The 20 year rule problem

[Spaces]

A while since I've posted - my Citroen driving has been at an all-time low in the last three or four years - instead, either diesel MB 124s or Audi A6 TDis (the C4 variety) have been my transport. Before them came a succession of many what I would call real Citroens before subjecting myself to Peugeot stuff - BXs and a Xantia or two and even the odd real Peugoet.

Bad experiences with Xantias sent me to German machines - I hate cars which are unnecessarily awkward to maintain and are deliberately made to fail prematurely (I'm thinking Xantia radiators and the LHM pump). Additionally they often felt lardy and rubbery after what had come before. I am still enjoying the simplicity, longevity and built-in reliability/durability of the 124s and older Audis.

BUT... the recent acquisition of a late series 1 Xantia 1.9TD has helped change my mind on the breed - admittedly it was a great buy at the right price which aways helps. Instead of seeing a Xantia as a modern-ish car, I view it now as a bit of a clunker - as I do my 124s - but love the well-galved body and the general simplicity. With recent belts, bottom pulley and water pump, new spheres all-round, new height correctors, new non-cat exhaust, newish Michelin tyres, recent discs, clutch and generally smart appearance the car makes a LOT of sense.

It was bought to replace a friend's Golf which lunched its gearbox, partly inspired by a friend whose '97 2.1TD VSX continues to run and run with nothing more than oil changes. And all of a sudden the Xantia feels like a half-decent Citroen. The fact that Xantias are worth zilch makes them even more appealing - for £500 you can buy a peach, if you look hard enough. It took me about half an hour on the web to find this beauty.

Maybe I just don't appreciate cars until they're over 20 years old from launch. It takes most of that to prove themselves worthy, in my book. Sure, the car still feels a little rubbery and overweight and the front end feels poorly located compared with a good Mercedes, CX or Traction Avant - and the seats are a little short under the leg. But for contemporary road condtions, it's so great. The engine and box may feel as if they should belong to a 305 yet they're just fine for a utility vehicle and without the cat sapping energy, quite quick enough. The lack of electronics is superb for longevity and comfort is spot on. Overall. the car feels just so tough. I can put up with a little lack of refinement when they are so cheap.

With ony 130k I would expect at least another 50,000 miles of reliable motoring - the radiator is all I can find which might give up the ghost within a that period. BX weaknesses appear to have been designed out of the Xantia (am I right in thinking this?) and all in all the green estate is riding high in my estimation.

[Lighty]

The 2.1 Xantia is a fine machine, not sure about the lack of electronics, also pretty sure it has a cat, or a soot trap .
We ran one for ages, but I always thought its fuel consumption was abysmal compared to equivalent German machines, mid 30's was all we ever got.
Have to admit, it was a mighty impressive car, that exhibited few faults, but I do remember ripping the dash board out to change the heater matrix

I think it soldiered on till 300.000 miles, and then I lost contact with it, no doubt gone to the after life now.

[bxzx16v]

+1 on the 2.1td Xantia , cracking car !

Mark

[Peter.N.]

I have run 2.1 td XMs for over 15 years and a lot of miles, they have generally proved to be reliable, once you have sorted out all the problems they arrive with. I have had two that have covered nearly 300,000 miles, one of them has sadly just gone for scrap as although it was running fine it was going rotten.

Peter

[Spaces]

Lighty, I was referring to the 1.9 re lack of electronics - although am I right in thinking the pump is electronically coded somehow? The exhaust system has been replaced with one intended for a pre-cat model - and it goes far better than any 1.9 Xantia I've ever known by a fair mile! I wonder how many older diesel are being suffocated by clogged-up cats and are performing dismally, with poor economy as well?

Having said that, my good friend with the 2.1 seems to average in the low to mid 40s. His car really does just go and go - it's just about ready for a cambelt though, and I'm not sure he's prepared to spend the money. Anyone on here interested in a decent 2.1 VSX? Even the aircon works ok, it has had a battery recently, glow plugs and front brakes. I think he's a member on here, I'll find out his fcf name.

[CitroJim]

Another vote for the 2.1TD

Lighty, I was referring to the 1.9 re lack of electronics - although am I right in thinking the pump is electronically coded somehow?

Early 1.9TDs up until about 1996 had fully mechanical pumps and no electronics whatsoever. The last of the mechanicals had a keypad immobilieser and armour - the electronics being a black lump that straddled the stop solenoid. Once de-armoured easy to bypass..

The later 1.9 TD pumps had their timing ECU controlled as well as the aforementioned keypad immobiliser. The electronics and the pumps themselves are, by and large, very reliable and no less so than the fully mechanical ones. The very last MK2 Xantia 1.9TD had a transponder immobiliser.

The 2.1TD in the Xantia and later XMs had the Lucas EPIC pump and this was a fully electronic fly-by-wire device. Very reliable though and the main faults will be found to be down to air leaks and leaky ESOS valves.

[red_dwarfers]

Another vote for the both the 1.9 and 2.1 here, each have their own advantages. 2.1 for low down torque and the 1.9 for it's free revving.

[Jabo]

Maybe I just don't appreciate cars until they're over 20 years old from launch. It takes most of that to prove themselves worthy, in my book.

I'm the same. I'd much rather have my 11 year old Citroen or any of my previous 10+ year old Rovers than a boring new Corsa/Fiesta/Megane.
Much more car for the money. There's so many 10+ year old cars that I still want to own, e.g. Rover Coupe Turbo, Mitsubishi 3000GT, BMW 325TDS. I'd have bought one if I hadn't invested so much time and money in repairs in the C5.

If I'm ever going to get a modern car it will have to be something special e.g. M3, 330D, RS4, Focus RS etc.

[Jabo]

^ or the diesel hybrid DS5.

[Spaces]

I'm the same. I'd much rather have my 11 year old Citroen or any of my previous 10+ year old Rovers than a boring new Corsa/Fiesta/Megane.
Much more car for the money. There's so many 10+ year old cars that I still want to own, e.g. Rover Coupe Turbo, Mitsubishi 3000GT, BMW 325TDS. I'd have bought one if I hadn't invested so much time and money in repairs in the C5.

I reckon cars ceased to improve from the late 80s/90s on - it's tweaking and the addition of electronics to make them appear as if they've improved and now that the ubiquitous straight four engine and MacPherson strut suspension is a given unless you buy an upmarket machine, manufacturers have had time to devote to better sound systems, the luxury of the dimming lights and making sure certain parts fail within a given time.

Instead of beautiful suspension engineering, by the 90s Citroen were using electronics and an additional sphere to make them corner better, whereas previously they had used the laws of physics with exquisitive geometries, expensive suspension layouts, low COGs and wide tracks (and many subtleties which few even today appreciate fully such as the fly-by-'wire' (hydraulic) diravi steering) to make their cars go round corners and 'hold the road' like nothing else. Unless you were prepared to repeatedly and constantly break the UK speed laws, then few Brits ever properly understood what Citroens were capable of.

From a driving enjoyment perspective, unless you were used to 80s Vauxhalls and Fords then things have gone backwards with overweight bodies and too much use of rubber between the driver and the wheels to make your cheap engineering feel a little less cheap. Even with its 70s doors, lack of galvanised steel and poorish cabin ventilation there is little to prefer over a good CX in the finest C5 or Xantia if all you do is drive on open, fast roads. A CX was an expensive design made as economically as possible, what followed is the reverse.

Cars ceased to be engineered by engineers a good while back, we are probably in the twilight of the ICE machine - I had a drive of an Ampera the other day and apart from the awful interior and purchase cost it was very good indeed. Bearing this in mind, it is often the product 60-85% through its genre's lifetime which is the best - much beyond that and the manufacturer is less concerned with quality and more with profit as what follows is just round the corner. You can even observe this with a model range once the ravages of time have been at work, many manufacturers will reduce quality for the last couple of years of production. Similarly, the last few years of LP record production was poor - it helped the CD sound much better than it otherwise would have.

[Lighty]

I think that the tide is turning in car development now. Manufacturers have been filling cars with electronics for quite a while now, and its easy to see why, its mostly down to legislation requiring better safety and much tighter emissions, you would never get reliable economy from a car with a set of points.
The thing is a lot of old design has been revamped with new technology, and the actual engines and suspensions etc have stayed the same.
Trouble is with the general unreliability of new cars, (seems to me they are designed to last until the warranty is finished). It has become acceptable for a less reliable car to be produced.
Look for example at the new Ford triple engine, just produced and on sale now.
This is where manufacturers have upped their game, and really invested in some new thinking.This little 1.0 litre engine produces 118 bhp in the top of the range B max (out very soon)
and Ford are currently testing a version with @ 175 bhp.
Makes you wonder how long they have planned this engine to last, as longevity doesnt seem to matter anymore. We will for sure see some huge steps forward in engine design, as diesel has been killed by Euro 6 legislation, and high fuel tax. PSA have a triple 1.0 engine coming to the 208 very soon.
Thing is where is all the revenue going to come from once we all have zero road tax to pay on these fuel sippers.

[Spaces]

I reckon the 'new thinking' you mention, Lighty, is simply to match the emission rules. 2 litre + and diesel engined private cars will most likely become rare in future because of the difficulty in cleaning tailpipes sufficiently. I don't see an enlightened bunch of manufacturers - small engines with large outputs will be inherently less long-lasting and will continue the trend towards the unfixable, disposable car. I know the VW group turbo and supercharged little engine is causing problems.

Making bodies lighter is the expensive way of reducing emissions, so this is the last thing to be done. What I find saddest is the fact that emerging electric vehicles are expected to accelerate as fast as a turbo-diesel with an overall weight just as high as a lardy 21st century dinosaur of an ICE car. The little McLaren is a ray of light in a desperately dark and boring range of vehicles available.

I think the big manufacturers are preventing any individual radical thinking with corporate fear and enormous sluggardliness inherent with such huge organisations.

The electric car is on its way and petrol-engined-only cars are in limbo as far as the product development in motor manufacturers is concerned, just sliding slowly to its extinction. My Mercedes 124 6 cylinder diesel, Xantia 2.1 and collection of other-worldy Citroëns are increasingly treasured, largely due to their inherent longevity and quality of design - as well as repairability. It's just that they'll probably be taxed into extinction.

[Spaces]

I see the Citroen Cocinelle as the most intelligent and relevant design for modern suburban and urban roads - which is saying something since it is well over 50 years old! With a small battery pack and small leccy motor, with onboard power generation from a tiny ICE engine, it would be a much more sensible answer to most people's needs than the likes of a BINI/BMW Mini or any other 'small' car on offer.

[Gibbo2286]

I had to chuckle at the "General unreliability of new cars" bit, cars are more reliable now than they've ever been, take that from someone with sixty two years experience in the motor trade (on the spanners), the owners and drivers are still sh!te though.

[Peter.N.]

Most of them probably are but for the ones that aren't the owners have the prospect of having to pay out more than they are worth in repairs or scrapping them. The only real advantage I see with modern cars is economy and improved safty, most mechanics don't know enough about them to positively identify a fault and work on the principle of replacing everything until they find the fault - at the customers expense.

I recently bought a C5 for very little money because it had an electrical fault that nobody could find, the owner had already spent a lot of money on a supposed cure which of course didn't work, I have been an elecronics engineer for over 50 years and I couldn't find it, it was through the good services of this forum that I was able to track it down and fix it, so what chance does the average DIYer have.

Peter