1994 Citroen XM Reviews from UK and Ireland

1994 Citroen XM Exclusive 2.5 TD

Model year1995
Year of manufacture1994
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 2.5 TD Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.3 / 10
Distance when acquired167000 miles
Most recent distance193000 miles
Previous carCitroen XM


Thunderbird 2 but with more power


Hydraulic Pump (Recon unit failed)

Front O/S bearing

Clutch (just worn, but scary cost to replace)

Front Drivers Window regulator (Oh so common fault in the Mk2)

Rust in both front floor panels - although fully galvanized this is a weak point due to the jacking points at the front, and causing the floor to rot out.

Water pump seized.

General Comments:

Despite all of the above faults, this car was superb and supremely comfortable. Until the water pump seized it was extremely reliable, always started in the morning, and still returned an average 41 MPG.

The MPG was mainly due to sitting on the motorways at just under 70mph. Yet if I needed to show the BMW drivers or the reps a clean pair of heels there was still oodles of oomph under the happy pedal. The hydractive sports suspension also gave it a lot more grip than I realised at the time - I'm now driving a TD xantia and the difference is very noticeable.

I must have been lucky as all the dot matrix displays, trip computer etc. all worked perfectly.

My only gripe is that the engine fills the engine bay so completely, that it should come with free knuckle-skin grafts as standard.

I'm very sad to see it go, but as well as getting the water-pump and the welding done it also needs new tyres, disks and pads all round and the turbo is on its way out. Thankfully it's going to be recycled by another Citroen enthusiast.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 2nd January, 2006

1994 Citroen XM Si CT turbo 2.0i turbo

Year of manufacture1994
Engine and transmission 2.0i turbo
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 6 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 4 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.8 / 10


Faulty hydractive suspension.

Excessive tyre wear.

General Comments:

Fantastic ride. Turbo engine not powerful enough to match pace and power of otherwise equivalent BMW and Mercedes.

Not a box. Gallic styling along the SM, DS individuality.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 8th February, 2000

Average review marks: 7.0 / 10, based on 2 reviews