The XM

[Spaces]

I was going to post this on club-xm.co.uk's forum, but it seems to be out of action at the moment. Apologies for any trodden-on toes - you all seem to be a little anti-XM on here, which seems strange when it's basically a big BX/Xantia - which command big respect!

Having always owned older cars and never having seen the sense in losing £££s in depreciation, I was still using CXs in the early 2000s. To be fair, the brilliance of Citroën's design caused me to use cars older than I otherwise would. I put off the day I wouldn't be using a CX, but eventually it came and having owned the odd BX and driven one or two Xantias and XMs (and having given them a good looking over - I work on my own cars) decided that PSA design just wasn't for me with both Peugeot and Citroën foibles combined into one unholy creation! It's impossible to find any modern car which begins to come close to the subtle genius of a CX and in the 90s, an XM seemed like a big-blinged-BX and a Xantia overweight and just oh-so ordinary.

Having never been able to leave hydraulic Citroens alone, I have more recently been impressed with the sheer ruggedness and reliability of the Xantia. I am never going to really like it - it is far too ordinary and Passat-like for me - but the 2.1 diesel engine and 'box are a particularly fine match with the car and a particularly fine engine and gearbox. In hydractive form this combination makes for one of the most pragnatic machines I've ever used - rot free, economical, tough, fast and quite comfortable. As modern cars are forced to kowtow to Brussels' latest regulations, something like a Xantia looks increasingly normal, acceptable and sane - even if replacing a radiator and the heater matrix takes longer than rebuilding a 2cv around a new chassis-platform.

Which leads me to think - since the XM is from the same era, uses the same parts and was built by the same people, sort of, why choose a Xantia when you can have an XM? It is more distinctive (like an XJS age has hugely improved it's physical form), bigger, rarer and has a longer wheelbase. Having experienced a fully-working HA2 system, with spheres beautifully matched to my usual roads and driving style, I hanker after a system which doesn't have a mind of its own intended to be at its best on EU-funded perfect French blacktop. (See http://www.frenchcarforum.co.uk/forum/v ... 15#p332018). Apparently the XM's heater matrix is easier to replace, in general a bigger car usually means more room to work and their banger status is long-gone. Plus, I've always found the bigger the Citroën, the more civilised and reliably helpful the people are who use them.

I have learned to expect nothing like a CX ever again so down the years my expectations have changed. I now believe an XM could make a superb car - I would really prefer to fit DIRAVI, as used for the French market. Or buy a French one.

So, what are the drawbacks? Age, obviously. I can cope with mechanical stuff. Are the short looms and poor connectors of the S1s all sorted? I'd really prefer a S1 car. And what about this rust business? Where do they go? Is there more room to change a belt on a 2.1's cambelt? Are all French cars DIRAVI?

I love the original alloy-wheel designs, petrols are a no-no and how much extra maintenance/what extra complication is there with the 2.5 diesel? XM lovers, I need to know!

[addo]

Earlier ones, here at least, are cursed by their plastics. Today, I had the driver's door interior armrest/handle on my 605 (think XM with slightly less drips) pull off; all three mount points are well broken. Didn't need the interruption to play.

[Chris570]

This is just my opinion here BUT.... having done all the work I have done to mine, the Xantia is a MUCH better thought out car in terms of item placement, wiring routes, connector choice, relay locations. My HDi is on 209k and the V6 XM on 172k. If I had to trust a car to take me to Inverness and back I could hand on heart say the HDi would do it without drama but the XM, would do it, but i'd not be certain of it. I feel that the XM has to be treated with a lot of care (which suits me rather well as I intend on it being well looked after). Yes the XM is a big Xantia in some ways but in many others it's not, you turn into a corner quickly with a HA2 Xantia and an HA2 XM and you'll see what I mean.

Maybe in my case it's more a perception thing, I mean don't get me wrong I love my XM and wouldnt be without it now but for an everyday car, the Xantia is far more practical, parking for one. Maybe as time goes on and the XM proves it's reliability (i'm sure it will) I'll adjust my views on the long journey front.

The main thing to remember though is that the Xantia and XM, although have broadly similar features in their operation are 2 totally different beasts to live with, so I think the reason people stick with Xantias is because of 2 reasons, more choice and it suits them better.

(Oh and I don't subscribe to the XM's Rust like a b*stard arguement, yes my XM had issues but I'm now of the opinion it's the life the car has had rather than the design)

[andmcit]

Crumbs this is a subject worth a lot more time than I can afford to give it but a couple of quick points:

I don't feel any anti Xm feelings here at FCF - to the contrary, there's new love for it with some regular daily contributors.

The Cx is a hard act to follow and nothing was ever going to succeed replacing it and I too resisted and to some
extent resented, the Xm at first actually because of this! I had to get my head around the idea that the Xm IS
another old big Citroen and after that I was fine living with it. Just keeping a Cx around too!

Ultimately, a Xant is a far more robust forgiving car that is more sacrificial for daily use yet an Xm easily
fits the role of daily driver too and isn't needy and problematic. My particular favourite choice is a 2.5 black
Exclusive and it is a truly astounding car that's moved 50 plus cars on a trailer with ease over tha last x2 months
without a murmur - in many respects better than a Cx I used before for the same work.

Ok, I said I had little time and am getting carried away so will leave for now!

Last word on rust too - s2 Xm's are more prone than the earlier cars although they're not immune either.
Xantiae will resist the ageing process far far better - probably why they have more fans and are loved more than Xm's?

A Xantia (whatever spec) is just a damned good car, whereas an Xm manages to be another fabulous BIG Citroen!

[messerschmitt owner]

Well, I've had five XMs, driven many CXs, owned GS and GSA, driven DSs and have never owned a Xantia - had plenty of BXs though so no stranger to the medium sized Citroen.

MY thoughts are that despite what Chris says, I use my XMs as every day cars - the white 2.1TD SX manual does 20,000+ miles a year, and the 2.0TCT I bought in June for £250 has already racked up over 2,000 miles.

Both cars are relatively rust free but you do have to keep on top of the car all the time, after all they are almost 18 years old.

My thoughts are that I love the pureness of the S1 but prefer the practicality of the S2. The best of both worlds is an L or M plate S1 or an M-S reg S2. The later S2s are not as well rust protected and have more toys which can go wrong. I prefer the manual box to the auto (but that's just me wanting to have control).

Yes, the XM is bigger, yes, you can't see either end when parking, but when I bought the XM estate I sold my BX as too wee, too ordinary and nowhere near as well specced or as much fun. Do I regret not having the smaller car - not a bit!

Buy a good XM and it will be a fantastic car.

Tell us whether you fancy a diesel or a petrol, auto or manual, turbo or non turbo, V6 or straight 4, estate or hatch, S1 or S2 and there are enough XM owners here who can point you in the right direction. Do also tell us what you want to do with it - motorway munching, town driving or whatever.

Trust me though, an XM is a really nice and well specced car and a fantastic place to be on a long journey. My best advice though is if you want one, buy the best car you can afford - there are plenty out there with decent history - and ignore the spec or the model and go for a quality car. What's the budget, by the way?

Campbell

[messerschmitt owner]

= My HDi is on 209k and the V6 XM on 172k.
Maybe as time goes on and the XM proves it's reliability (i'm sure it will) I'll adjust my views on the long journey front.

172,000 miles tells me somehow that your XM has proved its reliability!

[Chris570]

= My HDi is on 209k and the V6 XM on 172k.
Maybe as time goes on and the XM proves it's reliability (i'm sure it will) I'll adjust my views on the long journey front.

172,000 miles tells me somehow that your XM has proved its reliability!

The autobox spitting its toys and Head gaskets failing somewhat detracts that claim I thought!

It's taken a LOT of re-comissioning whereas the HDi has just kept going.....

My point about everyday is you have to choose which is the best car for you, if you drive around (and park) in a tight city then the xantia makes more practical sense If you cruise up and down a motorway all day the XM is a FAR superior car, I was surprised at just how much noiser (with wind) the HDi is at 70mph, the XM is almost silent.

[messerschmitt owner]

= My HDi is on 209k and the V6 XM on 172k.
Maybe as time goes on and the XM proves it's reliability (i'm sure it will) I'll adjust my views on the long journey front.

172,000 miles tells me somehow that your XM has proved its reliability!

The autobox spitting its toys and Head gaskets failing somewhat detracts that claim I thought!

It's taken a LOT of re-comissioning whereas the HDi has just kept going.....

My point about everyday is you have to choose which is the best car for you, if you drive around (and park) in a tight city then the xantia makes more practical sense If you cruise up and down a motorway all day the XM is a FAR superior car, I was surprised at just how much noiser (with wind) the HDi is at 70mph, the XM is almost silent.

lol - there is that - HG was done on my diesel at 102,000 - the result of the coolant never being changed. Access looked easier on the V6 too - 13 hours labour for an XM 2.1TD HG change!

Your XM is the later V6, isn't it, not the PRV One - looked like a nice car if it was the one at CXM.

[CitroJim]

No shortage of XM love here...

Look at my signature...

[Captain Slow]

I'm normally a lurker on this forum, but due to the XM one being down I am forced to confess my X(M) rated desires on here.

[Citroenmad]

Ill give a more in depth account later, however, XMs are superb cars and are as reliable as anything, so long as you find a good one.

Of course they are older cars now and so will need things doing, parts are becoming thin on the ground for some things but on the whole they are reliable.

We have had 5 and all have been very reliable. In fact one of the most reliable cars we have ever owned was our white 2.0 16v XM, it never ailed anything, given regular servicing.

[Xaccers]

There's a lot of love for the Xm, just not for the faults it can suffer from.

[Spaces]

Thanks for all the replies!

I'm quite happy with autoboxes if they have a service history of oil and filter changes and if they work well - the slight loss of power is made up for with the sheer 'driveability' of a well-matched one. There is a lot of talk of failing autoboxes, yet I never hear of manuals which give grief - which of course they can do. Is that ever a bother on XMs?

The engine would have to be a diesel, I know little about the 2.5 (please enlighten me!) but have experienced the 2.1 in a Xantia. It's one of the strongest-feeling engines I've ever known with superb power, torque and economy. Coming from someone who is used to the legendary Mercedes OM603, that is saying something!

I seem to be interpreting some of your comments as contradictory, which I'm sure they're not meant to be.

...prefer the practicality of the S2... The later S2s are not as well rust protected

Also, what is more practical about the S2, please?

Ease of parking is of no concern. Much more important is lack of fuss at 95mph on a long journey and accurate fast cornering. Comments seem to read that an XM is a far superior machine on a motorway, from which I get that they are much better when driven fast than a Xantia? I am not concerened with a slight lack of cornering ability - I fail to see how a car with an XM's specification cannot corner well at speed. Is the eager PSA rear axle as obvious in an XM as a Xantia?

Beyond being a diesel and a car which isn't worn, I usually look for a car which has had some decent servicing carried out down the years. Mileage is of little importance, except for cars with low mileages which I avoid like the plague. Originality is also important - it is always good to sample an old car in the state it emerged from the factory. Perfect interiors and paintwork are either the result of a car which has had little use (which I'll try and avoid) or an owner with a form of obsessive-complusive disorder! Or a car which has been treated poorly then had it's history covered up with new paint and new trim (something else I avoid, repainted cars). Nothing wrong with a few scratches and the odd dint, or slightly worn interiors - these are part of a car's life and show it has provided service for many years. There's a big difference between a car which looks down at heel and one which is wearing nicely, though.

Are the estates any more prone to problems than hatches - other than the fact they may have been used harder - and are the rear suspension's arm bearings up to carrying heavy loads and towing without wearing prematurely? There have always been so few XMs around it has been impossible to judge whether or not these fail to the same extent as on smaller PSA cars.

...a Xant is a far more robust forgiving car...

In what way? I suppose the shell is stronger? My thinking is that an XM is made up of the same parts as a Xantia, but in a bigger shell. If the body is not corroded and a car has been in regular use, it must have been reliable or at least had most problems sorted. I detest the fact that a Xantia's radiator and heater matrix are such a pain to replace, that the radiator fans are so complex and are not designed as well as on other cars (had the motors fail on an AC Xantia because of a build-up of carbon - which I repaired but it was unecessarily awkward to do) and that there are some appalling compromises with the suspension. However, I cannot see any of the above being any worse on an XM and there seem to be the benefits of character, individuality and finesse with Citroen's last large car which was intended for mass production. Had I an office job which necessitated a punctual 8.15 arrival 5 days a week I would most likely run an old Gold diesel for commuting - I can possibly afford to be slightly more reckless than most with my choice of car. It wouldn't be an only one, so the odd glitch could be pardoned.


Since an XM is so similar with its componentry, is the perceived lack of reliability when compared to Xantias down to poorer electrical connectors and relay locations? Since they are all Hydractive (in the UK, that is) then obviously the suspension requires a little more maintenance - is that a perceived unreliability? Or is it that the same engines have to work harder and so tire sooner? How much worse is the build quality and rust protection - are they all galvanised?

[Spaces]

Thanks for all the replies! I'm quite happy with autoboxes if they have a service history of oil and filter changes and if they work well - the slight loss of power is made up for with the sheer 'driveability' of a well-matched one. here is much to be heard of failing autoboxes, yet I never hear of manuals which give grief - which of course they can do. Is that ever a bother on XMs?

The engine would have to be a diesel, I know little about the 2.5 (please enlighten me!) but have experienced the 2.1 in a Xantia. It's one of the strongest-feeling engines I've ever known with excellent power, torque and economy. Coming from someone who is used to the legendary Mercedes OM603, that is saying something!

I seem to be interpreting some of your comments as contradictory, which I'm sure they're not meant to be.

...prefer the practicality of the S2... The later S2s are not as well rust protected

Also, what is more practical about the S2, please?

Ease of parking is of no concern. Much more important is lack of fuss at 95mph on a long journey and accurate fast cornering. Comments seem to read that an XM is a far superior machine on a motorway, from which I get that they are much better when driven fast than a Xantia? I am not concerened with a slight lack of cornering ability - I fail to see how a car with an XM's specification cannot corner well at speed. Is the eager PSA rear axle as obvious in an XM as a Xantia?

Beyond being a diesel and a car which isn't worn, I usually look for a car which has had some decent servicing carried out down the years. Mileage is of little importance, except for cars with low mileages which I avoid like the plague. Originality is also important - it is always good to sample an old car in the state it emerged from the factory. Perfect interiors and paintwork are either the result of a car which has had little use (which I'll try and avoid) or an owner with a form of obsessive-complusive disorder! Or a car which has been treated poorly then had it's history covered up with new paint and new trim (something else I avoid, repainted cars). Nothing wrong with a few scratches and the odd dint, or slightly worn interiors - these are part of a car's life and show it has provided service for many years. There's a big difference between a car which looks down at heel and one which is wearing nicely, though.

Are the estates any more prone to problems than hatches - other than the fact they may have been used harder - and are the rear suspension's arm bearings up to carrying heavy loads and towing without wearing prematurely? There have always been so few XMs around it has been impossible to judge whether or not these fail to the same extent as on smaller PSA cars. And are they all galvanised, and where are they prone to rotting?

My thinking is that an XM is made up of the same parts as a Xantia, but in a bigger shell. If the body is not corroded and a car has been in regular use, it must have been reliable or at least had most problems sorted. I detest the fact that a Xantia's radiator and heater matrix are such a pain to replace, that the radiator fans are so complex and are not designed as well as on other cars (I had the motors fail on an AC Xantia because of a build-up of carbon - which I repaired but it was unecessarily awkward to do and a design fault) and that there are some nasty compromises with the suspension.


However, I cannot see any of the above being any worse on an XM and there seem to be the benefits of character, individuality and finesse with Citroen's last large car which was intended for mass production. Had I an office job which necessitated a punctual 8.15 arrival 5 days a week I would most likely run an old Golf diesel for commuting - I can possibly afford to be slightly more reckless than most with my choice of car. It wouldn't be an only one, so the odd glitch could be pardoned.

[Citroenmad]

Id like to spend more time answering, but I dont have much at the moment.

The XM can handle, its not as nimble as the Xantia but corners well and can cover gound quickly. Far superior to most big cars of a similar vintage, especially given its super ride quality. Its more of a refined cruiser than the standard Xantia tends to be. Well i was more refined but I actually find XMs ever so slightly more noisy with wind at speed ... what I mean is its a big and softly suspended car ...

They will sit at 95mph all day long, the 2.1TD too, though it is reving quite high there. The 2.1TD auto is no performance car, the manuals are more perky. The 2.5TD is a strong performer but in fairly short supply.

All Xms have the potential to rust, expecially ones towards the end of production. S2s from early to mid 97 seem possibly the better ones. They do not rust like many cars, a similarily aged Ford Granada or something would only be good for sweeping up off the driveway by now. S2 windows motor mechs can fail (S1s dont really). The S2 is no more practical than an S1 and there are still plenty of very good S1s about. S2 obviously has an air bag or two.

Air con is not a standard fit on VSX, so you might be hard pushed to find it. I have seen one 2.1TD manual S2 with air con ... you get more autos with it though.

Estates tend to have been given a harder life, though there are still good examples about. Also dont nock low mileage cars, in my experience it depends on what the car has been used for. If its been used daily all of its life but only on town journeys then I would avoid,. if it has been only used for long runs then it will no doubt be fine. I much prefer a fresh car to a worn one.

They are galvanised, however only if the panels are original. Sills, check them, especially at the back towards the rear wheel and behind where the front mudflaps would be. Front subframes should be checked too. They can rust where Xantias do, on the lower of the rear wing, just on the door shut. Check strut tops.

To be honest, they are no more problematic than Xantias and have no more, if less, common problems. The heater matrix for example, a massive job on a Xantia but really easy on an XM. People who say XMs are a load of trouble have either found bad cars or listen to too many rumors!