Steel springs or an upgrade?

[Northern_Mike]

I get your point but the irony is that while Citroen suspension was a somewhat complex additional piece of equipment

Make your mind up Simon, you said in reply to my post they weren't complex....

[Northern_Mike]

We laud the GS, CX and BX as technical marvels, which they were. However they were complex, the backstreet boys couldn't fix them or didn't want to, and therefore to the masses, they weren't a great attraction. That and the added complexities of later systems is what killed of hydro-pneumatic.

I would strongly disagree that a GS is a complex car - by today's standards with complex computer systems, electronic fuel injected engines, complex emissions control systems and so on, a GS with its air cooled carburetted engine, no computers and barely any electrical systems is positively primitive. Except not primitive in a bad way, more primitive in an elegantly simple and minimalist way.

What's that you said about comparing apples with apples Simon? I'm talking about comparing it to cars of it's time - Escort MK1/2, Golf MK1, Renault 4/5/6, Honda Civic etc. not modern stuff (which, to be fair, you plug into a machine, and it tells you what's wrong, so much easier to fault find)

It was complex compared to any of them, and some jobs that were simple were a pig. Change points? Change plugs? ... yeah, simple.

[harvestmouse]

...my only real comparison (apart from my Series III Landrover).....

Series III Land Rovers had suspension? Have had 4 of them and never noticed.

Welcome back me, incidentally. Have been away for a while and don't even have that Dyane <------ any more. Am due to view another old Citroen tomorrow, will post details if it comes home with me.

[onthecut]

Just stumbled across this thread and I think one thing is missing from the debate ---- if you regularly carry heavy payloads then the proper Citroen suspension is the only choice.

As a recent facelift C5 owner, after various BX, XM and Xantia, I think the last of the Xantiae were about as good as it gets, except for not being quite as spacious as the XM or C5. The C5 doesn't feel at all as composed as a Hydractive Xantia, in my opinion.

I also think the current C5 has absolutely gone the wrong way --- narrower and shallower load area and the cabin seems markedly more cramped than the earlier C5, unless it's just the absence of headroom. Why modern car makers can't grasp that some of us actually want a large, functional estate rather than some stylist's whim is beyond me.

Mike.

[vborovic]

IMO Hydractive Xantia is the best such suspension car, the C5 (all generations) being bigger and bulkier, seems they couldn't reach the same level of comfort and driveability as on the Xantia with the Hydractive ... as for the heavy payloads and the regular suspension, I don't think so, can't remember now, but one of the senior FCF members is driving extra-heavy stuff almost daily for miles, and has a Hydractive C5 ... as for the narrow/shallow load area, I agree, but that doesn't have anything to do with the hydractive ...

[Peter.N.]

The CX was the best hydropnumatic estate followed by the XM but they have steadily gone down hill since then. I think the DS was even better but never had one of those.

Peter

[Bob L'eponge]

I have a steel-sprung X7 C5 and have always thought that the ride and comfort were good. It is certainly not that 'Germanic' when compared the the Audi A3 I hired, which had board-hard suspension and transmitted an astonishing amount of road noise into the cabin on rough road surfaces, I hated it!

I agree about the lack of depth in the boot - this was my biggest area of doubt when I bought the car. However, the main reason for this is not so much the styling but the 250mm of depth lost by virtue of carrying a full-sized spare under the boot liner. One day I might be glad to have a proper spare and so being able to change it and still carry on at normal motorways speeds, so avoiding missing a ferry or whatever, but carrying it sure does use up a lot of space.

[JohnD]

I too have recently changed from a Mk2 Exclusive Estate to a C5-X7 VTR Estate. Previously I've ridden on hydropneumatic suspension since buying my first BX in 1991, so I was a bit apprehensive about riding on steel springs, but I've been pleasantly surprised. I can only detect a difference on the roughest of roads. The car seems to ride even better when I have my caravan hitched on. The only thing I miss about not having the hydraulic suspension is the ease in hitching and unhitching of the trailer.

[vborovic]

Comparing to my Xsara before, the spare now is a lot more difficult to access being in the boot ... but at least the spare tire is happy and dry ... ... I just hope I won't have a need for it, or if it worse comes, it will be on a dry and sunny day, not on snow at night, with the full boot ... my dad says that compared to his Mk2 Hydraulic, the drive comfort for the rear passengers s lower in my car, and that in general, the car doesn't dampen the short cracks/bumps in the road (well, obviously, that's what the hydractive was designed for in the first place, to enhance drive stability and ride quality overall), but being it is a long car, it is very stable especially in corners at high speed ... can't compare the X7 hydractive to mine, didn't yet had the opportunity to test one ...