Stinkwheel wrote:Am i missing the point made earlier in this thread if i say..
"Everything man or machine assembled from manufactured parts can and will be prone to assembly or tolerance errors and resultant failure at some point, be it 200k miles old or 2 miles old, so, saying you cannot put hand on heart and say a BX's hydraulics are 100% reliable is akin to saying my brand new BMW's engine may expire tomorrow for any number of reasons unforseen, or put another way, nothing is 100% reliable, but maintenence gives you a fighting chance"
Or put another way, just because one member here doesnt trust his well known to them and maintained BX is more down to his personal take on his personal situation and past experiences than some in-alienable pre defined failures of hydraulic systems all over the world in our poor unfortunate BX's.
Ive been stranded only once in many 100's of decrepit jalopys and a smaller number of pristines beauties, it was in a dyane 6 in the pishing rain on the a1 near leeds, and it was my own fault, i knew id knackered the thread and was chancing my arm. Never (he says tempting fate, throwing salt over shoulder etc etc) in a hydraulic Citroën, ive had incovinient limps, but not left high and dry.
Sorry for the thread hijack and ramble, drink has been consumed of the real ale variety. Evening all, mind how you go
A lot of you still miss the point .... engines are common to all cars, steering is common to all cars, suspension joints are common to all cars, brakes are common to all cars, so they all suffer the same potential failure, which is checked at MOT. When you go for MOT, the mechanic checks all these (except the engine).
The MOT mechanic also checks the appearance of the pipes on your hydraulics, but he cannot see all of the rubber returns, and indeed these are arguably not going to cause an immediate accident when they fail. When these fail, your waning light on your hydraulics will very soon come on, and then you should stop, and then you need to call someone to get you out of your predicament.
You do not have this potential hydraulics failure if your car is not a BX. There are numerous posts in this forum about problems with rubber returns.
Here is something I posted in May about the Octopus pipes (a recurring theme), and if you go down to the third post you will find "When the Octopus fails it usually ruptures on the moulded sections where all the pipes come together underneath the engine. The piping at the tank can look magnificent and yet the green blood can still be pissing out from the octopus itself" .... not my words, but I agree, and I think everyone should understand this point. You all have an Achiles Heel buried in your BX that no amount of servicing and inspection will uncover.
My point is that these cars are now at least 18 years old, so the rubber returns are an unknown threat to reliability. You do not have that threat on a car without this hydraulic system.
So, why is the car that is advertised, worth £1500 compared to any other BX ? It has FSH, so it has probably had a lot of money spent on a lot of work. It has done 110k miles. It is shiny, probably had a good valet.
So if the advertised BX is not worth £1500, then why is any BX worth £1500. If it does reach £1500 then I will put my BX up for sale too, it does not have FSH, but I have done a lot of work on it myself.
Now to go back to a much earlier posting by me in this thread, does anyone want to participate in a sweepstake on the final price ?
](./images/smilies/eusa_wall.gif "Brick wall"){kind=small}
