Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - argybargy

Hi all

I've asked a few questions on here recently about suitable vehicles for purchase, and received lots of good advice and welcome information. However, partially due to financial constraints I've been unable so far to locate an affordable example of the vehicles recommended.

I have, however, seen a Citroen C4 VTR plus auto at a local garage via Autodoofer, with low miles. It's a little older than I would have liked, 2012 reg, but ticks all other boxes. Thing is, I know nothing about the model whatsoever. What little research I've done indicates a propensity for electrical faults and a higher insurance rating than my current 07 Focus. Just wondered whether anyone has any experience of the C4 (not Picasso)as an owner or otherwise?

Thanks once more.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - elekie&a/c doctor

So this will have the same engine as fitted to Peugeot and Mini variants.Think timing chain and oil consumption issues.Don't think it is a proper auto.It is one of those robotised manual gearboxes.Stick with your Focus.www.honestjohn.co.uk/carbycar/citroen/c4-2011/

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - 72 dudes

So this will have the same engine as fitted to Peugeot and Mini variants.Think timing chain and oil consumption issues.Don't think it is a proper auto.It is one of those robotised manual gearboxes.Stick with your Focus.www.honestjohn.co.uk/carbycar/citroen/c4-2011/

No, it's a proper torque converter auto as fitted to the 207/308 with the same engine. However it's only a 4 speed so is really busy at motorway speeds.

Mrs 72 Dudes had a 207 with this engine/gearbox (1.6 VTi, 118 BHP) and while the engine was smooth, lively and refined, fuel consumption was poor. Best we got was 42 MPG on a long run, but it would often drop to the mid 20s easily around town on short journeys.

I tried a C4 with the same engine/gearbox - much nicer, smoother ride, quieter, and while it was slightly higher geared than the 207, the 4 speeds put me off.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - SLO76
No... just no, stop right where you are! If you believe a 5yr old automatic Citroen is a wise buy then you need serious car buying help. Honestly, keep your Focus.

Edited by SLO76 on 11/07/2017 at 21:53

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - elekie&a/c doctor

Stand to be corrected,but is this not an EGS gearbox.?citroenet.org.uk/passenger-cars/psa/c4/c4-data/c4-...l

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - gordonbennet

horrid horrible box, best special tool selection to fix it when it goes horribly wrong can be found in a box of swan vestas.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - SLO76

Stand to be corrected,but is this not an EGS gearbox.?citroenet.org.uk/passenger-cars/psa/c4/c4-data/c4-...l

I thought they all were too but seems like the 1.6 VTi non-turbo was available with a conventional torque converter box while the diesels and 1.6 Turbo were all that horrid single clutch EGS box. Still wouldn't recommend buying one though.
Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - gordonbennet

When i delivered PSA cars it was usually only the very highest spec cars came with a torque converter auto, the rest usually got that awful automated manual thing.

The TC boxes were lovely and smooth (though haven't a clue about durability) and made some nice unusual choices for those who wanted different ie you could have the bubble shape C3 1.6SX and the C4 Picasso 'Lounge' (4 Captain's chairs) with TC boxes, and yes i do recall driving some 308's with TC boxes, so it is likely a C4 would be available with one too, though i suspect it might not be in VTR spec.

Edited by gordonbennet on 11/07/2017 at 22:16

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - 72 dudes

Stand to be corrected,but is this not an EGS gearbox.?citroenet.org.uk/passenger-cars/psa/c4/c4-data/c4-...l

Ah, talking at cross purposes. I assumed OP was talking about 1.6 petrol VTi, in which case torque converter box. This article refers to 1.6 HDi which was indeed nasty automated manual.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - argybargy
No... just no, stop right where you are! If you believe a 5yr old automatic Citroen is a wise buy then you need serious car buying help. Honestly, keep your Focus.

Which is exactly why I asked the question here before buying it, SLO. Because as with previous threads, I need serious car buying help, something this forum offers in abundance.

It would appear from the balance of comments on this thread thus far that its not a "wise buy", so yes, for now I'll be keeping the Focus. ;0)

Thanks to all for your contributions.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - SLO76
"Which is exactly why I asked the question here before buying it, SLO. Because as with previous threads, I need serious car buying help, something this forum offers in abundance.

It would appear from the balance of comments on this thread thus far that its not a "wise buy", so yes, for now I'll be keeping the Focus. ;0)

Thanks to all for your contributions."

You're certainly coming to the right place. Keep throwing those curveballs and we'll keep on batting them out the park.
Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - Avant

Remembering your previous thread and the cause of your search, Argybargy - the boneshaking ride of your current Focus, do be careful about Citroens. They used to have a deserved reputation for a very smooth ride, even the ones without hydraulic suspension, but some recent ones haven't nearly as good according to the road tests. The new CEO of Citroen, Linda Jackson (a Brit) has said she wants to bring back the smooth ride, but this will take time.

Is there scope for a change of wheel and tyre size on your Focus? It's not a car noted for an excessively firm ride, and I wonder if the wheels and tyres that you have are standard.

Edited by Avant on 12/07/2017 at 00:13

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - skidpan

If the Focus was bought 2nd hand who knows what the previous owner did to it. Stupid wheels/tyres and a suspension kit will almost certainly ruin what was the best car in its class for ride/handling/steering. Despite what some owners think manufacturers know a thing or two about cars having spent millions (if not hundreds of millions) developing them, a bloke in a shed with no more than the art of talking the talk will never improve it. Most owners who spend ££££'s on such kits rarely critisise what has been done since that would mean admitting they were wrong.

Why not try more Focus's before you decide to buy a car not noted for its durability.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - argybargy

Its OK, I've completely shelved the idea of buying the Citroen. But I had to ask, because on the face of it at least, it did tick some boxes, I've never owned any Citroen and had no knowledge of the model.

My Focus was a Motability car before we got it, and it did a fair number of miles whilst in that service. It was in reasonable nick bodywork-wise when we picked it up, but prior to that we had viewed a couple of Focuses at a different garage, cars which were also ex Motability and despite being just a couple of years old were covered in dings and scratches. "We haven't had time to prepare those yet, but they'll be sorted out", said the salesman, but I didn't much like the idea of taking away something which had needed that level of attention, even if as a result it looked as good as new. So we went for this one instead.

Of course, it might be that the Motability customer who had our Focus nominated some heavy footed lout as their driver, and that could explain the incessant rumbling from beneath. But in all honesty, the seemingly chronic problems with the suspension probably have more to do with our advancing age and need to find something with a more forgiving ride than any real fault with the car itself.

Right now I've got my eye on a nice B-Max, an auto with low miles, and most of what I've read about that model is good. Love those sliding rear doors in particular, and its not a diesel.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - skidpan

Right now I've got my eye on a nice B-Max, an auto with low miles, and most of what I've read about that model is good.

Have you read about the proplems with the Ford Powershift gearbox?

Why do you have to buy an auto. All small auto's are hateful things.The gearbox robs the car of any performance the manual may have had and robs you of any driving pleasure.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - argybargy

I test drove one today, and to be honest it was seamless, albeit on a fairly short run. However, I have checked online for reports of problems, and I fully appreciate that there were issues with early models, though things seem better now.

The reason for buying an auto is fairly simple: I want my wife to start driving again, and I don't think that with her various health issues she could cope day to day with a manual clutch pedal.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - argybargy

Bit more reading, particularly of articles published in the Australian Press, and I can see what you mean.

Maybe time to think again, again.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - badbusdriver

Here we go again, into the world of skidpan, where his opinion is fact, and any other opinions are held only by idiots.

For those who are willing to accept that other people are entitled to their own opinions, and further more, it is entirely acceptable for those opinions to differ, here is an alternative.

1, I derive driving pleasure by making serene, smooth and unhurried progress.

2, The automatic gearbox in any small car does in fact make it accelerate all the way from a standstill to its maximum speed, which, with very few exceptions, is likely to be at least 90mph. If the automatic gearbox 'robs the car of any performance the manual may have had', it would not be able to move at all.

3, Because I am an adult, not insecure, not impatient and not desperate to prove that my car's performance is superior to anyone else's at every available opportunity, I'm really not that bothered about how fast it goes.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - argybargy

He is, however, right about the problems with the Powershift gearbox. I knew no more about the Powershift than I did about the Citroen which was the original topic of this thread, till I read his reply here and did some research. No doubt there are plenty of examples out there which have never given any problems at all, but Sod's Law dictates that yours truly won't fall into that happy category if I buy one.

As for making progress in an auto, anyone who, like me, has driven a Vauxhall Meriva with an Easytronic gearbox couldn't fail to be impressed with just about anything else.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - badbusdriver

Yes, he is right about the Ford powershift.

But he isn't very good at accepting the possibility that other people's opinions, where they differ from his, are anything other than idiocy.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - Slow Eddie

Triffic post, bbd - needed to be said!

Edited by Slow Eddie on 12/07/2017 at 22:57

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - skidpan

But he isn't very good at accepting the possibility that other people's opinions, where they differ from his, are anything other than idiocy.

Its my opinion that small auto's are horrid and I am perfectly entitled to promote that opinion.

If you don't like it don't read my fekkin posts.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - John F

Its my opinion that small auto's are horrid and I am perfectly entitled to promote that opinion.

Our X reg 123,000m Focus Estate has the 4F27E auto developed with Mazda for the world market (mainly USA). It is perfectly suited to the 1.6Zetec, instant response, excellent acceleration redlining smoothly to 6,000+ revs, (actually there isn't a red line on the rev counter), smooth changes and relaxed on A roads and Mway at 26mph per 1000revs, robust (designed to cope with 2.0litre vans, I believe) and maintenance free. Overall petrol consuption 37.6mpg last time I monitored it over >1000miles. I don't know how long they used it before it was replaced by the dreaded Powershift, but if it was still available on the C Max I might buy another when ours pegs out.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - John F

But he isn't very good at accepting the possibility that other people's opinions, where they differ from his, are anything other than idiocy.

Its my opinion that small auto's are horrid.......

Not so good at apostrophe use, either ;-)

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - badbusdriver

But he isn't very good at accepting the possibility that other people's opinions, where they differ from his, are anything other than idiocy.

Its my opinion that small auto's are horrid and I am perfectly entitled to promote that opinion.

If you don't like it don't read my fekkin posts.

If an OP wants a small auto, he or she wants a small auto, if an OP wants a n/a petrol engine, then he or she wants a n/a petrol. Whether or not me or you like such a choice is irrelevant, that is what they want. I would never try to put an OP off of whatever type of car they are looking for just because I don't approve. If however, the OP is asking about a specific car with known reliability issues, then yes, by all means, try to persuade them against it.

If you don't approve of the type of car the OP is looking at, or can't offer anything other than that the OP is an idiot for wanting something you don't approve of, maybe you should refrain from contributing to such posts.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - argybargy

Must admit, BBD, I didn't get the impression from Skidpan's post that he considered me to be an idiot. Had I done so my response might have been a little more pithy.

To me, flicking through the range like Dick Dastardly isn't everything, and it doesn't matter to me that a small auto might take away something of the driving experience if it makes the car more suitable, and comfortable, for er indoors. Difference of opinion, nothing less; but thanks for the sterling defence of my honour anyhow. ;0)

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - badbusdriver

Must admit, BBD, I didn't get the impression from Skidpan's post that he considered me to be an idiot. Had I done so my response might have been a little more pithy.

To me, flicking through the range like Dick Dastardly isn't everything, and it doesn't matter to me that a small auto might take away something of the driving experience if it makes the car more suitable, and comfortable, for er indoors. Difference of opinion, nothing less; but thanks for the sterling defence of my honour anyhow. ;0)

Sorry argybargy, maybe I should have clarified, but my response isn't just based on skidpan's comments to you regarding a small automatic, but quite a few over the time I have been using this forum. This includes slagging off the resident motor trader, SLO, for recommending a n/a car to an OP looking for a reliable car on a small budget (as opposed to a car with skidpan's beloved 1.4tsi vag engine), slagging off motability car users, putting down other OP's looking specifically for a car with a n/a engine, and previous posts where, like you, the OP, for various reasons, is looking for a small automatic car. In fact not that long ago, he referred to everyone(!) on a nissan forum as idiots, as they had a different opinion to his, and he was apparently barred from said forum.

I have driven and enjoyed automatic cars for years now, of all shapes and sizes, from the tiny and ridiculous daihatsu move (850cc, 3cyl, about 42bhp), to the huge but sublime Bentley turbo r (6750cc, V8, around 350bhp). They both made me laugh out loud, but for very different reasons!. My wife now has a new Honda jazz with the cvt gearbox, we have had it for 2.5 months now, and we are both loving it!.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - argybargy

Cheers for the clarification, BBD.

It did occur to me that rather than being a one off expression of irritation, there was some history involved here.

My own experience of cars with autos is limited to the horrid Easytronic gearbox fitted in early Merivas. Not so horrid that it ever led to a mass recall and a blizzard of stab in the dark software fixes, like (apparently) the Powershift, but horrid enough to almost put me off autos for life. Still, er indoors doesn't like my manual gear changes so if we end up with another horrid auto, I know who will get the blame. Me again.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - Avant

As moderator I wouldn't call anyone posting on here an idiot: but 'idiot' is a flatteringly mild term for the hillock-rhymer who designed the Vauxhall Easytronic semi-automatic gearbox. I suffered it in a nearly-new Corsa courtesy car, and it was quite impossible to change gear without an almighty jerk. Jerk is the word indeed.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - badbusdriver

I could be wrong, but I think the easytronic was Vauxhall's 1st stab at the automated manual gearbox. Most of these were the same. Probably the best known was the one in the smart car. The combination of the jerky change along with extremely short length, but quite tall, meant driver often felt like a nodding dog!. You could reduce the effects by lifting off slightly at the gear change points, but it never went away completely!.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - skidpan

The facts here are quite simple. Posters are allowed to join the fanboy club to praise anything Japanese (except Nissan) and fitted with a normally aspirated petrol. No one is allowed to disagree with them. But whenever I post praising the VAG TSi in response to a question there are always plenty of replies telling the OP to ignore my comments since all VAG products are unreliable and the manufacturers are dishonourable. In my experience since buying my first VAG car in 1986 that is utter nonsense.

Because of that certain members of this forum have an issue with me because I dislike their beloved N/A petrol Honda, Mazda and Toyota cars. I have driven examples of all of them and on each occation have either bought a turbo diesel or concluded that if the VAG TSi had not existed I would have bought another turbo diesel. They may suit some people but I do not like their lack of low down power whch makes driving out of town and off motorways very tedious. Reliability is one thing but life with a hateful car will soon make you forget about the cars positive attributes. I feel I should make people aware of this as I would hate to think they would buy a car simply based on the fanboys biased view. I would also hate to think they bought a VAG TSi without a decent test drive to ensure it suited their needs.

That is my opinion but it does not fit with the fanboys thus it should be ignored.

As for buying older unreliable VAG TSi's as with all brands it is buyer beware. There are far more reliable VAG cars about there than unreliable ones but as with all brands you never hear from the happy owners of reliable cars. Whatever used car you buy unless it has been done recently it is wise to budget to replace the cam belt or chain if it is due by date/miles or if it is generally accepted that it is wise to carry out the work early.

As for my experience on the Nissan Note forum the above comments are totally wrong. Back in 2015 when the wife bought he Note I visted the site and posted what we had just bought and how it fitted our needs perfectly and looked forward to many happy years driving just like we had had with previous Micras. On poster responded saying that the car we had bought was rubbish and he would never buy one (he did not actually own one but felt he could say ours was rubbish). He went on to say it would be worthless in 7 years time and critised the performance, space, ride, finish etc. all of which are fine and were praised in Honest Johns test.

I responed point by point and then recieved a private message telling me I was banned for flame baiting as my comments praising the new car could upset owners of older cars with reliabilty issues. Another owner came to my defence and was also banned. If you visit the forum you will see that the number of posts has now dwindled and the forum is dying. Hardly surpring if you are not allowed to post your opinions.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - badbusdriver

Completely missing the point skidpan, as usual.

If an OP comes on the forum asking for recommendations for a small automatic car, in what way are your comments that essentially all small automatic cars are rubbish going to help?. They are not relevant to the question being asked. Why the OP wants a small automatic car has absolutely nothing to do with you or me. My response, which is also the case with most members, is to answer the question as best as I can, by offering suggestions for possible candidates. Yours is to say all small automatic cars are hopeless?.

There was another post recently where an OP asked for suggestions for a n/a petrol (automatic) car with a high seating position. Again, most members, including myself put forward suggestions which fitted into what the OP wanted. But you on the other hand, launched into a hugely long reply giving your own potted history with vag cars, particularly of the tsi variety. If you can't accept other people's opinions, or even contemplate that the OP may well know exactly what they are looking for, then surely you shouldn't be surprised if your responses are criticised.

Regarding SLO and his mazda 3/honda civic, if an OP is looking for a small, reliable car on a budget, those two options, in terms of reliability (which if you are on a limited budget, is surely the most important criteria) are amongst the best choices. And to be honest, the only vag tsi engines I recall SLO putting down, are the twincharge versions. In fact, I'm pretty sure I recall him recommending a seat leon tsi just recently. Pointing out that small capacity turbo cars are a relatively unknown quantity, is not the same as criticising or putting them down. I have seen plenty of criticism on vag in general, mostly justified. You may well have nothing but praise for your vag cars, but the facts are born out by consumer surveys and warranty claim companies, that vag, despite most peoples perception of them being a cut above the mainstream, in actual fact, aren't that great.

Personally, I only have an issue with your posts if they are irrelevant and unhelpful to the question being asked by the OP.

If an OP comes on looking for recommendations for a quick, economical car, then by all means, knock yourself out.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - Avant

If you have a silly sense of humour, like me, any contact between a bad bus driver and a skidpan is always going to end in tears....

I'm not surprised if the Nissan forum is losing ground. The whole point of a forum is to encourage different opinions: I might censor offensive posts but I hope that the only people whom I would ban would be spammers.

Indeed it's good for an OP asking for car-buying advice to receive widely differing opinions: it encourages them to think a bit more deeply about what they really want from a car and what their priorities are.

One problem we all have in advising people is that no-one seems to have invented a small automatic car which is both reliable and good to drive. Torque converters on any car under 2 litres sap too much performance; DSG and Powershift have yet to convince on their long-term reliability; and Vauxhall's Easytronic is just plain appalling.

CVT, as on the current Honda Jazz, may be the best bet, although the Jazz suffers from Honda UK's pig-headed refusal to offer it with a larger engine, as available in many other countries.

Maybe the Toyota Yaris CVT is currently the best of the bunch, but beware if buying more than a few years old, as the previous-shape Yaris had an awful semi-automatic transmission called MMT.

Edited by Avant on 14/07/2017 at 13:27

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - badbusdriver

If you have a silly sense of humour, like me, any contact between a bad bus driver and a skidpan is always going to end in tears....

I'm not surprised if the Nissan forum is losing ground. The whole point of a forum is to encourage different opinions: I might censor offensive posts but I hope that the only people whom I would ban would be spammers.

Indeed it's good for an OP asking for car-buying advice to receive widely differing opinions: it encourages them to think a bit more deeply about what they really want from a car and what their priorities are.

One problem we all have in advising people is that no-one seems to have invented a small automatic car which is both reliable and good to drive. Torque converters on any car under 2 litres sap too much performance; DSG and Powershift have yet to convince on their long-term reliability; and Vauxhall's Easytronic is just plain appalling.

CVT, as on the current Honda Jazz, may be the best bet, although the Jazz suffers from Honda UK's pig-headed refusal to offer it with a larger engine, as available in many other countries.

Maybe the Toyota Yaris CVT is currently the best of the bunch, but beware if buying more than a few years old, as the previous-shape Yaris had an awful semi-automatic transmission called MMT.

Very good Avant!, hadn't thought of that connection. It did bring to mind a skidding related event (not involving me thankfully) back when I worked at Stagecoach. Another driver, in very wintery conditions, did a complete 360° with a 40' coach full of passengers. Miraculously the bus stayed on the road and no cars were involved. After a few deep breaths and copious swearing, the driver carried on with no further incident!.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - Engineer Andy

If you have a silly sense of humour, like me, any contact between a bad bus driver and a skidpan is always going to end in tears....

I'm not surprised if the Nissan forum is losing ground. The whole point of a forum is to encourage different opinions: I might censor offensive posts but I hope that the only people whom I would ban would be spammers.

Indeed it's good for an OP asking for car-buying advice to receive widely differing opinions: it encourages them to think a bit more deeply about what they really want from a car and what their priorities are.

One problem we all have in advising people is that no-one seems to have invented a small automatic car which is both reliable and good to drive. Torque converters on any car under 2 litres sap too much performance; DSG and Powershift have yet to convince on their long-term reliability; and Vauxhall's Easytronic is just plain appalling.

CVT, as on the current Honda Jazz, may be the best bet, although the Jazz suffers from Honda UK's pig-headed refusal to offer it with a larger engine, as available in many other countries.

Maybe the Toyota Yaris CVT is currently the best of the bunch, but beware if buying more than a few years old, as the previous-shape Yaris had an awful semi-automatic transmission called MMT.

That first comment had me in stitches - visions of a London Routmaster drifting like a Nissan Skyline on that famous TV clip!

You're right about the downsides of smaller-engined cars with torque-converter auto boxes - even the new 2ltr auto in the latest Mazda3 and CX-3, whilst nice enough, wasn't 'amazing' compared to my 3's 1.6 petrol manual - its a shame that no make has yet managed to achieve both decent performance, reasonable mpg and longer term reliability with an auto box, the most being 2 out of 3 only. The 1st and 2nd Gen Mazda3 2ltr petrol autos were as slow as my 1.6 manual and thirsty, though very reliable. HJ liked the 1.6 petrol auto for its smoothness, even if it lacked any pace. Probably a nice car for 'tootling around town'.

Like yourself and HK, I'm amazed at how daft Honda are at not offering the Jazz with their 1.5 (normally asiprated) engine as they do with the HR-V or, for both those cars, replace the petrol engines with the new 1 ltr turbo, though from HJ's report its not well suited to the auto in the Civic - maybe it would do better in the smaller Jazz at least.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - badbusdriver

We have had our new jazz cvt for 2.5 months now, and while there is no doubt putting the 1.5 in there would make it faster, I have to say, anyone complaining about its performance is simply not stretching it properly. Over the last week due to my Dad being in hospital I have been covering quite a lot of miles. Furthermore, due to some very time consuming roadworks on the main road, I have been using some unclassified alternative routes to avoid them. So I have been 'exploring' the little jazz's performance to the full!. Yes, it doesn't offer much till you get to the upper reaches of the rev counter, but believe me, the performance is there. One of the most surprising aspects to its performance, given the lack of torque, is its overtaking ability. You do need to put the throttle all the way down to start the move, then once you are level with whatever you are passing you can ease off slightly, but it has really impressed me!. The back roads I have been using to avoid the roadworks are fairly straight, but are, in places, very bumpy. Tanking down this road at speed, the little Honda's body control is absolutely superb. Yes, it may be a little firm for some tastes in town, but personally, I think honda have struck the right balance between ride comfort and handling. There is also the option to change the 'gears' manually using paddles behind the steering wheel. I haven't really used them that much, as the gearbox, left to its own devices (either in drive or sport) works very well. But, I can confirm that in 'manual mode' the gear ratio changes very quickly (much, much quicker than the manual shift option on the hyundai i30 we had before the jazz). Also, the 7 gear ratio's means 70mph is about 2000rpm, and yes, in drive, it will hunt around, but if you put it in manual, it will sit in 7th quite happily (until you get to a hill).

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - skidpan

Completely missing the point skidpan, as usual.

If an OP comes on the forum asking for recommendations for a small automatic car, in what way are your comments that essentially all small automatic cars are rubbish going to help?. They are not relevant to the question being asked. Why the OP wants a small automatic car has absolutely nothing to do with you or me. My response, which is also the case with most members, is to answer the question as best as I can, by offering suggestions for possible candidates. Yours is to say all small automatic cars are hopeless?.

When people come on here asking what car to buy next it means one of two things

1 they are too idle to make a choice

or

2 they don't know nuch about cars and need some help

Assuming most are in the 2nd category:

when a poster comes on saying they want a small auto what is wrong trying to get them to rethink their strategy and try looking at better/alternative cars. Reading the posts after my last one it appears I am not in a club of one who dislikes small auto's.

and when a poster comes on saying they want a non turbo petrol car what is wrong trying to get them to think about and try one of the modern and far superior small turbo petrols. People on here who own TSi's absolutely love them, again I am not in a club of one.

If someone came on saying they did 2000 miles a years and wanted a new turbo diesel the 100% response would be don't do it, buy a petrol. There would be no criticism made from any regular poster if that occurred (and it quite often does).

So come on badbusdriver, please tell me why I should not be allowed to suggest better alternatives to an OP who is asking for help.

Edited by skidpan on 14/07/2017 at 20:21

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - skidpan

We have had our new jazz cvt for 2.5 months now.....But, I can confirm that in 'manual mode' the gear ratio changes very quickly (much, much quicker than the manual shift option on the hyundai i30 we had before the jazz). Also, the 7 gear ratio's means 70mph is about 2000rpm, and yes, in drive, it will hunt around, but if you put it in manual, it will sit in 7th quite happily (until you get to a hill).

The CVT box in a Jazz is not a gearbox since its does not contain any gears. The clue is in the name, CVT is an acronym for Continuously Variable Transmission and the change of road speed relative to engine revs is achived by moving belts (probably steel these days) across two cone shaped pulleys. The 7 gear ratios in "manual" mode are merely achieved by some electronic gizmo fixing the position of the belt and making it appear it has 7 ratios.

Its all smoke and mirrors but if you are happy that is all that matters.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - badbusdriver

Completely missing the point skidpan, as usual.

If an OP comes on the forum asking for recommendations for a small automatic car, in what way are your comments that essentially all small automatic cars are rubbish going to help?. They are not relevant to the question being asked. Why the OP wants a small automatic car has absolutely nothing to do with you or me. My response, which is also the case with most members, is to answer the question as best as I can, by offering suggestions for possible candidates. Yours is to say all small automatic cars are hopeless?.

When people come on here asking what car to buy next it means one of two things

1 they are too idle to make a choice

or

2 they don't know nuch about cars and need some help

Assuming most are in the 2nd category:

when a poster comes on saying they want a small auto what is wrong trying to get them to rethink their strategy and try looking at better/alternative cars. Reading the posts after my last one it appears I am not in a club of one who dislikes small auto's.

and when a poster comes on saying they want a non turbo petrol car what is wrong trying to get them to think about and try one of the modern and far superior small turbo petrols. People on here who own TSi's absolutely love them, again I am not in a club of one.

If someone came on saying they did 2000 miles a years and wanted a new turbo diesel the 100% response would be don't do it, buy a petrol. There would be no criticism made from any regular poster if that occurred (and it quite often does).

So come on badbusdriver, please tell me why I should not be allowed to suggest better alternatives to an OP who is asking for help.

If someone asks which turbo diesel to get if they cover 2k miles per year, not pointing out the likely outcome would be, at the very least, mean, at worst, irresponsible, as it could cost the OP dearly. It isn't the same thing at all.

I really am at a loss as to why you still don't seem to be getting the point!?. But, OK, I will try again.

If an OP wants to know what the forum thinks of small automatic cars, by all means, offer up your opinion. That small automatic cars are all rubbish.

If an OP wants some recommendations for a small automatic car, then they have already decided that is what they want/need. So telling them your opinion anyway is not helpful, it's arrogant.

An OP wants some recommendations for a small automatic car, with n/a petrol engine and a high seating position to do 3k miles per year. That is a fairly specific set of criteria, suggesting the OP has done some research. That criteria indicates that performance is unimportant and economy isn't a major factor. Completely ignoring the OP's question and requirements in favour of pushing them towards something you like, with a vag tsi engine and manual gearbox is not helpful, it's arrogant.

Let me put it another way, if you went into a shop looking to buy a blue t-shirt and the assistant told you that blue t-shirt's are rubbish and what you actually want is a pink polo shirt. Would you feel they were being helpful?.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - argybargy

Thanks for the interesting and lively discussion. Its taken this thread to a level I simply didn't realise was achievable on this forum.

I think its reasonable to ask for car buying assistance from those who DO know something about the cars that catch my eye, in the form of information, even opinion, that I don't currently have. Yes, I could (and do) look elsewhere, but this is a motoring discussion forum and I'm a motorist. I don't think that its anyone's place to suggest that asking for such help is an indication of idleness.

On a more general note, I'm not really upset by responses that verge on scorn, but I can certainly manage without them.

Edited by argybargy on 14/07/2017 at 23:15

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - Avant

For some reason, Argybargy, your 'nom de clavier' has inspired a great deal of unnecessary argy-bargy, but you've skilfully steered clear of it yourself. If anyone deserves to get the right car for their needs, it's you.

I can't remember what your budget is, but if you can afford a 2011-on Honda Jazz with CVT (and not the hopeless semi-automatic transmission that it had from, I think, 2008 to 2010), this could be your next car to look at. There are plenty in Cars for Sale on this site. Jazzes are reliable, easy to drive and quite high up off the ground, so your wife might be suitably impressed. The ride is on the firm side, but better than the Mark 1 Jazz which verged on the boneshaking.

Edited by Avant on 15/07/2017 at 01:22

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - argybargy

For some reason, Argybargy, your 'nom de clavier' has inspired a great deal of unnecessary argy-bargy, but you've skilfully steered clear of it yourself. If anyone deserves to get the right car for their needs, it's you.

I can't remember what your budget is, but if you can afford a 2011-on Honda Jazz with CVT (and not the hopeless semi-automatic transmission that it had from, I think, 2008 to 2010), this could be your next car to look at. There are plenty in Cars for Sale on this site. Jazzes are reliable, easy to drive and quite high up off the ground, so your wife might be suitably impressed. The ride is on the firm side, but better than the Mark 1 Jazz which verged on the boneshaking.

Thanks, Avant.

The user name is deliberately ironic, being as I am a potent combination of both physical and intellectual coward. I've obviously (hopefully unwittingly and temporarily) exposed some long standing frictions that exist on this forum, but I'm happy to thank you for your advice re the Jazz (budget is a very modest one, perhaps £7.5 k at the outside) to promise to do further research on that model and others rather than expect to be spoon fed information, and put this thread to bed before it starts to eat itself. ;0)

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - badbusdriver

Argybargy, first off, sorry about the 'hijacking' of your post!.

Your £7.5k budget will get you into a 2013/14 honda jazz (cvt) automatic with low mileage.

It will also get you into a Toyota yaris (cvt) automatic, possibly a year younger, again with low mileage. Incidentally, in the honest John review, the yaris automatic is described as being one of the best small automatics, regardless of gearbox type.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - expat

We have a 2009 Hyundai i30 auto with the 2lt petrol engine. It goes very well and has been totally reliable. It has the 4 speed torque convertor auto but the newer model has a 6 speed TC auto. A 2lt motor might use a bit more fuel than smaller cars but fuel is a cost that you can budget for. Reliability is a much more important factor in cost. Breakdowns can be very expensive and usually come when you can least afford them.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - SLO76
Try a Honda Civic 1.8 auto. These are well made, longlived, use a straightforward 5 speed conventional torque converter gearbox and unlike most smallish autos there's always demand for these later in life so you'll always get something for it.

Ride quality and refinement are much better than a Jazz or a Yaris but I wouldn't say it's much better (if at all) than a standard Ford Focus but it's the most reliable option if you want a smallish auto. Try one in SE or ES spec and avoid any sportier variants (rare with an auto anyway) over a good test drive to see what you and management think.

Auto Trader:

www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/20170612637...0

Edited by SLO76 on 15/07/2017 at 12:13

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - argybargy

BBD, no problem. In actual fact it was all quite entertaining. ;0)

Thanks again for the further recommendations.

I will be sorry to see the Focus go because it has been a great car, but I think its time to move on. It's been almost as good as the H reg Primera that we bought in 1996 and kept for 9 years, a carburettor model which had leisurely accelaration but never once let us down during many, many happy family holidays when the kids were small. I was sorry to see that go also, more so because I sold it to a work colleague who then drove it into the ground, left it on his drive for months where it deteriorated into a rusting wreck then scrapped it. Funny how you get attached to hunks of metal.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - SLO76

BBD, no problem. In actual fact it was all quite entertaining. ;0)

Thanks again for the further recommendations.

I will be sorry to see the Focus go because it has been a great car, but I think its time to move on. It's been almost as good as the H reg Primera that we bought in 1996 and kept for 9 years, a carburettor model which had leisurely accelaration but never once let us down during many, many happy family holidays when the kids were small. I was sorry to see that go also, more so because I sold it to a work colleague who then drove it into the ground, left it on his drive for months where it deteriorated into a rusting wreck then scrapped it. Funny how you get attached to hunks of metal.

I had a Primera for years too. Great cars and was also sold to a friend who ran it into the ground over the next three years, never servicing it once.
Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - 72 dudes

In 1990 I was driving a 1989 company Vauxhall Cavalier in 1.6L spec. Somehow I got invited to the launch of the Primera at the local Nissan dealer, where I tried a 1.6 SLX IIRC.

My goodness, what a revelation - tight, more refined, much more positive controls and a real feeling of engineering quality.

Shame it became so ugly after the facelift. And as for the Mark II thing.....

The original Mondeo used the Primera as a benchmark for all kinds of things, including NVH (noise, vibration and harshness)

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - skidpan

We had an 89 Bluebird with the carb engine. Total slug and thirsty with it. But it was comfortable and reliable but by 7 years old it was rusting badly.

Dad had a 1995 Primera 1.6. Face lift Mk 1 model (not the ugly Mk 2) with the injection engine. Better than the Bluebird in every respect and better than the early Modeo and Cavalier of its day by far.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - Smileyman

K reg 1.6 Primera (P10 designation) sold at auction with 172k miles ... occasional timing chain rattle!

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - barney100

Neighbour has a Citroen Berlingo which is several years old and has given good service. Are we too dimissive of Citroen as unreliable and not too well built? I've never had one but would love to hear how Citroen owners rate theirs.

Citroen C4 1.6 VTR plus - SLO76

Neighbour has a Citroen Berlingo which is several years old and has given good service. Are we too dimissive of Citroen as unreliable and not too well built? I've never had one but would love to hear how Citroen owners rate theirs.

The first gen cars were generally good news with straightforward 1.4/1.6/1.8 petrols and well tested 1.9/2.0 diesels but later post facelift and 2nd gen cars mostly use the notoriously unreliable 1.6 HDi which has a terrible reputation. Shame really as they're good, comfortable and practical family wagons. The Mk I facelift with the bombproof 2.0 HDi 8v could cover massive mileages if looked after.

Edited by SLO76 on 17/07/2017 at 21:38

 

Ask Honest John

Value my car