My new XM

[Armidillo]

Pleased to report that a fresh tank of fuel (98 octane) + a bottle of injector cleaner, and a 500+ km run to Port Macquarie and back (including the big climb up from Long Flat to Yarrowitch) seems to have done wonders for the idle/stalling problem.

Still doesn't drop instantly back to a smooth idle after revving it (revs tends to drop too low before it picks up then settles down), and the exhaust smells very rich while it's warming up, but with 530 km on the trip meter, and the fuel gauge still above half, it's hard to believe there's much wrong .

Cheers

Alec

 

[STALLED]

Awesome thread!

Doesn't the XM have a stupidly large fuel tank - watch for those $150 fills from empty when you're low on 98! :roflmao:

 

[Armidillo]

Awesome thread!

Doesn't the XM have a stupidly large fuel tank - watch for those $150 fills from empty when you're low on 98! :roflmao:

Thank you!

Yes I expected the fuel tank to be the same as the 605, but it seems even larger! I knew it was getting low, but after fitting the new fuel filter I had to add 2 or 3 litres to the tank to get it to prime again. Once going, I drove it straight into town (which would have used a litre), and it took 85 litres .

My assumption that drivetrain parts would be available because the ES9J4 is shared by other PSA vehicles has taken a knock. After Motorgnome's suggestion that in-cabin noise levels might have more to do with engine/gearbox mounts than exhaust leaks, I went shopping for the mounts.

Alas a critical engine mount is no longer available - probably because it is not used by the 406 SV.

Part # 181435 seems to be the only one unavailable - all other related rubber parts seem to be available either from Citroen or onlinecarparts.co.uk.

To be fair, I haven't tried EAI or Continentals, but any suggestions on other places I might check for NOS parts?

Cheers

Alec

 

[fritzelhund]

Thank you!

Yes I expected the fuel tank to be the same as the 605, but it seems even larger! I knew it was getting low, but after fitting the new fuel filter I had to add 2 or 3 litres to the tank to get it to prime again. Once going, I drove it straight into town (which would have used a litre), and it took 85 litres .

My assumption that drivetrain parts would be available because the ES9J4 is shared by other PSA vehicles has taken a knock. After Motorgnome's suggestion that in-cabin noise levels might have more to do with engine/gearbox mounts than exhaust leaks, I went shopping for the mounts.

Alas a critical engine mount is no longer available - probably because it is not used by the 406 SV.

Part # 181435 seems to be the only one unavailable - all other related rubber parts seem to be available either from Citroen or onlinecarparts.co.uk.

To be fair, I haven't tried EAI or Continentals, but any suggestions on other places I might check for NOS parts?

Cheers

Alec

Alec, is that the mount you CAN get or the one you can't ?? It looks suspiciously like a first shape C5 mount to me. Heaps available, even on Ebay. I replaced a sagged ( shagged / ) one last week. If it is any help I can measure the mount....( I bought two, so I have fresh and a drooped one ). In the C5 ( diesel ) application if fits on the right upper end of the engine. The sagged one looks intact except for the overall height of the "platform".. it has sagged by about 3 cm and the rubber has creased. I have seen one from a C5 petrol 4 cyl that had completely broken in half horizontally.

 

[Armidillo]

Yes, just to confirm, the photo is the part that is NFP.

I see what you mean about the mount used in the C5 (and the 407 and 607 as it happens). Part # 1844C0 does indeed look like 181435 - I wonder how great the differences are?

The irony is that, while the right mount is unavailable for the XM, the left mount is still listed. For the C5 it's the opposite - right mount available, left unavailable .

Anyway, looks like I shouldn't panic. Just checked the equivalent mounts for a 406 SV, and both L & R are NFP - but I managed to get all mounts for our 406 last year.

Thanks for the offer to measure your good one - it may help but I won't actually get a chance to pull my old one out until maybe late August. Even then, it will no doubt be shorter than a new one (but!

I found the following info about the C5 one (1844C0) in a parts description on AutoDoc

• Weight [kg] 0.86
  0,86​
• Outer diameter [mm]: 93
  93​
• Outer thread [mm]: M10x1.5
  M10 x 1,5​

Haven't been able to find even this much about the 181435 item.

Cheers

Alec

 

[forumnoreason]

I bought one on ebay last year for the xantia. XM mount. Guys on UK citroen site said they are better than the xantia ones. I'll see if I can find the ebay details for it. You should be able to find one fairly easily. Have a look at motordoctor.fr

 

[Armidillo]

Ah-hah!! Now we know why there are none available - stolen by wretched Xantia owners! And not even for a V6 (which does use the same mount)!!

Thanks for the link - I found motor-doctor.co.uk easier to read - plenty of engine mounts available - just not the one in question . What's concerning me is that I'm not even getting dodgy Russian and Chinese hits when I google this part number - just a link to spareto with the note "No longer supplied by the manufacturer".

Anyway, you're forgiven for taking the last one - the 'proper' Xantia mount (182722) is also NFP.

Cheers

Alec

 

[UFO]

Awesome thread!

Doesn't the XM have a stupidly large fuel tank - watch for those $150 fills from empty when you're low on 98! :roflmao:

You can squeeze 87 litres in if the tank is really low and you brim the fill, but always remember the fuel pickup in an XM is on the right side of the tank (standard for Euro cars I suppose) so when the warning says you have 85km or so left in the tank - get fuel NOW!

 

[Armidillo]

Thanks for the heads-up Craig. Although I usually leave the 605 until I've just got a flashing bar, instead of a number, I got caught once by exactly that problem. We were staying overnight in Sydney, and there were no flat parking spots left in the underground carpark. There was, I thought, plenty of fuel left, & I didn't think twice about parking with the driver's side uphill .

Next morning I was faced with a long walk to the nearest fuel station (over near Cleveland Street as I recall), and the cost of a fuel tin. Fortunately 5 litres was enough...

 

[forumnoreason]

febi bilstein 24595 is mount I bought Alec. On ebay, Ignore the info that you can check whether compatible. It does, it can, it will.

Found the box it came in, says for peugeots etc.

 

[David S]

It's certainly going to be close to an 85 litre fill when the fuel light has come on. 2nd click. 25 kms with the fuel light on hasn't caught me out yet, but I wouldn't chance more if any decent uphill is involved or even being caught in traffic going up a hill.

 

[Armidillo]

febi bilstein 24595 is mount I bought Alec. On ebay, Ignore the info that you can check whether compatible. It does, it can, it will.

Found the box it came in, says for peugeots etc.

OK - now it all makes sense. The 24595 is the replacement for the 1827.22 and 1827.15, which is the right (correct) mount for the Turbo CT motor in Xantia, XM & Pug 605, and also suits some other 2 litre motors in the same cars.

It certainly looks the same shape as the one for the V6, but I'd need a bit more information before ordering one, as suppliers are quite insistent that this part does not suit any of the 3xV6s fitted to the XM during it's production.

Oh well - if all else fails, I'll have to try Elastomer in Lithuania - as well as strut tops, they are advertising the "renovation" of XM engine mounts. However, they use polyurethane instead of rubber.

How do people find polyurethane engine mounts - do they transmit more engine noise and vibration than rubber? Beggars can't be choosers of course .

Cheers

Alec

 

[JAJEA]

It's certainly going to be close to an 85 deterioratel when if not used for s whilehe fuel light has come on. 2nd click. 25 kms with the fuel light on hasn't caught me out yet, but I wouldn't chance more if any decent uphill is involved or even being caught in traffic going up a hill.

Agreed, why would you. Fuel in the tank is yours. (Yes, it may deteriorate a bit if not used for a while but you are not "hill climbing" are you.)

The less fuel in your tank means the more air to condense and form water!.


Fill up well before you get the warning that it's going to run oit!

 

[Armidillo]

I just read (on another forum) that my XU9J4 equipped XM should have twin tailpipes - mine only has one. Now I knew mine's mufflers were not original, but it led me to take a closer look...

According to ServiceBox, I should have this exhaust:

whereas it actually has this:

which is the PRV exhaust layout (for both the XM and the Pug 605).

Can anyone think of an explanation? Is this for some reason normal for late-model XMs in Australia? It doesn't seem logical that the original pipes would have rusted out - for example I have a Pug 605 fitted with the 2nd layout. Although it has needed middle mufflers, it still has the original pipes (and rear muffler) after 24 years and 190,000 km. For the first 14 years of it's life, the 605 did short trips around Launceston, only covering 5,000 km per year, so it's hard to believe that this XM could have rusted out it's exhaust system more quickly - at only 19 years of age, it has travelled 173,000km - close to 10,000km/year).

The important question of course is whether the correct factory system was/is in some way tuned for the XU9J4? There's nothing wrong with the fuel economy as it is, but without testing on a dyno, I've no idea whether the car has all the power it should have. Then there's the noise issue...

Cheers

Alec

 

[David S]

It's 20 years old?
The outer layer probably rotted and was failed for rego at some point or someone didn't know the inner boxes were still good. Maybe, the baffled collapsed? Walker offers the PRV system at a reasonable price and it will fit the 24 Valve XM as well as the PRV, so that's probably why it is wearing that system.

 

[Armidillo]

Thanks for the tip about Walker's - I wasn't aware anyone still made a dual pipe system to suit!

I've not had problems with pipes rusting in recent years, but when I was first married (late 70's), our only car was a 1955 Austin A90 given to my wife by her great-aunt. It's exhaust system was exactly as you described, and we had to get a new one made up, as the old pipes just got too thin to repair.

However, this hasn't been my experience with French cars from the mid-90s and newer. Yes mufflers will need replacing sooner or later, but I can't recall ever needing replacement of, or even major repairs to, the actual exhaust pipes. So I would be surprised if this XM was very different.

Invoices bequeathed to me with the car document the following:

2 mufflers replaced at 93,000km (2008). These appear to have been the 2 rear ones - cost $446 and $750 (this did include fitting).

Front muffler/resonator replaced at 145,000km (5/2/15) - $162

Muffler bandage fitted to small leak at 146,000 (14/5/15) as part of rego check

Cat replaced at 146,500 (26/5/15) - $380

No mention anywhere of piping replacement - and the muffler bandage is still there - just behind the middle muffler .

On the other hand - the rear dual pipe section is still silver painted, with only the welds appearing rusty. In fact I would have to say it looks of similar age to the two rear mufflers (replaced in 2008). Now $750 does seem very exorbitant for a muffler - is is possible that the price included the dual pipe section (correct for a PRV)? Presumably couldn't be genuine at that price, but it might, as you suggest David, be a Walker copy. Can't read labels on the mufflers - they have been 'silver frosted'.

I might even ask Mike (the previous owner), although it seems pretty clear from the invoices that he focussed on the front section of the exhaust.

Cheers

Alec

 

[David S]

Alec, for $162, I'd expect the front muffler will be something like a hotdog grafted in. That is likely to boom more than the standard item and is what I have on a PRV XM that seems louder than the same car with a standard exhaust. I think it may also be strangling that car a little. The intermediate piping and the transverse muffler are a single unit as shown in your diagram, so that may be the more expensive item mentioned. It's quite a bulky item to freight. The final muffler box and short tailpipe connect to that. CTA were listing the muffler parts behind the cat, but from memory you need to look them up via XM S1 PRV although they are the same. I have the parts, but remarkably the inner muffler boxes and pipes of the original 1994 system minus the rotten outer and ceramic sandwich, remain quite OK to use.

 

[Armidillo]

You're absolutely right about the hotdog! Not totally sausage shaped (it does have flat ends) but it's not very big!

Actually I've been through this with the 605 - original middle muffler fell apart soon after I got it, local muffler man fitted a cheap hotdog, but it produced a nasty droning noise at or above 100km/h, so I got him to replace it with an actual muffler, which was better - nearly as good as the original!

So although it's not exactly the same - it doesn't have the nasty drone when cruising calmly at 100km/h - I will at some stage get that hotdog replaced.

Regarding originals - my 605 still has it's original final muffler. The outer skin has rusted off, but otherwise it's fine! Why is it that good Aussie mufflers (is there such a thing?) only have one 'skin', but European ones have a spare outer one?

Cheers

Alec

 

[Armidillo]

Apart from one trip to Port Macquarie the XM has been on light duties, with no progress on outstanding issues until yesterday.

My task was to change transmission fluid, in spite of the following statement in the manual: “The transmission is lubricated for life and the level should be checked every 60,000 km.“

Despite thumps on downshifts (when hot) I had been putting it off because it sounded complicated. In fact it's simpler than an AL4, as it has a drain plug underneath, and a separate level plug on the side. Got the car up on stands (with spare wheels etc. pushed under to make sure it stayed up), checked that everything was reasonably level with a spirit level, made sure I could get the breather/filler plug off, then drained the fluid. LT71141 does not look like ATF - it is not red, or any other nice colour - it just looks like engine oil. The oil that drained out was not burnt, but looked cloudy in the drain dish. There seemed an awful lot of it, so I poured it into an empty 5L oil bottle. To my surprise there was 4.5 litres (the manual states that the refill should use between 2.7 and 3 litres!!).

Actually I shouldn’t have been surprised, as Mike’s (previous owner’s) supplied records show that he drained and refilled the auto trans 3 times in 2015, and that he refilled it each time with 4.75 litres!!! Now Mike had mentioned that he didn't bother with the approved system for refilling - he just carefully measured the amount that came out, and replaced it with exactly the same amount. What could possibly go wrong? My money is on the problem starting with a Sydney auto transmission specialist, who Mike paid $250 to in February 2015 to do a ‘service’. Looking at the manual, the “oil remaining after draining” is 4.7 litres – so perhaps a mechanic in a hurry has seen that number and not read the text.

So it’s been overfilled for (at least) 4½ years/30,000km! If only they’d got on AF and asked!

Turns out I outsmarted myself (maybe Mike knew more than he was letting on?) – I hadn’t tried to undo the level plug until I had drained the old oil. It's smaller than the drain plug, and appeared to be removed with a Torx key, but 45 wouldn’t fit, and 40 just spun without getting any significant grip. It was getting dark (& cold, we were expecting a frost last night), so I decided to refill with the amount recommended in the manual – 3 litres. A very slow job, as the breather hole that doubles as a filler is very small!

Took it for a test drive – first time I slowed down it gave a half-hearted thump as it changed back into first, then after that it seemed perfect, even when fully warmed up - very gratifying, and relieves a major concern I had about this car. I will give it another fluid change soon (as there is still about 5 litres of dirty oil in there) – once I have worked out how to remove the level plug.

I have no idea what damage may have been done, but on balance, overfilling seems preferable to underfilling. The manual states that, apart from increasing the chance of fluid leaks, excess fluid will increase the fluid temperature. Now the thumps were only happening when the transmission was hot, so anything that reduces the fluid temperature has to be good!

Cheers

Alec

 

[Armidillo]

While I had the bonnet up, I removed the coil pack from the front set of plugs – I was delighted to find everything clean and dry - no oil in the plug wells!!! So it looks like:

a) the problem was indeed the oil filler cap (thanks Flash Car 76!!). Back in June I improved it's sealing by adding a couple of large diameter O-rings between the standard flat rubber/plastic seal and the upper part of the cap – this seems to have completely resolved the problem. I initially added an O-ring at the bottom, but the sharp edges of the filler hole cut the O-ring in half.

b) When I first found oil in the front plug wells, my first thought was that resealing of the cam boxes had not been successful (in fact I think Mike might have told me as much!). In fact it now seems that Jason H did an excellent job of resealing the cam boxes (sorry if doubted you Jason)!

I haven’t tried replacing the cap, as according to invoices supplied, it was replaced in 2015.

Cheers

Alec