Anything about BXs
- Posts: 503
- Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:08 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- My Cars: 1989 BX 19TRI Estate
1993 BX GTI
1997 Xantia CT Turbo
- Over 2k
- Posts: 6209
- Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 9:36 pm
- Location: Fareham, Hants
- x 50
Thats probably a better way of putting what I meantadamskibx wrote:Yes the XR4 was a lot more expensive, but still good value. In 1986, the BX19 GT cost £7289, and the XR4 cost £10,324. This is according to a 1986 Whatcar mag by the way. The 0-60 of the BX GT was 9.7 seconds, the XR4 8.3, so yeah an XR4 is a lot quicker. I know what you mean about the GT preffering lower revs, however peak power is where the red line starts (5600 RPM) Whatcar magazine says:
"In its new-found two-litre guise the BX is both lively and fast; it's perhaps the first compact Citroen capable of genuinely rapid performance. The flat torque curve of its 1905cc engine promises good flexibility too, which, in turn means fewer gearchanges during normal driving. In short, the BX19GT is a deceptively fast machine; its no boy racer but a comfortable family hatchback that can be surprisingly quick when roused".
Its fair to say they can shift if they need to, but I still wouldn't call them quick. Thats not to say I don't like them....the GT is one of my favourite models. I nearly kept it over the 16v, but luckily my dad stepped in so its still here.
I just would never class it as sporty. To me sporty is short ratios, engines that like to rev, half lairy bodykits as standard, wide wheels and eleborate badging! Although that excludes the 16v too....I still can't call it sporty because it leans too much in corners compared with anything else of the same league.
I wonder what the BX Sport is like to drive
- Our Trim Guru
- Posts: 1569
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 6:41 pm
- Location: Gosport, Hampshire, UK
- My Cars: None since the last BX.
- x 1
- Posts: 294
- Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 12:54 am
- Location: Eastleigh, Hampshire