The grey market was a strange creature. During the late seventies and eighties, a raft of European cars not officially offered for sale in the US began appearing on our streets. This included desirable but unavailable models such as the Mercedes 500SEC and BMW 745i, as well as cars without an American dealer network. It pretty much all ended in 1988, but some of these “grey” cars are still on our streets, like this like this Citroen CX25 GTi, even if it is blue.
Image from classicandperformancecar.com
Since manufacturers chose not to certify certain vehicles for sale in the US for marketing or various federal regulations (safety, EPA, or CAFE), or because they had decided to exit the market, a substantial cottage industry developed in importing European-spec cars; modifying them to meet US regulations, and then selling them to willing buyers. Because of the high relative value of the dollar at the time, European-market premium cars cars were cheap compared to the sticker prices their equivalent models were carried in the US.
This led to a very significant numbers of lower end Mercedes, BMWs and such also being imported via the grey market. Needless to say, the problem of lost sales became too large to overlook, and with Stuttgart seemingly unwilling to engineer a way around it, Mercedes-Benz USA made a successful effort to outlaw grey market sales by lobbying congress. After the resulting new laws were passed in 1988, sales of grey market cars declined precipitously.
Unfortunately, MBUSA’s efforts didn’t just foist anti-grey-market legislation on its own cars, but those of all makes, as well. This effectively ended sales of the Citroen CX in the US market, which the company had already officially exited in 1974 after laws were passed effectively banning the sale of cars with height adjustable suspensions due to mandated bumper heights. While Citroen would never again touch the US market, even with a 10 foot pole, the repeal of that law in 1981 allowed some 1,000 CXs being to be sold on the grey market at double the original European price.
For those who bought the car, its eccentric appeal was worth the cost. To start with, there was the very tasteful 1970s space age design, courtesy of Robert Opron. While its exterior styling could be attributed to the pursuit of aerodynamic finesse, there was no such justification for the interior design.
A true triumph of form over function and an absolute ergonomic nightmare, there was little logic in the placement of its controls. Most notably, the radio was where the armrest would usually be. The HVAC controls were tiny, making them difficult to locate. Functions normally controlled by stalks on the steering column were instead housed on two pods on either side of the gauge cluster (not unlike those found in the Eagle Premier). Turn signals that did not self-cancel and cubbies mounted prominently on the dash were other curiosities.
Loading parcels was also made difficult by a tiny trunk opening, instead of the hatch the car would appear to have. To Citroen’s credit, the distinctive one-spoke steering wheel allowed for a clear view of the gauges, which designers were charitable enough to change to traditional dials for the Series 2. That still was not enough to substantiate the company’s boast of thoughtful ergonomic design, as quoted in their brochure, “With experience, Citroen have developed still further the ergonomic layout of the detailed controls and instrumentation.”
If people thought the car itself was weird, the associated advertising sought to capitalize on its reputation. The car’s most famous ad, aired during its tenth year of production, featured Grace Jones, driving through a desert landscape and into a robotic replica of her own head. Some would say that it inspired the 1997 French Sci-fi movie “The Fifth Element”, specifically, the antics of DJ Ruby Rhod. I will agree with that, to the point that this ad could have passed as an endorsement from Mr. Rhod himself.
Even with all of its quirks, the CX seems to treat its owners well. The rotary originally planned for the car, co-developed with NSU, was canned very late in the design cycle, owning to the oil shock of 1973 and the financial insecurities of both companies involved. Thus, the hydraulics are the most fragile parts of the car, with most failures due to corrosion in high pressure lines or the use of incorrect fluid.
The overhead valve engine initially used was quite old, with its roots dating back to the units used in the Traction Avant of 1934. The acceleration of this French frigate was therefore leisurely before suitable power train alternatives could be developed. Eventually, a new, all-aluminum SOHC four, built and co-developed with Peugeot and Renault, came online in 1984, as did a turbo option. As the CX was an expensive large car with a small engine bay, turbo power suited it quite well, enabling extra power and muffling the vibrations of the large displacement four-cylinder.
Cars so equipped had their suspensions stiffened, but to fully enjoy the car’s hydropneumatic suspension and its graceful ability to eat up miles, earlier versions, complete with their bathroom scale instrumentation and narrow tires, are preferable. This car is clearly for leisure and cruising, not driving on race courses, so the lack of power may not as big a detriment as it would be in a more overtly sporting chassis.
That isn’t to say that the CX won’t perform admirably in a variety of conditions. Combined with the advanced self-leveling hydropneumatic suspension, the ultra fast-ratio, fully hydraulically powered DIRAVI steering system and pressure sensitive brakes enable a driver to cover ground smoothly and rapidly, once accustomed.
The CX, more than anything else, is a thing of beauty. From Robert Opron’s aerodynamic and minimalist exterior lines, to its mechanical complexity and unmatched ride, there really is no bad angle. Such outre and unconventional cars in general deserve more respect, because we may never see such passionately conceived automobiles again. You may ask why we increasingly lack access to this sort of machinery, but the answer is too complex to approach in a single article. Our responsibility as enthusiasts, on the other hand, is to ensure that the memory of these oddballs is kept alive.
“You can’t change the present, but you can revel in the past.”
What was the reason for banning height adjustable suspension in the US?
Try explaining the need for adjustable suspension to the average congressman. (Actually try explaining the need for anything other than re-election to the average congressman.) Somebody in the rule writing and/or lobbying department couldn’t get their head out of their ass far enough to think about such things.
What was the reason for banning height adjustable suspension in the US?
That was a side effect of the bumper legislation that went into effect in 74. Bumpers were required to take a 5mph impact without damage, and the bumpers were required to be at the same height so they could do their impact absorbing thing without overriding the bumper of another car and smashing it up. The car has to ride at the same height all the time, so the bumpers will be at the same height all the time.
The only really grey market sled I saw in the 70s was a Renault R20 that I saw around campus. I did see a Capri with European headlights, but the lights could have been retrofitted by the owner.
That actually makes sense. Surprised they couldn’t find a way around it, my guess is they were ready to exit the market anyway.
Surprised they couldn’t find a way around it,
Easy, just take the height adjustment control off the dash, and set a fixed ride height.
my guess is they were ready to exit the market anyway.
The company was about bankrupt at that time, and had a microscopic share of the US market. Just not worth further participation in the US.
I think they would need to also install some very light duty coil springs to maintain the car’s height when the pump isn’t supplying pressure. The Mercedes 450SEL 6.9 and, later, the Infiniti Q45a did just that.
Sure, until you actually have to make a panic stop, as does the car in front or back of you and the spongy suspensions rise or fall with the weight transfer and then whammo those bumpers dont exactly meet up anymore…but sure, it make sense!
…until you actually have to make a panic stop, as does the car in front or back of you and the spongy suspensions rise or fall with the weight transfer
Which is why bumpers in the 70s were so huge. iirc, the difference between the manditory minimum and maximum height above the road was close to 5 inches, so quite a bit of dive could be accomodated.
This was an improvement over what we saw in the early 70s. The rear bumper of a 72 Gran Torino, with the car stationary, was close to 5 inches higher than the front bumper. In even a minor collision, the rear bumper of a Torino would smash the grill, headlights and probably the hood of a following car.
‘course, these days, half the cars on the road are SUVs, which are exempt from the passenger car bumper height reg, so we’re back where we were 40 years ago. I thought about that often, as I sat in my Civic, with the bumper of an Expetition seemingly level with my hood.
…”don’t exactly meet up anymore”….
Good luck exactly meeting up a Peterbilt 379.
Ah but in a Citroen harsh braking slams the whole car to its lowest ride height giving excellent steering control even my non hydropnuematic Xsara does that it brakes rear wheels first then you can steer around the obstacle most drivers will crash into and winding on full lock at 70 mph it just steers nothing else no muss no fuss.
@Darren
Do you really really really think a car with metal spring suspension will maintain ride height under heavy braking? really?
Of course the fact that on hard braking the front bumper becomes closer to the ground and the rear bumper height increases didn’t make the slightest difference to those who wrote the legislation. They presumably thought that their constituents would simply plow into the car in front of them without bothering to try to stop.
Of all the cars in the world that I’d really love to own, assuming I could: a. Find one, and, b. Become proficient in its maintenance; the CX is definitely in the top five, and is the top rated four door sedan.
Definitely a car I’d love to drive.
a. Import one from continental Europe, internet is your friend.
b. Knowledge about specific cars can be found all over the globe, internet is your friend. (clubs, forums, specialists, parts suppliers)
Damn, the whole country here is full of exotics from all over the world and none of them was ever officially imported. That can be done the other way around too.
I give you a nice starting point, here’s a whole bunch to choose from:
http://www.gaspedaal.nl/Citroen/CX/?srt=pr
a. Import one from continental Europe, internet is your friend.
If a car is over 25 years old, under US regs, it is reasonably easy to import, as, due to age, it would be exempt from Federal safety and emissions regs, though you may still run afoul of state headlight or emissions regs. Bottom line, it would not be exhorbitantly expensive to bring in an 85 CX.
If a car is less than 25 years old, you are in a world of hurt when you try to title, register and insure it. You will need to add all the US specific safety equipment and pass US emissions regs, including providing a couple extra cars for crash testing.
Steve, I’ve heard of the 25 years-rule. Depending on how full my bag of money is I can import ANY old or brand new US vehicle I want. And that’s exactly what’s happening a lot here. You can’t buy a new Toyota Tundra at the official Toyota dealerships. Yet, lots of them a driving around here (running on LPG), all of them imported straight from the US.
Just minor things had to be changed when I imported my 1969 Plymouth.
Headlights and disconnecting the amber running lights. And connecting them again right away afterwards… And I had to advance the timing, that was basically it.
…I can import ANY old or brand new US vehicle I want. And that’s exactly what’s happening a lot here.
I gather you are not in the US? Perhaps the Netherlands? iirc, Volvo took over DAF, so there is no Dutch auto industry to protect with non-tarrif barriers, like the US has.
Yes Steve, the low lands. You know, that little piece of swamp land left of Germany. With centuries of experience in international trading. Although it was more “stealing” back in the good ol’ days.
But I think this thing has nothing to do with the more than 40 year old Daffodiles. I think it has to do with EU regulations. Germans (I call them Germans, I believe Nazis is the more popular term on most car related websites), for example, drive US cars and pickups too you know. They even tune them: http://www.geigercars.de/
Johannes Dutch,
I live in Germany and know what is being discussed here. I feel that some people, especially the Europeans, might not understand the process of importing the vehicles in United States (and by extension, Canada) and in Europe.
The US regulations are mostly and technically different from UNECE regulations. So much that the vehicles for the US market are considered a ‘separate design’ beside left-hand-drive and right-hand-drive. A very good explanation here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Forum_for_Harmonization_of_Vehicle_Regulations
Europeans have no problems importing the US vehicles and registering them for road use. The only caveat is that the warranty would not be honoured and that the radio might not work properly.
I have seen many American vehicles, including Ford Mustang and pick-up trucks, here in Germany. Dodge Ram is also popular.
Americans can’t just import any vehicle and register them as easily as the Europeans can. That is where some misunderstandings might have occured here.
The vehicle must be at least 25-year-old in order to *bypass* the federalisation process in the United States. The only modification was done to the emission control system for the year of manufacture.
If it is less than 25-year-old, the vehicle must be modified to meet the US regulations on the date of its manufacture.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/import/
Informative FAQ here:
http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/import/faq%20site/pages/page2.html
The federalisation process must be done by the registered importers who have been certified by US Department of Transportation to carry out the modification work for the *specific* vehicles. You can’t just swap the wiring, headlamps, and so forth then call it ‘legal’ as you can in the Netherlands or elsewhere in Europe. I am not going into the extensive detail how it is done. You can read more about it in this link:
http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/import/web_RI_list01122006.html
The cost of modification varies greatly. If the vehicle had never been officially imported or been modified by registered importer before, the cost is very high. For instance, McLaren F1 cost more than $100.000 to be modified and certified for road use. That process was profiled in Road & Track magazine in the 1990s.
One exemption that is not mentioned very often is called ‘Show and Display’, but it has lot of restriction and is not easy to obtain.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/import/faq%20site/pages/page2.html#Anchor-12-30207
I believe that this CX25 GTi was either imported via the 25 year rule or the show and display rule. The only CX ever officially imported into the US (in large-ish numbers was the CX Prestige.
@Syke
Oh thank you Syke, I always thought that I’m a weirdo for loving the CX.
Toffee, even though I may have bashed the CX in this article, I still love oddballs like this, other Citröens, and various Saabs.
I used to see a lot of these Citroens,reading this made me realise it’s ages since I saw one.
Where I used to go for EH Holden parts in McGraths Hill near Sydney across the road was a yard full of these CXs 4 parked and one daily runner the parked cars were complete not parts cars maybe the guy was hedging his bets figuring the supply would run out eventually similar situation to the EH guy he had the remains of at least 20 EHs and still drove 3.
We had a dealer selling CX’s (couldn’t sell them as Citroens for some legal reason) on Cleveland’s West Side. the owner was a friend of my dad’s so I got to ride in a couple. Neat cars.
This was an old school “foreign” car dealership with a two car showroom, multiple dirty service garages only a mechanic could love and a side lot full or derelict old Citroens in various states of disrepair. Over the years the number of Citroens decreased but the service department filled up with Alfa Romeos in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s when they had that franchise and then the CX’s began trickling back in the late 1980’s. They always had a small display at the Cleveland Auto Show with a demo parked close to the exhibitors rear entrance for hot prospects at the show. I think they closed sometime in the 1990’s and now the building has been cleaned up and remodeled into an art gallery and antique auction house but if you look really closely you can still see remnants of the old Citroen Auto Sales which I’ll always remember fondly.
A hefty dose of Acute Broughamitis antidote this morning. 🙂 Yes, the CX was one of my all-time lust objects. I was just 20 or so when it first came out in Europe, and I drooled on my copies of auto, motor und sport. And in 1985, when these grey import CXs were readily available (and seen on the streets) in CA, I was sorely tempted….for a few minutes, anyway. The reality of committing myself to one was another story.
If there is a car that can be truly describe as “the anti-brougham”, this is it.
I don’t know, I consider those wood strips on the doors to be a touch of brougham. As we all know though brougham is in the eye of the beholder.
For ride comfort any Citroen is a big step up from any American brougham
The Brougham Hordes would disagree with that statement.
I prefer a balanced ride over the floaty ride of a brougham.
A highly interesting car. Every once in awhile, I daydream about how it would be if all major developed countries could agree on a single set of vehicle regulations. Then everyone could get (almost) everything.
I daydream about how it would be if all major developed countries could agree on a single set of vehicle regulations.
Think “non-tariff trade barriers”. The US industry whines about Japanese laws that require US models be converted to right hand drive, but the US safety and emission regs inhibit importation of vehicles from other countries.
Imagine if it was easy for Renault to sell it’s products through Nissan dealers and Fiat to bring it’s models in enmasse for sale in Chrysler dealers. Or even if importing VW Polos was just a matter of putting them on the ship. GM and Ford, who only use their foreign models from time to time to fill perceived gaps in their North American produced lines, would not welcome the extra competition.
Would I like to get my hands on a current VW Scirocco? Heck yes! But the cost of “Federalizing” it means Ford and GM don’t need to worry.
If federalizing a car is possible for even the smallest companies like Ferrari, McLaren and others, its possible for a huge company like VW or Nissan to federalize and import anything they want, they just choose not to.
If federalizing a car is possible for even the smallest companies like Ferrari, McLaren
It may just be me, but seems anyone who would shell out $200K for a Ferrari will not be put off by several thousand extra being tacked on for regulatory compliance.
Mass produced cars, like the VW Polo, have a harder business case to make, where the compliance cost for a low volume model may price it out of the market. I have heard that VW has been considering Federalizing the Polo for several years, but just can’t make the case.
Neogtiations did start last summer with the goal of bringing US and EU safety standards in line, which would simplfy Federalizing autos as then manufacturers would only need to worry about emissions regs.
But there are other low costs cars that are imported, the new Mitsubishi Mirage is like $12K and its imported from Mumbai or something or other….
I don’t agree with making the standards the same either, because that would tie US regs in to whatever Europe does, and they do have some vehement car hating groups over there that I would rather not have any association with.
But there are other low costs cars that are imported, the new Mitsubishi Mirage is like $12K and its imported from Mumbai or something or other….
The Mirage VIN has an ML prefix, indicating Thailand. I suspect Thai production costs are a *lot* lower than Japan, or Korea, yet the Mirage’s $12,995 price doesn’t undercut the US built Chevy Sonic’s $14,770 by as much as you would expect. The Korean built Chevy Spark starts at $12,170, so it looks like something is burning up the Mitsu’s labor cost advantage and more. I would bet part of it is the compliance cost, amortized over far fewer vehicles that Chevy based the Sonic or Spark amortization over.
Mitsu really has the smell of death about it. The dealer in Ann Arbor doesn’t even have any Lancers in stock, just 3 Mirages and one Outlander. If they tried to low ball the Mirage price as a hail mary pass, with the company’s prospects for staying in the US market, I’m afraid they’ll find there is noone to receive it. And that is leaving aside the issue of Thai parts and build quality, vs Japanese, or Yugoslavian, for that matter.
I don’t agree with making the standards the same either, because that would tie US regs in to whatever Europe does, and they do have some vehement car hating groups over there that I would rather not have any association with
There are plenty of car haters here too. Some of the reports I have seen say it’s more a matter of the US accepting as safe anything that passes EU standards and the EU accepting as safe anything that passes US standards.
@Carmine- you gotta take the bad with the good sometimes. If it means that more Americans can drive cars that can’t currently be bought here, I’ll take the chance.
Ferrari is hardly a small company lacking resources being fully owned by Fiat. In any case, many small manufacturers get waivers for certian requirements in exchange for limited sales, for example the Lotus Exige and Elise line. No airbag over here but recently the exemption ran out, so they are now sold as “track only”.
VW isn’t exactly a boutique operation either….I mean they have figured out how to sell all of their other models here, but “poor” them, the big bad tough US regulations make it “impossible” for them to sell the Polo here? Please.
@CARMINE
Simple:
Federalizing adds a few hundred $ to the cost. Those few hundred meant nothing to buyers of Ferrari etc., But a polo burdened with $$ will not be competitive in Europe, Asia, etc.
Yes, I know, but there are plenty of other manufacturers that figure out how to do do it, I think VW makes Polos in Mexico along with all the other garbage it imports into the US, so it could import them from Mexico. What I’m trying to say, is that our market is still pretty easy to get into, so lets skip on the “poor poor car manufacturers trying to get into the tough American market” B.S.
That is a neat car. I especially liked the interior…until you described all the ergonomic issues it had. I also assumed it was a hatch.
I actually like the older drum gauges. They fit the quirkiness of the car better than the standard round ones.
until you described all the ergonomic issues
It’s French. To turn on the headlights in my Renault, I had to first twist the stalk on the left of the wheel to turn on the parking lights, then push it up one notch for low beam, two notches up for high beam. Additionally, the horn was honked by pushing in on the headlight stalk, so where to reach for the horn button changed with the setting for the headlights
It’s different, but once you get used to it, it works just fine..
The switch I remember needed to be roatated 90 degree for parking and 90 more for the headlamps. Highs would feel like a traditional GM stalk.
The weird part were the mechanical. And to think people say old Saabs are weird.
The switch I remember needed to be roatated 90 degree for parking and 90 more for the headlamps.
Mine was a 80 US spec R5. I’m pretty sure it was rotate for parking lights and up for headlights, but it has been nearly 30 years. When the “trade in evaluator” at the Mazda dealer jumped in it, I had to show him how to turn the lights on.
The weird part were the mechanical.
If you took the engine and trans from a VW beetle or Corvair and moved it to the front, it would look about the same, with the trans in front of the wheels and half of the engine up under the cowl. Same thing with the R5, with a transplanted R10 drivetrain.
Inspectors get confused checking my car every 6 months, Headlights are too high sir, So adjust them I say, How they ask, Just turn the little thumb wheel until you think they are correct on the dash,Headlights on the left stalk Wiper/washer on the right simple as it gets.
Change the timing belt, the horror of most mechanics because its a diesel, I could teach a child to do it, insert 8mm bolt to lock crankshaft @TDC No1 insert two 8mm bolts to lock injector pump remove and replace said belt start and drive away. Simple cars really.
@Phil
The so call ergonomic issue somehow goes away after the initial drive. The AC is weak and inadequate however, just lousy design.
Not as elegant as the DS but still a graceful looking car,make mine a Safari wagon.I never knew these had a 17 year production run,no wonder they were seen everywhere in the UK for ages.While I like the DS and the CX I’ve always had vanilla safe easy to work on cars with inexpensive parts and I don’t think I’d have bought one.
See above complete rear axle replacement 3 hours without the proper tools
I seem to have missed out on a good car.
I remember a documentary about the designer of the CX, Robert Opron. They asked the old man what he thought of the CX-successor, the Citroën XM. He said something like: “…way too many lines, you can draw an extra car from them…”
He also said that people driving around on the Paris’ Boulevard Périphérique in a big SUV were pathetic…
I agree with him. When it comes to styling, simplicity and elegance often go together.
You could say that about most contemporary cars. Slash it, fold it, doodle on it until you’re done, then some more!
You COULD get a 500SEC in the U.S. through your MBUSA dealer between mid-year ’84 through ’88 (by then the 560SEC) . . . . very limited, but they were here. I remember seeing at a car show an ’84 U.S. spec model. The sealed beam halogens, extended bumpers . . . .
I had the Mercedes-Benz brochures from 1979 onward. Mercedes-Benz had never offered 500SEL and 500SEC in the United States.
What you saw is either the excellent modification work done or the name tags changed. I have seen the frequent swapping of name tags to reflect the exclusivity. Like fake 1000SEL, for instance.
https://www.google.com/search?q=mercedes-benz+1000sel&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=xwHcUrLKDOGs7Qaj4IGIAw&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1492&bih=1022
As proud owner of CX in the ’80s. I couldn’t disagree more with Mann’s assessment of CX’s interior layout. Yes, it’s different; so it took a little time to get going. After that, one questions why other cars weren’t designed that way.
My CX was one of the earlier models, the interior was different from the blue CX’s. Mine was definitely an Opron design, not sure about the late ’80s CXs such as the blue CX. Radio on mine faced the driver, the round thingy on top of the radio —— >> ashtray.
In fact, if anyone know of a chrome bumper CX estate for sale. Please let me know? I am definitely ready to buy.
I see the stick shift, but I don’t see the clutch. Were some CX’s sold with the Citromatic?
Mine was, some sort of semi automatic.
Yes, some CXes were sold with the Citromatic semi-auto, until an automatic was introduced in 1980 for the Series 1 model. The automatic was also available in the 1982-91 CX Series 2.
I know it is different, but when most people are not Francophiles that are used to French eccentricities, cars like the CX are considered very un-ergonomic. For example, look at Bryce’s example of how to operate his headlight in his Citroen Xsara and how hard it was for inspectors to figure out.
“Inspectors get confused checking my car every 6 months, Headlights are too high sir, So adjust them I say, How they ask, Just turn the little thumb wheel until you think they are correct on the dash,Headlights on the left stalk Wiper/washer on the right simple as it gets.”
Another example is commenter Steve’s example:
“until you described all the ergonomic issues
It’s French. To turn on the headlights in my Renault, I had to first twist the stalk on the left of the wheel to turn on the parking lights, then push it up one notch for low beam, two notches up for high beam. Additionally, the horn was honked by pushing in on the headlight stalk, so where to reach for the horn button changed with the setting for the headlights
It’s different, but once you get used to it, it works just fine..”
I know it is different, but when most people are not Francophiles that are used to French eccentricities,
Us old geezers were used to stomping on a metal button on the floor to change between high and low beam headlights. The dimmer switch can be just about anywhere now, on US big three models. My Ford has the headlight switch on the dash, but I have to pull the turn signal lever to switch to high beams. My old Escort had headlight switch and dimmer switch on a steering column stalk.
It would be nice to have everything work the same on every car, but these days, you can’t even expect everything to work the same from model to model from the same manufacturer.
What I said wrt my 80 Renault, now applies to my 08 Ford, whose controls are very different from my Escort or Civic. it’s different, but once I got used to it, it works just fine. Actually, the only thing on the 08 that I did not have to read the insructions for was the cruise control, the only thing in the car where the operation was obvious.
Steve, the CX and your Renault are French. It is a given fact that their idiosyncrasies are going to be magnified by an unknown variable.
As you said, everything does take time to adjust to. The only difference between then and now is that controls used to be a lot more basic and standardized outside of France.
Sigh. My dream is to daily-drive a CX.
I would like to point out that if this was another car made by another manufacturer that I wont name, and it was STILL using a 1934 engine in 1979 and it didn’t have self canceling turn signals, it would be on the Deadly Sin list with a bullet.
Also, is that Grace Jones commercial supposed to make me WANT one of these? Because it does just the opposite…
Hah – ya know, Carmine, I am going to agree with you here.
Nice try, but the actual relationship of the CX engine to the Citroen engine of 1934 is roughly analogous to the Chevy 265 small block of 1955 and today’s LS generation engine. The CX 2.5 GTi’s engine may have had its roots in the 1934 Citroen engine, but had been drastically developed over the decades. With its top speed of 137 mph, the GTi turbo was not lacking in performance. How fast was the fastest GM sedan in 1984?
They weren’t designed for traffic light drags that’s for those with er manhood problems but for high speed touring and one of these would be perfectly composed at 130+mph not the white knuckle ride of a Mustang or similar
That’s exactly why this is a real and pure GTi, as in: Grand Tourisme injection.
No of course, its never wrong when someone else does it….
BTW, if you would have skimmed the article, this 1985 one doesn’t have the engine from 1934. but an engine that designed by Renault-Peugot-Citroen-Crosby-Stills-Nash and Young (Imagine if GM ever designed an engine with 3 other manufacturers……ohhhhh the humanity!!!! the sheer incompetence!!!!!) NOT a turbocharged version of the 50 year old previous motor.
With enough gearing almost anything can do 130…
Fastest GM sedan form 1984, probably an Opel Senator or something? Maybe a hot Holden?
In the US? I dunno, we had a stupid 55 mph speed limit at the time….Probably around 115?
Yeah, were not going to compare “manhoods”, and then lets just go to straight argument about top speed, riiiiiight…….
Carmine: Nice try, again; but you haven’t done your homework, once again (French cars aren’t exactly your strong suit). The “new” engine you refer to, the “Douvrin” four”, was only used on the lower end CX models, in 2.0 and 2.2 L four versions. It was cheaper to build than the Citroen engine.
The 2.5 GTi and GTi Turbo engine was still the “true” Citroen engine, not the Douvrin. Just like some American engines that have used a common architecture/bore spacing for over half a century (sbc), because of existing production transfer lines, the actual components and details evolved very significantly.
Anyway, your whole premise is a bit absurd, and highly defensive. Do you know that the Citroen four was known to be quite a rugged and long-lived engine? The same engine that powered the legendary Citroen H-Van and other trucks?
It wasn’t quite prone to self destruction like certain GM Deadly Sin engines. Citroen didn’t send it out in the world with an undersize oil pan, or with porous aluminum blocks, or not enough head bolts, or crappy rods, or soft cams, or…..the list of GM engine Deadly Sins is long.
If you’d like to point out the faults with the Citroen engine, please do so, but from an informed position, instead of just lobbing cheap shots that keep blowing up in your face. Maybe it would be better for you if you stick to the subjects you know well, like crushed velour.
BTW, I did more than “skim” this article. I reviewed it carefully, edited it extensively, and re-wrote some parts of it. The author, who is in his teens, did an excellent job, but I wanted to make sure it was quite right.
+1 Paul.
“BTW, I did more than “skim” this article. I reviewed it carefully, edited it extensively, and re-wrote some parts of it. The author, who is in his teens, did an excellent job, but I wanted to make sure it was quite right.”
Thanks Paul. That was very kind 🙂
@Paul
+1
Yeah, but their turn signals still self canceled.
I guess that’s why PSA engines are shipped all over the world to other car makers to plant in their cars the poor design must have something to do with that. Ford BMW Suzuki to name just 3 all used PSA engines.
fastest GM car for 84 not sure and really don’t care but most likely a Brock Commodore group A,
With enough gearing any old crap heap can hit 130 very likely but will it steer at those speeds no
When you 0-60 bullet can hit 60 and turn hard right or left without lifting off you might have something worth mentioning.
@Paul
+1
I would like to point out that if this was another car made by another manufacturer that I wont name, and it was STILL using a 1934 engine in 1979 and it didn’t have self canceling turn signals, it would be on the Deadly Sin list with a bullet.
Where is the evidence for that? It seems like one of the few things CC articles and comments all unanimously sing the praises of are the AMC, Chevy, Ford and Chrysler inline sixes, or the Buick V6, which were all in production for three or four decades. I seem to remember Paul doing an article not too long ago about how cool the Brazilian version of the Chevy 250 from the late 90s was, which was an evolution of an (at that point) nearly 70 year old design.
I don’t hate Citroens, I think they are interesting cars, really I do, I would love to own and SM, but in the spirit of the Deadly Sin series, these sort of do belong on there, were they successful for Citroen? Did the French government have to step in and force a merger between Citroen and Peugeot? Did Citroen end up become more or less a re-badge Peugeot because of this another mistakes Citroen made? Think about that, before everyone jumps on the Citroen “butt-hurt” bandwagon….
Was it a success for Citroen? Absolutely, both commercially and critically. Had the CX been a dud, it’s very unlikely that the brand would even exist today.
I have a good friend who drives a CX Presige (LWB) — black with leather interior… If we could sit in that car together, Little Carmine, I would pass the salt and you would gladly eat those words.
Other Citroens might belong on the “deadly sins” list (the LN, the Saxo, the Dyane, the Axel…), but the CX sold well and were not too bad quality-wise for a French car of that era. When was the last time anybody anywhere saw a serviceable Peugeot 604?
The way they ran the company into the ground, buying other makers left, right and centre (Panhard, Berliet, Maserati) while not having a mid-size car in their range — it was either a 2CV or a DS, nothing really in between, for over a decade — was prescient of the sort of ineptitude seen later at British Leyland or GM under R. Smith. That was mostly the fault of Pierre Bercot, the Citroen CEO throughout the 60s.
Of course, the government stepped in when Michelin, Citroen’s largest stakeholder, decided to cut and run in ’74. And Peugeot was the only competitor that could buy Citroen, so they did, as they later bought Chrysler Europe. Governments usually step in when there are millions of jobs at stake, as recent history has shown yet again on your side of the pond.
Incidentally, the CX, which came out in ’74, was the last “pre-Peugeot” model, but Peugeot didn’t kill it. Why? Because it was a good and very profitable car. So the CX isn’t why “Citroen ended up becoming a more or less re-badged Peugeot”. It was corporate mismanagement (but not bad products) predating the CX that did Citroen in and made it into a shadow of its former self.
Hi,
I was rear ended by CX in about 1995…….driver said “that was the wrong time to look for the fuel gauge”……………and he was right. No one hurt, so we move on.
However, great car and a great find in Michigan……..no wonder it gets attention. One of the best cars of the 1970s.
The disappointing thing is that in the 1950s Citroen had the best car in its class (the DS) by a country mile and that in the 1970s it was replaced by the CX, which was great car let down by the old engine principally. But Citroen had issues replacing the DS with the CX (it took 20 years) and the subsequent XM had too much Peugeot ordinariness to match it. The C6 was a good attempt but too little, too late and by then Citroen was a bit part player on the mattings of this part of the market.
The DS name is now been used on every level of Citroen from the C3 to the C5 – some distinctive cars but not really a DS.
Oddly enough, the DS was supposed to get a flat-six engine (IIRC), but lacking the appropriate budget, Citroen was forced to go with the old engine from the Traction Avant. So with the CX, it was the EXACT same story AGAIN. What a mess.
It would be intriguing to swap a Subaru H6 into a CX. Quite sure (via Visio) that CX has enough overhang in front to accommodate. Read somewhere the planned Citroen H6 for DS was air cooled so perhaps an air cooled Porsche H6 would be even closer to the spirit than Subaru H6.
Transverse engine in a CX. As was just mentioned, the DS was indeed designed around a horizontally-opposed engine and the GS actually had a flat-4, so those would be better candidates.
Of course, the 2CV also had a boxer engine, and the internet is full of GS and even BMW motorcycle engine conversions.
Seen on a Manhattan street a couple of weeks ago. Note the wooden jackstand device meant to hold up the sagging suspension. Probably works fine when the motor is running, though I wasn’t close enough to notice any oil puddles underneath.
Spheres have failed easy enough to fix google is your friend for parts and info
Ahhh where is this car, exactly? I’ve tried finding it before around 20th-30th street(s) between 7th-9th Avenues, and I know the owner has a Citroen GS he parks on the street as well, because it was in Hemmings a couple of times.
The 5mph bumper regulation is in a nutshell, bullshit. It is one of the clearest examples of the extent of corrupt conspiring that existed and largely still goes on between US Congress and corporate America. The mandated bumper regulation, was introduced alongside a number of other safety regulations with a safety “theme”. These included: “door ajar/key in ignition/Fasten Seat Belt” buzzers, moving the ignition from the dashboard to the steering column, impact absorbing padding on the dashboards, etc. When examined closely, most have nothing to do at all with saving lives. It was enacted specifically to reduce the number of parking lot claims motorists were submitting to auto insurers back then, judged by the industry to be “excessive” and dragging down the industry’s overall profit making.
The effect of the 5mph bumper regulation had a significant effect on US automobile styling for decades and marked the singular moment when European cars began to look like that hot exchange student from Europe who lives with her cousin down the street; you can kinda see a faint family resemblance, but somehow or something went very, very wrong with the American one. The cars came over with “cattle catcher” battering rams stuck onto them. They looked just what they were; an afterthought. Combine this with the also mandated sealed headlight regulation (the American public was determined to be too stupid to be able to change a bulb, requiring the whole headlamp assembly to changed out) and the overall effect was a living, moving rolling disaster, destroying the integrity of the styling.
Was the 5 mph bumper law introduced as a direct response to the extremely vulnerable and expensive to fix “Bunkie Beaks” seen on many Ford products in the late 1960s?
These cars are so hot. Nothing looked like them despite the fact that there were so many manufacturers trying four door fastbacks. That front end is so important, those headlights and counterpoint grille set up the rest of the car perfectly. The concave rear window and taillights finish everything, again perfectly. Now that I have to stand behind @toffee for a chrome wagon, it’s time for me to consider how damn fine-looking the saloon is. Of course, I’m petrified of owning one and that’s coming from someone who’s seen action on the Italian front.
As to the MB; on my recent motor-vehicle shopping task force, I was very close to a 1-owner 380SEC for AUD$4,500. In the end, the bad-guy-in-a-conspiracy-thriller w116 won me over, but those coupés sure look good.
Thank you for a very discerning article, Mr. Edward Mann. Would you have time to do an article on the Matra Rancho?
BTW, if you have pictures of a Matra Rancho (in all of it’s Simca-rooted glory), I can make an article around them.
I wish. When my parents took us to Europe in the late 70s/early 80s we used to play car spotter with these, but alas no pictures. I am a massive, massive fan of the first series Range Rover, but the argument can be made that these things were the real proto-SSUV; I don’t even think they were 4WD.
I am a massive, massive fan of the first series Range Rover…real proto-SSUV
iirc, early 70s. Always looked to me like a 3/4 scale version of the original Jeep Wagoneer of 63.
BTW, if you have pictures of a Matra Rancho (in all of it’s Simca-rooted glory), I can make an article around them.
If you do a piece on the Rancho, you will have to give credit to it’s Simca 1204 bones. Paul did a piece on the 1204 3 years ago.
And discussion of the Rancho would require credit given to the Renault Rodeo, which ran on R4 and R5 bits.
Wow, that Rodeo looks like an enlarged Broughamtastic Mehari.
Yep agree with you about the Jeep; a great-looking vehicle and an acknowledged proto-SUV. Simca did a far better job taking a 60s saloon into the eighties than Ford Argentina did with the Falcon; the Rancho was top-points in our car spotting game. Something about its Swiss-Army Knife aesthetic.
Still making my way through the back catalogue, 1204 now on the list.
Wow, that Rodeo looks like an enlarged Broughamtastic Mehari.
I’ll see your Mehari, and raise you a Mini Moke…and in the mid 60s, the Moke was imported to the US! No greyness there!
We could have a Jolly time with this.
Mokes are popping up on the road here in oz again, nice ones getting $15k. I think someone is considering making a new run, couldn’t be too hard if you had the stuff. We made them here, but I assume the stamping went to the next territory.
Edward – GREAT find and great article!! I’m a sucker for all things Citroen, and while there are other models that are (only slightly) more lustworthy, the CX is in some ways the most frequent and appealing target of my daydreams since it’s the only one that I could realistically afford to own. And despite only a small sample size ever making it over to this side of the Atlantic, it seems like most that made the trip have survived. I can’t remember ever seeing this color on one of them before, but I think it looks outstanding. Blue + French car always goes together well.
Maybe they were somewhat less “Citroen-y” than the early versions, but the GTi Turbo models have always been my favorite. I don’t even really know what kind of reputation or type of buyer the CX had in Europe all that well, but in my mind it’s at it’s core a somewhat luxurious car that is also exciting to drive – though, of course, not at all in the same way a BMW fits the same description – and the more well equipped cars with the hottest engines match up best with my perception of them.
Although this example is definitely a grey market car or more recent import, the CX actually was “officially” imported into the US for most of it’s production run… just not by Citroen. Post-grey market clampdown, there was a company called CX Automotive that got them certified for US safety and emissions regulations, which required a not-so-small fortune in crash testing, and sold brand new cars out of their own showroom. They were based in New Jersey and I’ve seen a bunch over the years, more often in classified ads than in the metal – but they’re out there. After CX production ended they went through the same process with the XM as well!! The EPA website even still lists official mileage ratings for both cars:
Sean, Car And Driver recently destroyed one of the few CX Automotive imported CXes recently ;(
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/retour-a-lenvoyeur-driving-a-citroen-cx-from-new-york-to-france-feature
Yeah, well, screw them. I lost a bit of respect for that publication when I saw that article.
Me too, although not because of what happened to the Citroen. I thought it was a cool concept for a story and I’d love to do that same road trip myself, but I felt more like I was reading a blog written by someone who had just recently discovered Top Gear than the magazine that was once a conduit for transmitting the thoughts of the 20th century’s greatest auto writers.
+1
Compare the CX with the Austin Princess wedge abomination which came out around the same time.I know which one I’d sooner have!
You mean this, right?
That’s it a warmed over Land Crab,1 of BL’s many Deadly Sins
I know they were awful, but I think these look cool!
Believe me you don’t want one,unless you prefer burning shoe leather instead of rubber
I used to gas up my Humber 80 where these were sold new, used to crack me up big sheets of cardboard under each car to catch the oil, new cars Christ the well beaten Humber 80 had 90,000 on it and didn’t leak that much, they didn’t sell well either we’d had P76s which were ok X6s which weren’t, Landcrabs didn’t last well and the Princess was viewed with suspicion but some people bought them but they are rarely seen today, Minis, 11/1300s yep plenty still in use anything bigger was too much for the drive train arrangements.
Edward, thanks for the article on this overlooked classic. I first drove a CX 2200 about 20 years ago and just loved everything but the cassette deck fitted vertically between the seats. Oh, and the self destructing vinyl clad sculptured foam door trims weren’t great in the Australian sun either. I had not met a more solidly constructed car until I too got a W116 similar to Don’s. Slow off the line but once it was rolling all was forgiven. And roll it did around corners making all aboard smile. Too bad they have always been undervalued, that particular car was written off after a light bump into a concrete column creased the rear quarter – the rest was perfect. The rust prone Series I cars are the most aesthetically pure, they shouldn’t have messed with it. The CX Break is something to behold but quite rare here, still unsurpassed in my opinion. A friend in Sydney still runs a silver CX 25 GTi…trust an architect.
Jim, you’re right about the solidity of the 116. There was a CX Break for sale over here a little while back for $12k. Silver, but not a GTi I think.
The holy grail of one of these CXes would be either the 1984 Citroen CX 25 GTi Turbo 1…
…Or the Citroen CX Prestige Turbo 2.
Perhaps the President’s model? Longer wheelbase; prettier but not as statesmanlike as the DS and SM versions.
Possibly. Possibly…
Simple, back then you had cars and Citroëns.
These were simply master of the autobahn, no there were faster cars but in those days newspapers were driven all around European airports at night by CXés Diesels.
Simply because they were the best.
The Dutch Ad paper tried a Mercedes estate, a Chevy C10 van and went back to the CX estate.
These guys would do a run from Paris Charles de Gaulle, to Brussels, Rotterdam, Amsterdam and then to Frankfurt Germany to deliver and pick up newspapers.
Some companies drove specially made CX’es by Tissier, a six wheeler.
Remember those dfays a Mercedes Van could do 80MPH Max with the engine noise of an exploding vulcano, the CX Diesel would do a 100MPH easily.
I drove a straight six Volvo 230 Diesel estate and never ever could keep up with the CX.
I’m surprised that a Mercedes-Benz estate wouldn’t be able to keep up with the CX, especially after hearing Herr Niedermeyer’s tales of cruising at triple digit speeds down California highways. One of these tales can be found here:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-european/curbside-classic-mercedes-w124-the-best-car-of-the-past-thirty-years/
MBs and BMWs are revelations to Americans but their advertising far exceeds reality
Wow. I am just amazed that this Citroen could cause such a stir! This has surely exceeded my expectations.
“Authentic” Citroëns always cause a stir. Basically since the days of the Traction Avant and the 2CV.
It’s certainly nice to see 100+ comments !
Really?
All car nuts knew that Citroen and stirs are package deals, buy 1 get 1 free. You didn’t know that?
Really?
Toffee, your theory has been proven false a number of times here at CC. Four times to be exact, and more than enough to prove something right or wrong.
Example 1 is a CC on the Citroen Hy-Van that has less than 15 comments, which would be quite hard to call a stir. In fact, 15 comments is almost minimal at CC:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-european/le-curbside-classic-citroen-h-van-the-french-tin-goose/
Example 2 is a CC Capsule on the Citroen BX that has just over 30 comments, quite average here at CC:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/cohort-capsule-1990-citroen-bx-peugeot-in-a-citroen-suit/
Example 3 is an article on the Citroen Acadianne (updated 2CV) that has less than 20 comments. Below average at CC:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/cc-outtake/cc-outtake-citroen-acadiane/
Example 4 is another Citroen H-Van (or should I say H-truck?) article with less than 30 comments. Quite average here:
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/cohort-sighting-citroen-hy-truck-my-latest-heartthrob/
I rest my case.
Citroenalia covers both the quirkily agricultural as well as the breathlessly jet age. CX was a dream car on the road, in some ways the Countach of four doors. And there weren’t nearly as many LM400 posters on kids walls.
Edward, there seems to be some question over a mooted Lancia Gamma/ Citroen CX joint venture;
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/cc-were-not-likely-to-find-1976-lancia-gamma-the-subaru-legacy-of-its-time/
Can you shed any further light?
For a boxy Peugeot with Pneumatic that wasn’t sold in this country to get that kind of responses were a testament to the strength of Citroen. I gave you H-van, thought it would have gotten more responses.
Toffee, you gave great H-van. You remember those prototype 2CVs hidden away during the war? More corrugated iron than an Aussie lean-to.
As to the CX, what’s French for zeitgeist?
CC is limited to the English-speaking world, and though there are quite a few regulars from Europe and down under, I’m pretty sure that most of the traffic here comes from North America. Any car that is basically unknown on that continent won’t generate that many comments (with some exceptions), which is more a function of the type of comments American and American-market cars yield than anything else. “My dad had one of these, it was a piece of crap!” can’t be said by most people living in Iowa or Michigan in regards to a Citroen H-Van! Plus, it’s just a whole lot easier to have an opinion on something familiar. I don’t necessarily think lack of responses equates with lack of interest. I comment on cars like this often, but I’ve also always been into them. When it comes to motorcycles or, more recently, snowmobiles, I greatly enjoy reading about them but they’re so foreign to me that I rarely have anything productive to add.
I think the CX probably did better than most because it’s a Citroen CX, and in Michigan to boot!
@ Don: l’esprit du siècle.
Johannes, merci beaucoup.
Since I’m possibly the only person here who has owned both a DS and a CX, I thought I should weigh in.
The place and time: London in the 1990s
The cars: 1972 DS20 (late series, pale gold with orange velour, 1985cc, 5-speed manual with column shift); 1987 CX25 GTi (late series, silver with black leather, 2499cc, 3-speed automatic)
Some thoughts:
– The DS definitely had greater pose value, but people often noticed the CX also, even though they weren’t rare at that time.
– Although the CX didn’t have the in-your-face spaceship quality of the DS, I thought it was more elegant – the interior and exterior detailing was beautifully integrated.
– As other people have said above, the CX’s ergonomics worked very well once you were used to them (with the exception of the vertically mounted radio/cassette, which was placed perfectly for dropping things into the cassette slot). And my retired-airline-pilot father was hugely impressed with the controls.
– The back seat in the CX was merely normal-sized, compared to the DS which had sufficient head- and leg-room for my 6’7″ then-partner to fit comfortably.
– The trunk in the CX was much bigger than the DS, and the opening was more usable than it appeared at first (if you look closely at the blue CX photo, you can see the hinges in the chrome strips to each side of the rear window). Most of the back end of the car was the trunk lid – it was completely vertical, so you just treated the space like a drawer and, for example, loaded suitcases standing upright instead of on their sides.
– I didn’t put a vast amount of mileage on either of them, but never had any huge mechanical problems. The DS needed a new steering rack (about £250 if I remember correctly) and the engine bearings were on their last legs – since that was an engine-out job which took several days, I was told to drive it until the engine died and then get a rebuilt one. It never did die, so I sold it still grumbling but still running.
I can’t say I’d particularly want one now, but I’m glad I had opportunity to own them.
@adam_b
Ride wise, would you prefer DS or your late ’80s CX? My CX was an early chrome bumper job with softer seats and suspension. I assume its ride would be closer to DS than your GTi.
@toffee: as you imply, they’re not really comparable. I actually preferred the CX on the whole; the ride wasn’t noticeably worse, and it was much better in corners and on humps.
I have to say that contrary to popular myth, neither was that great over speed bumps – hydropneumatic suspension doesn’t have any rebound damping, so if you went too quickly over big heaves, the suspension would “top out”.
If memory serves, Citroen put firmer seats in plastic bumper CXs? I really miss the soft suspension and seats in old French cars.
I once restored a DS 23 injection for a guy with some friends, a rolling restoration, the car needed some TLC after being neglected by previous owners.
The impressive part of that Godess, (I was a kid early twenties) was doing a 100MPh in the rain, my girlfriend snugged up real close to me and the
DS chasing away all slow traffic on the motorway.
It was this special feeling of cozyness (nice girl), the Ds’es ambiance, the dark rainy weather and the car simply doing what it was supposed to do, bring us home safely, which it did.
CX’es I have driven were different, they for sure did their business but were more of an Industrial design then the DS were, the Ds had the perfect mix of elegance and arrogance, it was soft, much softer and feminine then the
CX, I have Always considered the CX to be a rationalized DS.
Nothing wrong with it, I guess Robert Opron who had the difficult, if not impossible task to ‘breed’a Ds successor did a fantastic job, he succeeded to design a car which was totally perfect and advanced for its period, evens so good that I am seriously considering of buying one, probably a series two model (these are much better manufactured, yet less avantgarde interior wise)
A good one here in the Netherlands will not cost you a fortune and there are a zillion Citroën specialist garages overhere, we Always loved Citroën, we Dutch Always considered Citroën to be ours, Andre Citroëns parents were Dutch Jews who moved to Paris, so his ancestors were Dutch.
This and probably the hang of the Dutch for individualism, to try new stuff, we share with the French may be the reason for the success Citroën Always had in the low lands.
today, like anywhere else in the world most people fall under the dictatorship of lease companies who decide which is what to drive.
It sure is getting boring on the road.
Great story Rammstein.
I’ve also read that the original (Dutch) name of the family was “Limoenman”
(“Lime man” in English). Later on they changed their last name into “Citroen”. Citroen is Dutch for lemon, that’s right, originally they were greengrocers.
Once in France it became Citroën, more chique….
“What was the reason for banning height adjustable suspension in the US?”
If adjustable ride height was outlawed in the US, how do we account for the Audi Quattro Allroad we’ve seen since 1999?
“The standard adjustable air suspension system can lift the car high enough to provide 208 mm (8 in) of ground clearance; a low-range mode (an option with manual transmission), absent from other quattro-equipped vehicles, can be selected with the touch of a button. When used together, the two systems made it possible for the allroad to complete an official Land Rover test-course, thus far it is the only car-based SUV that has been proven capable of doing so in testing. Conversely, the air suspension can lower the vehicle down to only 142 mm (6 in) above road level, and simultaneously stiffen the spring and damper rates to provide a sporty driving experience, much like that of the conventional A6 with the sports suspension.” -Wikipedia (link)
I’ve always admired the Allroad as the constructive response to the turn-of-the-century American SUV. The fact no one else copied Allroad put the lie to pretenses about what these truck-based SUVs were “for”.
Mike, the ban was lifted in 1981.
Oops, now I see it in your article. I’m glad to know that. Fine article too, thanks!
I remember reading somewhere that the rest of the world got Audis with a low-range function, but I didn’t know any of the US models had that feature. Pretty cool!
Mr. Edward Mann: I’m a wee bit late getting here, and it’s taken a while to read the article and all the responses. Now I’m at the end, I just wanted to say very nicely done, it made an interesting and excellent read, thank you! Great photos of the feature car too!
While I was growing up I thought CXs were weird and hideous (although much less so than the DS that looked like a slug) until one day in the late 80s when I was aged about 14 and out bike riding. Another road ran across some wheat fields just ahead of me, perpendicular to the one I was on. The wheat was just tall enough that the road surface wasn’t visible, so I’d see cars and trucks whiz by, seemingly through the wheat. They’d be bobbing around a little over the bumps on the road.
Suddenly a silver Series 2 CX appeared to my left. As it zoomed past it looked like a perfectly level bullet or arrow hovering above the wheat, seemingly unaffected by surface irregularities. And at the same time I noticed this, all of a sudden all the details of the design fell into place in my head – no longer was a the CX a weird disparately-styled car, I now understood it, and all of a sudden it was the most stylish and modern thing on the road. I’ve been in love with the CX styling (especially in facelifted form with the integrated bumpers) ever since. I also grew to understand and greatly appreciate the DS styling too.
Anyway, I’ve rambled enough; again: love the pics and excellent article! 🙂
Thanks for the kind words.
Interesting story too. Made the car seem like a sort of earth-bound space that floated just above the ground like a landspeeder in Star Wars.
These CXs are great. Very nice article and an amazing find! I’ve always liked Citroens and the DS, CX and SM are my favorites.
Thanks for writing this one up!
I thought you would like it, knowing your love of Citröens.
I own and use a 1985 CX25 Gti as a daily driver in the UK. Whilst it is a polarising car it’s hardly un ergonomic. In fact it is the only car I know of where you can operate all lights horns wipers etc without taking your hand from the wheel at the approved 10 to 2 position. In Europe we are very used to driving cars from all over the world with different layouts. I own a Jag, a brace of Volvos a BMW and a Ford as well as the CX and all have different layouts of basic controls. The 25 gti is a proper grand tourer. The 2.5lt engine is a bit course for a European car but a hell of a lot better than the contemporary chrysler four pot. It’s a quick car because the suspension and steering not to mention the brakes allow it to go round corners at outrageous speeds from a car of this period if this type.
Yesterday I did 500 miles towing one tonne in the CX and it didn’t miss a beat and I didn’t notice I was towing.
I’ve just bought a late XM Exclusive Tdi. Diesel turbo for a daily whilst the beloved cx gets elevated to classic toy. The XM has a bosch fuel pump which means it can run on vegetable oil….not a bad thing considering the 2.40 dollars a litre diesel oil costs in the UK just now.
The CX is an itch I just had to scratch, and I acquired a 6-owner, 79000-miler Series 2 GTi Auto a couple of months ago. I have to say that, so far, everything that has been said about CXs is true, from the “magic carpet” ride which damps down the bumps and irregularities that would unsettle a conventionally-sprung car, to the almost telepathic steering and brakes. It was clearly designed to be unruffled, to provide as much space as was practically possible for its occupants, and to make life just a bit easier for its driver.
Series 1, chrome-bumpered, cars were purer, whilst Series 2 were slightly better-built with conventional instrumentation. With the Series 2, however, came some extra eccentricities, such as the auto gearshift indicator placed somewhere by the driver’s knee, or the not exactly brilliant heating and ventilation, or the rear-window demister switch hidden in the roof.
The GTi Auto in particular requires so little effort to drive, it’s not far off driving itself. The steering centres itself even at a standstill. You stroke the brake pedal with your tow, not stamp on it – it only needs the merest touch. If I have a gripe, it’s that the ZF 3-speed was never replaced by a 4-speed (which ZF had available from at least 1982) which would have given the car an even more relaxed – and economical – manner. The 3-speed gives 3100rpm at 70mph, whilst a 4-speed lock-up top would have lowered the revs to an easier 2250.
For a car this old, spares are not easy to come by – Citroen takes a Stalinist attitude to its history and does not support its old models. Much of the unsold NOS stock was snapped up by German-based CX Basis who then tripled or quadrupled the price of a lot of parts – 1000 Euro for a used Series 2 front bumper moulding? 80 Euro for a small plastic bootlid badge? No thanks!