Back from the Banal

Citroën’s attempt to return some flair to its C-segment contender.

2004 Citröen C4 five-door. Image:

Of all automotive marques, Citroën used to be the most difficult to pigeonhole. While its competitors happily (or resignedly) occupied their clearly defined or evolved positions(1) in the automotive hierarchy, Citroën somehow managed to design, build and sell simple, utilitarian vehicles like the 2CV alongside technical marvels like the SM without causing confusion or consternation amongst their widely divergent customers. Sadly, the company’s iconoclastic and sometimes chaotic approach to product planning eventually saw it threatened with bankruptcy, and it fell into the hands of Peugeot, its staunchly conservative French rival.

Following the 1974 takeover, Citroënistes were quick to express concerns that the accountants who ran Peugeot (both the company and its cars) would neuter Citroën and rob it of its individuality and charm in a quest to achieve the financial stability that had long evaded the marque. However, the first(2) proper fruit of the union, the 1978 Citroën Visa, assuaged many of those concerns. While based on the platform of the Peugeot 104, it was a quirky and interesting enough car to pass as a genuine product of the Quai de Javel and sold well.

Time passed and the long-running Citroën GS finally ran out of road in 1986. There followed a four-year hiatus during which time Citroën had no C-segment hatch to offer, until the launch of the ZX in 1991. This was a disappointingly conventional looking car, but it was rescued from mediocrity by being unusually well built (for a Citroën) and sharing the underpinnings of the Peugeot 306, which gave it a class-leading combination of handling and ride.

The ZX’s successor, however, was a dud. PSA had, for some reason, decreed that Citroën should be positioned as a value offering alongside its (marginally) more prestigious Peugeot stablemate. The 1997 Xsara was a product of this policy and was widely derided by the UK automotive press for its stylistic blandness. It was the automotive equivalent of woodchip wallpaper: functional but entirely lacking in charisma or appeal. It still sold well enough on the back of heavy discounting and cheap finance deals, but it did lasting damage to Citroën’s reputation.

When the time came to replace the Xsara, Citroën decided to inject some desperately needed style into the mix. The 2004 C4 was offered in two distinct versions, a five-door hatchback with a distinctive beetle-backed arched roofline and corresponding side DLO, and a three-door coupé with a sharply truncated Kamm-style tail and a unique(3) L-shaped tailgate with split rear glass, the vertical element of which was bookended by high-set tail lights. While the coupé was probably the more striking design, both models shared an unusual extreme cab-forward stance(4) that required the shut-line at the leading edge of the front door to be scribed around the trailing edge of the front wheel arch.

2008 Citroën C4 five-door. Image:

The in-house design team behind the C4 was led by Jean-Pierre Ploué(5) and included Bertrand Rapate and Donato Coco, an Italian designer who would go on to work for Ferrari. There were plenty of pleasing details to take in. On the five-door, there was a subtle waistline crease that began with a concentric arc following the curve of the front wheel arch and ended in a sharp uptick beneath the rear quarter window. The angle of this uptick was neatly repeated in the wing to bumper panel gap and upper edge of the rear light cluster.

On the coupé, the uptick at the trailing edge of the long rear side window was mirrored by the leading edge of the tail light cluster, creating a distinctive swept back C-pillar. The extreme forward positioning of the tailgate hinges allowed the opening to be deeper and more practical than would otherwise be the case, and the second (roof) glass, although it did little for rear visibility, allowed more light into the rear cabin.

2004 Citroën C4 Coupé

Both models shared a bold and confident front end, with a minimalist slot grille formed by two chrome bars incorporating the double chevron logo at its centre, bookended by large upswept geometric headlamps. Thick practical side rubbing strips were neatly integrated into the bottom edges of the doors. The five-door and coupé were not only distinctive looking but also had impressive Cd figures of 0.29 and 0.28 respectively.

Inside, there was a welcome return to Citroën individuality with a fixed hub in the centre of the steering wheel containing the controls for the audio, telephone, sat nav and cruise control (with other secondary controls on conventional stalks). The dashboard was interestingly minimalist, with instruments split between a wide high-set central LCD screen and a smaller display in front of the driver.

2004 Citroën C4 interior. Image:

There were four fuel-injected petrol engines available, ranging from a 90bhp (67kW) 1.4-litre to a 180bhp (134kW) 2.0-litre. Three HDi turbodiesel engines ranged from a 92bhp (69kW) 1.6-litre to a 136bhp (101kW) 2.0-litre. Transmission was via a five or six-speed manual or four-speed automatic gearbox. Suspension was the industry norm for the C-segment, McPherson struts at the front and a torsion beam at the rear.

Autocar magazine published its first road test of the new C4 in October 2004. In his introduction, the reviewer, Steve Cropley, pondered “how on earth has Citroën managed to produce this mostly excellent, individualistic car in one generational leap from the humdrum, unpromising and totally forgettable Xsara”. Cropley went on to state that the C4 “not only brings a fresh look and a new philosophy to the trench warfare of the Focus-Golf class, but also easily exceeds its Peugeot family equivalent, the 307”.

Cropley was also impressed by the range of technology and safety features on offer, including swivelling headlights, a speed-limiter, tyre pressure warning system, six airbags, laminated glass in the side windows and a radar-activated lane departure alert that vibrated the corresponding side of the driver’s seat cushion, which was rated as “eerily effective”. There was even a perfume dispenser integrated into the ventilation system. The cabin felt spacious, with good headroom and better rear seat knee room than the 307, if less generous than the class-leading Golf or Focus.

2008 Citroën C4 Coupë. Image:

The C4’s ride was described as “supple and quiet, and its designers’ emphasis on comfort is obvious” while the steering was “perhaps rather too light when the car is being driven hard”. The C4 was “agile and holds the road well, its neutral stance moving into understeer as cornering speeds rise” although it was “not as agile or sporty as the current Ford Focus or even the latest VW Golf”. Overall, the car was rated as “an impressive start” and an indication that Citroën had “rediscovered its roots with [the] radical C4”.

In truth, Cropley might have been rather overawed by the degree of the C4’s improvement over its dismal predecessor, to the extent that he overlooked some of its shortcomings, such as the underpowered 1.4-litre petrol engine, the narrow front footwells that were awkward for drivers with large feet, or the variable quality of interior plastics. These were only minor negatives, however, and the first was easily avoided. The C4 was a strong seller and total European sales over seven years were 859,659 units(6). The C4 was also sold in saloon form in China and certain South American markets.

The 2004 Citroën C4 was by no means a mould-breaking car, but at least it attempted to bring a modicum of Citroën style and individuality back to the highly conservative C-segment(7). Unfortunately, its replacement, the 2010 model of the same name, reverted to an even more extreme dullness, on this occasion to avoid stealing the limelight from its new DS4 stablemate, a car with superficial glamour but little substance. Both it and the second-generation C4 would be deservedly poor sellers.


(1) At least until the 1990s, when Toyota moved confidently upmarket with Lexus and Mercedes-Benz invaded Volkswagen’s traditional territory, prompting a counter-attack from Wolfsburg.

(2) Ignoring the stop-gap 1976 Citroën LN, a Peugeot 104 coupé with a 2CV engine and makeshift new nose.

(3) Certain Honda models, for example the Accord Aerodeck, did feature something similar back in the 1980s.

(4) This was inherited from the Peugeot 307, with which the C4 shared its platform.

(5) Ploué designed the original 1992 Renault Twingo when he worked for Renault under the leadership of Patrick Le Quément.

(6) Sales data from

(7) Renault attempted to do likewise with the 2002 Megane II, an even more individualistic and polarising design than the C4.

Author: Daniel O'Callaghan

Shut-line obsessive...Hates rudeness, loves biscuits.

50 thoughts on “Back from the Banal”

  1. Good morning, Daniel. I like these cars, which is odd, because there are plenty of things that I would like to see altered. The shape of the headlights, for instance might be distinctive, but definitely not delightful, at least to my eyes. I also think there is too much chrome on the grill.

    The shut line of the front door drives me mad, as do the shut lines between rear bumper, side panel and rear light on the coupé. The rear wiper on the coupé is a joke and I imagine so is the rear visibility. Also the rear headroom of the coupé looks rather limited and it seems the position of the hinges of the rear hatch make that even worse. I could be wrong, though, as I’ve never sat in one.

    Yet I like these. I can’t exactly figure out why. It’s probably the overall shape of the car.

  2. And with a booted version for China and South America only at first, then Spain where I rented one once, but I’m not sure about anywhere else. No sign of that former staple in this size/class of Citroën an estate/wagon. I was impressed by the Nissa Primera style boot hinges, a complexity that even the Germans don’t bother with now.

    1. Hi David. Thanks for posting those images of the saloon variant. It certainly looks quirky, but gets away with it because it doesn’t look as though the boot is an afterthought, simply ‘stuck on’ to the five-door hatch.

    2. I have to say I don’t like the way the crease in the side just plummets down just before the rear lights. The boot aft from that seems, if not tacked on, a little uncertain. Apart from that, it does indeed seem a relatively nice design, though not quite a match for the three and five door.

      There is something vaguely Audi-like in the creases and volumes of the rear of the booted version, it seems to me.

      There, unsurprisingly, is a different version of the saloon version in China, which to me looks a little less coherent stylistically. The front – even in facelifted form – has a strong identity not matched by the more generic rear:

    3. Tom, I think that might be Dongfeng’s next model, the model I showed was from ’06, that one is from ’15/’16.

    4. That’s very possible, though it seems strange they’d graft an entirely new back end on the same car.

    5. Well, they did do these…

      Not quite a Peugeot 206

      Not quite, a ZX

    6. They did, and many more besides, as did other manufacturers. There are quite a few interesting oddities over there, just as there are in South America. The plot thickens: the one you pictured is the European sedan (concurrent with the hatch), the one I found is indeed the Dongfeng C-Triomphe, which later morphed into the C-Quatre (with the front from the next C4, that poor shutline):

      Which – not at all confusingly – was also sold as the C-Quatre Cross, which despite all efforts still looks rather nice to me:

      The detailing on the headlight looks quite intricate.

      That not quite ZX was featured here a while ago. It looks nicely resolved for such an extensive (and presumably affordable) alteration-yet-not-complete-reskin.

    7. Hi Tom. The shut-line between the leading edge of the bonnet and top edge of the headlamp looks very odd. It’s very noticeable on the grey car, where the gap widens towards the wing. Surely they didn’t intend it to look like that?

    8. I think it’s meant to be a styling flourish, although varying light angles make it look different so I don’t know exactly what’s going on, an Opel-esque gap between bonnet and headlamp top or something else.

  3. Wonderful write-up as usual! I’d just been hoping for more discussions of the modern Citroens, perhaps we’ll see the Mk2 C5 soon? The Mk1 C4 is up there in terms of charming French design with practical icons like the Twingo 1 and Rancho, playful while still looking resolved and satisfying. It’s interesting to know Ploue was involved with this as well as the seminal Twingo 1. I thought the fixed-hub wheel was a fantastic tribute to the single-spoke steering wheels of yore, and I’d heard that it offered better airbag deployment as well due to the fact that it always deploys in the same orientation vs. ‘regular’ airbag wheels that must deploy at any angle.

    Freerk points out the perhaps clumsy finishing with regards to shutlines and detailing, but I again advocate that the overall shape and effect of the car should take precedence when passing judgement, and this C4 is adorable in either bodystyle! I agree that the upturned headlamps are a bit much, and overall the 3-door seems too sporting of a shape to be a ‘real’ Citroen, looking more like a Japanese hot hatch from Honda or Mitsubishi. I still think the twin-tier grille with integrated badging was one of the few good aspects of Citroen’s overarching corporate themes at this time as it was beautifully done on the C6, though it would be less satisfying when later grafted onto the facelifted Cactus.

    1. I definitely agree that the overall shape of the 5 door is good, but for me the details are import. Once seen, they cannot be unseen. But then again perfect is the enemy of good.

    2. Good morning all. Weirdly, given my well documented fussiness in this regard, I’m perfectly comfortable with the C4’s shut-line management, on both versions of the car. There seems to be an underlying logic to it, even the one at the leading edge of the front door:

    3. Mmmm, I’d never noticed the front door shutline curving around the wheelarch. That is a bit bothersome, especially when there’s such a (comparatively) long front overhang! Still, what was that about true beauty/creativity always being partially flawed?

    4. Hi Alexander. I really liked the Mk2 C5, although many criticised its allegedly Audi-apeing design. I’ll pop it in my in-tray for further attention…🙂

    5. The design is from PSA’s phase of unnecessarily large windscreens and oversize headlights. On the 308 and 407 it didn’t need much and the lights and screen would have met.
      You can see in the C4’s lateral view what you get from this: acres of useless dashboard top surface, windscreen wiper mechanisms the size and weight of stuff normally used in travel buses and small bonnet openings making work in the engine compartment unnecessarily difficult.

  4. BL autos gave me a c4 (as they negotiated with my c6). 1.6HDI. Stonking engine combined with v light structure. Loved it. Not transferring the floating steering wheel arrangement to c6 was a missed opportunity.

    1. I’ve been loaned that one before as well. I liked it a lot. It’s always a joy having a courtesy car from BL Autos as one never quite knows what piece of PSA’s back catalogue one is going to get.

  5. It’s sad that, as we now know, these cars represented only a brief uptick in Citroën’s stylistic output but nonetheless pleasant to be reminded of them. I thought at the time that the five door C4 was a terrific design for a mass market hatch and hasn’t it aged well?

    1. The 5-door C4 has indeed aged well; not so sure about the coupé. Thank you Daniel for this reminder of Citroën in one of the increasingly rare moments of identity self-assurance, now probably gone forever. Although I do find myself warming to the C3 Aircross – and hating myself for doing so!

      As for the fixed-hub steering wheel, I am reminded of Foden trucks and buses of the early ’50s which so housed their speedometers. There’s nothing new….

    2. Citroën tried something with the speedometer like that as well:

      As did Suzuki:

    3. Ah, yes the infamous Edsel. I have the Maserati Boomerang. Not a production car, I’ll admit.

  6. I think people are sometimes too hard on the ZX and Xsara. I think the ZX especially is a rather nice design, maybe a bit on the bland side, but still (very) subtly stylish. And for some reason I think it actually still looks like a Citroen. The Xsara is, I would say, even more on the bland side, and looks less like what a Citroen should look like, but still not a bad looking car. I think they look even better in comparison with some of the later, much more fussily styled Citroens, like the ones that came after the first gen C4 and the C6.

    1. Hi boarezina. The ZX was certainly a decent car. DTW gave it the once-over here:

      Z-List or X-Factor?

      As for the Xsara, I’ll need some more convincing…

    2. When looked at from a certain distance and a squint of the eye the ZX looks like a true hydro pneumatic Citroen.
      It has a sloping roof line and the long nose, what spoils it are the thick door window frames and the non-aligned rear side window (please don’t tell me that the non-alignment of the windows should remind us of the silly kink in the XM’s belt line).
      In the early phase of its development they even tried a cheaper hydro pneumatic system with only one sphere per axle but could not make this work properly and went for conventional springs in the end.

      There’s a big difference between the 306 and the ZX: the 306’s chassis is tuned nearly perfectly and combines impeccable low-speed comfort with agile handling in a way that puts to shame many cars from two classes above. The ZX has an over active rear suspension with an exaggerated self steering effect that was irritating for most drivers, if they drove fast enough to experience it.

  7. I’m a little surprised no-one’s mentioned the memorable Transformers inspired TV advertising campaign for the C4.

  8. Ah,the coupé (VTR trim level) of which I owned an Arctic Steel silver model for almost five years before…no, let’s deal with the good first.

    I fell for the looks on passing the local dealership and the car was at the front. A delightful test drive and the 55 plate 1.4 was mine; the car was around 18 months old when I got it at significant discount and some extra with haggling (remember that fun?) and the last vehicle I would purchase with my pa in tow; he was gone in but a few months.

    The car was totally gutless for Sheffield’s hilly country and abysmal in snow. So, drive it to the limiter – which flashed red – and hoon it round corners. This diminutive pocket (not so) rocket was a gentle blast. But also with supremely comfortable seating, both front and rear. In fact, aside from the Volvo, the most comfortable chairs my back has encountered within a motor car.

    I loved the styling and the car regularly garnered favourable comments. The doors were incredibly long and heavy which meant the underside and leading edge got regular scuffs. The paint touch up stick got plenty of, er, use. Being the coupé, friends of my age never complained of rear access but those of a more mature nature frequently asked when I was buying a car with proper doors; charming! The rear spoiler added incredible weight to the already heavy glass.

    The interior was always a talking point as to where things were placed but I quickly got used to it. I don’t remember having any issues seeing out. That tiny wiper did improve the view – honest, guv! I remember chatting up the service desk girl and gleaning a vial of perfume (worth about £18) which helped improve the atmosphere on warm days; all that glass meant for a hot interior but the air conditioning was great.

    I always hankered a “by Loeb” edition, the car vaguely resembling something driven with more elan by Sebastian on the rally stage but they were either too expensive or got stolen. What an awful name for a car. Makes it sound like an aftershave or overtly expensive kitchen.

    Downsides…oh, there were many. Drank engine oil like no tomorrow. My annual mileage was around 20,000 per year and between services, the mill required a litre or more every month. Bulbs failed with hilarious regularity. One time I changed the left headlamp, drove off and saw the right hand side had gone. When back at the garage for some other malady, I was told “they’re like that.” Winter journeys could prove interesting.

    The clutch would frequently judder in 1st gear, trying its hardest to violently ruin many trips. The joy of trying to precisely match revolutions, especially on cold mornings…who needs forward vision?

    Interior was fine until around 60,000 when all manner of trim decided to expire. The glovebox lid fell off and wouldn’t go back, bits of dashboard came loose or squeaked. The ventilation fans could give a jumbo jet a run for their (noisy) money. Trim around the doors gave up the ghost, seats frayed like tissue paper and oddly a pervading smell of petrol would enter the cabin on braking. Often on a Tuesday for some reason. The perfume dispenser was rarely topped up and what’s wrong with a little benzine in the cabin? Are there two police cars in front of me…?

    Both rear wheel bearings were shot at a similar time but then the head gasket cried enough at around 90,000. The repair went well but the car was never the same again to my, pre-DTW feelings. The coupé never lost it looks to me but the verve had flown. The car was traded in for a five door Fiesta, a car with a bruising attitude after the somewhat cosseting French machine. The Ford had a shocking ride after the Citroën’s gossamer nature.

    It appears my former example rattled on until very recently; failing it’s MOT with 140,000 on the clock and one believes now probably a new washing machine.

    Summing up, this Citroën contained far too many faults but it’s character overarched them for a long time. It also assisted me mining the rich Citroën archives for machines of odd qualities. I’m so glad that Citroën were allowed to create such oddities. Today, I wouldn’t go back to the double chevron though but as part of my motoring history, it was the perfect car for me at that time.

    And that Transformers ad was quite something to a Citroën-iste !

    1. Good morning Andrew. You’ve been hiding that little secret from me! I’ll have to interrogate you offline for a full history of your automotive involvements. Thanks for sharing your experience of the C4 with us.

    2. I remember quite well the first examples of the C4 which had seat covers with seams that split and fabric that wore through and suffered from severe ‘pilling’ sometimes within weeks. I helped a couple of owners to convince their stiff necked (as usual at PSA) dealers to treat this as the warranty cases they were, in some cases by threatening them with legal action. At least I learned that PSA customer service is no better than FCA’s…

    3. Gooddog, I wonder why Lamborghini never went ahead with Gandini’s proposal for a four door Espada?

  9. Those were well-designed cars indeed, though the front isn’t their best angle. The coupé reminds my slightly of the Mazda 323C (my niece had one of those) – or 323 Neo in Japan – though the Citroën is far better resolved:

    The 323C in turn was a (relatively poor) reference to the excellent second-generation Honda CRX:

    Not that I’m reaching for reasons to post a picture of a Honda CRX, mind… Such a reference is quite high praise for the Citroën, I think. Even tough you can probably fit three CRX-es in the volume of one C4 Coupé. All that said, I think the 5 door is – certainly from the rear – the better resolved design, the roof/c pillar arch gives the thing a wonderful tension that is supported by the details you mention, Daniel.

    1. High praise indeed.

      As I love all three, I will leave you, dear reader to determine which is the better resolved design. (Regrettably, the Prius PHV/Prime and CRZ were too slow to make it to this posting)

    2. Citroën once owned a certain company that did this:

      Thank god privacy glass wasn’t a thing back then.

    3. Oof, those are some beautiful cars, thanks gooddog and Freerk. Especially the Khamsin is nice, although the US version less so:

      I’ve always wanted to like the CRZ, a valiant effort from Honda to return to making a compact coupé, and to make a sporty hybrid car. It didn’t quite pan out (not least because I understand fuel consumption isn’t all that impressive and you don’t get a particularly quick car in return for that surprisingly large amount of fuel).

  10. The Xsara was certainly a conservative and low-risk shape, but bland or even banal? Hmmm, I would challenge that – the Coupé version had exceptionally dynamic contours, easily outshining the Mégane and 306 designs in my opinion. When attending French motorsport events one can’t not notice the firetruck red Xsaras mostly on white wheels that some fans arrive in: those are of course hommage editions to the rally machines Citroën Sport raced at the time. Some overdo it by adding all kind of aftermarket spoilers and stickers, but while of course the kit car and WRC rally cars had nothing to do with the stock Xsaras, they did a pretty good job of highliting some elements in the core design that would otherwise remain hidden to the eyes, yet are very agressively present on an aerodynamics-focused variant.
    Colour is also a key element here as the Xsara appeared in an age when manufacturers started pushing metallic paints into mass sales, but it certainly did no good for the image of the vehicle – the Xsara pops well in the above mentioned Citroën Sport-red, white and bright colours, but darker and metallic shades do it no good service unfortunately.
    Turning back to the topic of Citroën Sport and jumping forward in time to remain in line with today’s post – I believe the motorsport presence generated even more sales for the C4 than for the Xsara – one was able to buy Sébasten Loeb limited edition cars even with base 1.4 petrol and 1.6 diesel engines – and people did just that in huge numbers! Odd, in my opinion the C4 was far too avantgarde to be associated with sportiness, but Citroën pulled it off somehow. Motorsport marketing can potentially generate massive revenues in times of economic growth and that worked well until the financial crisis struck in Europe. Though truth to be told it was mostly scrappage schemes and state purchase programs (police and public sector tenders) that propelled the sales counter of the C4 after that (not sure if the sales number of the C4 Picasso are baked into that almost 1 million figure).

    1. Hello Freerk – that’s quite Volvo C30-like from the rear. There were a few Air-prefix concepts, plus an R-Pur C4 with an opening roof.

  11. Hi all and happy Easter long weekend
    I must admit that this is one of the few modern Citroens I would contemplate. The looks have ( for me) a strong and successful family resemblance to the c6, which is no small compliment. Which of course zx and Xsara didn’t. Also interesting in that Citroen dared to be different and many dislike it

  12. I think that the robot advert for the C4 inspired a DVLA advert about the perils of not paying vehicle tax.I think it was like the one below, except that the vehicle bore a resemblance to the C4 and/or the robot at some point. So much so that I think that Citroen objected and the advert was revised. I can’t find reference to it – can anyone else remember it?

    1. Hi Tom. I remember the ‘imploding Audi’ advertisement you posted above, but not one that resembled the C4 advertisement. Thanks for posting.

  13. The C4 was a product of the era when the manufacturers decided that damped items meant quality. Citroen thus added an opening flap beneath the radio display (the radio itself being further down but without display, Vauxhall-style) and a small drawer in the housing for each outer air vent. I can’t recall my father actually using any of those receptacles for anything! It was a good car, though – unlike Andrew’s experience, the seats of his example (in a strange fabric, like sportswear) remained in good condition, and I can’t remember him having any issue with it at all.

    It was his first French car, after being with Ford for many years, as well as his first diesel. Again unlike Andrew’s experience, it felt well-powered and I was surprised to discover later that it was only the 90hp version rather than the 110. It remains his only Citroen, but I reckon that if PSA had made an estate version, he probably would have replaced it with one. Instead he bought a 308SW, which was probably their intention.

    Using Wikipedia and Citroenet, it looks like the saloon version may have been called Pallas, and was imported from Argentina to Greece, Hungary and Turkey as well as to Spain. It seems to have been the same as the Chinese C-Triomphe, and used the ‘extended’ version of the PF2 platform, as did the European 308SW. It seems that Dongfeng later added the C-Quatre saloon, a smaller car that used the regular wheelbase platform of the hatchback variants.

    1. Hi Tom,

      the “Pallas” moniker of the saloon version was used in Brazil but not in Argentina, where it was just the C4 sedan. this body style was also offered in Russia.

      here’s the C4 Pallas ad, shot in São Paulo, with an Argentinian actress (Aracéli Gonzalez) and Kiefer Sutherland – back then, at the height of his fame as Jack Bauer from “24 hours”. the best part, for me, is the Etta James song:

  14. Hello Daniel. A friend had a Citroen C4 dark grey the 3 door version. He had offered me a ride once. Of course, I was sitting in the front passenger seat. I remember the steering wheel hub centre section being huge in my eyes, the digital speed indicator was very easy to read, there was a feeling of the car being roomy and with lots of light coming through the large windscreen and windows. The door was feeling very heavy and difficult to manage when the car parked in a side inclined position. I do not remember the feel of the suspension, but the roads are usually littered with a lot of deep-ish holes where the wheels hit with a bumping noise. Every car gets ruined and the motorcycles worse.

  15. Here in Athens, the Citroen C4 version with 4 doors has been frequently spotted. It is like the one in the picture in David’s comment, not like the red one.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: