2008 Citroen C4 Picasso Road Test Review

header

The French, I don’t get. Love ‘em of course: mad as snakes and randy as hell, but I just don’t get them. Too many contradictions. Take Gerard Depardieu for instance. He’s got a head like a Burbank potato, yet, in France, is considered a sex symbol. But also a sex symbol is the knees-meltingly gorgeous Audrey Tatou. (Explain to me one day how they get those two under the one heading.)

Take Citroen. Gave the world the double helical gear (which kinda made modern differentials possible); gave the world the astonishing DS 19 and 2CV, but also gave us the BX19GT which fell apart one millisecond after the sun raked across its panels and melted the interior.

But, to be fair, the BX was light as a feather and went like stink. With adjustable hydro-pneumatic suspension, it was a comfortable and swift inter-city tourer (provided you drove it in the dark – then you couldn’t see the bits falling off and bouncing away down the road).

So, how do you explain such flawed genius as the French? So many contradictions, so much flouting of convention. So damned Gallic.

This brings us to Citroen’s Picasso.

Its packaging is brilliant, yet it’s not. It’s both. It’s filled with great ideas and dopey ones. It’s like they did the good bits in the morning, knocked off a bottle of Bordeaux’s finest with cassoulet over lunch, then finished things off in the afternoon.

picasso_01

Dynamically, it’s the same mixed story. It has fabulous long-travel suspension that, at highway speeds, soaks road imperfections like a magic carpet. But at low speeds it ‘thucks’. Over small breaks in the road it sounds like you’re carrying a dodgy strut. And it’s a tad irritating. How did they do it? How did Citroen get the ride so right, yet not?

Now before we jump to any conclusions, let’s just pause for a minute and go over things sensibly. It’s important we do, because this car, Citroen’s Picasso, is intoxicating. It’s a little maddening - sure – but also sophisticated, clever and versatile.

It’s one of those cars that when you first see it, because it’s ‘boxy’ and a little odd, you’ll think you won’t like it. But give it time - spend a day or more behind the wheel, and its eccentric Gallic personality may find its way under your skin. It’s also, in its diesel form at least, surprisingly adept on the highway.

Open the door and you’ll be amazed at the sense of space and uncluttered look and feel inside. There is no handbrake wedged between the seats (replaced instead by an automatic electric parking brake), nor is there a centre console or gear lever - it sits behind the fixed-hub steering wheel.

another well written review TMR. MY concern with the french brands is how long they will last out here and what they cost ot service. Ive heard horror stories.
That aside, they design some brilliant cars when they put their minds to it.

It’s a lot safer buying Australian made if you are worried about durability and service costs harro. Buy French if you want that bit of flair and a car that is comparatively unique.

Great write up, very entertaining. Who is ‘The Insider’ and why don’t we know his real name. Is The Insider like the dentists who cant show us their faces? What gives here?

I’ll show you mine, if you show me yours?
RM

The Insider won’t give his name, because when he does, the PR guys won’t give him anymore cars for TMR.

:D

Yars ‘R’… enticing proposition this ’showing’ of stuff; would I… could I… should I?

Alas, I must decline.

And the Insider? “He’s just a man, honey, just an ordinary man, but one who puts himself on the line for you, and me, everyday…” “Ooh, thank you Insider!”

I think that’s how it goes.

You see ‘R’, because there is such a lot of ill-informed crap masquerading as advice appearing on the web these days (have you seen some of the other car sites…? Give me strength…) you have to be terribly careful who you associate with.

This lot, TMR, they’re rabbits, they know that, but they’re sorta loveable in a ‘rabbit-stew’ kind of way. I might fess up one day, tell them who I am… maybe… one day. (Perhaps soon; I’m getting sick of walking backwards into meetings because I can’t show them my face…)

The Insider

I AM getting a bit sick of you sitting in the darkest corner of every meeting room…

Great review Insider, and I really appreciate your understanding and history of the appeal of the French marquees. The car you tested is an identical twin to the one that I’ve had for nearly 18 months, except mine also has the massive moonroof which makes it feel like you’re driving a convertible!

Whilst the majority of your review is accurate, there’s a few points that I’d like to clarify:

1. The model you drove was not the “Exclusive” top of the range, so it didn’t have the hydropneumatic suspension on the rear axle that you alluded to.

2. The bumps that you kept feeling at low speeds are mainly because of the low profile tyres and 17″ alloys. If you had driven the petrol version with 16″ alloys, and higher profile tyres, the ride would have been a lot more Citroën-like.

3. Your negative commentary on the styling is counter to the majority of comments that I receive. Most people love both the interior and exterior look.

4. The torque figure that you quoted (270Nm)is for the 1.6L HDi. The 2.0 HDi that you tested actual has a torque of 320Nm (actually 340Nm with overboost).

5. You managed to break an Australian journalistic record for a review of a French car in using the “Q” word more than 4 times! :-)

Damn I hate being wrong… no… that’s not quite right… damn I hate being discovered I’m wrong.

But yes, the torque figure is wrong (Madame Le Lash is on her way to administer the thrashing); it has now been fixed and it won’t happen again… although that might depend on how much I enjoy the thrashing.

I can only count “quirk”, “quirky”, and “quirks” three times, but I am sure there are more.

But I’m with you Pikachu on the “discrete charms of the French automobile”. (I’ve owned more than a few in my day.)

The Insider