Freak Or Unique: Motoring Innovations

[forddeliveryboy]

 

Until the ring main leaks badly enough to lose your brakes. And your steering.

And the suspension. At speed. Junkman isn't picking his objections out of his arse, you know.

Also, transverse ridges. Why can't the incredibly wonderful, not-at-all pointlessly complicated suspension sort that out?

 

Every HP Citroen I've driven hard on back roads turns into a flobbery mess when you push it. Nice for trundling around though. You could always learn to cadence brake.

 

Whereas every other car with a just four or five eggcup-fuls of corrosive, hygroscopic brake fluid has never, ever suffered from a sudden loss of brakes.

 

It would be interesting to know exactly what failed/had been assembled wrongly on JM's CX way back when - the entire system is designed to be as fail-safe as possible, and makes a conventional master cylinder and wee reservoir look scarily crap in the failure mode. Of course a mechanic or factory worker doing something wrong can cause anything to fail, whether it's rod brakes or a hydraulic gearchange. Perhaps that's one reason there is the love affair with electronics - a PCB is easily tested and is relatively fail-safe to remove and refit.

 

Your experience of hydraulic Cits on back roads is interesting - they do require a different style of driving when pressing on, which some really never learn. And of course the early DSs were very soft, not the best for English back roads. (The PSA ones are rubbery, soggy things compared with what went before - and hate sharp bumps.)

 

But there are some back roads which are just too winding and slow for DSs and CXs - they were designed for fast French roads. I'd suggest a DS makes a better fist of a lifetime of ye olde Englande country lanes than an Austin Cambridge would have just three hours of speed (well. 75mph) on French pavés. If the occupants survived the trauma, there would be a few bits of car left forever on a foreign verge. Sometimes just trim and mirrors, sometimes pistons.

 

 

edit - maybe what your Dad drove is often unloved by children, dugong?

[dugong]

Whereas every other car with a just four or five eggcup-fuls of corrosive, hygroscopic brake fluid has never, ever suffered from a sudden loss of brakes.

 

It would be interesting to know exactly what failed/had been assembled wrongly on JM's CX way back when - the entire system is designed to be as fail-safe as possible, and makes a conventional master cylinder and wee reservoir look scarily crap in the failure mode. Of course a mechanic or factory worker doing something wrong can cause anything to fail, whether it's rod brakes or a hydraulic gearchange. Perhaps that's one reason there is the love affair with electronics - a PCB is easily tested and is relatively fail-safe to remove and refit.

 

Your experience of hydraulic Cits on back roads is interesting - they do require a different style of driving when pressing on, which some really never learn. And of course the early DSs were very soft, not the best for English back roads. (The PSA ones are rubbery, soggy things compared with what went before - and hate sharp bumps.)

 

But there are some back roads which are just too winding and slow for DSs and CXs - they were designed for fast French roads. I'd suggest a DS makes a better fist of a lifetime of ye olde Englande country lanes than an Austin Cambridge would of just three hours of speed (well. 75mph) on French pavés. If the occupants survived the trauma, there would be a few bits of car left forever on a foreign verge. Sometimes just trim and mirrors, sometimes pistons.

 

 

edit - maybe what your Dad drove is often unloved by children?

 

Of course.

Losing the steering, suspension and brakes in one sitting (instead of just the brakes) means a hydropneumatic Citroen is superior to all those  intellectually inferior cars. Can you tell I'm unconvinced? I don't think either system is particularly brilliant. Far more Citroen ring mains have failed to my knowledge than the 'technologically bankrupt' setup you describe. In failure terms, interconnecting everything is, frankly, fucking stupid.

 

I actually like 'Fifties and 'Sixties Citroens. I despise the smug purple prose written about them, though. Purists can hurl abuse at Peugeot for 'cheapening' their beloved hydropneumatics - had it not stepped in 1976, Citroen wouldn't have survived. 

 

Pity it didn't spend some money on engine development before that point, either. We'll overlook the disasterous relationship it had with Maserati, and the asset-stripping, piecemeal way it ran Panhard into the ground, too.

 

It's all very well being high-minded, but if no-one wants to buy the product, and you refuse to train the wider world in how it works, it's pretty pointless if the company that makes then circles the toilet - unless academic achievement is your thing.

[saucedoctor]

My X Type has a front heated screen, with the tiny, wiggly elements embed in it. Works great, but I simply cannot see out of the car on a wet night. I wear really strong glasses, and in the dark and rain my eyes focus on the heater elements when there are vehicles coming the other way. I'm seriously thinking about either getting a "plain" windscreen fitted, or changing the car.

[dugong]

I dislike MkIV Golfs for many reasons - the primary one being that I can't read any of the instruments or the rest of the dashboard at night because of the blue back-lighting. The numbers and symbols in the dial pack and on the switches get swamped by the blue - as far as I'm concerned, they may as well be blank.

Then there's the things that are actually wrong with it.............

 

[dollywobbler]

My X Type has a front heated screen, with the tiny, wiggly elements embed in it. Works great, but I simply cannot see out of the car on a wet night. I wear really strong glasses, and in the dark and rain my eyes focus on the heater elements when there are vehicles coming the other way. I'm seriously thinking about either getting a "plain" windscreen fitted, or changing the car.

 

Glad I'm not the only one. I remember trying to drive a Mk3 Mondeo with heated screen on a damp motorway once. It made my eyeballs ache! Absolutely horrible. 

 

As for Citroen suspension - I've never had a devastating failure either. The one major failure I had still left the car drivable (that car had covered over 300,000 miles too). I do find the DS and CX far too soft though. Utterly hopeless on roads around here. I would like to spend some time with a Xantia though. Activa perhaps.

[Wilko220]

 I would like to spend some time with a Xantia though. Activa perhaps.

 

Is driving an Xantia Activa a very different experience to driving a normal one? Should one believe the hype? I assume there must be a few people on here with experience of both....

[dugong]

I've had one devastating brake failure on a conventionally braked car (my 306 TD). The seals in the master cylinder went and I had no brakes whatsoever. Not fun at the top of Bowerham Road.

Weirdly, because the suspension stayed upright, the steering was separately assisted and I didn't panic, I used engine braking and the handbrake to bring the car to a halt. No nuns or kittens were harmed in the instance of my brakes failing.

 

Xantia Activas are really special. Pity the complexity, ludicrous tyre sensitivity and marque snobbishness prevented Citroen from transferring the technology to the C5.


 

[dollywobbler]

Wilco - Activa is very different to the Hydractive suspension. The latter gets a bit firmer when you hoof it. The former actually cancels out any form of body roll. Hideously complex! And coped by Land Rover on the Disco II...

[dugong]

Is driving an Xantia Activa a very different experience to driving a normal one? Should one believe the hype? I assume there must be a few people on here with experience of both....

 

Yes, they're worthy of the hype provided they've been looked after.

Some people dislike the 'CT' turbo 8 valve engine. I loved it; it didn't feel like it had forced induction - it felt like it had a 3.0-litre V6 under the bonnet. The French markets got V6 Activas; we didn't.

 

VW earned shitloads of plaudits for its 2.0-litre turbo engine in the MkV GTI - the Activa's works on similar principles. I found it really impressive.

 

The cornering speeds it could achieve were incredible. I have a stretch of road near PARENTS_DUGONG that I know extremely well. The only car that's gone faster down there through the corners is an Evo V I lent off a mate. For a front-wheel drive family hatchback with half the power, that's incredible. It was very, very close in terms of cornering speed.

 

They also corner flat. There's a momentary, infinitesimal dip while the sensors level the body out, and then the car just carries on. You don't realise how much pitch and yaw a steel sprung car has until you get back into it after driving the Xantia. Getting back into my 460 after the Citroen was weird - it felt drunk in comparison.

[Wilko220]

Cheers guys - never realised they were such a big deal.

[forddeliveryboy]

I've driven Activas and I'd say to enjoy their qualities, you'd be travelling rather too fast (for the road, not the law) on almost all public roads - but fascinating, all the same. The way they operate is about as crude as the way the rest of the suspension is subtle and clever - a ram shoves the anti-roll bar into sufficient torsion that it resists roll almost completely. But it works well. If you ever have chance to ride in or drive one, do.

 

For me there were a couple of hours of cheap thrills, then the realisation that you were in a modern Eurobox with corrupting, cheap rubber bushings everywhere in the suspension and with a self-steering rear axle. Which depends on load applied, not just cornering force to decide on your trajectory. Temperature, side-wind and mass-onboard dependent, very unhappy with surface changes mid-corner when travelling hard. Let alone bumps - imagine anti-roll bars 5 or 10 times stiffer than normal. Chaos!

 

There were diesel ones available in Europe too, bizarrely - the 2.1 then 110hp HDi.

 

 

Dollywobbler - since your roads sound as if they're lumpy, bumpy, humpy and twisty, you might find that reverting to first principles makes more sense than trying to correct (with humungous complication) something which is inherently unsuitable. A wide track, well-located suspension and a low centre of mass with low polar moments of inertia would be a few fine starting points, rather than trying to ameliorate a powerful family hatchback.

[dugong]

Where did I say it was the same as an Evo V in anything other than cornering speed?
They are very, very tyre sensitive. On progressive tyres like Avon ZV3s, its responses are just that. Can't say the ride bothered me. Better some composure than the mushy mess you get in the majority of HP Citroens. Oh wait - sorry, I don't drive a Roland Barthes essay so I don't know what I'm talking about.

For someone who doesn't like rubber bushes, your car choice is odd. I mean, a W124 Merc? What are bushes supposed to bemade out of, o sage?

 

[forddeliveryboy]

I'm pointing out that the Activa's a car with uneven abilities. A fast car which is great only in parts isn't an easy one to live with. It's a shame the steering's so mushy and the brakes (until you replace that bloody stupid spring with something solid) so impossible to regulate accurately.

 

For me, the faster the Xantia, the more the cheaper elements of its chassis are brought into focus. Which you'll deride as some form of academic or high-minded smug proselytising, no doubt M dG.

 

 

 

For someone who doesn't like rubber bushes, your car choice is odd. I mean, a W124 Merc?

 

You may find that a 124's wheels are free to move about a lot less than a Xantia's or 406's under braking/cornering/sidewind loads. I don't use my 124s for Top Gear track capability, but a 124 is a long way from a dud through corners in the real world - and will grip harder than might be expected, more consistently and predictably than any PSA product I've tried.

 

Even with regurgitating balls, the steering's a lot more precise and pleasant than any Xantia or 406 I've used. Things like that (and Citroën-licenced springing at the back) endear it on long journeys.

[forddeliveryboy]

Of course.

Losing the steering, suspension and brakes in one sitting (instead of just the brakes) means a hydropneumatic Citroen is superior to all those  intellectually inferior cars. Can you tell I'm unconvinced? I don't think either system is particularly brilliant. Far more Citroen ring mains have failed to my knowledge than the 'technologically bankrupt' setup you describe. In failure terms, interconnecting everything is, frankly, fucking stupid.

 

I actually like 'Fifties and 'Sixties Citroens. I despise the smug purple prose written about them, though. Purists can hurl abuse at Peugeot for 'cheapening' their beloved hydropneumatics - had it not stepped in 1976, Citroen wouldn't have survived. 

 

Pity it didn't spend some money on engine development before that point, either. We'll overlook the disasterous relationship it had with Maserati, and the asset-stripping, piecemeal way it ran Panhard into the ground, too.

 

It's all very well being high-minded, but if no-one wants to buy the product, and you refuse to train the wider world in how it works, it's pretty pointless if the company that makes then circles the toilet - unless academic achievement is your thing.

 

 

I've dared to speak up for a long-gone breed of motor cars, which I happen to appreciate. And which seems to have touched a raw nerve with you, dugong. I've driven them extensively as well as maintained them and in my opinion, they were significantly better engineered than many others and decades ahead of their time. We all have different criteria, we all drive differently and some would class shiny leather and deep pile carpet as indicative of a quality car. Would you get so upset if I trailblazed a superb work of engineering like Honda's VTEC system?

 

As Citroën became rather too much the engineering perfectionist, weren't Peugeot's qualities those of simplicity and engineering along the lines of Ford, VW and Vauxhall - sufficiently good for most people and guaranteed to keep workers in jobs? It was the égalité of France which meant Citroën were the makers of the cars for the masses, in contrast to expensive Rovers and BMWs of us Anglo-Saxons. I imagine CXs were barely more expensive than a BMW 318.

 

To say the Sochaux firm rescued Citroën is a bit of a laugh, unless by that you mean the name has survived. I'd say Peugoet's ownership of Citroën is little better than GM's of Saab. It has just been a more protracted, agonising demise. If only a dynamic, engineering-led company like Honda or Fuji HI had been allowed into to the closed shop of the French business world in 1973.

 

If there was ever anything likely to go wrong with Citroën suspension, it was either a mechanic tipping in DoT3/4 or rotting pipes on a BX, routed as they were just forwards of a rear wheel, a la chassis Pug. Compared with conventional braking or suspension systems, it was very tolerant of abuse and neglect. Using the stored energy in the suspension to apply the brakes in the event of simultaneous and total loss of both accumulator (2 of) pressure and HP pump pressure was a good safety-feature.

 

By contrast to the very rare sudden total fluid/pressure loss on a CX (I'd never heard of it until on here - your comment M dG, "Until the ring main leaks badly enough..." - 'Until' is applicable to what follows, not to what happened to JM), a relatively regular event on a modern Peugeot means a car collapsed down at one front corner, on a disintegrating tyre and with little or no brakes if a coil spring breaks - worse even than JM's nightmare. Difference being, this isn't a freak occurrence but a relatively common component failure with no safety restraint to prevent the broken coil spearing the brake hose, ABS wiring, driveshaft joint and tyre.

 

Concorde set on fire and crashed, because of debris on a runway from an American plane, not because it was a flying liability. Nothing in this world is immune to occasional, unpredictable disaster. So long as cars drive where there's debris on the road, there is always the chance of a stone or other sharp debris cutting a brake line. And so long as they're more than a plank on two solid axles, there's a slim chance something terrible happened in assembly.

[dangerousdave]

im not a citroen fan myself but I do love citroens engineering and quirkiness the dare to be different attitude whi ch I think myself was missing from citroen towards the late 90,s into the 2000s

 

my range rover has a heated screen and I love it so good on a frosty morning start car turn heated screen on clear side windows screens clear and I cant see the heater elements in that at all

[Magnificent Rustbucket]

Also first or at least pioneers in the use of turbos on petrol engines.

 

Oldsmobile's Jetfire Turbo Rocket was a decade and a half before the SAAB.

 

My Jag has a heated screen. It works well, particularly as it is linked to the air conditioning/climate control. The screen clears very fast indeed. I do notice the wires slightly at  night, but it doesn't really bother me.

[forddeliveryboy]

A heated front screen for old, leaky cars would be perfect. Especially when it's -5C and the heater motor's fubar.

 

I suppose Saab made the turbo suitable for the mass-market - BMW had a 2002 with a turbo in the early 70s and it was a little unpredictable.

[Magnificent Rustbucket]

A heated front screen for old, leaky cars would be perfect. Especially when it's -5C and the heater motor's fubar.

 

I suppose Saab made the turbo suitable for the mass-market - BMW had a 2002 with a turbo in the early 70s and it was a little unpredictable.

 

 

if the 2002 was a little unpredictable, the '63 Chevy Corvair Monza Spyder Turbo must have been a Nader baiter!

[mat_the_cat]

Ford bought LR in 2000, according to your signature both your Discos are pre-2000.

 

Its a myth that only Ford have the right to use heated front screens.

 

 

I stand corrected - I genuinely thought that Ford owned them earlier than 2000. I did know that a few other cars had them, but assumed it was the Ford influence in this case. Interesting how some people really hate the wires (I've met a few, mainly those who wear glasses for driving) yet others don't even notice...

[dugong]

I've learned that every Citroën produced after 1973-6 is irrelevant and impure, and that Xantia Activas are useless, uneven cars designed for the braying masses. Sorry, my tastes must be common.

 

I've had family in the garage trade for nearly thirty years - they encountered more bizarre hydropneumatic Citroën suspension \ steering \ brake failures than any other marque of conventionally-engineered car. Whether that's commensurate with neglect I'm not sure, but it's a moot point. You claim that coil-spring failure is a 'relatively common' occurance. Not in our experience - over the past five years, when tempering guidelines changed, maybe. I think we'll have to disagree on that one.

 

Please don't take away that I'm anti-Citroën. I owned a GS (which was a complete bitch to sell, incidentally, as marque enthusiasts tend toward the 'eccentric'). It was the surrounding scene and it's superiority complex I disliked, rather than the car itself. Pity the GS used so much appropriated Panhard expertise. The ICCCR was great, by the way. An excellent day out. They even let me park my C4 on the show field.

 

Citroëns are worthy of praise, and have a deserved following. I've nothing against engineering-led cars - they tend to be the more interesting examples historically. Citroën's approach didn't do it any favours, though. Someone has to take the risk, granted. The Traction Avant undoubtedly moved the game on, but it crippled the company so badly Michelin had to step in. Car companies are set up to make money. Going broke producing technology a tiny field of enthusiasts and publications praise to the sky is not an effective business model.

 

Peugeot are up shit creek now, anyway, so Citroën will probably end up with Dongfeng or another Chinese maker. I take it you'll be rolling out the bunting when that happens.

 

I'm as much a fan of Peugeots as you are of Citroëns - and I'm nowhere near as intolerant of the latter as you are of the former. Yes, Sochaux tended towards the conventional production solution, but executed it a damn sight better than the majority of the competition. There was a great deal of sound engineering in the RWD Peugeots, too - particularly the '04 series. They too, were strongly built and tolerant of neglect. You're welcome to slag the post 2001 cars off - PSA stopped trying at that point, I'll give you that.

 

If only Peugeot had known not to bother in '76, eh? Would have saved this debate.

[Junkman]

What always struck me, is the overwhelming pointlessness of those Citroen 'innovations', that bankrupted them on a regular basis.

I like the quirkiness, but merely for its entertainment value.

Personal experience, though, is mainly limited to puking my guts out in my father's DS as soon as it was in motion, and a CX trying to kill me, without having itself proven to be superior in comfort, handling, or performance, to many less gimmick ridden cars I drove before or since.

[richardmorris]

The DS is a bit soft for me too, and being driven in one has put me off. But I thought the CXs I had really comfortable. I did 100,000miles in mine with no hydraulic problems at all. The separate brake accumulator really should make it possible to stop from speed even if there is a major leak on the hydraulic side. The suspension, steering and brakes share the LHM reservoir and the pump, but have separate hydraulic lines.

[dugong]

I've never suffered from motion sickness in any hydropneumatic Citroën. In fact, the only car to ever make me queasy was an Audi A4 S-Line. Take from that what you will - that's how not to conventionally engineer a chassis (or indeed, sign it off before taking it on a British back-road). 

Despite certain misgivings, the 2CV is the Citroën that ticks most of the boxes for me. It showed that sophistication wasn't synonymous with gimmicks and complexity. Although the Renault 4 used similar parameters to better real-world effect, in terms of meeting its design brief, the 2CV was uncanny. They're incredible on Fens roads, the closest I've come in the UK to replicating French driving conditions. 
 

Citroën's large car engines were a major weakness from the DS onward. Although it's clear the PSA tie-up was not appreciated from certain quarters, at least it gave access to some up to date engine designs into the 'Eighties. 

Sadly, the market does not reward engineering bravery. It didn't work for BMC and, sadly, the same was true for Citroën.

[dollywobbler]

I consider the Peugeot takeover one of the best things for Citroen. The BX was a good car with mass-market appeal precisely because Peugeot voted out the most bonkers ideas and fitted decent engines (albeit with utter shit for carburettors on the petrol ones). When the BX Club had a stand at the NEC, we had a LOT of people come up to us with tales of using them on a fleet or as taxis. I've not spent enough time with a Peugeot 405 to judge whether conventional engineering worked just as well though. 

[Sloth in a bowl]

I hope this one is only a fad:

The stupid buzzer mounted under the windscreen of my Skoda that is setup to buzz when you accelerate hard for bonus engine noise. A fair number of these things get unplugged and I can see why. Normaly it's almost unnoticable and ocassionally it sounds like a bad trim rattle. Totaly pointless.

[Junkman]

I've not spent enough time with a Peugeot 405 to judge whether conventional engineering worked just as well though. 

 

I had a 405 estate and a BX estate simultaneously.

The 405 is a good car.

[dugong]

I consider the Peugeot takeover one of the best things for Citroen. The BX was a good car with mass-market appeal precisely because Peugeot voted out the most bonkers ideas and fitted decent engines (albeit with utter shit for carburettors on the petrol ones). When the BX Club had a stand at the NEC, we had a LOT of people come up to us with tales of using them on a fleet or as taxis. I've not spent enough time with a Peugeot 405 to judge whether conventional engineering worked just as well though. 

 

Amen on the carburettors. That Solex autochoke fitted to my 305 was one of the most hateful things 'pon the earth. 

 

There's a lot of BX in the 405, and the Peugeot is a decent car. 

[Wilko220]

I hope this one is only a fad:

The stupid buzzer mounted under the windscreen of my Skoda that is setup to buzz when you accelerate hard for bonus engine noise.

 

Seriously?

[richardmorris]

I hope this one is only a fad:

The stupid buzzer mounted under the windscreen of my Skoda that is setup to buzz when you accelerate hard for bonus engine noise. A fair number of these things get unplugged and I can see why. Normaly it's almost unnoticable and ocassionally it sounds like a bad trim rattle. Totaly pointless.

 

 

Are you SURE it's not a trim rattle?

[forddeliveryboy]

I had a 405 estate and a BX estate simultaneously.

The 405 is a good car.

 

A good BX break is a superb tool, but I'd say a 405 is the better car, overall. It feels genuine, for a start. But less good if you're hitching on a heavy boat, with no-one around to help.

 

 

 

I've learned that every Citroën produced after 1973-6 is irrelevant and impure, and that Xantia Activas are useless, uneven cars designed for the braying masses. Sorry, my tastes must be common.

 

Ach c'mon man, stop being so bloody shoulder-chipped. You have your opinion, I have mine. That we don't agree is no bad thing, just don't take it so bloody personally. I ran (ie welded, painted, rebuilt engines) my own business rebuilding old cars from my 20s into my 30s, which included working on Minis, Ferraris and other odd stuff. If there was ever a car marque which impressed me, it was Citroën. I loved driving them and enjoyed putting them right. The brainpower used to design them was quite superb.

 

Blame it on a family of aircraft engineers, ships pilots, academics or classical musicians - it don't really f-ing matter-  it's my opinion and no matter how arsey you get, you won't change it! I found their mechanical and structural (before rust) engineering utterly awesome compared with almost every other marque I had the pleasure or displeasure to sort out.

 

So many other cars felt fast, they were fast. But I totally acknowedge on crowded English roads, old cars with fine aerodynamics, fine suspension, fine brakes and handling but just-powerful-enough engines are never going to flatter. What matters here is that we enjoy what we see as the best of what has gone before, and how it's better than much of the stuff sold today. I love all old cars and can usually enjoy the most challenging!