PGO Hemera Review: Specs, Generations, and Which Version to Buy
Overview of the PGO Hemera coupe (2009–present): one generation, 140–184 hp, RWD, with advice on which version to choose.
The PGO Hemera is a rear-wheel-drive coupe produced from 2009 to the present, offering between 140 and 184 hp across four modifications. It suits drivers looking for a compact, distinctive sports coupe with a simple RWD layout and a choice of manual or automatic transmission.
PGO Hemera generations
1 generation (2009–present)
The first and only generation of the PGO Hemera has been in production since 2009, offered exclusively as a coupe with rear-wheel drive. The lineup spans 140 to 184 hp across four modifications, with both Automatic and Manual gearboxes available. The range is built around two engines: a 1.6-liter (1600 cc) unit producing 184 hp and a 2.0-liter (1997 cc) unit producing 140 hp. Notably, the smaller 1.6-liter engine is the more powerful of the two, while the 2.0 AT sits at the bottom of the power range. The PGO Hemera 1.6 MT (1 generation) delivers its 184 hp with a claimed fuel consumption of 7.6 l/100km, and the PGO Hemera 2.0 AT (1 generation) returns 8.4 l/100km with 140 hp.
Which PGO Hemera to buy
- 1.6 MT (1 generation): the most powerful and most efficient combination in the data — 184 hp from the 1600 cc engine with 7.6 l/100km, paired with a manual gearbox and RWD.
- 1.6 AT (1 generation): the popular choice — the same 184 hp and 1600 cc engine with the convenience of an Automatic transmission.
- 2.0 AT (1 generation): a fresher option in the lineup — 140 hp from the larger 1997 cc engine with an Automatic gearbox and 8.4 l/100km.
Buying used is straightforward in one respect: with a single generation running unchanged since 2009, there are no generational changeovers or facelift boundaries to research — the main differences between cars come down to engine, gearbox, and year of build.
Which PGO Hemera to avoid
The numbers point away from the PGO Hemera 2.0 AT (1 generation) if outright performance and efficiency matter: it produces 140 hp against the 184 hp of both 1.6-liter versions, and its 8.4 l/100km consumption is higher than the 7.6 l/100km of the 1.6 MT. The 2.0 AT only makes sense if you specifically want the larger 1997 cc engine; otherwise the 1.6 AT offers more power with the same Automatic transmission.