Pepsi Max: Test Drive

Last year in March, Pepsi Max along with professional stock car racing driver Jeff Gordon performed a prank on an unsuspecting car salesman by taking him on a test drive of his life…

The video since then got over 41 Million views on YouTube. Despite its viral success, automotive journalist Travis Okulski was not impressed and was pretty vocal in pointing out inconsistencies in the viral ad and calling it a fake.

So Jeff Gordon teamed up again with Pepsi Max to pull a similar prank on unsuspecting Travis Okulski, just to prove the authenticity of the original test drive video…

But even after all of that Travis Okulski is still not convinced and the video since its release last week has already gotten over 13 Million views on YouTube.

Why this became a two-part story

The first video worked because the premise is simple, the escalation feels real, and the payoff is pure reaction. But the moment it went viral, it also invited scrutiny. That is what makes the follow-up so interesting. The brand turned criticism into content by making the skeptic part of the narrative.

  • Viral hook. A familiar setting, then a sudden reveal of unexpected capability.
  • Credibility challenge. A public critique that reframed the conversation as “real or staged”.
  • Response as sequel. A second execution aimed at the critic to re-earn belief.

What to learn from the backlash

When stunts travel, authenticity becomes part of the product. If the audience starts debating “is it real”, the brand can either go silent or lean in. Pepsi Max leaned in and used the debate as fuel, which extended the lifecycle and kept attention anchored to the same brand platform.


A few fast answers before you act

What is Pepsi Max “Test Drive” with Jeff Gordon?

It is a prank-style stunt video where Jeff Gordon takes an unsuspecting car salesman on an extreme test drive, created as part of Pepsi Max’s viral entertainment approach.

Why was there controversy around the first video?

An automotive journalist publicly pointed out inconsistencies and argued it was staged, which sparked debate about authenticity.

Why did Pepsi Max do a second video?

To address the credibility debate directly by repeating a similar stunt and making the outspoken critic part of the execution.

What is the transferable pattern for viral campaigns?

Expect scrutiny, especially when the content looks “too good”. If doubt becomes the story, design a credible sequel that engages the criticism rather than ignoring it.

The world’s most interactive print ad

On a number of occasions I have featured examples of brands creating interactive print ads. In this latest example, the new Lexus 2013 ES is seen changing colors, turning on its headlights and exposing its interiors while music plays in this interactive print ad for the October 15th Sports Illustrated issue.

Goodyear Eagle F1 Test Drive

Goodyear does not try to “tell” you that a tire grips better. They stage a test drive that makes you feel it.

A customer walks into a Goodyear retail store expecting the usual sales conversation. Instead, a salesman offers a test drive. The customer gets into a performance car with what looks like a normal driver. Then the drive turns into a controlled, choreographed, Hollywood-grade demonstration. The driver is a disguised stunt professional. The “test route” includes conditions that exaggerate what traction and control actually mean when things get unpredictable.

That single choice is the unlock. The product story is no longer a brochure. It is an experience.

The idea in one line

Goodyear turns a retail test drive into entertainment that proves performance.

Why this works so well

Most tire marketing struggles with the same problem. Performance is hard to visualize until you are already in a situation where you need it. “Better grip” sounds like every other claim until something slips.

This activation removes that abstraction by doing three things at once:

  1. It makes proof visible.
    The story is designed around moments where traction and handling show up as a physical result. You do not need to understand tread compounds to understand what you just felt.
  2. It creates real human reaction.
    A staged product demo can feel like a stunt. A real customer reaction makes it believable, and shareable, at the same time.
  3. It anchors the brand in the point of sale.
    This is not a distant TV spot. The narrative starts inside the tire store. The purchase context is baked into the content, so the jump from awareness to intent is shorter.

The “retail first” storytelling pattern

A lot of experiential marketing starts with spectacle, then tries to connect it back to the product.

This one starts with the most ordinary commercial moment. A customer is about to buy tires. Then the experience expands outward. That sequencing matters, because it keeps the brand motive clear. This is not adrenaline for its own sake. It is a dramatic way to demonstrate a benefit that is otherwise invisible.

If you are a brand leader trying to justify experiential investment, this is a useful blueprint. It is not “brand theater.” It is a product demonstration that happens to be entertaining enough to travel.

What to borrow if you run marketing or commerce

Design for “proof moments,” not messages

Write down the one thing a customer must believe for your product to win. Then ask what they would need to see, feel, or experience for that belief to become non-negotiable.

Build the experience around the buying context

Placing the opening scene in a retail outlet removes friction. The story is already where the decision happens. For many categories, that is the most underrated advantage.

Treat the camera as a distribution strategy

The activation is designed to be filmed. Multiple angles. Real people. A sequence that escalates. In practice, the video becomes the scalable media layer on top of a physical stunt.

Make the customer the hero, not the brand

The most memorable part is not a feature list. It is the reaction. The brand earns attention by giving the customer an experience worth talking about.

The deeper point

This is a category where functional proof usually loses to price promotions and familiarity. Goodyear flips that by turning functional proof into an event.

It is a reminder that “performance marketing” does not always mean dashboards and retargeting. Sometimes it means engineering a moment where the product benefit cannot be unseen.


A few fast answers before you act

What is the campaign actually demonstrating?

It demonstrates traction and handling in exaggerated all-season conditions, so the benefit becomes tangible.

Why stage it in a retail store instead of a track?

Because the purchase decision lives in retail. The story starts where intent is highest.

What makes this feel credible instead of gimmicky?

Real customer reactions plus a clear link between the stunts and the product promise. The entertainment serves the proof.

What is the repeatable lesson for other categories?

Find your “invisible benefit” and create a safe, dramatic way to make it visible, then film it for scale.

When does this approach fail?

When the experience is spectacle with no causal link to a product benefit. If you cannot explain what is being proven, you are buying attention, not belief.