As many of the CCognoscenti here will know, the Citroen DS was named after a pun; ‘Déesse’ being French for ‘Goddess’. Of course this (French?) blue example may well be a lesser ID model (‘Idée’ – idea), but still I couldn’t help but notice the juxtaposition with the celebrity-endorsed billboarding for a new apartment complex.
It seems these two goddesses have met before. Charlize Theron has just been announced as a villain in the eighth Fast and Furious movie. I wonder what she’ll be driving.
Where is the “Like” button?
Never mind the “like”button, where’s the “I want this so much I’m not bothered about the photo of Charlie Thurzon” button?
+1
First thought: If the blue thing is a car, then the gray things around it are not cars. If the gray things are cars, then the blue thing is not a car.
Second thought: Despite the interplanetary difference in appearance, the gray things have copied many elements of the blue thing. Fish-like front with minimal grille; sculptured headlights; high-up taillights; supershort bobtail; FWD; adaptive suspension.
With all those similarities, why is the sum total so totally different? I can’t resolve it.
“If the blue thing is a car, then the gray things around it are not cars. If the gray things are cars, then the blue thing is not a car.”
That’s the thing about the DS. in so many ways, it is so technically current -monocoque, aerodynamic, composite body, semi-automatic, hydraulic suspension and brakes, as well as the pint s you mention, it seems amazing that this is 60 years old. Truly, an all-time great.
There is always a special place in my fantasy garage for one!
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-european/curbside-classic-citroen-id-storming-the-bastille-of-convention/
+1.
+2
How small it is! Or how big everything else has gotten. A great find of a Goddess in the wild.
Indeed. That Focus looks massive!
Uuuff!!
Sorry, maybe Am I the only one, who dislikes these cars????
Straneous lines, nonsense design here and there…
Should be that, maybe much people loves, but not for me
You’re not the only one. I never did like them back in the day and still don’t today.
Aesthetically, I totally agree. And when I was younger, frankly they seemed kind of nerdy (not that we used that term then). No performance either in reality, or even in image (at least Peugeots and Volvos were winning rallies). And they already had a reputation, perhaps undeserved, for complexity and unreliability. But certainly from a 21st century perspective, they were innovative and sophisticated. I’m not sure any modern Citroen fits that description any more.
The Cactus may do, but in a very different sort of way and it’s built for a very different target customer.
http://www.citroenet.org.uk/sport/ds-rally-cars-01.html Peugeot & Volvo weren’t the only ones winning rallies.
The DS was a multiple Monte Carlo winner, amongst other things.
No you’re not the only one. I’ve learned to appreciate it over time(CC made this possible) but I have to admit my eyes still roll into the back of my head whenever I see word Goddess used for DS, similar to my reaction when “Prii” used for the plural of Prius.
Plus a lot of it’s innovations are praised for forshadowing 21st century car design. Well I won’t take away that credit, but for my personal tastes that’s not something to be proud of.
Disclosure: although I’m a great admirer of these cars, I’ve never found them particularly pretty. Distinctive, yes. Idiosyncratic, yes. Vernacular-defining, yes. But not nearly as visually appealing as, say, a more conventionally styled Ford Comete from around the same period. And certainly not as pretty as Charlize. But a goddess she is named, and as goddess I will address her.
Me and Dad with his DS (ID?) circa 1969.
Great pic.
Nice catch, and I like that bright blue, yet the (classic) DS is so common here it’s not even special anymore. This morning I overtook a Renault 6 on the freeway, now that was a real treat ! A white one, just like our neighbor had, way back in the early seventies.
Here’s today’s DS line-up. Neat hatchbacks, but goddesses ?
And this is a Renault 6.
So called because it was 20% uglier than a Renault 5?
Because it was Renault’s answer to the Citroën Ami 6.
Now that’s a car we’ve never covered here at CC.
Go for it, Paul!
I’ve got the photos int he files the files….4 and 6 together would make sense?
Some cars are better left alone and forgotten.
If you’d mention the Renault 4, the car the 6 is based on, I’d say yes I agree, but the Renault 6 was merely an attempt to try and make a car of the Renault 4, as you know the Renault 4 was a form of transportation like a 2CV.
And itis like Johannes says, the 6 was made to compete with the Ami 6 and the simpler Opel Kadett and Ford Escort versions.
There were two engines available : The Renault 6 L with the 850 cc from the Renault 4 and the TL with the 1100 Ventoux engine from the Renault 8
The 850 cc was a baaaaad idea, the 1100 you could live with.
And a 1st generation one at that.
Even better than Charlize Theron would have been a billboard with une vraie déesse française.
Catherine Deneuve for those who don’t recognize and, yes indeed, a true French goddess.
Yum
Wow!l! +1
Splendid shot.
Yes, just like so many people, cars have bulked up over the decades. It’s pretty startling, though, against these “compacts”.
I’ve always wondered… with the “cab backward design, and narrow rear track, and general small size, how small must the DS’s trunk be? How does it have space for a gas tank and a spare tire, let alone luggage?
Well, the spare’s under the hood, filling up that front overhang.
The trunk is just fine. The spare is ahead of the engine and the tank is under the back seat. Also the suspension takes up virtually no room at all.
Here is Gina Lollobrigida (speaking of goddesses) with her luggage, that was claimed to all fit in the Citroen; whether all in the trunk I’m not so sure.
I did see a claim of 500 litres of space, or 17.7 cu.ft. for the luggage volume.
I had a 1972 DS20 and can testify that the trunk is much bigger than you’d expect. It’s also very regularly shaped, so suitcases fit well. But no, Gina’s luggage would not all fit.
What I really love about this picture is how the Citroen sits compared to the two newer cars on either end. The colorful black sheep it is. High in the front, low in the back, even the roof line has a rearward slope to it, as if the car were slouching- a smug appearance, proudly defiant and opposite of the modern wedge design where the belt line is higher in the rear and lower in the front. At the risk of sounding cliche’, it is against those other gray conformists. So much more fun to be different!
Genius . via Voisin’s le Lefebvre.
So I’m not the only one who take pictures of Charlize Theron ads 🙂
(NYC, Dec. 2014)
Dang Brendan, you missed the front end of that truck!
Hell yes, what a shame ! I’d say it’s an Isuzu N-series.
Hehehe
Ooops! My bad 🙂
OK so we need one from Israel but neither Deneuve nor Theron:)
Great shot Don!
An iconic car. At any one time there’s often one or two for sale on Carsales (currently one) and there are some specialist shops to help keep them on the road (one is in Fairfield not far from me).
I’ve admired a few, but never actually pulled the trigger on a French car (never enough room in the garage). In any event, somehow I don’t think the DS is quite for me. A well kept GS would be more tempting – or an SM if I was a wealthy man – not for the cost of buying so much as maintaining it!
There are a couple quite visible on my side of the Yarra. An immaculate DS21 and a (very) slightly tatty DS23. Both gold, both driven regularly.
C’est magnifique photo!
When I was young these cars roamed the streets of America. Back then I hated them. When parked they were 3 inches off of the ground and the styling was just odd to my young eyes. Fast forward to 2016, I have nothing but respect for these cars. They were so far ahead of their time that in 2016 they are still ahead of their time and most likely will be 50 years from now. They were not perfect by any means but in this modern age, if they ever do a retro DS with today’s technology, it would likely be more memorable than the original. I hope.
Not the only DS going around. I’ve spotted a gray one in Richmond.
These get thumbs ups from the whole family.
The day I bought my old Merc, I ran into a gentleman at the AAA DMV in front of me in line while doing the title transfer. He was renewing the registration on his daily driven, white, very well maintained DS. I’d never seen one before! He couldn’t talk for long but I was blown away. He claimed mileage in the vicinity of 260,000 km without a rebuild. Seeking more info on these cars actually led me here!
Except the early ones (a typical Citroen curse), if driven and maintained regularly these cars were way more dependable than their reputation suggests. I remember seeing quite a lot of them being used as taxis in French cities well into the 1970s. In 1980 my father bought a 1969 20 Pallas with over 100 000 kms on the clock and he drove it for 3 years without a hitch (then he sold it for peanuts, nobody wanted them at that time :-).
They were expensive compared to British cars in the 60s though I remember seeing quite a few around in 60s & 70s Britain. One of the few cars which looks equally good as a saloon (sedan), estate (wagon) or convertible.
1955, Paris auto show.
A senior designer from Daimler Benz cries out ‘So etwas können wir Nie machen” upon seeing the DS on display for the first time .
“We will never be able to make something like that ”
Thing is with the DS, wheather you like it or not is actually of no importance at all, the DS simply set the benchmark for the whole auto-industry back then, most European brands have used the DS as their guiding light for comfort, braking, steering and road holding.
And I simply loved them back in the day, there simply was not one single car in late seventies Europe you could do 160 kph with in the rain except for a DS, the rest in BMW’s or whatever were suicidal maniacs.
And comfort wise and the seating position; there is simply no car as good as a Big Cit’
Even its last child the C6 gives you that typical Citroën ride, you have to ge tused to it, these are more like flying carpets, the smoothness of the hydraulic suspension, the road holding the stiff brakes from the dead brake pedal GREAT !
To this day I never understand why we are still using an antique part like a spring under a car.
It is completely useless compared to the hydro pneumatic spheres of a Citroen, especially when you take the computer technology they used for the fast Citroen Xantia V6 Activa, which kept the car completely levelled out during cornering, making blood poor out of your ears when cornering fast and making you half unconsious (Clarkson mode off now)
I live in Holland where we have been suffering from a massive outbreak of speedbumps, except when you are in a Citroen oil-rider, then they seem not to be existing.
I mean even Mercedes Ambulances and Rolls Royce used Citroën hydraulics for the rear axle suspension.
The current Citroën C5 is the last Citroën (ever) with -optional- hydropneumatic suspension. The car itself looks very…well…German. Like most other cars in this segment, even Kia / Hyundai (no wonder, because Peter Schreyer).
The next gen C5 will get a new “revolutionary Citroën-worthy suspension”. That will be in 2017, so I’ve read.