1987 Citroen BX I (Phase II, 1987) Dimensions, Size & Specs

The curb weight of the Citroën BX I (Phase II, 1987) ranges from 900 kg to 1135 kg (approximately 1984 to 2501 lbs), depending on the specific model variant and equipment levels. The maximum allowed weight (gross vehicle weight) ranges from 1360 kg to 1595 kg (2998 to 3516 lbs). Variations in weight reflect differences in engine options, trim levels, and added features, influencing performance, fuel efficiency, and handling characteristics.

With the rear seats in place, the Citroën BX I (Phase II, 1987) offers a luggage capacity of approximately 445 liters (15.7 cubic feet), which is ample for daily shopping or weekend trips. When the rear seats are folded down, the cargo space expands significantly to between 1455 and 1544 liters (51.4 to 54.5 cubic feet), providing versatile loading options to accommodate larger items or increased storage needs.

Yes, the Citroën BX I (Phase II, 1987) generally fits comfortably into a standard household garage. Considering that typical garages have widths of about 2400 to 3000 mm (94.5 to 118 inches) and depths of around 4800 to 6000 mm (189 to 236 inches), the BX’s dimensions (length 4237 mm / 166.7 inches and width up to 1690 mm / 66.5 inches) easily allow for parking with enough room for opening doors and maneuvering.

The Citroën BX I (Phase II, 1987) typically comes with rims sized at 14.5J x 14 inches, paired with tires sized from 155/70 R14 to 195/60 R14. The range of tire widths and profiles allows owners moderate flexibility between comfort and handling performance. Narrower tires (155/70 R14) tend to provide better fuel economy and a softer ride, while wider tires (195/60 R14) enhance grip and cornering stability.

The 1987 Citroën BX I (Phase II) offers a notably practical interior layout typical of the era’s European hatchbacks. Thanks to its clever design and hatchback format, it maximizes usable passenger and cargo space within its compact footprint. The rear seats fold flat to greatly increase cargo volume, making it versatile for families and individuals needing extra storage. Compared to contemporaries, the BX’s height and efficient packaging often make it feel more spacious inside relative to some similarly sized hatchbacks.

Compared to the original Citroën BX I (Phase I, 1982-1987), the Phase II (introduced in 1987) retained very similar dimensions, including length around 4237 mm (166.7 inches), width roughly between 1682-1690 mm (66.2-66.5 inches), and height between 1350-1370 mm (53.1-53.9 inches). Weight ranges also remained comparable, though the Phase II featured some refinements and updates in design and materials that could slightly impact curb weight depending on trim. Overall, the Phase II maintained the compact and lightweight nature of its predecessor while updating styling and features.

The Citroën BX I (Phase II, 1987) distinguished itself among mid to late 1980s hatchbacks with its unique hydropneumatic suspension system, providing an exceptionally smooth and adjustable ride. While dimensionally similar to competitors like the Volkswagen Golf Mk2 or Ford Escort, the BX offered distinct styling with angular design cues and a focus on innovative technology. Its lightweight construction and efficient packaging often gave it advantages in fuel economy and interior space utilization compared to rivals of similar size.

The compact dimensions of the Citroën BX I (Phase II, 1987), with a length of 4237 mm (166.7 inches) and width up to 1690 mm (66.5 inches), make it highly maneuverable in urban settings. Its relatively narrow width allows easier navigation through tight city streets and parking spots, and its moderate height facilitates good visibility. Additionally, its lightweight builds contribute to nimble handling, while the spacious cabin and hatchback configuration provide practical convenience for urban driving needs.

The slight height variations between 1350 mm and 1370 mm (53.1 to 53.9 inches) in the Citroën BX I (Phase II, 1987) typically result from different suspension settings or optional equipment affecting ride height. These differences can influence the car’s aerodynamics and interior headroom marginally. A taller setup might provide a more comfortable cabin space, especially for taller passengers, while a lower profile enhances handling and stability. Overall, this height range balances practicality and driving dynamics effectively.