Geneva Gallery: Five By Peugeot Concept

geneva gallery five by peugeot concept

When Jaguar’s new XJ hit the car show circuit, many found themselves remarking that the latest big cat bears more than a striking resemblance to the Citroen design language. No surprise then, that Citroen’s sister brand has built a concept version of a forthcoming midsized sedan that bears a number of similar styling cues. Thanks to Ian Callum’s adventurous experiment, the Five by Peugeot Concept can almost be compared to an XJ, which is more than can be said for any American-market midsize sedan. Perhaps we could still learn a thing or two from the French.



Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 8 comments
  • Rusted Source Rusted Source on Mar 03, 2010

    What an amazing feat, they managed to crib the current Maxima and previous-gen Maxima all in one vehicle.

  • Uncle Mellow Uncle Mellow on Mar 03, 2010

    They can't sell this as a Peugeot , it deserves a more up-market brand-name. I can't be the only person who still wonders if the new XJ looks as questionable in the metal as it does in photos.The middle is OK , but the front isn't right and the back is indescribable.

  • MaintenanceCosts The sweet spot of this generation isn't made anymore: the SRT 392. The Scat Pack is more or less filling the same space but it lacks a lot of the goodies, including SRT suspension, brakes, and seats. The Hellcat is too much and isn't available with a manual anymore.
  • Arthur Dailey I am normally a fan of Exner's designs but by this time the front end on the Stutz like most of the rest of the vehicle is a laughable monstrosity of gauche. The interior finishes suit the rest of the vehicle. Corey please put this series out of its misery. This is one vehicle manufacturer best left on the scrap heap of history.
  • Art Vandelay I always thought what my Challenger really needed was a convertible top to make it heavier and make visability worse.
  • Dlc65688410 Please stop, we can't take anymore of this. Think about doing something on the Spanish Pegaso.
  • MaintenanceCosts A few bits of context largely missing from this article:(1) For complicated historical reasons, the feds already end up paying much of the cost of buying new transit buses of all types. It is easier legally and politically to put capital funds than operating funds into the federal budget, so the model that has developed in most US agencies is that operational costs are raised from a combination of local taxes and fares while the feds pick up much of the agencies' capital needs. So this is not really new spending but a new direction for spending that's been going on for a long time.(2) Current electric buses are range-challenged. Depending on type of service they can realistically do 100-150 miles on a charge. That's just fine for commuter service where the buses typically do one or two trips in the morning, park through the midday, and do one or two trips in the evening. It doesn't work well for all-day service. Instead of having one bus that can stay out from early in the morning until late at night (with a driver change or two) you need to bring the bus back to the garage once or twice during the day. That means you need quite a few more buses and also increases operating costs. Many agencies are saying for political reasons that they are going to go electric in this replacement cycle but the more realistic outcome is that half the buses can go electric while the other half need one more replacement cycle for battery density to improve. Once the buses can go 300 miles in all weather they will be fine for the vast majority of service.(3) With all that said, the transition to electric will be very good. Moving from straight diesel to hybrid already cut down substantially on emissions, but even reduced diesel emissions cause real public health damage in city settings. Transitioning both these buses and much of the urban truck fleet to electric will have measurable and meaningful impacts on public health.
Next