CITROEN C5 2.0 HDI BAV 138HP CONSUMPTION

[azzazel]

Hi to you all,

I’m new on this forum and I hope that this thread doesn’t create any problems…

So my problem is that I want to buy a 2009 Citroen c5 Avant 2.0 hdi 138hp with a 115k km on board with the automatic gear box and I’m curious about the medium consumption of this car. I’ve seen that the board computer indicates a medium consumption of 9.1 l/km and it seemed a little bit high. So my question is if any of you have this engine with this gear box what is the consumption for this model (in town; on open road; and medium). Also I’m interested in the performance of this engine (0-100km/h time) because I didn’t seem to find any figures for the 138hp engine with automatic gear box.

Again I hope I didn’t break any rules…
Thank you

[Peter.N.]

It largely depends on your place and style of driving, driving with a light throttle in a rural area can use half the fuel of heavy footed town driving and of course the auto box gives you an immediate disadvantage. I know that doesn't answer your question but hopefully some one will soon be along who can.

Peter

[Citroenmad]

I don't work in l/km but the UK specs for the C5III 2.0HDi 138 auto is: (taken from autotrader)

Fuel consumption (urban) 28.2 mpg
Fuel consumption (extra urban) 50.4 mpg
Fuel consumption (combined) 39.2 mpg
0 - 62 mph 13.3 seconds
Top speed 123 mph
Cylinders 4
Valves 16 v
Engine power 138 bhp
Engine torque 236 lbs/ftauto

Its a heavy car and with an autobox things are not improved. That engine in the C5II and a manual box is over 3 seconds quicker to 60 and 10MPG up on average.

Is the gearbox on the one your looking at a full automatic or an automated manual gearbox?

[KevMayer]

9.1 l/100km works out as 31.2 mpg which doesn't seem very good.

[Citroenmad]

9.1 l/100km works out as 31.2 mpg which doesn't seem very good.

Quite understandable if its done a few short journeys or has had a driver with a heavy foot. That is inbetween the urban and combined figures.

[cachaciero]

Just a note of caution here, the Citroen quoted consumption figures particularly the extra urban one is based upon a fixed standard speed regime. Now as I re-call the extra urban segment is 56mph I believe that you may well get the 50mpg @56mph on the motorway but you won't get near that at 70, low forties would be my best guess. A 2.2 which is also 138bhp will give me on the daily route to work, 14miles each way undulating B road with a final 2 mile Mway blast 32/33 mpg. Same car on M/Way @70 38/39 @60 42/43, short 2 mile trip to shops and back cold 25 mpg. Now I reckon the slightly more efficient 2 Ltr 138 in a heavier body is probably not going to be much different.

cachaciero

[azzazel]

Thank you guys for the helpful replies
I forgot that you measure in mpg not in l/km sorry…..

The specs from citroenmad were very helpful although the 13.3 seconds to 0-62 seems a very poor figure for a 140hp engine. I’ll take the seller for a spin to check that because it’s a real deal breaker…
Regarding the question if the gear box is fully automated or not I don’t have an answer… to be honest this is the first automatic car I’m taking into consideration and I’m not very familiar with this …. Yet. What I can tell you is that the gear box has both manual and automatic option. So if I want I can change the gear up or down if for some reason I get bored or I don’t like the automatic changing. If you can figure it out from this description I’m curious what is the difference between them ….

Now the consumption I’ve specified above of 9,1l/km is 25.8mpg (not 31.2  ) which seems far off from the figures the producer gives that’s what concerns me. Also the consumption was calculated from 6000km (3728miles).

Cachaciero the figures you give are not so bad. In fact they are quite good. What I want to ask you is if your car has an automated gearbox and also it is Avant. If the figures must be close to those than you stated the reason of that high consumption must be eater the driver or the engine (because I cannot believe the guy did 3700miles only in the city and only in 2 miles trips)….

Thank you guys again
Waiting for more opinions ….

[Citroenmad]

The 0-60 figure is poor for the C5III, it weighs an awful lot more than the original C5s but does with the same engines. The 138 2.0HDi was upped to 160 in recent C5 models. You can get a 1.6HDi in the C5III which must be pretty dull really. The 2.0HDi 138 manual in a C5III has the same performance figures as a 1.6HDi in a C5II!

You could always get the 138 remapped and take it closer to 170+, that would solve the performance and can give increased MPG. It no doubt will as the engine will have more torque so its easier for it to pull the car around.

Cachaciero has a C5I 2.2HDi estate automatic, a full automatic unlik emost C5III autos which is a semi auto. A manual gearbox and clutch but with an automated change - so no clutch pedal and has a fully auto option on the gearbox. Some people like these butgenerally they are slow to change gears, a little jerky and the clutch is either on or off, making marking in tight spaces tricky. However, im not sure if both a semi-auto and full auto was available in the C5II 2.0HDi, ill find out.

Perhaps the previous owner of the considered C5 was a lead footed driver who did many town miles. Its pretty poor MPG, you might as well have a petrol for that efficiency. The above figures are more what you should expect to be achieveing. Usually always a little out.

I have a 138 2.0HDi C5II hatch manual and get spot on the stated average economy for my car, 47-48MPG without even trying. Today ive done 100 miles and drive slightly more carefully and averaged 52.2mpg. Its a very efficient engine, its just a shame the C5III is such a heavy thing.

[Peter.N.]

If you are looking for better economy the 2.0 L 110 bhp manual diesel is much better at around 50 mpg and will probably give you better performance and reliability also the road tax is cheaper.

Peter

[coolscan]

Hi,

I have a 2007 C5 2.2 TT. The average litres per 100km shown by the computer is about 15% pessimistic, checked against actual usage over 5,000 km. So don't necessarily believe the figure it shows if all else is good. Also, do you know what kind of usage produced that figure?

Regards, Coolscan

[azzazel]

I was thinking the same thing to remap the chip but I’m not shure if this won’t over stress the gearbox being full automatic (and maybe other parts). Also do you think that the remapping will make a noticeable difference in mpg efficiency?

[dieselnutjob]

Now the consumption I’ve specified above of 9,1l/km is 25.8mpg (not 31.2  )

I think that you might mean 25.8mpg in US units. A US gallon is smaller than than an imperial gallon (3.8 litres vs 4.5 litres). Still, 31.2 is very low.

My 607 2.2HDI auto is doing about 36mpg and I drive it hard with a lot of town and London driving. It dropped to about 33 when the DPF was blocked. The automatic transmission does destroy the economy though. I think that there is about a 20% penalty for the automatics. The penalty is worst in town though. On a motorway trip I can get 40mpg even cruising at illegal speeds.

[addo]

A modern autobox in freeway conditions, suffers almost no economy penalty. Negligible converter slip and good overdrive ratios see that sorted. People waste more fuel by driving with the windows down...

[cachaciero]

A modern autobox in freeway conditions, suffers almost no economy penalty. Negligible converter slip and good overdrive ratios see that sorted. People waste more fuel by driving with the windows down...

I know that that is the case theoretically, however I am not totally convinced that that is the case practically, seems to me that those with Series 1 2.2's and manual boxes can still get better consumption on the M/Ways than I can. Mind unless one can really do a true comparison speed for speed, gradient for gradient and indeed windows / roof open or shut suspension height set correctly, the things one reads probably don't mean a lot.
In answer to a question yes the auto box on the S1 2.2 is a fully 4 speed auto box (4HP20) with the ability to "drive" it manually i.e Tiptronic type operation, which I do quite often, having said that in terms of economy I can't beat the figures the box gets in auto when I leave it alone.
The later 173 bhp 2.2's had the six speed Aisin box as did all the Mk2's with the 2.0 ltr 138 engine and it is my belief that that is also the box fitted to the MK3's (which arn't C5's anyway being a completely different car).

cachaciero

[citroenxm]

.......... MK3's (which arn't C5's anyway being a completely different car).

cachaciero

Correct, they are C6's...