Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
-
999monkey
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 20 Jul 2022, 06:33
Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
Hello to everyone, first of all sorry for my bad English !
My name is Jovan (John, Juan, Jean, Giovanni etc...) Iam from Belgrade, Serbia.
I have driven few Citroens (x2 C5s and C6), I've been thinking about buying older one like: Xantia, BX, Xm S2...
How they compares with the new ones that I had, in terms of comfortable (very bumpy roads, big speed bumps, awfull potholes etc.)
Most comfortable car I have ever driven was Citroen C6, but I still have felt those very big and sharp potholes..
Thanks in advance !!!
My name is Jovan (John, Juan, Jean, Giovanni etc...) Iam from Belgrade, Serbia.
I have driven few Citroens (x2 C5s and C6), I've been thinking about buying older one like: Xantia, BX, Xm S2...
How they compares with the new ones that I had, in terms of comfortable (very bumpy roads, big speed bumps, awfull potholes etc.)
Most comfortable car I have ever driven was Citroen C6, but I still have felt those very big and sharp potholes..
Thanks in advance !!!
-
cit-rotti
- Donor 2024
- Posts: 273
- Joined: 07 May 2020, 09:19
- x 78
Re: Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
I have been driving Citroen for more than 50 years.
The car with the best suspension was the ID/DS model.
The suspension comfort of all hydraulic citrones can still be improved a little if the tare pressure of the spring balls is moderately increased - around 5-10 bar.
With new original spring balls, the tare pressure is usually 3-5 bar higher - this ensures that the customer really notices that he has new spring balls.
Disadvantage ID/DS no electronic helpers - it's just an older car.
Greetings
The car with the best suspension was the ID/DS model.
The suspension comfort of all hydraulic citrones can still be improved a little if the tare pressure of the spring balls is moderately increased - around 5-10 bar.
With new original spring balls, the tare pressure is usually 3-5 bar higher - this ensures that the customer really notices that he has new spring balls.
Disadvantage ID/DS no electronic helpers - it's just an older car.
Greetings
-
jamescarruthers
- (Donor 2023)
- Posts: 227
- Joined: 25 Oct 2016, 19:31
- x 47
Re: Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
I’ve owned BX, XM, C5 (Mk. 1 with hydr active) and C6 and think the earlier ones are better on rougher surfaces (more suspension travel and softer) but later ones are better if you want better “feeling” handling on twisty roads.
1987 Volvo 480 ES
2006 Citroen C6 3.0 petrol Exclusive
2006 Citroen C6 3.0 petrol Exclusive
-
Rp0thejester
- Donor 2024
- Posts: 3134
- Joined: 11 May 2022, 19:54
- x 973
Re: Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
Clearly you've never driven a C8 down country roads, handles pot holes well but rolls side to side like a ship in a thunderstorm!
Ryan
'99 Xsara 1.6 X (Red) with Sunkissed bonnet. T59 SBX
'54 Astra Estate 1.7DTI (Artic White)
'06 C8 2.2Hdi Exclusive (Aster Grey)
Champion of Where's CitroJim
Yes I ask the stupid questions, because normally it is that simple.
'99 Xsara 1.6 X (Red) with Sunkissed bonnet. T59 SBX
'54 Astra Estate 1.7DTI (Artic White)
'06 C8 2.2Hdi Exclusive (Aster Grey)
Champion of Where's CitroJim
Yes I ask the stupid questions, because normally it is that simple.
-
myglaren
- Forum Admin Team
- Posts: 28417
- Joined: 02 Mar 2008, 13:30
- x 5573
Re: Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
On the whole I agree. Had a GS and thought it wonderful, still do. Then a BX, then Xantia and then two C5s. Have been in an Xm and a handful of C6s.jamescarruthers wrote: 20 Jul 2022, 13:22 I’ve owned BX, XM, C5 (Mk. 1 with hydr active) and C6 and think the earlier ones are better on rougher surfaces (more suspension travel and softer) but later ones are better if you want better “feeling” handling on twisty roads.
The GS was almost like a hovercraft, ignored bumps and potholes and although I loved all the subsequent ones, all but one of the C6s seemed to be less compliant.
I was very surprised at the chuckability of the C5s and so were many who observed its capabilities and expected it to roll over.
-
Jay-Bruce
- Donor 2024
- Posts: 548
- Joined: 20 Mar 2019, 00:30
- x 282
Re: Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
I concur, the BX is by far the comfiest car I've ever driven, closely followed by a Xantia. Our C5 is approaching that level of comfort, but while it's better than most if not all modern cars, it's not quite as smooth as an older citroen. So, if you like the comfort of a C5/C6, and can live with the foibles of older cars, you'll love the classic citroens.
-
leithant
- (Donor 2023)
- Posts: 110
- Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 22:15
- x 9
Re: Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
I think there are good reasons to say The GS is the peak of suspension design as far as comfort goes.
06 Citroen C5 Estate 2.2 Hdi Auto
95 Peugeot 306 S16
95 Silver Xantia VSX - now deceased
95 Peugeot 306 S16
95 Silver Xantia VSX - now deceased
-
Hell Razor5543
- (Donor 2023)
- Posts: 14261
- Joined: 01 Apr 2012, 09:47
- x 3275
Re: Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
I have been told that the series 2 CX has a very comfortable ride, if you can find a nice one.
James
ex BX 1.9
ex Xantia 2.0HDi SX
ex Xantia 2.0HDi LX
ex C5 2.0HDi VTR
ex C5 2.0HDi VTR
ex C5 2.2HDi VTX+
Yes, I am paranoid, but am I paranoid ENOUGH?
Out amongst the stars, looking for a world of my own!
ex BX 1.9
ex Xantia 2.0HDi SX
ex Xantia 2.0HDi LX
ex C5 2.0HDi VTR
ex C5 2.0HDi VTR
ex C5 2.2HDi VTX+
Yes, I am paranoid, but am I paranoid ENOUGH?
Out amongst the stars, looking for a world of my own!
-
999monkey
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 20 Jul 2022, 06:33
Re: Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
Thanks a lot to everyone...that means a lot to me!!!
-
Huskyxantia
- (Donor 2025)
- Posts: 3410
- Joined: 30 Jul 2018, 22:11
- x 748
Re: Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
And a mk2 2.0hdi slightly better engine and some nice upgrades the rides a bit more refined but both cars are easy to work on plenty of room lovely cars, id like a bx , ive still my old zx estate very basic nothing power assisted but its a joy to drive an old car.
Oh all diesel all returned over 56mpg
Husky.
Thinking outside of the box is better than sitting in a dark one.

-
999monkey
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 20 Jul 2022, 06:33
Re: Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
Definitely I will go for XM S2, now my question is which one have more reliable engine: 1) 2.5 TD 2) 2.1 TD or 3) 3.0 V6 12v 167hp (1995) ?
I'am concerned about that V6 automatic transmission. I've red that is very unreliable ZF transmission ?! How much might it cost to put in 5 speed manual transmission ?
I'am concerned about that V6 automatic transmission. I've red that is very unreliable ZF transmission ?! How much might it cost to put in 5 speed manual transmission ?
-
cit-rotti
- Donor 2024
- Posts: 273
- Joined: 07 May 2020, 09:19
- x 78
Re: Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
Hello,
the 2.5 TD has always been problematic
the 2.1 diesel is almost indestructible
I have no experience with the 3 ltr. V6 and the automatic transmission - the engine should be good.
the 2.5 TD has always been problematic
the 2.1 diesel is almost indestructible
I have no experience with the 3 ltr. V6 and the automatic transmission - the engine should be good.
-
999monkey
- Posts: 4
- Joined: 20 Jul 2022, 06:33
Re: Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
Thank you so much, sir !!!cit-rotti wrote: 21 Jul 2022, 15:07 Hello,
the 2.5 TD has always been problematic
the 2.1 diesel is almost indestructible
I have no experience with the 3 ltr. V6 and the automatic transmission - the engine should be good.
-
xantia_v6
- Forum Admin Team
- Posts: 10746
- Joined: 09 Nov 2005, 22:03
- x 1341
Re: Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
I have owned 5 Xantia V6s with the ES9 engine and 4HP20 transmission (I still have one), and own a 1999 XM V6 with (factory) manual transmission. Overall, I prefer driving the XM to the Xantia (but I have just driven the Xantia 1300 miles in the past week). The main difference in driving is that the manual transmission is quieter, I did not realise how much white noise the automatic transmission creates until I drove the manual.
The 4HP20 is in most ways an excellent transmission, and 99.9% of the time selects gears in just the way that I would want. It is bullet-proof, except for its one major weakness. It has a full-flow oil fiter (like an engine oil filter) between the oil pick-up and pump. As part of the normal operation of the transmission, the clutches, especially the lock-up clutch in the torqued converter, create dust particles which get carried around in the oil and get trapped in the filter.
That should be good, but the filter is not large enough to handle all the clutch wear over the life of a transmission, and the filter gets blocked, typically at 150,00 -200,000 km. When that happens, there are several failure scenarios, but the most common is that the torque converter nose bush get starved of lubrication and overheats, spinning the bush in the oil pump, often damaging the pump housing. Other transmissions limp on with reduced oil pressure, but don't engage the clutches properly, burning the clutches or breaking springs in the valve block to to oscillations.
The problems could be avoided if the liter was changed regularly (maybe every 100,000 km), but the transmission is designed so that the filter cannot be replaced unless the transmission is removed from the car and partially dismantled. On the Xanti, that is an engine-out job (because there is no clearance to remove the transmission), but on the XM, I am sure that the transmission will come out the top without removing the engine, because the engine bay is bigger (for the ZPJ and 2.5D engines).
Conversion of an ES9 car to manual transmission is possible (a couple of members of the club-xm.co.uk forum have previously done it) but requires sourcing and fitting of the correct donor parts (transmission, driveshafts, gear linkages, hydraulic clutch assembly). Fitting the clutch pedal requires removal of the dashboard. To be strictly correct, you should also source an engine ECU form a manual car (with correct or disabled immobiliser), as the fuel mapping is different (the automatic never runs the engine at low revs and high torque).
The 4HP20 is in most ways an excellent transmission, and 99.9% of the time selects gears in just the way that I would want. It is bullet-proof, except for its one major weakness. It has a full-flow oil fiter (like an engine oil filter) between the oil pick-up and pump. As part of the normal operation of the transmission, the clutches, especially the lock-up clutch in the torqued converter, create dust particles which get carried around in the oil and get trapped in the filter.
That should be good, but the filter is not large enough to handle all the clutch wear over the life of a transmission, and the filter gets blocked, typically at 150,00 -200,000 km. When that happens, there are several failure scenarios, but the most common is that the torque converter nose bush get starved of lubrication and overheats, spinning the bush in the oil pump, often damaging the pump housing. Other transmissions limp on with reduced oil pressure, but don't engage the clutches properly, burning the clutches or breaking springs in the valve block to to oscillations.
The problems could be avoided if the liter was changed regularly (maybe every 100,000 km), but the transmission is designed so that the filter cannot be replaced unless the transmission is removed from the car and partially dismantled. On the Xanti, that is an engine-out job (because there is no clearance to remove the transmission), but on the XM, I am sure that the transmission will come out the top without removing the engine, because the engine bay is bigger (for the ZPJ and 2.5D engines).
Conversion of an ES9 car to manual transmission is possible (a couple of members of the club-xm.co.uk forum have previously done it) but requires sourcing and fitting of the correct donor parts (transmission, driveshafts, gear linkages, hydraulic clutch assembly). Fitting the clutch pedal requires removal of the dashboard. To be strictly correct, you should also source an engine ECU form a manual car (with correct or disabled immobiliser), as the fuel mapping is different (the automatic never runs the engine at low revs and high torque).
-
Huskyxantia
- (Donor 2025)
- Posts: 3410
- Joined: 30 Jul 2018, 22:11
- x 748
Re: Hydroactive 2 vs 3/3+
2.1 would be the reliable less complicated car
Husky.
Thinking outside of the box is better than sitting in a dark one.
