Draft letter from Paul Magès to Mr. Grosseau regarding the specifications for vehicle L (11 March 1971)

In this document

This draft letter, dated 11.3.71 (handwritten date at the top right), is addressed by Paul Magès to Mr. Grosseau and concerns the "Specifications for vehicle L" p. 147.

Magès' observation

Magès observes that the bodywork designers "changed course" very quickly after the presentation of the vehicle L bodywork projects to Mr. Ravenel, which in his view reflects a clear decision to return to the 1969 specifications p. 147.

The protest

He specifies that he is not criticizing Mr. Ravenel himself, as the latter decided "based on the information provided to him" p. 147. On the other hand, Magès deeply regrets that this decision could have been taken "without us being able to give the mechanics' point of view" p. 147.

He believes that the prices established by Mr. Durin based on information provided by the BEA should have been discussed before presentation, for solutions he deems questionable — a joint review could, according to him, have brought out "an acceptable solution" p. 147.

He recalls having already indicated to Mr. Sarre, at an unspecified earlier time, that technical decisions should only be made after consultation p. 147.

He concludes by stating that he is not "at the design office to undergo 'changes of course'" without understanding the reasons, while saying he is ready to "immerse himself back into pure technique" p. 147. The end of the document is illegible.

Context

The "vehicle L" mentioned here corresponds, in Citroën's history, to a large touring car project from the years 1968-1974 which would lead to the CX, launched in 1974. This period was marked by internal tensions at Citroën between the design office, bodywork designers, and management, in a difficult industrial context (takeover by Peugeot in progress). These elements are part of general historical knowledge and are not mentioned in the document itself.

Archivist's perspective

This letter illustrates, it seems, a recurring tension experienced by Magès: that of a mechanical engineer feeling insufficiently consulted on bodywork choices that have technical implications p. 147. The tone is firm but measured, with Magès taking care not to specifically incriminate Mr. Ravenel.

Visual markings — red stripe, vertical lines in the margin, crossed-out word — suggest an attentive re-reading, probably by Magès himself, highlighting the most sensitive passages.

This document can usefully be compared with the Summary of folder 60-74, which places this correspondence within the set of decisions and projects followed by the BEA during this period.