2.1 Autos- are they really that slow?

[citroenxm]

I don't like the auto's not just because they are slower but because you can't drive them for economy, on my manuals I like to change up at or before 2000 rpm, the auto doesn't change up until about 3000 which makes it noisy and thirsty, additionally manual boxes usually last longer than the rest of the car the same can't be said of the auto, the cost of replacing it will likely be more than the car is worth.

I can see the case for an auto if you are driving in town all the time and have plenty of money but they are not for me.

Peter

auto box life is a matter of Maintenace!! my mates 2.1 td auto is now and 221k on the same box we change the auto box fluid every other service. box is still perfectly smooth and takes up perfectly. They are NOT much worse on fuel on a run.. They still can manage 45mpg.. If you get an auto and it works perfectly fine KEEP on top of the fuild changes with DEX 2 ONLY and they will keep going. Buy a petrol if you want to spend LOTs on fuel..

ive got a 2;1 td manual and when she was on the road theres a very noticeable difference between the manual and auto... my opinion at the end of the day is the eira of the xm is this. if you want performance but the tct or v6 engine but it will cost you fuel economy the 2.5 is better then the petrols but in reality the economy is still only around the 38 to 40 mpg. the 2;1 is a plodder which can shift when they want to but also can give amazing economy for the age..45-50mpg only the 2.5 td can be chipped the other early ones are fully mechanical and the later epic which all will have an auto box attached is not very good and do fail.

what im saying is dont rubbish the auto 2.1 buy a derv for economy not racing.. buy a petrol to move a bit faster..

[robertmnorton]

Hi Rommel, i agree with much of the comments made here. I have had all 3 pump variants of the 2.1, the Epic is without doubt not only the quickest, regardless of g/box, but the sharpest in response with instant sub zero stating and driveably, the Bosch and Rotodiesel never seemed to drive as well from cold start. A lot of auto owners don't like the auto change points, you get used this, although sometimes irritating sitting in slow moving traffic at 40-45 stuck in 3rd. Stepdown in the Epic is extremely rapid and holds the gears right up to max rpm 4200 before shifting up - 82ish in 3rd. I do have an electronic performance improvement device fitted along with the improved air filter and s/s custom exhaust and have had wheel spin in the wet in 2nd from the unloaded wheel when cornering and applying a little too much throttle. I never owned a 2.5 but test drove one once, aside from being ultra smooth the complexity of maintenance ruled it out and there was no noticeable performance difference with my Epic 2.1. I had the torque converter and g/box rebuilt by ZF 6 years ago, when i purchased the car this was intended due the notchy gear change, but not within 9 months. However, 100k and 6 years on, oil changes at 5000 miles using ZF spec 11a/11b it's still great. I still shop around for ZF spec fluid, whereas i accept Dex 2 is an alternate, ZF's reply to my query when contacted on the rebuid of my g/box confirmed the specs and usage.
The Epic is a very clean burner with no smoke on start up regardless of temp, and even under hard acceleration. Reliability has never been an issue, and regardless of the comments here have never heard of a pump failure that has been run on diesel. I replaced a faulty instrument injector at 145k and put the other 3 injectors in for testing at the same time, they required no work, spring pressures, pintle wear and spray pattern were all in spec. MOT smoke tests have always been in the 0.4- 0.5 absorbtion range.
I hope it turns out to be a good one.
robertm

If the car your looking at

[xmexclusive]

I have owned and driven most types of XM.
Which ones suit best really depends on individual driving preferences.
For me in motorway driving almost any XM would be fine.
When it comes to the secondary 2 lane roads then performance in overtaking is critical to me.
I seldom overtake but when I do I want it quick and clean even if the other car accelerates.
Of my XM's only the 2.5 has been ideal for this provided you understand the max rev cut out.
Even the V6autos I found a touch sluggish on take up but fine as soon as wound up.
The V6's went because of the 20% extra fuel costs compared to a 2.5TD.

So in answer to your original question, yes for me 2.1's are really slow in one particular aspect of driving that I consider important.
Try one if you can before you buy.
XM's are superb as cars giving relaxed and comfortable driving.
So whatever you get you are likely to be hooked.

John

[Rommel]

Great information given here, thanks guys.
I might retitle the thread as the info contained within it will no doubt be useful to others.

According to the info I've found here the Bosch mechanical seems to dispppear around cars registered after early 96 (built in 95). So from there on in it's Lucas Epic?
Are there any telltale features under the bonnet by which a Lucas-equipped car can be spotted?

It seems from the opinions given that with a tweak or two the 2.1 Auto can be sprightly enough.
Not overly impressed with the mpg figures given for the Lucas Epic XM on Citroenet!

I am generally into a more relaxed driving style these days and the only time I want real speed is for overtakes so John's comment above is food for thought.

[robertmnorton]

Hi Rommel, it will be obvious once looking in the engine bay, the pump has a plastic cover panel with the cable exiting towards you, and the accelerator quadrant has the circular pump connector pot mounted on it. Make no mistake, a 130hp 2.1 with close to 300Nm of torque, even in auto is a very quick overtaker. For comparative fuel consumption figures of real time driving go to http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/
Driving style, vehicle maintenance and driving conditions have more effect on fuel consumption than the actaul fuel system type.
robertm

[citroenxm]

2.1 epic consumption figures are much poorer.. due to cat and egr systems etc..

early lucas mechanical cars also had plastic inlet manifolds fitted to them and its only the bosch mechanical cars that had the alloy manifold. bosch was fitted from around 1992 K reg to 1996 .. ive a J reg 2.1 manual with lucas but just sold a K reg with bosch on it...

so theres only a small window of bosch... However a xantia bosch pump and injectors from the xantia can be fitted to the 2.1 with some adjustments to make it work. there has been a couple of sucessfull conversions done on here..

[robert_e_smart]

For the Record.

2.1 Lucas Mechanical



2.1 Bosch Mechanical



2.1 Lucas Epic

[xmexclusive]

RobertM

Where has this 130bhp 2.1 with close to 300Nm torque appeared from.
That is way above the standard Citroen 2.1 XM spec.
Giving people advice about heavily modified cars without making this clear can mislead.
I still stand by my statement:
The standard 2.1 is pure crap if the person you are passing puts their foot down as you get alongside.
You can end up a long time running bang road or have to brake and go back behind.

John

[citroenxm]

Standard 2.1 is 110bhp.. however with a manual box are not a slouch or crap at all.. sorry john i disagree...must get the sed manual back on the road...!

[russ92xmsed]

I have been very impressed with my autobox. It is a recon, done by the previous owner. It changes perfectly, with no shove, if thats a description! All you hear is the engine noise change & it kicks down instantly. Smoother than a L reg V6 I have driven...but that was 11 years ago! Changes up at about 2000rpm. But it does depend on how you drive it and it can take it's time getting in to 4th.
I intend to change the auto box fluid every year. Might be over the top but as Paul says, it will prolong the life of the gearbox.

Russ