Citroen SM

Which Citroen SM version to buy

Buy 2.7 MT if the job is pace: 8.7 s to 100 km/h, 217 km/h, five Manual gears. Buy 2.7 AT if the job is peak output and three Automatic gears: 180 hp, 245 Nm, 9.3 s, 205 km/h. Same kerb weight (1450 kg), same fuel tank (90 L), same Coupe, same years. Extra power does not buy extra speed here.

Buy 2.7 MT if the job is pace: 8.7 s to 100 km/h, 217 km/h, five Manual gears. Buy 2.7 AT if the job is peak output and three Automatic gears: 180 hp, 245 Nm, 9.3 s, 205 km/h. Same kerb weight (1450 kg), same fuel tank (90 L), same Coupe, same years. Extra power does not buy extra speed here.

There is no third generation, no restyle generation, and no other body. Both versions run 1970-01-01 to 1975-12-31. A 1972 Citroen SM and a 1973 Citroen SM in this data are the same two rows, not extra years of hardware.

Citroen SM generations compared (only one exists)

1 generation is Coupe, two modifications, 1970–1975. Nothing later replaced it in this dataset. “Which generation changed what” has one answer: nothing later is listed. Choice is version vs version, not generation vs generation.

Both versions share Independent hydropneumatic front and rear, Drum front brakes, Disc rear brakes. Suspension and brake labels do not pick a winner.

Citroen SM engine: 2.7 MT vs 2.7 AT (horsepower, torque, layout)

Same displacement, same cylinder count, same V-shaped layout, same 2 valves per cylinder, same No boost, same Carburetor, same compression 9.1. Differences that are in the data:

• Power: 2.7 AT +10 hp and +9 kW (180 vs 170; 134 vs 125). Peak rpm is 250 higher (5750 vs 5500).
• Torque: 2.7 AT +15 Nm (245 vs 230), both at 4000 rpm.
• Bore × stroke: 2.7 MT 87 × 75; 2.7 AT 91.6 × 75. Stroke matches; bore is 4.6 mm larger on 2.7 AT.
• Gearbox: Manual 5 vs Automatic 3.

Power per litre (hp ÷ 2.670 L): 2.7 MT 63.7 hp/L; 2.7 AT 67.4 hp/L. The Automatic row is the denser engine, not a detuned “auto” copy of the Manual.

Engine position: not measured for both. Fuel grade: not measured. Those blanks are not “Maserati” or any other badge — they are missing fields.

Citroen SM performance figures: 0–100, top speed, what extra power buys

Kerb weight is 1450 kg on both, so mass does not explain the gap. 2.7 AT has the better power-to-weight (8.06 vs 8.53 kg/hp) and still loses 0.6 s to 100 km/h and 12 km/h of top speed. The extra 10 hp and 15 Nm buy a 3-speed Automatic, not a faster Coupe.

If the search is “Citroen SM top speed,” the catalogue answer is 217 km/h for 2.7 MT and 205 km/h for 2.7 AT. If the search is “Citroen SM horsepower,” it is 170 hp and 180 hp, not one number for the model.

Citroen SM mpg, economy, tank

City, highway, and mixed consumption: not measured for 2.7 MT and not measured for 2.7 AT. CO2: not measured. Eco class: not measured. Tank: 90 L on both — no range math is possible without consumption.

“Citroen SM mpg” is therefore not a version differentiator in this data. Do not treat the missing mpg as “the SM uses little” or “the SM uses a lot.”

Citroen SM dimensions, weight, size

Kerb weight: 1450 kg for 2.7 MT and 1450 kg for 2.7 AT. Gross weight: not measured. Ground clearance: not measured. Wheel sizes: not measured. Length/width/height/wheelbase: not in this dataset.

What you can compare: both Coupes sit on the same listed kerb mass and the same 90 L tank. “Citroen SM size” and “Citroen SM dimensions” as external measures are not measured here. Weight per horsepower is the only size-adjacent split, and it favors 2.7 AT on paper while acceleration favors 2.7 MT.

Citroen SM vs Citroen SM: Manual five-speed or Automatic three-speed

Arithmetic recap you can take out of context:

• 2.7 MT: 170 hp, 125 kW, 230 Nm, 2670 cm³, Gasoline, 6, V-shaped, 2 valves/cyl, No boost, Carburetor, 9.1, 87 × 75, Manual 5, FWD, 8.7 s, 217 km/h, 1450 kg, 90 L.
• 2.7 AT: 180 hp, 134 kW, 245 Nm, 2670 cm³, Gasoline, 6, V-shaped, 2 valves/cyl, No boost, Carburetor, 9.1, 91.6 × 75, Automatic 3, FWD, 9.3 s, 205 km/h, 1450 kg, 90 L.

Same: body Coupe, years 1970–1975, displacement, fuel type, cylinder count and layout, valves, boost, feed, compression, drive, kerb weight, tank, suspension labels, brake labels.

Different: +10 hp / +9 kW / +15 Nm on 2.7 AT; +4.6 mm bore on 2.7 AT; two extra Manual ratios vs two fewer Automatic ratios; 2.7 MT is 0.6 s quicker and 12 km/h faster.

There is no listed price, so “what the extra money buys” can only mean what the extra listed hardware buys: 10 hp, 15 Nm, Automatic 3, and a slower 0–100 and top speed. It does not buy a later generation, AWD, a different body, or measured economy.

Citroen SM problems, reliability, service (what this catalogue does not measure)

Problems, reliability, rebuild notes, engine-swap notes, and service-manual content are not measured in the data. Both versions are Carburetor, No boost, Independent hydropneumatic front and rear, Drum front, Disc rear. That is the hardware list, not a fault list. Do not infer that hydropneumatic or carburetor equals “unreliable”; do not infer the opposite either.

Original price, current value, and “for sale” counts are not in the data. How many Citroen SM were made is not in the data.

Buyer shortlist

1. Want the fastest listed SM: 2.7 MT — 8.7 s, 217 km/h, 170 hp, Manual 5. 2. Want the strongest listed engine and Automatic: 2.7 AT — 180 hp, 245 Nm, Automatic 3, accepting 9.3 s and 205 km/h. 3. Want a later generation, another body, measured mpg, measured dimensions, or a measured reliability score: none of those exist in this model’s data. The catalogue stops at two Coupe versions in 1 generation.

Same names as the database: 2.7 MT and 2.7 AT. There is only one of each; they are already split by 170 hp vs 180 hp, so no extra power suffix is required.