'new' C5 Tourer..a step up?

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

Moderator: RichardW

Post Reply
User avatar
old'uns
Posts: 558
Joined: 06 Mar 2010, 20:21
Location: Cannock / 72800 sarthe
My Cars: '02 C5 - gone
'09 X7 - gone
CMax - X7 replacement - gone
Acadiane - lost to a V5c applicant
'06 C5 VTR auto est
'90 Honda Beat
'73 ST70 Dax
'75 ST Dax - 120 powered
x 127

'new' C5 Tourer..a step up?

Post by old'uns »

as Q, anyone 'upgraded' ( well in theory ) from S1,S11 C5?

with my '02 110 now rocking on with 210k i've been tentatively looking to replace as i need a reliable car for work as i do 20k per yr +.

options at moment are C5 or Skoda Octy Vrs/L & K although C5 is edging it purely on price/yr/mileage options.

so....is it better to go Hydro Exclusive or steel VTR regards ride?
engine....2.0 138 or 160, 1.6 looks ok on paper but real world bearing in mind it's usually at least half loaded?

ideally i'd like 2.7/3.0 V6 but probably won't happen yet.

any input welcomed, sorry no XM/Xantia suggestions, a little too old
:wink:
currently '06 C5 2.0 HDi auto estate Tip run and France trekker - well should be!! occupied currently by '10 Superb DSG 170 elegance- whistles and bells that work
Citroenmad
Posts: 8125
Joined: 04 Dec 2008, 22:08
Location: Northeast
My Cars: 07 Citroen C6 V6 HDi Exclusive - Red
07 Citroen C5 HDi VTR - Red
09 Citroen C3 1.4i VTR - Silver
01 Citroen Saxo 1.1i Forte - Mango Orange
93 Ford Mondeo 2.0i GLX
19 Hyundai i10
x 110

Post by Citroenmad »

There are a few people on here now with the C5III, not all regular users though.

They are decent cars, though if your used to the boot size of your current C5 estate you will be a bit dissapointed with the 'Tourer'. Shame really as Citroen has always been known to offer a large hold all estate.

Id not get the 1.6HDi, the C5III is heavier than the C5I and C5II, infact I think the 2.0HDi 138 in the C5III is smilar to a 2.0HDi 110 or 1.6HDi in the earlier C5s, despite it being much quicker in the C5II. So go for either the 138 or 160 2.0HDi. Depends how much performance you want, the 138 is good, ive been in a C5III with that engine, it pulled well and was quite economical.

SOme people say the steel sprung C5 rides well, ive not experienced one though. If you think you would prefer the hydropneumatic suspension, with its softer ride and self-leveling abilities, then thats the one to have. Though most C5III are steel sprung, again im thinking thats a shame, as its what Citroen is known for and it has so many advantages, plus it makes the car a bit different too. So id go for the hydractive version.

Have you thought about one of the last C5II estates, 57/08 plate? I prefer them over the C5III, roomier, all hydractive and well proven. A lot of people i know in the CCC prefer the C5II to the C5III and say they would probably get a late C5II in the future. It depends what you like really, and what will suit your car needs.

The III is a nice car though, i quite like its looks and it does seem to be getting a more popular sight on the roads too.
Chris
07 Citroen C6 V6 HDi Exclusive - Red
07 Citroen C5 HDi VTR - Red
09 Citroen C3 1.4i VTR - Silver
01 Citroen Saxo 1.1i Forte - Mango Orange
.
93 Ford Mondeo 2.0i GLX
19 Hyundai i10
fifth_cit
Posts: 82
Joined: 18 Jan 2010, 19:53
Location: North West
My Cars:

Post by fifth_cit »

I have a C5 Tourer 2.0 hdi SX (138) and it is very good, everthing works and nothings rattles, groans or squeaks. It does not have all the bells and whistles that the VTR+ plus has but what the hell, I can switch on my own lights and wipers.

Mine has steel suspension and gives a good ride and road holding and tows my caravan with ease although I must admit that with a bit of weight in back and the caravan on, the suspension is low. These cars have been around a while in the guise of a Pug 407 SW, my neighbour has one and his and mine have identical rear suspension.

There are becoming more popular and when I was at a caravan park in Southport recently there was my SX, a VTR+ and an Exclusive which have fluid suspension.

I get good economy from mine 33+ locally and 50+ on the motorway. All round very happy with it and so is my brother who has a 2.0 hdi VTR+ saloon.
C5 III Tourer 2.0HDi SX
Previous Citroens:-
05 C5 Facelift VTR 2.0Hdi
03 C5 LX 2.0Hdi
51 C5 LX 2.0Hdi
96 Xantia LX TD
cachaciero
Posts: 1407
Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 07:24
Location: West Sussex U.K
My Cars:
x 9

Post by cachaciero »

New C5 a step up ? Naw it's a Pug 407 with a different body style, personally prefer the 407SW.

In my mind I am juggling replacing my S1 C5 it's becoming very difficult to find a good reason to choose Citroen over any other of a number of worthy contenders. Citroen have virtually lost the technical discriminator which made them worth buying i.e suspension and integrated high pressure hydraulics. Still the fact that I have a Lexia weighs the arguments very slightly in favour of PSA but it's more likely to be a Pug 407SW than a C5 S3.

cachaciero
2006 Toyota Prius T Spirit
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC
Citroenmad
Posts: 8125
Joined: 04 Dec 2008, 22:08
Location: Northeast
My Cars: 07 Citroen C6 V6 HDi Exclusive - Red
07 Citroen C5 HDi VTR - Red
09 Citroen C3 1.4i VTR - Silver
01 Citroen Saxo 1.1i Forte - Mango Orange
93 Ford Mondeo 2.0i GLX
19 Hyundai i10
x 110

Post by Citroenmad »

Yes, i think i might agree with you, i do like 407s and as they have the same running gear they are virtually the same car. Had the C5III of been a hatchback them id like it much much more, but its a saloon and ruined for me. So it would have to be a tourer and it would be hard to ignor the 407 SW when considering a C5III Tourer.

For my money though, its hard to beat a late C5II, still a proper Citroen with all the advantages of hydropneumatic suspension - possibly the last proper large family Citroen. I dont count C5IIIs with coils springs as a genuine Citroen, thats a backwards step! Aside from the C6, which is more of an exectuive car, it is fantastic mind.
Chris
07 Citroen C6 V6 HDi Exclusive - Red
07 Citroen C5 HDi VTR - Red
09 Citroen C3 1.4i VTR - Silver
01 Citroen Saxo 1.1i Forte - Mango Orange
.
93 Ford Mondeo 2.0i GLX
19 Hyundai i10
User avatar
old'uns
Posts: 558
Joined: 06 Mar 2010, 20:21
Location: Cannock / 72800 sarthe
My Cars: '02 C5 - gone
'09 X7 - gone
CMax - X7 replacement - gone
Acadiane - lost to a V5c applicant
'06 C5 VTR auto est
'90 Honda Beat
'73 ST70 Dax
'75 ST Dax - 120 powered
x 127

Post by old'uns »

Citroenmad wrote:Have you thought about one of the last C5II estates, 57/08 plate? I prefer them over the C5III, roomier, all hydractive and well proven.
i did at first, but after having this one 7+ yrs i thought it was time to change rather than another 7 yrs in similar car.
had a shock though, Autotrader have 2 pages of 2010 reg SII estates!

cachaciero
'New C5 a step up ? Naw it's a Pug 407 with a different body style, personally prefer the 407SW. '

never been keen on the Pug, to me looks too long at front & estate part seems low & maybe a bit too small for my work.
regards 'step-up', probably didn't phrase it right :?

thanks so far for input
currently '06 C5 2.0 HDi auto estate Tip run and France trekker - well should be!! occupied currently by '10 Superb DSG 170 elegance- whistles and bells that work
User avatar
DickieG
Monaco's youngest playboy
Posts: 4877
Joined: 25 Nov 2006, 09:15
Location: Buckinghamshire
My Cars:
x 38

Post by DickieG »

On my recent estate car search I looked at a Pug 407SW 2.7 TDi and was shocked at the tiny boot space and poor build quality, personally I wouldn't touch one with a barge pole. The latest C5 looks to have a far better build quality.
13 Ram 1500 Hemi
14 BMW 535D Tourer
19 BMW i3s
06 C3 Desire 1.4
72 DS 21 EFi Pallas BVH
cachaciero
Posts: 1407
Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 07:24
Location: West Sussex U.K
My Cars:
x 9

Post by cachaciero »

DickieG wrote:On my recent estate car search I looked at a Pug 407SW 2.7 TDi and was shocked at the tiny boot space and poor build quality, personally I wouldn't touch one with a barge pole. The latest C5 looks to have a far better build quality.
Have to say that mentally I don't see the 407SW as an estate rather than a stylish hatch, I would agree tha space wise and indeed rear door access dimensions are smaller than a C5 II estate however it don't seem much different to a C5 III tourer but that is on memory without the benefit of being able to see the two side by side.
Build quality well I have looked at a few 407's and the ones I have looked at don't seem any worse or better than Citroen, I have mental questions about plastic quality and longevity on both of them, I reckon that build quality is generally difficult to assess until you start taking them apart :-)

For me the biggest bitch is that they don't make the engine gearbox combination that I would like on any of them. i.e a 1.6 with an auto box.

cachaciero
2006 Toyota Prius T Spirit
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC
Citroenmad
Posts: 8125
Joined: 04 Dec 2008, 22:08
Location: Northeast
My Cars: 07 Citroen C6 V6 HDi Exclusive - Red
07 Citroen C5 HDi VTR - Red
09 Citroen C3 1.4i VTR - Silver
01 Citroen Saxo 1.1i Forte - Mango Orange
93 Ford Mondeo 2.0i GLX
19 Hyundai i10
x 110

Post by Citroenmad »

You wouldnt want a 1.6HDi with an auto-box in such a big car, it would be very slow!

The C5III 'Tourer' is heading in the direction of the 407SW< with smaller boot space and less room in the rear. Being used to C5s i find it hard getting in the back of a C5III, the room between the door and seat is small to get my feet in and the headroom and legroom is less. Something i wont comprimise on.

As our C5II Estate lugs loads for its job, we could not replace it with a C5III Tourer when the time comes, its too small. We will probably get hold of a late C5II Estate or failing that, it will have to be a non-Citroen. Perhaps a Skoda Superb Estate - they are massive!
Chris
07 Citroen C6 V6 HDi Exclusive - Red
07 Citroen C5 HDi VTR - Red
09 Citroen C3 1.4i VTR - Silver
01 Citroen Saxo 1.1i Forte - Mango Orange
.
93 Ford Mondeo 2.0i GLX
19 Hyundai i10
addo
Sara Watson's Stalker
Posts: 7098
Joined: 19 Aug 2008, 12:38
Location: NEW South Wales, Australia. I'll show you "Far, far away" ;-)
My Cars: Peugeot 605
Citroën Berlingo
Alfa 147
x 93

Post by addo »

GM Suburban? :shock: That's "massive"... :P

As to the original poster: "half loaded" may mean either by volume or weight - does it truly have a couple of hundred kilos in work-related detritus filling the rear nearly always?
cachaciero
Posts: 1407
Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 07:24
Location: West Sussex U.K
My Cars:
x 9

Post by cachaciero »

Citroenmad wrote:You wouldnt want a 1.6HDi with an auto-box in such a big car, it would be very slow!
I was waiting for someone to say that :-)

Looking at the in car computer over the last 1000Miles the average speed has been 26MPH and the average consumption 28mpg.

The 2.1 XM developed a 110HP and was coupled to a 4 speed auto box, the XM was a heavier car, it was admirably suited to 95% of the driving and conditions which I normally encounter. True, overtaking could take a little planning but here on the congested roads of the South East overtaking is often an exercise in futility anyway, on rare occasions pulling out into a traffic stream also required a degree of patience :-). On the motorway the car would get to and cruise @70 easily and if no one was looking it had no problem @90 either.
Finally both from a taxation and fuel consumption it was considerably more economical than the 2.2 C5.
So I reason that the 1.6 @110hp in a lighter car would do me, why buy and pay for more performance than you can use?

Why Auto?
As far as I am concerned when the majority of driving is in any traffic heavier than light continually wanking around with a gearstick when technology will do it for you is strictly for masochists.

An EGS system would be an acceptable alternative to a full auto (better tax band) but that isn't available either at least on the C5II or the 407.

cachaciero
2006 Toyota Prius T Spirit
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC
User avatar
old'uns
Posts: 558
Joined: 06 Mar 2010, 20:21
Location: Cannock / 72800 sarthe
My Cars: '02 C5 - gone
'09 X7 - gone
CMax - X7 replacement - gone
Acadiane - lost to a V5c applicant
'06 C5 VTR auto est
'90 Honda Beat
'73 ST70 Dax
'75 ST Dax - 120 powered
x 127

Post by old'uns »

addo wrote:

As to the original poster: "half loaded" may mean either by volume or weight - does it truly have a couple of hundred kilos in work-related detritus filling the rear nearly always?
not kilo's wise but volume the boot area is up to rear of seats & various 'stuff' on rear seats, again not heavy but spacious.

from what i've seen the 407 rear is narrow & tapered?
Tourer looks slightly smaller than old C5 but would still be ample for my needs.
Octy, for a 'smaller' car seems to have an impressive amount of space so again would probably suffice.

now.....spanner in works as far as changing, chance conversation at cattery picking up Mother in Laws cat, '85 2CV van LHD (ideal for le Chateau) available to buy may mean my C5 will have to survive a little further to 250k
currently '06 C5 2.0 HDi auto estate Tip run and France trekker - well should be!! occupied currently by '10 Superb DSG 170 elegance- whistles and bells that work
Citroenmad
Posts: 8125
Joined: 04 Dec 2008, 22:08
Location: Northeast
My Cars: 07 Citroen C6 V6 HDi Exclusive - Red
07 Citroen C5 HDi VTR - Red
09 Citroen C3 1.4i VTR - Silver
01 Citroen Saxo 1.1i Forte - Mango Orange
93 Ford Mondeo 2.0i GLX
19 Hyundai i10
x 110

Post by Citroenmad »

The 1.6 HDi is said by some to feel slower than the 2.0HDi 110, which has enough performance for most people, and the 1.6 has the same power, if a little less torque, but the C5II is a tiny bit heavier than the S1C5 as it has extra crumple zones and is a little longer. WHich explains performance between S1 2.0HDi and C5II 1.6HDi 110.

Id be very surprised if the C5III is lighter than an Xm? Its heavier than the original C5, so a heavier car (than the C5II) with the same engine but an auto gearbox, that would be quite slow in my opinion.

Reading your post you thought the 2.1 auto Xm was slow, maybe it was aqequate for your needs but there are times when a little extra go would be nice.

The 1.6 is only a little less on road tax than the 2.0 138 or 160, and economy will be the same as the 1.6 will need working harder.

I guess thats why a 1.6 automatic doesnt exist in the C5III?

The EGS gearbox is much like the sensodrive gearboxes, can be an acquired taste, but if you get used to them they provide a more flexible driving experience than most conventional auto boxes, as you can change gear when you like, up and down the box, but you still have the automatic option. Though 'creep' is missing from the EGS, it seems to be either clutch engaged or disengaged, making edging up to things a little difficult when parking.

Im not really up with knowledge on C5III, but i trust they make a 2.0HDi 138 or 160 automatic? That would be perfect for what you describe you need a car for.

Though i do recall, that the 2.0HDi 138 manual int he Germanic C5III is only as quick as a 1.6HDi 110 manual in a C5II. So you would need to step up to the 2.0 16v HDi for the same performance as that car, then with an autobox its not going to be as quick either.

I know that a 2.1TD manual XM provides very very similar performance to a 2.0HDi 110 C5 hatchback.

Its quite a complicated way around things, how ive explained that, but in short, i wouldnt think anything less than a 2.0HDi 138 in a C5III would suffice for most people, with an auto gearbox.

You know, looking at C5III engine specs and figures compared tot he C5II or S5I and what ive written and read above, its not looking very appealing! Heavier and slower, generally.
Chris
07 Citroen C6 V6 HDi Exclusive - Red
07 Citroen C5 HDi VTR - Red
09 Citroen C3 1.4i VTR - Silver
01 Citroen Saxo 1.1i Forte - Mango Orange
.
93 Ford Mondeo 2.0i GLX
19 Hyundai i10
Citroenmad
Posts: 8125
Joined: 04 Dec 2008, 22:08
Location: Northeast
My Cars: 07 Citroen C6 V6 HDi Exclusive - Red
07 Citroen C5 HDi VTR - Red
09 Citroen C3 1.4i VTR - Silver
01 Citroen Saxo 1.1i Forte - Mango Orange
93 Ford Mondeo 2.0i GLX
19 Hyundai i10
x 110

Post by Citroenmad »

old'uns wrote:'85 2CV van LHD (ideal for le Chateau) available to buy may mean my C5 will have to survive a little further to 250k
Sounds far more interesting, buy that 8-)
Chris
07 Citroen C6 V6 HDi Exclusive - Red
07 Citroen C5 HDi VTR - Red
09 Citroen C3 1.4i VTR - Silver
01 Citroen Saxo 1.1i Forte - Mango Orange
.
93 Ford Mondeo 2.0i GLX
19 Hyundai i10
cachaciero
Posts: 1407
Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 07:24
Location: West Sussex U.K
My Cars:
x 9

Post by cachaciero »

As regards C5II & III I am not considering the C5III, as I said previously I don't regard the 3 as much different to the 407 and I prefer the looks of the 407 and there are quite a few around on the S/H market at reasonable prices.
The C5II is still a main contender in part because of the knowledge I already have (buy what you know!).

As regards weight V the XM well I reckon that the C51/2 must be considerably lighter than the XM due to size, general scaling down of component sizes, and choice of materials etc. and while the 3 may be heavier than 1/2 my gut feel is that it would still be lighter than an XM.

I have / am thinking about a 2.0 L C5-2 but with an autobox attached it goes up a tax bracket and this is reflected in fuel consumption and the same is true of the 2.2.

While I agree that a bit of extra power in hand is always nice to have if that is at the expense of higher fuel consumption over the normal operating range of the car it is a luxury that I can live without, given that I can see diesel being £2.00 a litre by years end it is worth thinking about. I really don't see the 1.6 having to be worked at all hard for most of it's time.

cachaciero
2006 Toyota Prius T Spirit
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC
Post Reply