Citroen XM Forum

onthecut wrote:I look at CX prices and predominantly they are firmly rooted in banger territory.

I beg to differ - there is normally always at least a couple of CXs advertised at what I might call 'retail' prices and these prices have most certainly risen. About 3 or 4 years back the absolutely TOP money for a high-spec (eg) GTi Turbo 2 or Prestige was £3995. £4295 at an absolute push for a low mileage FSH car. Nowadays, for a top condition car it's up to £8,000. Sure, as with any car there's going to be lesser quality vehicles and thus a reduction is price. I can't really see someone buying a CX as "just a car" to use everyday...

onthecut wrote:Hate to say it, but I'm not at all sure that the XM is 'special' enough to really make it into the proper collectible, definite value for a given age and spec. market.

My perception of the 'classic' car market is that essentially it is split into two parts ---- those vehicles that command a genuine premium on the grounds of innovation, performance, scarcity, iconic status,
Mike.

I think the XM will make it eventually as it has cutting edge innovation in the name of Hydractive ride. It was the first production car in the World to have active ride.

Dean wrote:

Shouldn't say so on here, but what about a Xantia estate ? I've seen some cracking buys lately, often with modest miles and I have come to think the later ones were a serously well put together bit of kit.

Sound advise, the xant is just as good as the 406 but you get proper suspension and they are cheaper than the pug usualy, parts are very easy to come by too when compared to the XM.
How is your 406 going anyway Peter, thought you were happy with it?

D

I am Dean, I think its a brilliant car except for the concrete springs and although it has much more room than the the Beemer its not of course as roomy as the XM, its very nice to drive and has been utterly reliable so far, have covered about 12,000 mile since I bought it, its now done 202,000 - XM teritory, it starts instantly although in this very cold weather sometimes stops again, doesn't seem to need glow plugs. The seats are comfortable the visibility is good and it will do 60 mpg+, I just can't get use to feeling the bumps. I had considered a Xantia but the 406 is somewhat easier to work on and statistically more reliable.

A friend of mine has a rover 75 which according to many reports is one of the best riding cars available, he is going to let me borrow it so I will keep you posted.

Peter

Xantias are harder to work on than the Xms in my opinion. Similar sized engines crammed into smaller spaces.

Peter.N. wrote:A friend of mine has a rover 75 which according to many reports is one of the best riding cars available, he is going to let me borrow it so I will keep you posted.

Don't bother. We have one because my father-in-law gave it to my wife when he had to give up driving. It only has 50k on the clock at the moment - partly why we took it.

The ride is good for a sprung car. That is the one good point.

Bad points include:
Visibility - On a saloon, if you want to be able to judge where the back of the car is to within about 2 foot then you need rear parking sensors. There is no visibility of anything past the rear windscreen and there is a great big boot sticking out! And the parking sensors are a common failure point too. You can't see the front either - we are all slightly used to that with an XM, but the rover is worse cause it makes you think you can.
Handbrake - probably won't work, though it is fixable if you know the correct way to adjust it (and regularly re-adjust it as far as I can tell from ours though that may be the past abuse by a garage that didn't know how to adjust it).
Boot is very prone to leaking in multiple ways - bad BMW design.
Sunroof is prone to getting stuck open - again bad BMW design, easy fix though.
Interior space is very lacking for the size of car - a fault shared with many modern cars and seems quite plasticy even compared to the XM.
Aircon is an old fashioned design for the age of car as far as I can tell and has big implications to fuel consumption and if you have a small engine then don't try to pull away with it on.
Seat comfort etc is not up to XM standards.
Seems to suffer from broken springs from what I have seen, but that is also common to many cars.

And if you even think about a 1.8 petrol then just remember your CX headgasket antics and be prepared to repeat them. To be fair, from what I have read if you did it yourself it would be fine, but many garages don't seem to be able to get them to last. And it isn't just underpowered - you will want to have a flintstones style hole cut in the floor, and will still only be getting low 20's mpg if there is any town driving involved. My 2.5 XM gets high thirtys on similar use.

Many people do love them with a passion though. And the ride is very good. The engineering and design is not a patch on the XM or the 306 that the Rover replaced from what I have seen. It is very let down by some BMW parts and designs.

That is just our experience of owning a very low mileage one though. You may love it!

And if you even think about a 1.8 petrol then just remember your CX headgasket antics and be prepared to repeat them. To be fair, from what I have read if you did it yourself it would be fine, but many garages don't seem to be able to get them to last.

Ah the K-Series, you have to strip the head off and check the liner heights BEFORE choosing a head gasket, an MLS gasket is not an improvement its a gasket for engines with high liner protrusions, a payen is more suited to engines with a flush deck, the other big killer is the heads, people overheat the engine and anneal the head so the firing rings become sunk into the now softened alloy head, skiming the head will not work, if you have driven it without water and cooked it you must replace the head or the gasket will fail again fairly soon.
Smae goes for the liners, if you really cook the engine the liners can slump in the block, liner heights must be checked.

Good engine, it just wont suffer fools easily, which is a shame as they were not fitted with coolant level sensors and the cooling systems in the rovers would not self bleed causing massive problems in an engine that suffered so badly if it ran out of coolant.

Peter, im glad your getting on ok with that pug, i think you will like the rover but as already mentioned it too has its drabacks, very comfy ride though and super quiet on the motorways.

D

You ought to know I wouldn't have considered a petrol one or a saloon or an auto the diesel has a decent BMW engine. Anyway, its all irrelevent now as I drove my friends yesterday and although it rides better than any other sprung car I have tried, its not good enough, so I have ruled it out.

I took some stuff down to the tip today in the XM - that's what I want, one of those.

Peter

You want a Tip Peter?

I've allready got one Robert, I'm slowly moving it down to the recycling centre

Interesting thread this......

In my view there are a number of different rules that can be applied to what becomes collectable. When it comes to affordable cars these are different to the top end of the market. When looking at the affordable end, I would argue that four of the most important aspects are:

1) Style / beauty / distictiveness / engineering...... I've grouped these together because they are what makes the particular car what it is.
2) Heritage....... e.g. a Ford Escort RS2000 was relatively affordable when new but the Rally heritage adds noughts to the end of the price now.
3) Innovation....... this is seperate from the first point cos a car could be a paragon of "style / beauty / distictiveness / engineering" but not have moved the game on one jot..... however a car either be unlike anything else on the road (Avantime / Pluriel) or be fairly unremarkable in engineering terms but be the first of it's kind and change the car market forever..... ref Golf GTI / Range Rover.
4) "My Dad had one of those!"..... In some ways this is the most important aspect. I still love the Triumph Vitesse because of happy memories of drives out to North Wales as a kid.... same is true of the Ford Anglia as it happens, but also the GS (once my Dad saw the light!). A variation of this rule is the one where people want a Rover 3500 SD1 cos the police used to drive them!

So where does the XM score on these?

On 1), I would argue that it scores highly. It is probably not conventionally beautiful but it IS dramatic and distinctive and I feel the styling has stood the test of time incredibly well. It is looked at when I'm on the road (usually in confused "what's that" kind of way but never in a laughing at it kind of way..... I think!) and is commented on occasionally when I'm at the petrol station (happened 3 times now). I don't think that would happen if I was driving a Vauxhall Omega.
On 2) it scores highly again. There is NO better big car heritage than TA, DS, SM, CX.... I disagree that CX prices are in banger territory..... good examples fetch really decent money now, even fairly low spec. I really do believe that this pattern will repeat for the XM in a few years.
On 3) not sure about this one. The innovations in the XM are pretty well hidden. However, they are there in the computer controlled suspension. It certainly didn't change the car market forever though!
On 4)..... doesn't score well here I'm afraid. There weren't enough sold.....

So what does this mean for future values? I would watch CX values and in there you will see a model of where the XM will be in a few years time. I think they probably reached the bottom a year or so ago and have strengthened now for good examples. The only way is up!