EB0 1.0 PureTech vs XU10 2.0

Side-by-side reliability comparison

Higher reliability score
XU10 2.0 ACCEPTABLE 74/100
+9 points over EB0 1.0 PureTech
0 / 100
CAUTION EB0 1.0 PureTech PSA
0 / 100
ACCEPTABLE XU10 2.0 PSA

Specifications

EB0 1.0 PureTech
XU10 2.0
Brand
PSA
PSA
Verdict
CAUTION
ACCEPTABLE
Reliability
65
74
Years
2012--2017
1992--2002
Displacement
999 cc
1998 cc
Layout
I3
I4
Type
Petrol Na
Petrol Na
Power
68 hp
132--167 hp
Known Issues
0
1
Total Risk Cost
€0--€0
€250--€500

Character

EB0 1.0 PureTech

"108/C1/Aygo base engine. Oil overconsumption reported. Adequate but not impressive."

XU10 2.0

"405/406/Xantia. Older XU family — cast iron block. Turbo 16V version (RFS) in 405 T16. Timing belt. Head gasket on turbo variants. Simple, proven, cheap parts. RFS turbo is a classic."

Issues Comparison

EB0 1.0 PureTech 0

No documented issues.

XU10 2.0 1

▲ HIGH
Timing belt (interference) €250--€500 60,000 km--90,000 km

Models

EB0 1.0 PureTech 5

108 — 2014--2021 208 A9 2012--2019 C3 A51 2010--2016 208 CA/CC 2012--2019 106 1A/1C 1991--2003

XU10 2.0 5

206 T1 1999--2007 206 2A/C 1999--2006 406 — 1996--2004 306 N3/N5 1993--2002 306 N3/N5 1994--2002
Full EB0 1.0 PureTech Report Full XU10 2.0 Report