Sleek and stylish

IT is a common criticism of cars in the two-litre saloon class these

days that ''they all look the same''. This is partly a result of the

fact that, if you ask different manufacturers' computers to come up with

a suitable aerodynamic shape for that size and type of car, they tend to

produce similar answers.

However, look-alike appearance does not mean identical

characteristics. Performance, economy, ride and handling, interior

space, and convenience of layout are quite different in cars which look

outwardly much the same.

In any case, some stylists do manage an individual appearance. There

could be no mistaking the Citroen Xantia for any of its rivals. This is

a car whose sleek body design stresses its long wheelbase and also the

very high upper window line, which gives the Xantia such a slim-looking

roof.

Turbo diesels continue to make substantial inroads in this area of the

market, and the Xantia is well represented, with three versions all

using the 1905cc 92bhp engine. The LX is the entry model at #12,900, I

have been driving the better specified SX at #14,200, and the top model

in this mini-range is the VSX whose extra #2050 brings the computer

controlled Hydractive suspension system.

Once settled into the cruise, the Xantia's turbo diesel engine is

quiet and relaxed. In fact, the whole car is quieter than many earlier

Citroens, even ones with petrol engines. With this model Citroen has

gone to greater pains than ever before to insulate the occupants from

mechanical and road noise, although there are, of course, moments when

you are aware -- even if not annoyed by the fact -- that there is a

diesel power plant under the bonnet.

With higher overall gearing than its petrol equivalents, the SX turbo

diesel has its strengths and weaknesses, compared with rivals in the

class, in terms of performance. It will reach 60mph in about 13 seconds,

offer sturdy performance in the middle range of engine speeds where

turbo diesels are always at their best, and go on to a test track

maximum around 110mph.

Comparing its official economy figures with the unblown diesel car is

quite illuminating. Despite its much stronger performance, the TD is

only marginally less economical in the DoE tests. It should manage about

56mpg at 56mph, compared with 58mpg for the diesel. The 75mph figure is

37mpg compared with 38. And the urban cycle return is 41mpg compared

with 43. Really use the turbo diesel's performance, however, and it will

drink fuel at a noticeably higher rate.

A reader recently ticked me off for never, as he mistakenly thought,

giving the urban cycle economy figure, and for quoting a 75mph figure

which can be attained only at an illegal speed on UK public roads.

I find the steady speed returns give a more realistic comparison

between different cars, as well as a good indication of the different

gearing employed. And I think the urban cycle test is too artificial.

The steady speed mph figures selected are admittedly weird. Who in

their right mind would use 56mph as a benchmark? When the DoE tests were

devised, our bureaucratic masters obviously thought we would be going

metric -- 56mph is roughly 100kph and 75mph is 120kph -- and that the

top speed limit here would be raised to 120kph. Perhaps they have not

noticed that neither expectation has been fulfilled.

Another question to which all owners of diesel-powered cars should be

demanding an answer is: why is cheaper-to-refine diesel fuel so

expensive at the pumps here compared with petrol?

Back with the Xantia SX TD, it has individual looks, excellent ride

quality, quite ''sudden'' brakes, a gear change which seems to vary in

slickness from car to car, and a mile-eating ability out on the open

road. This is one of the modern Citroens which makes it easy to

understand why the company has been steadily increasing its share of UK

market sales.