HDi enters in a new level:
C6 2.7HDi - 208PS :: 440Nm :: ? [:0]

Post by **Jon** » 07 Apr 2005, 00:55

So, if we found a good CX DTR T2 and adjusted the pump and the wastegate.................the CX would still cut the mustard against a tuned Xantia HDi.

Post by **Thunderbird** » 07 Apr 2005, 01:07

Yes, that's right - just don't forget the Plywood for the rust! [:D]

tomsheppard · Post by **tomsheppard** » 07 Apr 2005, 01:20

Gladdened to find colleague's new C5 was heavier than
Grace. A good bit quicker, though.
Plywood? Xantias don't rust that badly, do they?

ActivaV6uk · Post by **ActivaV6uk** » 07 Apr 2005, 01:24

I'm going to retract my comment and say nice one tom

lol

Post by **Thunderbird** » 07 Apr 2005, 01:30

The plywood was meant for this beautiful car:

ghostrider · Post by **ghostrider** » 07 Apr 2005, 05:53

What all this KPh stuff? [:D] [:D] [:D] I've had an indicated 145MPH out of the GTI TII, (nearly matched the speed that the fuel gauge needle was moving towards empty [:D] [:D] ). The thing with the cx is that its acceleration is nearly constant all the way to about 130, each 20mph taking the same time and as I remember its only doing just on 3000 rpm at 100. The bottom end of a cx engine is bombproof no question. On another thread there was a discussion about bottom end rebuilds and a mechnic observed that it might not be too bad to do but he had never heard of one that needed doing. It is certainly quicker than any of the XMs that replaced it.
The torque for a TII was 300NM and 168 Brake 0-60mph 7.8s. A Maikonics stage 1 kit (about ?250 as I remember and basically a wastegate/ecu mod) takes it out to a monster 450Nm and around 230 brake. I Met a guy with such a device at my local scrappers once, he was running 255*50*15 on the front and he said that you could still get wheelspin in the dry at 100 in 3rd [:D] He certainly made my jaw drop when he left. The bottom end was standard, he had a heavier clutch but std driveshafts and brakes.
Its all very well being able to go fast but stopping is just as important, the brakes on the CX were essentially unchanged from the early 1985cc engine right up to the end, On the 1985 a 4 pot calliper and 230mm vented discs was almost an overkill on the GTI Tii a joke, as I found out, a couple of heavy stops from around a ton and there is Nothing left. I always thought that the 14" discs and callipers from a Sierra Cossy would balance things up nicely but with the inner half of the Cx calliper being part of the hub assmbley not an easy thing to do.
As Bx bodger says it is not really fair to compare a 1984 car with basically a 1956 engine in it to a 2000 car, the other thing I would say is that the Xantia is nothing like as stable as the CX even at a ton. In the CX the big danger is always that you are almost completely unaware of the speed, it is very quiet at a ton and rock steady with loads of feel through the steering as the varipower has removed most of the assist by the time you get to those sort of speeds. Now my Xantia has not had as much care lavished on it as the CX, but I have to concentrate if I'm going quickly, the CX is just awesome if you could afford the juice 120mph plus cruising is effortless in the CX.
What would be interesting would be a CX activa....... the turn in on a standard CX is almost scarily quick for such a big car and with Activa to control the body roll...Vanny sounds like a new mission to me, CX Activa, maikonics stage 2 at around 450 brake and telephone number torque, limited slip diff, 15"discs and 6 pot callipers all round, the insoluble problem? well 2 actually first is rust and the second is ventilation see the aircon threads!!!
Right I'm off to buy 100kilometres of hydraulic pipe and pick up an activa from the scrappers[:D] [:D] [:D] [:D]
Pete
________
Dodge Rampage Specifications

DoubleChevron · Post by **DoubleChevron** » 07 Apr 2005, 05:54

Guys,
You can't compare a petrol motor to a deisel. I'm also bloody sure that the power quoted for a lot of cars is garbage. eg: A CX2500 GTi Turbo is rated at 168hp. Anyone that's driven one knows they are incredibly fast cars (not really a car to drag hot hatches away from traffic lights with --it's still beat most, but the likes of new Clio Sports/WRX's/206GTi180s will be faster).
Now apparantly the Xsara are supposed to be 180hp. So why is a much heavier 168hp CX faster than it ??
The aspect that has improved dramatically is the 'drivability' of cars. You used to have to rev the absolute sh!t out of them and be extremely abusive to get them to go fast. Cars now don't really have any 'flat' spots as such. They'll effortlessly pull away from just about anywhere in the rev range.
I'm not sure who you guys are kidding, a CX isn't much heavier than a Xantia. The reason the Xantia feels like it's built like a brick sh!thouse (especially compared to the BX) is because it's *heavy* ...... As heavy as the lower spec CX's.
If I had my choice there would be a HDi Xantia parked in my drive for my wife to drive tomorrow. But they were never sold out here and I couldn't afford one if they were (mind you I'd stick with my old CX turbo anyway). They have something that the modern cars don't.... Not sure what it is, but the modern bland Citroens don't have it.
I certainly would *not* expect the CX turbo diesel to match the modern HDi's. Infact I doubt it would even come close. How could it possibly, the power the new HDi's put out is quite incredible.
I know which one I'd rather run for the long term (ie: decades, not months) ... The CX of course. I'm not sure how long the HDi's will last when they are pulling such staggering amounts of power/torque out of such tiny diesel motors.
seeya,
Shane L.