Citroen XM Forum

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/1 ... ore-653698
Out of the blue they wrote this. It´s generally a really intelligent website about cars, based in the US. It is reporting news that Car doesn´t bother with and they do a fine job with their reviews.

Generally a good write up, although I suspect he has been talking to Clarkson. Pity about the centre spheres, to my mind they are the most important components of an XM.

Peter

I quite liked it but was surprised the writer considered the XM to look very conventional. He also tested the Series 2 which was a bit less distinctive inside and out. That said the photos were very fine. The author also noted that the car´s ability to handle surface imperfections (small bumps and lumps) was not as good as might be hoped. That´s always been my criticism of the suspension. I really don´t want to experience thuds and crashes from the road and the first job of the suspension in a non-sportscar is to insulate the driver and passenger´s from bad paving. Overall, I am glad to see the XM getting some coverage.
What makes you think he was "talking to Clarkson"?

A few friends of ours, coming to visit us here for the first time, can't quite get to grips with what they're being picked up from the airport in. "What's this then?" And on the coastal motorway at 120km/h plus, "How old did you say this was???"

Yes, the XM is still in many ways a very advanced car. It still looks futuristic which is not true of many vehicles that came after it? Is there a futuristic car on sale today? If there is, it´s probably Japanese.

"What makes you think he was "talking to Clarkson"?"

The quips about how unconventional he expected it to be.

It says the Hydractive was in hard mode, so not surprising the ride quality was jittery.

As I have said before, even with brand new comfort spheres, my 1990 car has always had a disappointing inability to smother small-scale surface irregularities. That´s why I am considering getting tyres with a higher profile. This will mean I will not drive over 100 mph (not a problem) and perhaps the steering might feel less precise. Back to this article he wrongly says the spheres need to be a changed every six or seven years. I change mine every three. They lose 10% of their springiness every year, as I understand it.

I would agree, the one failing of hydropnumatic suspension is its inability to cope with small sharp bumps at low speed. The taller the tyres the better will be the ride but there can be a lot of difference between the compliance of different tyres. I go to my local friendly tyre supplier and 'test' the tyres of the correct size by holding the edge and seeing how easy it is to push the centre of the tread in with your thumbs, the easier the softer the ride, you will probably notice a considerable difference between tyres. The 2.1 uses 195:65:15's as opposed to the lower 205:60's used by some others, the rolling radius is near enough the same so the 65's would be my preferred tyre. The ones I am using at the moment are 'Nexen' they not only ride better but they are quieter.

Peter

It´s a pretty daft failing, isn´t? The car´s USP is supposed to be good ride quality. The motorway trips are fine but a lot of my driving is on urban roads. I desperately want to have a better time roving about the city than I do now.
The best riding car I have been in lately is the hated Mercedes R-Class. A taxi-R-class took me home from the train station in the crappy road surfaces I know very well. The ride was incredibly insulated: nothing seemed to get into the cabin.