Xantia CT turbo fuel economy.

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

Moderator: RichardW

DoubleChevron
Posts: 622
Joined: 22 Sep 2003, 18:06

Xantia CT turbo fuel economy.

Post by DoubleChevron » 08 Sep 2005, 05:47

Hi Guys,
I was hoping to get one of these cars for my wife ... Eventually...
However there is a guy over in Australia that's keeping extremelly consistent records of his CT turbo's fuel economy (he's had two of them) and he averages 22mpg [:0][V] I struggle to get such low milage out of my CX GTi Turbo (that is considerably more powerful and faster than the Xantia)....
What sort of fuel economy do you guys get out of these cars... There's no way I can afford to run two cars that get such poor fuel economy !!
I was thinking a CT turbo would be good, as I could tow the caravan with it and it would have decent air-con (something the CX will never have).
seeya,
Shane L.

Homer
Posts: 1497
Joined: 26 Feb 2003, 11:52
x 12

Post by Homer » 08 Sep 2005, 10:03

I always got 30mpg out of ours without the roofbox.
With the roofbox, and a good motorway run at *ahem*mph it would drop to about 26.
I don't know what this guy is doing to get 22mpg, do they use US gallons in Australia?
It would be a shame to go towing a caravan with one though.

DoubleChevron
Posts: 622
Joined: 22 Sep 2003, 18:06

Post by DoubleChevron » 08 Sep 2005, 11:08

It's in the travelling you do ... What is your daily fuel economy like (ie: not a run along the highway... eg: trip the the shops, SWMBO driving it around, commuting to work & back etc...). this is where a lot of cars do most of there driving... And it's this fuel economy we don't mention.
eg: My CX GTi Turbo get 34mpg ...... Only when cruising the highways ... To work and back where it barely gets upto operating temperature .... 20-24mpg depending on temperature/driving/etc...
Why would it be a shame to tow a caravan ?? Don't you think it's within the cars abilities ?? My CX GTi Turbo hauls the caravan along effortlessly, however get bloody hot whenever the suns out for the occupants of the car.
seeya,
Shane L.

macaroni
Posts: 301
Joined: 24 Sep 2003, 13:35

Post by macaroni » 08 Sep 2005, 13:37

I have an Activa, which has the turbo CT engine and I keep meticulous fuel-usage records and have averaged, over the past year, 26.5mpg, with a worst of 24 and a best of 32, which was on a long run with the cruise set to 80.
If you want to use such an engine for towing and with aircon on, I guess you will struggle to hit 20!
Best bet would be a Xantia 2.1TD VSX/Exclusive. All the toys, as much torque as the v6 and 40+mpg.

Peter.N.
Moderating Team
Posts: 9250
Joined: 02 Apr 2005, 16:11
x 182

Post by Peter.N. » 08 Sep 2005, 14:25

Have you thought about a 2.1 td? I think that would have all the performance you want plus 50 mpg. Have a look at the figures. My XM averages 40-45 mpg and thats considerably heavier, although admittedly I do live in a rural area. Diesels are much better on short runs, maybe X 2.

DoubleChevron
Posts: 622
Joined: 22 Sep 2003, 18:06

Post by DoubleChevron » 08 Sep 2005, 15:12

Hi Guys,
I live in Australia ... We only got a *very* few diesels out here, they were all 1.9litre turbo diesels, no HDi's or 2.1's.... Yep, the petrol engines burn a sh!tload of fuel when towing. The CX averages about 18mpg when towing at 100km/h.
A 2.1turbo deisel would probably be perfect if we'd got them. Finding a towcar in Australia isn't an issue (at all), most cars out here have at least a 3.5litre V6 ... However I want a cheapish 2nd car for my wife to run (she currently has a 2litre 8valve slugomatic). It does tow the caravan quite well, but does struggle to sit on the speedlimit where there is constant uphill gradients.
seeya,
Shane L.

patneenan
Posts: 75
Joined: 12 Apr 2005, 22:49

Post by patneenan » 08 Sep 2005, 16:33

I used to get 18 mpg out of mine!!! , but since i changed the faulty knocksensor , cleared the fault code , fitted a m.b.c. (a boost controller ), it has gone up to about 24 m.p.g. a lot more acceptable i.e. a 33% increase.
Even my old Rover 3500 v8 auto did 20 mpg!!
I don't thrash mine all the time , but I do use it 90% of time on short runs in town.

macaroni
Posts: 301
Joined: 24 Sep 2003, 13:35

Post by macaroni » 08 Sep 2005, 17:56

A 1.9td would be fine. You could always tweak it if you want more grunt.

DoubleChevron
Posts: 622
Joined: 22 Sep 2003, 18:06

Post by DoubleChevron » 08 Sep 2005, 19:20

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by patneenan</i>

I used to get 18 mpg out of mine!!! , but since i changed the faulty knocksensor , cleared the fault code , fitted a m.b.c. (a boost controller ), it has gone up to about 24 m.p.g. a lot more acceptable i.e. a 33% increase.
Even my old Rover 3500 v8 auto did 20 mpg!!
I don't thrash mine all the time , but I do use it 90% of time on short runs in town.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Thanks Pat,
that's comfirmed what I thought ... they use more petrol than a CX GTi Turbo and produce less power, not to mention being considerably slower (infact not really much faster than a Xantia 16valve) ... I'm buggered if I can figure that one out.
I'll keep my eyes open for a turbo deisel in the future I guess ... Maybe I'll have to wait a few (lot ?) of years until a C5 HDi is in my price range ??
seeya,
Shane L.

macaroni
Posts: 301
Joined: 24 Sep 2003, 13:35

Post by macaroni » 08 Sep 2005, 21:23

They are a bit faster than a 16v, but the engine is much nicer. The CX is considerably lighter than a Xantia, so that could be a factor.
You must have a low price range as C5 hdis here are dirt cheap.

User avatar
Mandrake
Posts: 7786
Joined: 10 Apr 2005, 17:23
x 192

Post by Mandrake » 09 Sep 2005, 02:18

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by macaroni</i>

They are a bit faster than a 16v, but the engine is much nicer. The CX is considerably lighter than a Xantia, so that could be a factor.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
How do you figure that ?
A standard spec 2400cc CX is about 1300Kg - slightly more than a "standard spec" Xantia 2 litre slugomatic. (1280Kg)
A fully spec'd 2500cc Turbo CX is well over 1400Kg, similar to the weight of a Xantia turbo.
Having said that, I can't figure out how a Xantia is so heavy for the size of car that it is...seems to be a lot of wasted weight...the CX is about the same weight per model spec, and yet is a bigger car (apart from the boot [:D]) and has MUCH more solid construction, espeically the suspension chassis. Hmm...
Regards,
Simon

jeremy
Posts: 3959
Joined: 20 Oct 2002, 16:00

Post by jeremy » 09 Sep 2005, 04:32

Its the bits the CX doesn't have that add the weight. My BX TD estate in fact weighs the same virtually as out ZX 1.9D - and the difference is things like side intrusion bars, a body with some crash worthiness and so on.
Jeremy

DoubleChevron
Posts: 622
Joined: 22 Sep 2003, 18:06

Post by DoubleChevron » 09 Sep 2005, 05:57

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by macaroni</i>

They are a bit faster than a 16v, but the engine is much nicer. The CX is considerably lighter than a Xantia, so that could be a factor.
You must have a low price range as C5 hdis here are dirt cheap.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
It's comes down to power ... The CX's have about 170hp and 300Nm ... It's not a 'CT' motor, so you do need for it to be on boost to give it's best (ie: 3000rpm). The Xantia has a modern turbo that'll generating considerable power from 1800rpm...
Same weight:
--CX 2.5 litre turbo charged engine
--Xantia 2.0litre turbo charged engine
That's a whole big chunk of engine capacity to make up. For the fuel the Xantia uses, I might as well run a V6 XM ... That'll tow well, and you get a bigger car thrown in (and probably not much less fuel economy).
Out here C5 HDi's are holding the value remarkably well for:
a) A citroen
b) a deisel powered passenger car (of which the locals figure should be fitted with a 5litre V8 due to it's size).
All of the early C5 HDI's out here were only 2.0litres (the early lower powered motor) until recent times too. We now get the lower older 2.2HDi, not the more powerful new 2.0litre.
seeya,
Shane L.

Homer
Posts: 1497
Joined: 26 Feb 2003, 11:52
x 12

Post by Homer » 10 Sep 2005, 01:25

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by DoubleChevron</i>

It's in the travelling you do ... What is your daily fuel economy like (ie: not a run along the highway... eg: trip the the shops, SWMBO driving it around, commuting to work & back etc...). this is where a lot of cars do most of there driving... And it's this fuel economy we don't mention.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
My 30mpg is based on brim to brim fills. I don't keep records but I would check the consumption after each fill as a check on the cars health. The type of driving didn't affect it much apart from one very long run down through Scotland in heavy traffic where we were stuck at 50 to 60 mph all the way with no chance to overtake when it averaged about 35mpg.
By the way, do you use US gallons or British ones? The US gallon is 20% smaller than a proper one.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">eg: My CX GTi Turbo get 34mpg ...... Only when cruising the highways ... To work and back where it barely gets upto operating temperature .... 20-24mpg depending on temperature/driving/etc...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I never really put that much scrutiny into the consumption but we don't usually do short trips where the engine doesn't warm up. I walk to work and the wife had over 30 mins commute when she was working.
Fro reference we are currently getting 27.9mpg out of a Peugeot 807 2.0 HDi (averaged over 2500 miles).
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Why would it be a shame to tow a caravan ?? Don't you think it's within the cars abilities ?? My CX GTi Turbo hauls the caravan along effortlessly, however get bloody hot whenever the suns out for the occupants of the car.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I'm sure it would do a fine job of hauling a caravan. I just think it is a shame to tether a shed to the back of such a wonderful driving machine.

DoubleChevron
Posts: 622
Joined: 22 Sep 2003, 18:06

Post by DoubleChevron » 10 Sep 2005, 06:13

Hi Homer,
were metric, back in the pre '70s when we were not metric it was the UK measurement sytem.
The CX GTi turbo would similar economy as your HDi given the running your doing which I find quite strange as it's NOT an economical car to run by any stretch of the imagination. The BX and Xantia non turbo would effortlessly surpass the economy your getting from your HDi ... Is there something wrong with it ?? Maybe the pump timing is out ??
seeya,
Shane L.