Interesting XM review / test

[casalingua]

The recession probably affected absolute sales but not relative sales. The very attempt to go up market and to address the perceived quality seems to have made the XM more expensive than people were prepared to accept. However, test after test resulted in other cars winning the laurels or a conclusion composed of faint praise. Journalists seemed not to warm to the car. Even Gavin Green in CAR couldn't give it the unequivocal thumbs up. He didn't like the styling while others criticised the ride, performance or refinement at various times. About the only thing which I agree was a fault is the ride quality. The other things I think unimportant or just wrong. In the end, the XM was unlucky enough to come five years late to the market. If they'd sold the same car in 1985, say, they could have retained a large body of customers who were driving CXs. But PSA left the CX on sale too long and those customers who switched to Ford and Opel and Renault never came back. Ford and Opel kept their large cars competitive and so kept their customers longer. The Omega sold very well for a lot longer than the XM, for example. If the XM had come along in 1985 it could have sold maybe 500,000 or 600,000 units. The next car would then have been the one to do under 250,000 which might have been enough to warrant a generation of large Citroen we never saw. The DS5 certainly isn't that car and nor is the China-market concept thing shown last year.

[Dieselman]

Have you ever been in a Vx omega, I've been in two and thought both were crap.

[casalingua]

It depends on what you're comparing them with (or to). It also could be one of annoying subjective things. Without saying you're wrong I find it impossible to find any important differences in quality between the Omega or its near rivals. The general design was as good (or as bland) as anything from VW at the time; the exterior was professional and the ride and handling very good indeed. But the car wasn't as well made as a W-126 (nothing is) or as dynamic as a 525i (but cheaper). The Scorpio had more toys and more rear legroom but had a dated chassis. All in all, there were plenty of good reasons to view an Omega as the best of the rest if not up to Munich and Stuttgart's best. I can see why people don't love them though, they're missing a distinctive character.

[casalingua]

The XM Wikipedia entry has been amended again (by me). It now references the 1989 first drive. John Simister in Performance Car gave the car one thumb up. There is also a new citation of the V6's "hollow victory" over the Alfa Romeo 164 Cloverleaf in June 1991. I have my eye on an Autocar group test of the XM, Rover 800 and BMW 5 series dubbed "XM versus the best and bestseller". I expect the XM lost as it was neither as sporty as the BMW nor as British as the Rover.
I have found that rust has bitten my car behind the front wing, between the wheel arch and door, where the wing is flanged to the sill. Is this weldable or do you think a new wing is needed? Has anyone else had this problem?

[casalingua]

I have ordered that Autocar now. Another item I left on the shelf is a Performance Car edition from 1990. The listing didn't say enough to tempt me. I expect it was a "now on sale in UK" test which, if it follows car journalism norms, would be more critical than the launch write-up.
I managed to replace a left hand stop lamp bulb yesterday night. That I could lower the rear seat back meant I could see the bulbs working while sitting in the driver's seat.

[casalingua]

Today I needed a taxi to carry three adults, a child and a large push-chair. A Mercedes E-class was the vehicle available. It astonished me how cramped the rear of the cabin was and how awkward the ingress/egress was for one of my parents who has a replacement hip. The push chair fouled the huge hinges of the bootlid. I think the Mercedes would be easily able to outrun my XM but many other parameters were inferior. In the XM I find the same load is stowed and carried with ease and my parents seem to lounge with a lot of room to spare. Crucially the b-pillar and rear seat base are set much further apart in the XM than in the Benz. One seems to be able to step into the XM while the Benz requires manoeuvring of foot and ankle to negotiate the narrower gap. For such a massive car, the Benz seems decidedly poorly packaged. Yet again I realise what a pleasingly useful car the XM is. It also reminds me that the low value seemingly placed on packaging results in cars for show-room appeal but which don't do their job properly.
I noted the front seats of the Benz required manual adjustment. Power operated seats sound like a trivial detail but they work so much more elegantly and controllably.

[captainhaddock]

I drove an E 320-class as a taxi for some time and yes, you're right there. This Benz wasn't easy to service either. Ever tried to change an alternator on one..... But, I did like it, to be honest. But it was expensive to run. It didn't let me down ever, which was great cause that would have been a night mare. I had never looked or run any XM at the time, but I would have preferred it, in hind sight. But the Benz, wasn't bad.

[casalingua]

Which version of the E did you run? The car I was in was the current generation.

[robert_e_smart]

When I was in Copenhagen the place was heaving with these current E class Taxis. I wasn't all that impressed by them. Very bland and non descript. However, one of them I was in was particularly fast, the young driver had fun showing me his drifting skills aboard his E class estate!

[captainhaddock]

Which version of the E did you run? The car I was in was the current generation.

One was old, from 1999, second newer model from 2004 both s 320 turbo diesels