2018 Peugeot 5008 1.2 PureTech 130 - POV Test Drive (no talking, pure driving)

This POV test drive features a 2018 Peugeot 5008 1.2 PureTech 130. For technical specifications of this car, visit www.roadfanati...
Follow us on Social Media:
Facebook:
/ roadfanatic
Instagram:
/ roadfanatic
Twitter:
/ road_fanatic
For business enquiries, send us an email: [e-mail]

[@oslo162]

the pure tech 1.2 is a poor engine to avoid at all cost how bad they are ,peoples shouldn't to spend their money on something on that useless thing anymore

[@25musicmaker]

Failed the driving exam...😏

[@d947]

De pinker heeft echt een leuk geluidje! Anders dan andere auto's

[@michaeloakley7486]

Amazing :O

[@한재영-c9s]

Why Small turbo engine? Hybrid is good (engine+electric motor system)

[@PlayWaves1]

Less expensive

[@alxactly]

so much better with the 2019 EAT8 automatic

[@Dominik00768]

With manual is best

[@Daumex]

@@Dominik00768 it's not. This is a big, slow crossover that doesn't need a manual. The automatic has 8 speeds so it's literally superior.

[@muldix]

Seems poor with that little engine... Greetings from driving POV videos :)

[@edwardwain4435]

Your be surprise how powerful it is

[@gamingisawesome5015]

Hello, i'm thinking of buying this suv with the exact 1.2 engine and I would like to know how is the real world fuel consumption?

[@gamingisawesome5015]

Bought it and I love it!

[@shan0063]

What do you fell bro

[@gamingisawesome5015]

@@shan0063 come again?

[@shan0063]

What are the thinks that you like about this great suv 🚙

[@shan0063]

Hey please reply me

[@ventiadi1460]

Why 1.2?

[@ventiadi1460]

Thordur Hogna this engine is to small for thar car . What if i go with this car to vacation with 7kids? That engine go EXPLODE

[@ventiadi1460]

Maresalul Antonescu wait after 140000 km than broke that engine

[@Lookmanelala]

Well, but the 3 cylinder sound is just horrible !!

[@arnemaeschaelck5012]

Honestly, don't underestimate it. I've seen a lot of three cylinder engines being so much more throttle-responsive and snappier than four cylinder engines, and don't forget a comparable three cylinder has more torque ready at lower RPM's than a 4 cylinder. It's probably not ideal to be carrying around 7 adults all the time, but that's not why people get this car. They get it to drive to work or the store 90% of the time, and for that, a 3 cylinder is impressively fuel efficient. Keep in mind that it is a *very* light car at 1.200 kg. If you're really gonna drive around with a lot of passengers, the four cylinder gasoline or even more so the diesel options (up to a 2.0 liter) are more for you. :) EDIT: I do agree that, from its appearance, you would think it should come with a V6, but heck, it weighs barely anything, this is Europe, and we can.

[@baptpopeil]

Finally a sensible answer ! People just see an (apparently) heavy SUV, see the figures 1.2 and believe European carmakers put a 65 hp 3 cylinder in a 2t car. This is in fact a remarkably light yet stiff car. The engine is really smooth and peppy thanks to its direct injection, VVT and a turbo. So 130 hp ans 230 nm, is not ridiculous (Go compare the 1.6 naturally aspirated engine from Hyundai: 130 hp too, but 160 n.m...). And you are absolutely right: most people will never put 7 people in these cars and a trailer in the back so no need to get a V6 "just in case" because 90% of your time you're just wasting money.

[@denizg2653]

What is the "real life" urban consumption of this 1.2 turbo petrol engine? I suppose that official 6.5L/100km is impossible, but would 9L be possible in daily urban commute?

[@arnemaeschaelck5012]

I don't know about urban driving, but the combined real-world fuel economy is around 6,5 l / 100 km according to Spritmonitor (real owners that keep track of their fuel consumption). This is for the manual version. Most owners with the automatic version get around 7,5 l / 100 km, which isn't too strange considering it's a real torque converter. 9 liters is way too much. It's petrol, but it's also a very light vehicle with a 3 cylinder. They're very fuel efficient if you're not pushing them to their limits.

[@andersnielsen6044]

It is impossible to answer cause it all depends on the "joe" behind the wheel. ;)

[@andersnielsen6044]

@@arnemaeschaelck5012 Many many people including the driver in this video, would not go more than 9l/100km, cause they tend to drive around with WAY too many rpm's on the engine all the time. They all think they are driving a Honda Civic from the 90's and have no idea of how a turbo engine works best and should be driven. ;)

[@arnemaeschaelck5012]

@@andersnielsen6044 I agree, a lot of turbo engines could be driven without ever exceeding 2000 rpm in normal driving conditions (not climbing a hill or something like that). Usually lots of torque, much more than whatever the same car would have with a bigger, n/a engine. (Like the Jeep's 3.6 V6 vs their 2.0T I4, the I4 will be 'more acceptable' over here, yet it's acutally torquier). Turbo's could be weird, though. Some are still more in their sweet spot at higher revs, even though they feel perfectly fine with less revs. I guess you're still dragging yourself around with just 1.2 liters of displacement after all, lol.

[@lopezben3023]

. . . NOT, NOT, NOT ... Peuge-NOT. . . . .

[@gabinsto5348]

Plagia autotopnl !