XM diesel estate, Crewe, Cheshire. (eBay link)...

cavmad · Post by **cavmad** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 1:38 pm

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ... &rd=1&rd=1

Started at a quid I think and mus be attracting a lot of bidders.

tim leech · Post by **tim leech** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 2:44 pm

Lot of car for that money and its a manual too so should prove ok? Not sure about the faux wood gearknob.

DavidRutherford · Post by **DavidRutherford** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 2:50 pm

Nice motah, but it is the "how the hell do you work on that?" 2445 cc Diesel rather than the XUD11 engine

I think the owner is in cloud cuckoo land if he believe's he's getting 45mpg from it. Even the best figures available for the 2.5TD xm recon on high thirties. The 2.1TD will *just* about achieve 45mpg, but only at a steady-speed gentle long-distance journey.

Ian_Fearn · Post by **Ian_Fearn** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 2:56 pm

2 radiators, nose cone off for EVERYTHING, big horrible lump of pig iron under the bonnet.

Nobody will ever convince me that the 'lorry' engine in the 2.5 XM's is a nice lump.

Now the 2.1 is a different animal.

XM's are nice but dont let anybody kid you a 2.5 will be cheap to run. MPG from what i've seen is more like 30-35.

tim leech · Post by **tim leech** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 2:57 pm

Lorry engine?

Ian_Fearn · Post by **Ian_Fearn** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 3:04 pm

tim leech wrote:Lorry engine?

You ever heard one???

tim leech · Post by **tim leech** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 3:14 pm

Ive heard a CX DTR and that sounded rough as bears behind.

Ian_Fearn · Post by **Ian_Fearn** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 3:23 pm

Correct me if i'm wrong but isnt this a variation (or the same engine) of the old CX lump??

I think they put this engine into the C25 van as well as various Peugeot/Talbot vehicles.

tim leech · Post by **tim leech** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 3:25 pm

Sounds like a bus then!

ken newbold · Post by **ken newbold** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 7:18 pm

Ian_Fearn wrote:Correct me if i'm wrong but isnt this a variation (or the same engine) of the old CX lump??

OK, sorry Ian you're wrong

The 2.5 in the CX was a 1950s engine, great technology to work with, but the XM 2.5 is a different beast.

Two timing belts an all.

tom · Post by **tom** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 7:23 pm

And the CX 2.5 TD was a fine engine in series 1 guise; quiet, torquey and very frugal. If only the CX wasn't such a rustbucket, I'd probably have one now. The XM just doesn't do it for me. After all, there's a lot more car to push around than a BX but there are a lot fewer spares to be had and the Diesel estates are very expensive.

ken newbold · Post by **ken newbold** » Sun Dec 31, 2006 8:22 pm

Just noticed, this is a relisted item, had it on watch while I was on holiday, only finished at about £750. Now the seller has a new user ID and it's a private auction

Post by **docchevron** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:16 am

The 2.5 engine is awful! any engine that needs TWO balance shafts to make it less tractor like is poor design from the outset.

The 21 is a lovely engine, I really miss my old XM, frugal, rapid, smooth, awesome.

I wouldn't have a 25 given to me.

Cheers
Chris G

Ian_Fearn · Post by **Ian_Fearn** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 8:16 pm

ken newbold wrote:
Ian_Fearn wrote:Correct me if i'm wrong but isnt this a variation (or the same engine) of the old CX lump??
OK, sorry Ian you're wrong

The 2.5 in the CX was a 1950s engine, great technology to work with, but the XM 2.5 is a different beast.

Two timing belts an all.

Thanks for putting me right Ken

. Its still an awful sounding tractor engine though!

Kitch · Post by **Kitch** » Mon Jan 01, 2007 8:21 pm

docchevron1472 wrote: any engine that needs TWO balance shafts to make it less tractor like is poor design from the outset.

Beat me to it