From £7,3656
Facebook makes a car that won't appeal to all tastes in the way it looks or drives

Our Verdict

The Citroën C1 is the cheapest of the C1-107-Aygo triplets. The city car is cute, but noisy and basic

What is it?: 

It’s the car that Facebook built, after Citroën asked its Facebook followers to design a special edition of the C1.

Around 24,000 responses later and the most popular design that emerged is this, the Connexion. It's something that looks like a negative image of a ladybird, with red door handles and exterior mirrors sitting on black paint.

The Facebook fraternity asked for 14in alloy wheels; they got them too. They also wanted the ladybird theme to continue inside with lashings of red trim for everything from the rev counter surround to floor mate trim; Citroën obliged.

Air-con, front electric windows and remote central locking were some of the goodies Citroën threw in, by basing the Connexion on a VTR specification model.

What's it like?: 

What the Facebookers didn’t get a say in is what the car was like to drive. Mechanically, the Connexion is like any other C1, with power coming from a 67bhp 1.0-litre three-cylinder engine.

The engine makes a pleasing sound and is nippy enough around town, but it’ll soon run out of puff outside the city limits, the noise switching from pleasing to intrusive in the process.

The ride is a bit firm and not the most supple, although it never becomes uncomfortable. The steering feels a bit disconnected from the wheels, but at least the C1 shows a willingness to cling on — to an extent — when you’re feeling a bit brave while cornering.

Inside, the new trim that the Connexion model brings is a bit garish to our tastes and lacks subtlety. But some eye-catching touches remain in the C1’s cabin – the floating speedo and excellent visibility among them – even if the quality and interior space of the VW Up is not there.

Should I buy one?: 

The C1 Connexion is good enough in isolation, but good enough is not good enough in a class that contains rivals as strong as the Fiat Panda, VW Up and Hyundai i10.

When you think of something the C1 does quite well, it’s not hard to quickly think of a rival that does the same thing better. The Panda’s TwinAir engine sounds better than the C1’s; the Up’s engine is quieter and more refined; the Panda and Up are more spacious; the Up and i10 both eclipse its dynamic slickness.

You shouldn’t necessarily write it off completely though (unless that colour scheme really isn’t for you), as the C1 Connexion is being offered with one year of free insurance for those as young as 19, with monthly payments for the car costing upwards of £109.

Other manufacturers offer something similar; Seat’s Mii is available from £79 per month with a year of free insurance - but only for those aged 21 and over. Citroën is able to offer the free insurance for those aged a couple of years younger by fitting an all-seeing insurance black box in the car.

The cost of an insurance policy alone - on even the most basic car for an average 19-year-old - is likely to exceed the £109 you could hand over to Citroën, and you get a new car out of it as well.

Young drivers who won’t settle for an old banger should look no further.

Citroën C1 Connexion

Price £10,170; 0-62mph 12.3sec; Top speed 98mph; Economy 65.7mpg; CO2 99g/km; Kerb weight 805kg; Engine 3 cyls, 998cc, petrol; Power 67bhp at 6000rpm; Torque 69lb ft at 3600rpm; Gearbox 5spd manual

Join the debate

Comments
12

24 May 2013

I have seen worse looking cars, some C1s that are red with black spots on them

24 May 2013

I'd recommend a C1 to anyone who wants a car that costs very little to run and is extremely reliable.  In my three and a half years with one I spent £1.67 to replace the plastic cover for the bolt that holds the wiper blade.  I'd have bought another, but there was talk of a DS1 or even a totally new C1 model, so I decided that even with the cosmetic changes it wasn't different enough to tempt me.  Should Citroen introduce a new, better C1 or DS1 then I'd certainly buy one.  From personal experience, it's a car that delivers real value for money.

24 May 2013

I applaud the marketing boffins at Citroen for flogging its 'dead horse' (i.e., the C1) a bit longer, especially in light of the New Kids On The Block (Up!, Mii, Citigo) ...

24 May 2013

805kg? Glad to see that not all small cars are overweight these days.

24 May 2013

Reliable, cheap and cheerful, yes. But in the case of the citroen c1/peugeot107/toyota aygo cheap comes at a price. They didn't do well at all in the Euroncap tests.

http://www.euroncap.com/results/citroen/c1/509.aspx 

I personally wouldn't go near one for that very fact.

 

24 May 2013

harmona19 wrote:

Reliable, cheap and cheerful, yes. But in the case of the citroen c1/peugeot107/toyota aygo cheap comes at a price. They didn't do well at all in the Euroncap tests.

http://www.euroncap.com/results/citroen/c1/509.aspx 

I personally wouldn't go near one for that very fact.

 

 

Are you planning to have an accident then???

Hardly think it's unsafe - no supermini is going to make a great deal of difference in an accident.  I think the Black Box idea is far far more important from a safety point of view than just a EuroNcap rating and I hope that it becomes mandatory for anyone who gets stopped for a traffic offence and for new drivers for upto 5 years.   The amount of driver I see every solitary day on mobile phones - people overtaking near junctions, over blocked white lines and driving up peoples boots!  Speeding seems to be getting worse too - and now to the extent where it is sometimes twice the speed limit!   Too much time is spent making cars safer and not the driver!

25 May 2013

Safari wrote:

harmona19 wrote:

Reliable, cheap and cheerful, yes. But in the case of the citroen c1/peugeot107/toyota aygo cheap comes at a price. They didn't do well at all in the Euroncap tests.

http://www.euroncap.com/results/citroen/c1/509.aspx 

I personally wouldn't go near one for that very fact.

 

 

Are you planning to have an accident then???

Hardly think it's unsafe - no supermini is going to make a great deal of difference in an accident.  I think the Black Box idea is far far more important from a safety point of view than just a EuroNcap rating and I hope that it becomes mandatory for anyone who gets stopped for a traffic offence and for new drivers for upto 5 years.   The amount of driver I see every solitary day on mobile phones - people overtaking near junctions, over blocked white lines and driving up peoples boots!  Speeding seems to be getting worse too - and now to the extent where it is sometimes twice the speed limit!   Too much time is spent making cars safer and not the driver!

On making the driver safe, surely you'd support (like I firmly do) the need to retest drivers after so many years with driving lessons advised for the poor drivers to come back up to scratch? New or younger drivers aren't the ones doing 90mph in the 3rd lane of the M6 in the company Mercs, BWM and Audi's for example.

25 May 2013

C2_Matt wrote:

Safari wrote:

harmona19 wrote:

Reliable, cheap and cheerful, yes. But in the case of the citroen c1/peugeot107/toyota aygo cheap comes at a price. They didn't do well at all in the Euroncap tests.

http://www.euroncap.com/results/citroen/c1/509.aspx 

I personally wouldn't go near one for that very fact.

 

 

Are you planning to have an accident then???

Hardly think it's unsafe - no supermini is going to make a great deal of difference in an accident.  I think the Black Box idea is far far more important from a safety point of view than just a EuroNcap rating and I hope that it becomes mandatory for anyone who gets stopped for a traffic offence and for new drivers for upto 5 years.   The amount of driver I see every solitary day on mobile phones - people overtaking near junctions, over blocked white lines and driving up peoples boots!  Speeding seems to be getting worse too - and now to the extent where it is sometimes twice the speed limit!   Too much time is spent making cars safer and not the driver!

On making the driver safe, surely you'd support (like I firmly do) the need to retest drivers after so many years with driving lessons advised for the poor drivers to come back up to scratch? New or younger drivers aren't the ones doing 90mph in the 3rd lane of the M6 in the company Mercs, BWM and Audi's for example.

 

In some cases drivers do have to go through a test again.  Also there are Driver Awareness courses for those who don't want to take points - but I know people who have done 3 of these already and they think it is worth the £100 and the course for driving fast all the time.   So this clearly doesn't work.   A Black Box is the only way forward!   It should be mandatory!  Then we are not penalising young drivers who are responsible and take care.

26 May 2013

Safari wrote:

In some cases drivers do have to go through a test again.  Also there are Driver Awareness courses for those who don't want to take points - but I know people who have done 3 of these already and they think it is worth the £100 and the course for driving fast all the time.   So this clearly doesn't work.   A Black Box is the only way forward!   It should be mandatory!  Then we are not penalising young drivers who are responsible and take care.

I'd favour a test after 3 years for new drivers then every 10 - 15 years for everyone else and it should be across the board to make sure they're up to standard. Over 70's should be retested when applying for a new licence. Im 25 and I've been driving for under 2 years so it's not like I'd be avoiding it. I'm currently debating doing the IAM course, purely because I want the extra training because inexperianced drivers do get such bad press.

Driving awareness courses are pointless, sit in a room for 3 hours and come out 'clean' doesn't address the issue that got them there in the first place. Everyone knows the dangers of misused speed, sitting in a hotel watching dvd's isn't going to be the eye opener they need. The black box will say where you were and how quick you were going, but it won't be able to tell if you've cut someone up or tailgated for 90% of the way which is my issue with the box. Black box insurance was just as expensive with it when I looked for my renewal. It was the insurance version of a Smart car - great idea but just too many compromises for my everyday needs.

28 May 2013

C2_Matt wrote:

I'd favour a test after 3 years for new drivers then every 10 - 15 years for everyone else and it should be across the board to make sure they're up to standard. Over 70's should be retested when applying for a new licence. Im 25 and I've been driving for under 2 years so it's not like I'd be avoiding it. I'm currently debating doing the IAM course, purely because I want the extra training because inexperianced drivers do get such bad press.

 

I consider it a complete waste of time and effort for existing licence holders to be retested at any time.

When I passed my car test in 1967 aged 17 the examiner said you have proved you can drive adequately and if you carry on driving like that will remain safe but remember it is your choice to remain safe.

A driving test can only check that you know how to drive safely it cannot have any effect on how you drive when the examiner is not seated next to you.

Again I think it a waste of time to retest over 70's as they know only too well how to drive. The over 70's though should have their sight/awareness and physical ability checked upon licence renewal.

No amount of testing will prevent an idiot behaving like one, some people just should not drive as they either are frightened by driving, all those who can only manage 30 to 40 mph mph on a trunk road and brake whenever a car comes the other way, or fail to recognise when they are getting into a dangerous position as they seem to lack any sense of self presevation and those that think having a car with a high EuroCap rating will somehow make them safer. If you are hit by a heavy vehicle in a supermini no EuroCap rating will make any difference.

maxecat

Pages

Add your comment

Log in or register to post comments

Find an Autocar car review

Driven this week