Tester’s notes - All Comments

re: Britain's most pointless car?

ThwartedEfforts — Thu, 15 May 2008 22:59:46 GMT

Citroen has a boggling array of cars in the 'B' CO2 category (i.e. taxed at just £35 per year), so it's not as though the company hasn't got its eco-act together.

Primarily the C5 2.2 is a four-banger manual. That means if you really want a six cylinder auto with which to hoof it up and down the country and continent, the 2.7 litre - pref. in Tourer form - is the one that fits the bill. It's a very large, soothing, quiet car, and a very large, soothing, quiet engine is the perfect accompaniment to it. You can chip it to 250bhp if that's what you feel you need, and come on, it's not as though it's diesel debauchery anyway - it returns over 40mpg on a run.

The Mondeo is a nice car but very dull. It's also very dull to see it presented as the default choice in this sector over and over again, when car buying is so often about what your heart tells you to do. A motoring hack should understand why more than just a few people will be actively seeking a Citroen instead of the Ford - perhaps even a pointless one with two extra cylinders.

And sure, while the French company's advertising is a bit odd (to say the very least), you're the one giving them the repeat marketing they crave...

re: Britain's most pointless car?

Sibbo — Thu, 15 May 2008 20:08:40 GMT

The fact they need to imply it is German is damning and says it all. French cars are badly screwed together, and fall apart easily. My father in law's 4 year old Laguna is a fine example. Bits were falling off it as soon as it left the showroom.

I would never put any of my hard-earned into anything with 4 wheels which is made by the French or Italians (unless they live in Modena, but then there isn't enough hard-earned for that).

re: Britain's most pointless car?

julianphillips — Thu, 15 May 2008 18:56:09 GMT

www.ae-plus.com/.../cc-Citroen-news14.htm

Might be of interest; although it doesn't prove that the C5 is a good car.

re: Britain's most pointless car?

julianphillips — Thu, 15 May 2008 18:35:43 GMT

"...a serious attempt to suggest that the C5 is German and therefore well built, efficient and likely to hold its value well. Erm."

John - Erm it is well built, very well built in fact. On the efficiency side, not sure what you mean but it is certainly econmical in all senses of the word - as a car in diesel guise and as an economical model for Citroen's finances: Although I currently work in the heavy duty US truck component market, I have worked on Euro projects with several of the automotive components suppliers who were involved in the C5 - Johnson Controls, Behr, Bosch and ArvinMeritor - and I can tell you that it was built to raise credibility as a rival to the German brands WHILST also saving costs on the component side. Certainly from the industry side of the market it is regarded as a high quality product. Perhaps the advert will help to persuade the car buying public of this as well.

As far as holding its value, maybe not compared to list price, but as I implied earlier - and your friend at Autocar Mr Ruppert may agree (hopefully) - the list price is totally irrelevant. The real retained value that a car like this will hold is in fact very strong, at least expressed as a percentage which is what CAP and Glass's would have you believe is all important, because it is likely to be so heavily discounted at the front end. This is why it is cheaper for me to choose a C5 over a similarly priced/engined/specced Mondeo as a company car, because the depreciation is minimal thanks to a lower front end cost and the RV isn't all that different from the Ford. This applies to corporate or private buyers, so I would say it does hold its value well. This is ignoring the fact that it is massively better than its predecessor and this may result in a stronger RV than the low-ish one that CAP and Glass's have predicted.

re: Britain's most pointless car?

John McIlroy — Thu, 15 May 2008 17:58:23 GMT

I don't deny that Ride of the Valkyries is a terrific piece of music. I just don't see what it's got to do with a French car...

re: Britain's most pointless car?

loather — Thu, 15 May 2008 17:56:31 GMT

"MPs condemn Citroen C5 advert for Nazi imagery"

motortorque.askaprice.com/.../mps-condemn-citroen-c5-advert-for-nazi-imagery.asp

The country's going to the dogs and some Scottish MP's got the time to condemn an 'evil' car advert by a French company that harks back to the 1930s? Jesus, these clowns haver got way too much time on their hands.

re: Britain's most pointless car?

loather — Thu, 15 May 2008 17:48:11 GMT

Can't agree Mr McIlroy. The Citroen C5 advert is great. The girl, flleetingly shown with a cape, on a horse?, is stunning - worth watching for alone. The music, Wagner's Ride of the Valkyries, is wonderful. If that doesn't stir you, your heart's stopped beating. The whole imagery is superb. About the only light, life-enhancing? advert on the box.

To the car. Aren't these diesels shared, been jointly-developed with Ford? Isn't the HDi 2.7 the same twin-turbo(one per bank) unit in the Jaguar XK? Hasn't that engine been lauded by this magazine amongst many others since launch, especially for its class-leading smoothness and quietness? However, it is now being outgunned by the latest BMW/Audi/Merc 3 litre plus twin-turbo, 3rd/4th generation common rail etc ueber-diesels, and being squeezed from below by increasingly powerful 4 cyl. units like the in-house 2.2 Ford/PSA 175 hp variety.

re: Britain's most pointless car?

theoriginalshoe — Thu, 15 May 2008 17:23:51 GMT

I'm with you John. Stupid advertising, unnecessary car.

re: Britain's most pointless car?

John McIlroy — Thu, 15 May 2008 16:35:42 GMT

Er, I was the 34, the last time I looked, although my musical tastes are slightly older than they should be...

Julian, do you seriously think that the advertising illustrates that Citroen quality is very good? If so, how? It's either a joke (in which case, yes, somethingmissing, I don't get it) or a serious attempt to suggest that the C5 is German and therefore well built, efficient and likely to hold its value well. Erm.

re: Britain's most pointless car?

julianphillips — Thu, 15 May 2008 14:35:06 GMT

Agreed to a point, although I think the quality is probably there in terms of relaibility for manufacturers like Citroen, but not there in terms of perception and 'feel'. I still feel BMW is leagues ahead in terms of general feelgood factor when you sit in any of their range, from the most poverty spec 116i upwards.

However, the article above was mainly concentrating on the merits - or lack of - of buying the top-of-the range 2.7 variant. My point is that it needn't be the 'irrelevant' vehicle that McIlroy thinks it is. I'd take it over the Mondeo any day of the week for emotive reasons.

re: Britain's most pointless car?

JJBoxster — Thu, 15 May 2008 14:21:14 GMT

A "pointless car" would technically be one that doesn't go A to B.

I think what J.Mc is reffering to is probably the marketing campaign of linking a French car with German brand and engineering success. He has a point about the spin as a Citroen doesn't match up on either count to be frank.

J.Mc likes the car and rates it a good alternative in comparison to a Mondeo so maybe all he needs to do is work on his spin -headlines.

re: Britain's most pointless car?

somethingmissing — Thu, 15 May 2008 13:27:57 GMT

But Mr. McIlroy, you were not in the target audience for that Citroen ad, since it's aimed at people whose senses of humour haven't yet completely atrophied and dropped off.

re: Britain's most pointless car?

julianphillips — Thu, 15 May 2008 10:50:37 GMT

Britain's most pointless article?

I'm not in the market for a C5 of any specification, but having driven both I would probably take the Citroen. I also happen to think its a great advertising campaign, maybe not to someone in his fifties (apologies if I'm incorrect on the age, just going by the picture above) but to someone who has grown up with the increasing dominance of the German brands in the upper-medium/small exec sector, due in no small part to perceived quality and image, the advertising very clearly illustrates the fact that Citroen quality is also very good.

On the 'pointless' issue: Have heard all this before, and it could - and often is - be applied to many top-of-the range cars, especially non-premium ones. For example, Vectra V6, 407 V6 petrol and diesel, 2.5 litre Mondeo, 300C V6 petrol, BLS V6, etc.

The reality is that with heavy discounting you can get the top end modle at a price that reflects a far more reasonable premium over the list price of the next model down in the range. A quick call to a dealer in North Surrey which took less than 4 minutes resulted in an instant £1,000 drop and a tank of free petrol (albeit with a very long delivery date), no doubt there are greater discounts to be negotiated. As far as 0-60 goes, who cares. My Volvo is barely any faster 0-60 than the next engine down the range, but 50-70 and 30-50 it is noticeably stronger, and it is also noticeably more refined. These aspects should be taken into account when looking at the 2.7HDI versus the 2.2, not just outright 0-60 times and top speed. I drove the 2.7 diesel in the Peugeot 407 Coupe and thought it was great and extremely refined, I assume it is the same as used in the C5. The only instance I can think of where the top-end engine in a range has been particularly undesirable was the D5 diesel Volvo engine as fitted to the V50 and V70, purely because it is so noisy.

re: BMW X6: the definitive polarising machine?

rogerthedodger — Wed, 14 May 2008 13:46:44 GMT

I saw on of these last week in Denmark and can confirm it is a truly hideous object. It didn't move all day - preseumably the driver waswaiting for darkness to fall.

And call me an old fogey if you want, but what exactly is the point and purpose of it?

re: Audi's lost quality

ThwartedEfforts — Tue, 13 May 2008 10:19:58 GMT

An Audi with a poor ride you say? Golly, now there's a thing!