Peugeot 2008 GT, Volkswagen T-Cross R-Line: From the clean scene

 

Compact crossovers are all the rage and there’s nothing wrong with Euro flair, so …

P and V front.jpeg

ONE can but rarely does, the other cannot and simply shouldn’t.

If you’re still confused by the difference between a sports utility and a crossover – and it’s understandable, as both types are going for that achingly trendy rugged and ever-so-slightly bulked look - then that’s a good a disparity as any.

Effectively, it comes down to the first type generally having an off-road ability whereas the others aren’t so much wannabes than never-weres …. presenting in two-wheel-drive in a way that just isn’t tailored for any kind of daily driving surface other than those created by man. They absolutely eschew any kind of off-road gumption, which is okay because you were never going to use it anyway.

The cars on test today are high achievers at the art of looking a touch terrain-trustworthy yet in a manner that relates clear desire to steer clear of icky dirt or grime.

If anything that ambience enhances probable appeal as perfect choices to become hatchback alternates for those seeking a sensible urban and occasionally open road choice with recognition that even all-wheel-drive mightn’t make a jot of difference in those environments.

There’s more going on here, of course. Almost all crossovers have become the Swiss Army knives of the car world through their clever packaging, but there’s no argument that can be a secondary consideration to at-wheel playfulness and how well they present at the kerbside.

In that respect, the two models here do seem to have a certain something more.

VOLKSWAGEN T-CROSS R-Line

Price: $43,490

Powertrain and economy: 1.5-litre four cylinder turbopetrol, 110kWkW/250Nm, 7-speed dual-clutch, FWD, combined economy 5.5 L/100km, CO2 126 g/km

Vital statistics: 4235mm long, 1782mm wide, 1584mm high, 2551mm wheelbase, luggage capacity 455 litres, 18-inch alloy wheels.

We like: Smart but sensible ambience, good ride, nice engine.

We don't like: Some interior plastics, stop/start abruptness.

 

THINKING small has been a careful process for Volkswagen; basically, it’s taken the best part of a decade for it to arrive at this car, the new baby of its sports utility/crossover family. 

The project started in 2012, when Wolfsburg’s designers created the Taigun concept; basically a quasi rockhopper based off the Up! City hatch. It was greenlit for sale by 2016, but obviously that never happened. After giving it more thought, VW determined the car would be too small. They’ve since junked the Up!, too.

It then started over, shifting focus to what now have, a larger but still tightly dimensioned derivative of the Polo hatchback. The Taigun nameplate hasn’t gone to waste, as it is being reused as a rebadged long-wheelbase T-Cross. But that’s only for the Indian market, so don’t hold hope for local introduction. 

The Cross delivers in 1.0-litre three-cylinder Life and Style formats which certainly sound like fun. Yet assuredly this 1.5-litre four-pot R-Line on test will also do brisk business; so many customers find it easy to buy into a flagship that seems tailored to deliver just that little bit extra verve and visual fizz. In respect to the latter, the R-Line is not as flamboyant as the limited-count 1.0-litre First Edition that’s been snapped by early birders. I wouldn’t be dismayed about that; the R-Line’s body kit embellishments aren’t as loud, yet they lend more coherence to an overall look which I suspect will be a major lure for buyers.

Sure, look at the T-Cross when it’s parked alongside the 2008 GT and there’s no argument which delivers the more drama; that Peugeot is a far more vivacious thing, not just from all exterior angles but also when you slip inside. 

At same token, though, it’s easy to imagine the VW won’t loss too much ground from being less immediately striking. Whether or not we should ever celebrate when a design approach is less likely to axe-split opinion is somewhat moot.

What is more relevant is that, though it’s clearly less outrageous, the T-Cross is hardly a weak design in its own right: All the cues that link it to a wider family spanning through T-Roc, Tiguan and Touareg are there; I quite like how it acknowledges their inspiration by being upright and just a touch square. There is some plastic cladding but it isn’t overdone, in overall shape and stance it very nicely and neatly done and, more importantly, by and large it evidences as class act in ambience.

The latter is important. Small crossovers can risk being considered cheap and generally nasty because of a perception they, and the cars they derive from, are often built down to a price. 

You can hardly sense that with the T-Cross; in large part because it’s derived from a hatch that has always aced on an aura of upmarket appeal but also this sub-sector has so risen in consumer popularity quite often the choices are made simply of impression of quality. In this instance, that is has much of the same dashboard and interior layout as the Polo is far from harmful. While you might only quibble about some of the interior plastics, but that’s really about it. 

Having the same 'MQB-A0' platform as the Polo, the same engines, and the same basic structure also strengthens the proposition. 

It's far roomier than some older small crossover models, with a decent 385-litre boot and good space in the back seats. You get some excellent front seats, the digital instrument screen looks classy and works well, and the central touchscreen is, generally, a model of simple and explicable menu layouts. It has rather handsome graphics, too.

Standard kit for a T-Roc includes a multi-function steering wheel, all-round electric windows, air conditioning, lane keeping assistant, forward collision alert with automated braking, stop-start, a blind spot monitor and LED daytime running lights. Quite a lot, then.

The R-Line upsizes the touchscreen and handily adds a reversing camera, adaptive cruise control, keyless access, digital instruments and a decent stereo system. The steering wheel integrates not only has buttons for the media controls but also for the cruise control, which in older VW’s has always been by stalks. That’s a good improvement that’ll start to transfer to other models. Also new is a wireless recharge pad for your phone; that’s good, but since you have to cable in the enable Apple CarPlay functionality it slighty smacks as a halfway. After all, your device will recharge off the US anyway. Better to to go the whole way and have wireless CarPlay and recharging, really.

The driving side of things is by large VW 101: It’s no hot hatch, of course, and less effervescent than the Peugeot when it comes to chassis balance and steering feel, but there’s a likeable honesty to the actions and it has an air of solid dependability. Those largish rims – everything but the base car runs on 18s - don't wreck the ride, and though it’s certainly not an expedition vehicle, it drives confidently on gravel and will likely not embarrass itself on a grassy field, assuming it’s not a sopping day and there’s minimum mud. 

I’m keen to try this car with the 1.0-litre, because it has an awesome reputation and it’s also potentially enough for this model anyway, but would also say that in isolation, the larger capacity unit on test is going to appeal for its broad torque, sharp throttle responses and pretty decent refinement. It also works comfortably with the seven-speed direct shift transmission that, again, is common to all versions.

PEUGEOT 2008 GT

Price: $45,990

Powertrain and economy: 1.2-litre turbo-petrol inline-three, 114kW/240Nm, 8-speed automatic, FWD, combined economy 6.1L/100km, CO2 138g/km.

Vital statistics: 4300mm long, 1550mm wide, 1530mm high, 2605mm wheelbase, luggage capacity 434 litres, 18-inch alloy wheels.

We like: Effervescent engine, 3D i-cockpit, creative styling.

We don't like: Driving position.

 

MUM and dad were average height, so too my sister. My brother? Short. So, I of course, have defied the sequence.

My tallness is not sufficient to ensure an NBA selection shortlist, but has definitely refined what I do in motorsport, which I’ve taken up at club level. Even if I had the skill set, the long legs and frame aspect ruled out single seaters.

Road cars aren’t so bad, but some are more challenging that others. For instance, the MX-5 roadster is a bit of tight fit when the top is up, but I’ll always make it work because the car is so good. 

Anyway, now to the 2008. It’s been around a while now, and we’ve met before on two previous occasions, so I knew what to expect when slipping into the driver’s seat. Basically, weirdness. All to do with the iCockpit layout, which features the dials set high on the dashboard. 

I’m sure it’s not a problem for an average-sized driver. And it’s clearly not one for Peugeot, because why else would they make it a signature of all its passenger product? It didn’t become an issue for Mrs B, who is rather less height advantaged than I am (and no, you can’t see the wedding photos), when she drove the car.

But it is a problem for me, and here’s why. The dinky and oddly shaped steering wheel has to be set low, otherwise the rim obscures the dials. When you're tall, that effectively asks for the wheel to place virtually in my lap, which makes for an awkward driving position that any amount of fiddling with the seat and wheel positioning just doesn’t seem to quite rectify. As I say, it’s not something everyone is irked by. I daresay a lot of people won't have a problem. And, just to reinforce, I didn’t find the car outright impossible to drive. But it often just felt awkward. So, I’d have to say it's well worth trying before you buy.

Funny thing is, the car itself is quite roomy and the seats are truly comfortable for someone of my height. Also, I’m also really quite impressed by the new instrument display in the redesigned format that’s among the key upgrade features arriving with the car’s big mid-life facelift.

The display has always been digital but now there’s a 3D effect would be easy to describe as a gimmick, but in reality, it works very well. It’s implemented by combining the 10-inch digital display with a similarly sized screen sitting a couple of centimetres further in front.

That second screen gets key information (speed, navigation, that sort of thing) beamed onto it from above, like an inverted head-up display, while the one behind also runs information. It’s not as complex as it sounds, looks utterly amazing and you don’t need special glasses. Also, there’s nothing else like it in the class nor, as far as I can tell, in any other production car. Though the much, much pricier Mercedes S-Class is promised to deliver something similar. As an option.

 Anyway, where it’s really effective is when delivering the various viewing modes, selected via a roller on the wheel. Go for ‘Driving’ and you get a 3D model of the 2008 within its lane. On either side are lines, which associate with the lane keep and highlight in orange if the car thinks you’re straying into danger. It’ll ultimately intervene at the wheel, this action reminding it’s meted “semi-autonomous driving capability.” Which means hands-off for a short period, but basically it really only suits motorway running.

There’s also a way of delivering the sat nav front and centre, and having the speedo tucked off to the side, plus ‘Personal’ modes that allow you to pick what you want to appear; like a trip computer beside the speed readout. You’re probably imagining there’s every chance of all this instrument screen interaction risks becoming a distraction and yet it really isn’t, in part because the logics are … um, logical.

Not everything else is. Far less so are the row of push-buttons below the centre screen, which all seem to have dual functions, the individual activations depending on how they’re touched. Or, it sometimes seemed, simply how they were looked at. 

Maybe that’s a bit too avant garde, but there are other stabs at achieving a standard of utter modernity that do pay off. One little tweak deserving credit comes with how it considers personal device interaction; in addition to a USB port, there’s another for USB-C, which is set to be the next big thing, yet is still ignored by most makers. The only other one I know of that is also doing this is … well, it’s Mercedes.

Overall, in respect to pure design effectiveness, the 2008 GT’s cabin it’s not as strong as the T-Cross’s, and neither is it as roomy – in the cabin proper, rear seat passengers won’t get the same lower leg space and might find it a touch constrained for head room, in the boot you’ll have to remove the rear parcel tray to fit anything too bulky (for me, it was a standard bbq gas bottle) - but it is rather more flairful. You’ll be more delighted to show it to others simply on that basis.

The 1.2-litre three-cylinder is now a core performer in small Peugeots, although the GT achieves a higher state of tune – so, an extra 18kW and 10Nm above standards - and achieves an eight-speed automatic rather than a six-speed.

It doesn’t seem to be overwhelmed by the extra cogs but can become a little busy; not so much in the ramp up from 50kmh to 100kmh but certainly when you’re buzzing the car down a fun road and running in Drive. The provision of paddle shifters behind the steering wheel is a not-so-subtle reminder that Peugeot’s expectation is for this kind of driving to be totally hands on. Certainly, it’s a better drive when you’re manually changing gears, having also put it into Sport mode. A function that also sharpens the throttle, weighs up the steering and makes the engine sound racier. All in all, in this level of engagement, it’s a proper little scamp and no end of fun. Not that secondary road driving is the only forte. Actually, it has a wide talent when it comes to driving, which might surprise because, relatively speaking, it is a small car. 

Yet it doesn't drive like one. It has very grown up manners especially in terms of damping and stability at speed and under braking. Body control through corners is also good, though the flipside is that the ride is a bit firm, it’s hardly disconcertingly ripply.

Assuming you’re comfortable enough with the driving position to feel wholly confident with the car. And sadly I’m not. I can see the benefit – for one, having such a small steering wheel means don't need to put in the same amount of input due to its size – and yet, it’s just not for me.

 Such a shame because it is, otherwise, a little charmer. C’est la vie, right?

 

 

VW T-Roc R-Line: Golden child crossover

First taste of this key small SUV comes in a premium serving sure to interest style (and badge)-conscious buyers.

IMG_5745.jpeg

Price:  $51,990.
Powertrain and performance:  2.0-litre four-cylinder DOHC turbocharged petrol engine; 140kW/4200-6000rpm, 320Nm/1500-4177rpm. All-wheel drive.
Vital statistics: Length 4234mm, height 1573mm, width 1992mm, wheelbase 2593mm. Luggage 392 litres. Wheels: 19-inch alloys with 225/40 R19 tyres.
We like: Chunky styling, seating comfort, handles better than you’d expect a crossover to.
We don’t like: Some interior plastics, rigid ride.

 

BE honest now: Who hasn’t felt a hankering over the past few years to take the wheel of a compact wannabe four-by-four with a countryside-ready stance yet none of the actual off-road gumption of a proper, actual, real SUV? 

Even if the customer queue stretches for kilometres more in literal than actual sense, perhaps the selection of ready-and-able candidate vehicles really now might if they were to be collected and lined up nose to tail.

Yet, as much as the crossover catalogue might seem to already be crammed to bursting, brands with ability to add another one or two into the mix are rushing to do just that.

Covid-19 notwithstanding, this sector is an automotive Klondike. Everyone who mines it seems to strike paydirt. 

Volkswagen is having two goes, with some fresh product they seem to so believe will suit consumers to a ‘T’ they’ve used that letter in the naming convention. (actually, that’s not the reason. The letter is to associate with the Touareg and Tiguan). 

Today’s test focuses of the larger of the two, the T-Roc, which the maker reckons will help sales grow from 6.4 million globally to 10.6 million in just 10 years. This car will sit alongside the smaller T-Cross, but don’t go looking for it quite yet. The baby is here but the slightly bigger bro is not. Well, not officially. Confused about what I’ve just said there? All will be explained.

IMG_5782.jpeg

The ‘Roc’ – from ‘rock’ and apparently to establish the car’s off-roading bone-fides (yeah, that’ll rattle Suzuki and Jeep … not) - is of course built on the modular transverse matrix (MQB) platform that underpins others of its ilk, from the Audi Q2 to the Skoda Kodiaq and Karoq. You might need to be a particular student of VW Group architecture application to also twig to a further DNA association.

Which is to … ? Well, the car that, despite the erosion caused on hatch interest by these crossovers, is still very vital to VW: The Golf. The T-Roc can claim DNA association not just to the Golf as we know it now but also the new one coming at the end of the year (or early in 2021). 

That’s not to suggest complete triplet-ship. The distinctions between the crossover and the road cars are diverse in detail, if less so in basic design and mechanical application. Still, familial links are so cemented and market trends being what they are it seems probable one will be examined as an alternate to the other.

Where to put your money? Well, there’s another twist to consider, and that’s to do with the T-Roc itself. When saying that this car doesn’t launch for another couple of months, I mean in its full NZ market spec. The scheduling is a reminder that this ‘latest’ arrival is also a late one. 

T-Roc has been in production for almost three years and, in fact, there’s a 150-strong colony here already. This comprises flagship R-Lines ordered by another right-hand drive market and snapped up by our distributor when they became surplus stock. The test car is the last of that lot, so its residency status is well sorted. However, getting more has proven a challenge to VW NZ. It seems the car has been so well received in other places we’ve been pushed down the queue. The perils of being small? Well, sometimes that works to advantage, too (for instance, our modest uptake of Touareg V8s has allowed us to achieve that car ahead of many larger countries).

IMG_5780.jpeg

The early arrivals deserve mention because they might well yet differ slightly to the incoming fully-accredited local market versions that were supposed to land next month but, on latest talk, might not now arrive until November, thanks of course to Covid interruption. Nothing major; but talk is that ‘ours’ could well have a more upmarket audio unit and perhaps a less plasticky trim.

What’s also important to note is that in addition to the 2.0-litre all-wheel-drive on test, the NZ range will include a pair of 1.5-litre front-drive Life and Style editions in a lower price positioning, at $39,990 and $44,990 respectively.

That’s a positive, too. It would not be fair to call the R-Line overly expensive, simply because there are others in its price level. For instance, Mazda’s CX-30 Limited is exactly lineball with this $51,990 VW. YEt it’s fair, surely, to suggest anything sitting above $50k tends to to be considered an almost premium purchasing experience.

Having basically handed in Hiroshima’s new baby just days before driving the T-Roc, it seemed to me the Mazda only has clear advantage on content, but would be beaten on spaciousness and have to concede a touch on performance – they’re all but lineball on power but VW’s engine has almost 70Nm more torque than CX-30’s 2.5-litre. 

You could quibble about the styling for ages; the VW is less daring and potentially less ‘modern’ in its look, but that’s not to say it loses appeal for it. If anything it’s a bit beefier with its flared arches and a wide grille, and there’s something more macho in its stance (regardless that it has just 2cm more ground clearance than a Golf). Those pronounced wheel arches and plastic cladding around the lower sections don’t seem false and it looks swollen in most of the right places, while the extra touches coming with R-Line - additional brightwork along the top of the plastic-clad sills, those anodised roof rails and the 19-inch alloys - add flair. Really, it’s aged quite well for a car that has been around in its home market for almost three years.

As you’d expect from VW there are plenty of safety and tech features, with a hefty focus on safety. So, Front Assist with city emergency braking and lane assist, adaptive cruise control, road sign display, blind spot monitor, park assist and a reversing camera all feature on the R-Line.

IMG_5787.jpeg

The design also delivers a useful amount of room for a family of five. The boot has enough space to swallow up bulky items though going all-wheel-drive clearly also erode capacity, with 392 litres’ boot space quoted for the R-line against 445 litres for the front drivers. Of course, you can drop the rear seats to create a significantly large cargo volume, though again it’s 1232 litres versus 1290. Throughout the rest of the interior there are several storage areas for placing oddments. 

Notwithstanding that detail change seems likely, the infotainment system as I saw it was very neat and is slick and intuitive to inputs. Crucially, it also supports Android Auto and Apple CarPlay, and the USB ports for this are within easy reach at the base of the centre console.

An adjustment to the trim quality would be welcomed, though. The leather is very good and it ergonomically sound but there are hard surfaces and scratchy plastics, that, for me, don't fully reflect the price tag. For sure, those surfaces are wipe clean and durable, which is a good thing if you have kids, but overall VW could do well to see how Mazda has introduced much nicer surfaces to lend impression of a far more premium ambience.

Actually, you needn’t even go that far: As much as the T-Roc’s interior space and big boot could stand as good reasons to go for it over a Golf, the hatch in the here and now (and certainly, it seems, in its next execution) is better in terms of perceived quality. 

Curiously, they’re less far apart in respect to the driving position than I’d imagined they might be, in that the T-Roc’s is more car-like than SUV-like. So much so that those that like a higher, more commanding placement may be a little disappointed. However, this does make for a more relaxing and comfortable experience and enhances the sense that it is more fun to drive that you might initially give it credit for.

IMG_5769.jpeg

As good as the Golf? For the most part, yes. Even on a winding road, where you’d think it would simply have to feel feel more top-heavy, the T-Roc surprises in retaining plenty of composure. The well-judged steering allows you accurately choose a line through the bends. It’s not an overtly sporty car, but when you push it harder it doesn't get flustered.

The ride quality might not appeal to everybody, in that it’s a little on the firm side, even when avoiding the Sport mode that obviously reduces the damper yield. If you automatically think that a crossover means a plush ride, it’s out to demonstrate otherwise. In saying that, it is certainly not so rigid as to be unacceptable and you certainly won’t find any shortcoming with other elements, such as its very sure-footed traction. If anything, it is a ‘grower’, in that the deeper under its skin you get, the more rewarding it becomes. I’d put some of that down to that well-engineered feeling that Volkswagen imbues into its cars.

The top line engine has more than enough performance to cope with the daily commute and gets up to open road speed comfortably and quickly. In all honesty, the smaller unit en route might suit its role even more comfortably. Yet the 2.0-litre’s not going to disappoint easily, either. There’s more than enough torque to not only pull its mass along quite comfortably but to also ensure the seven-speed direct shift gearbox retains its decorum even when you find sudden need to hurry up the pace. On the other hand, it is also rather economical if you light-foot the throttle. 

VW is definitely a magnet brand for style-conscious buyers and those looking for looks, practicality and the latest tech in an urban four-wheel-drive (of sorts) are surely going to see plenty to like here, starting with the package’s sizing. If you think a Tiguan is too big, then the T-Roc might be for you, given it has the immediate advantage of being 252mm shorter, which – along with a tighter turning circle - makes it more manoeuvrable around town. It’s a better looking car, too.

Of course, as said, this is a very congested segment and even if you’re particularly wed to VW Group design and engineering approaches, it’s possible to shop for an alternate without leaving the broader family. The SEAT Arona and the Karoq, which play to a lower budget yet also build on the same underpinning, are equally practical and, in the Skoda’s case, slightly roomier. Alternately, you could await that new Golf – it does seem to be extremely swish. 

Or go electric? Ultimately, too, VW’s boots and all foray into battery-dedicated motoring is set to deliver a plug-in equivalent of sorts, in the form of the ID.4. But that’ll be a couple of years away yet.

 Meantime, there’s likelihood the T-Roc family might expand further, not to include the fatuous and climatically-inappropriate Cabriolet that’s already selling overseas but another model that outwardly seems a touch oxymoronic but will doubtless prove to be exactly to market taste. This being the R edition, which borrows all it go-fast gear from the Golf R; so a 220kW 2.0-litre mated to a DSG automatic transmission and 4Motion all-wheel drive, delivering 0-100kmh in under five seconds and a top speed of 250kmh. Grrrr.

IMG_5771.jpeg