Xantia sd lx fuel consumption

This is the Forum for all your Citroen Technical Questions, Problems or Advice.
wornelly
Posts: 42
Joined: 30 Sep 2010, 21:27

Xantia sd lx fuel consumption

Unread post by wornelly »

What is the manufacturers fuel consumption figures on this car mine is a 97 P reg model, but i am getting between 58 and 61 mpg on a long run, any ideas, thanks :shock:
User avatar
CitroJim
A very naughty boy
Posts: 54726
Joined: 30 Apr 2005, 23:33
x 8165

Unread post by CitroJim »

That's very good :D I don't know the official fuel consumption figures but back in the day when I had a 405 1.9 GRD (normally aspirated) 55 mpg was easy and the norm. If I really tried I could get it down to 52-53mpg.

So, on that basis I can see the SD, basically an NA with a hint of a breeze from a low pressure turbo, being similar. You must be a steady driver.

Those old NA diesels could be remarkably good on a trip. The old 205D could be even better but then a 205 is little more than a motorised biscuit tin with seats and wheels...

Here's the thing though, the SD had the moniker 'Slow Diesel' for good reason - it was :D :D :D

So was my old 405. But then it was adequate and the payoff between frugality and performance was very acceptable.

Has your SD got a Lucas pump? I have a belief that Lucas pumps are more frugal overall than the Bosch pumps and generally give better performance...
Jim

A bit of a Citroen AX fan...
User avatar
DickieG
Monaco's youngest playboy
Posts: 4878
Joined: 25 Nov 2006, 09:15
x 38

Re: Xantia sd lx fuel consumption

Unread post by DickieG »

wornelly wrote:What is the manufacturers fuel consumption figures on this car mine is a 97 P reg model, but i am getting between 58 and 61 mpg on a long run, any ideas, thanks :shock:
From a Xantia brochure of the time; urban 31.0, extra urban 50.4, combined 40.9. Power output 75 bhp hence the moniker 'Slow Diesel' 0-60 = 16 secs :lol:

Interestingly the older TD giving 15 bhp more is shown as 30.4, 51.4, 40.9.

TD auto 24.6, 47.1, 35.3.

HDi 110 38.7, 62.8, 51.4.

2.0 16v man 21.9, 40.9, 31.0.

2.0 auto 20.3, 40.4, 29.7.

Activa 20.3, 37.2, 28.5.

V6 16.4, 33.6, 24.4.
25 Jeep Renegade Trailhawk
23 BMW iX3 M Sport Pro
23 Jeep Avenger
13 Ram 1500 Hemi
06 C3 Desire 1.4
72 DS 21 EFi Pallas BVH
wornelly
Posts: 42
Joined: 30 Sep 2010, 21:27

Unread post by wornelly »

CitroJim wrote:That's very good :D I don't know the official fuel consumption figures but back in the day when I had a 405 1.9 GRD (normally aspirated) 55 mpg was easy and the norm. If I really tried I could get it down to 52-53mpg.

So, on that basis I can see the SD, basically an NA with a hint of a breeze from a low pressure turbo, being similar. You must be a steady driver.

Those old NA diesels could be remarkably good on a trip. The old 205D could be even better but then a 205 is little more than a motorised biscuit tin with seats and wheels...

Here's the thing though, the SD had the moniker 'Slow Diesel' for good reason - it was :D :D :D

So was my old 405. But then it was adequate and the payoff between frugality and performance was very acceptable.

Has your SD got a Lucas pump? I have a belief that Lucas pumps are more frugal overall than the Bosch pumps and generally give better performance...
nor my car is fitted with the bosch pump, which I like as i can use veg oil, bio diesel, and the performance is adequate i have my bike for speed lol, :P