Avatr 11: Which Version Should You Buy?
The Avatr 11 has two electric versions, both called AT, so power and drive type are essential when distinguishing them. The AT (313 hp, RWD) is the less powerful choice, producing 370 Nm and reaching 100 km/h in 6.6 seconds. The AT (578 hp, AWD) raises output by 265 hp and torque by 280 Nm, while reducing the 0–100 km/h time by 2.62 seconds to 3.98 seconds.
The Avatr 11 has two electric versions, both called AT, so power and drive type are essential when distinguishing them. The AT (313 hp, RWD) is the less powerful choice, producing 370 Nm and reaching 100 km/h in 6.6 seconds. The AT (578 hp, AWD) raises output by 265 hp and torque by 280 Nm, while reducing the 0–100 km/h time by 2.62 seconds to 3.98 seconds. Both versions belong to the same first generation, use the SUV 5-doors body, have a 1-speed Automatic gearbox, reach 200 km/h, and weigh 2160 kg. On the available figures, the RWD version is the straightforward choice when maximum acceleration is unnecessary, while the AWD version is the stronger option when power, torque, all-wheel drive, and quicker acceleration matter most.
Avatr 11 generations: what changed?
There is only one Avatr 11 generation in the supplied catalogue data, so there is no intergenerational change to compare. The 1 generation entered production in August 2023 and has no recorded end date. It is an SUV 5-doors with two versions: AT (313 hp, RWD) and AT (578 hp, AWD).
No restyling or additional generation is listed. Consequently, choosing an Avatr 11 from these data means comparing two powertrain and drive configurations within the same generation rather than deciding between older and newer generations.
Avatr 11 specs and electric motor comparison
Both versions are electric, and neither has an engine displacement, cylinder count, cylinder layout, or boost specification. Those fields are therefore shown as not measured rather than inferred from the electric powertrain.
| Version | Power | Torque | Displacement | Fuel | Cylinders | Cylinder layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AT (313 hp, RWD) | 313 hp / 230 kW | 370 Nm | not measured | Electro | not measured | not measured | not measured | 1-speed Automatic | RWD |
| AT (578 hp, AWD) | 578 hp / 425 kW | 650 Nm | not measured | Electro | not measured | not measured | not measured | 1-speed Automatic | AWD |
The AT (578 hp, AWD) has 84.7% more horsepower than the AT (313 hp, RWD), based on the difference between 578 hp and 313 hp. Its 650 Nm output is 75.7% greater than the RWD version’s 370 Nm. In metric output, the AWD version adds 195 kW to the RWD version’s 230 kW.
Power per litre cannot be calculated for either AT version because displacement is not measured. The available comparison is power relative to kerb weight. At 2160 kg, the AT (313 hp, RWD) carries approximately 6.90 kg per horsepower, while the AT (578 hp, AWD) carries approximately 3.74 kg per horsepower. The lower weight-per-horsepower result gives the AWD version a clear numerical advantage in power relative to mass.
Avatr 11 performance, top speed, and economy
| Version | 0–100 km/h | Top speed | City consumption | Highway consumption | Combined consumption | CO₂ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AT (313 hp, RWD) | 6.6 seconds | 200 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured | 0 |
| AT (578 hp, AWD) | 3.98 seconds | 200 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured | 0 |
The AT (578 hp, AWD) is 2.62 seconds quicker from 0 to 100 km/h than the AT (313 hp, RWD). That makes its recorded acceleration time approximately 39.7% shorter. The advantage does not extend to top speed: both versions have the same 200 km/h maximum.
City, highway, and combined consumption are not measured for either version. The data also provide no battery capacity or driving-range figure, so economy and range cannot be used to choose between them. Both versions have a recorded CO₂ figure of 0.
For buyers comparing acceleration alone, the AWD version is decisive. For drivers who do not need a 3.98-second 0–100 km/h time, the RWD version still reaches the identical 200 km/h top speed with 313 hp and 370 Nm.
Avatr 11 dimensions, weight, and chassis specifications
Body dimensions—including length, width, and height—are not measured in the supplied data. Both versions have the same recorded kerb weight of 2160 kg, so selecting the more powerful model does not carry a recorded weight penalty in this catalogue.
| Version | Kerb weight | Gross weight | Ground clearance | Tank | Wheel sizes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AT (313 hp, RWD) | 2160 kg | not measured | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| AT (578 hp, AWD) | 2160 kg | not measured | not measured | not measured | not measured |
Both versions use Independent, spring suspension at the front and rear. Each has Ventilated disc front brakes and Disc rear brakes. Because their recorded kerb weight, suspension descriptions, and brake specifications are identical, none of those fields separates the two choices.
Gross weight, ground clearance, tank specification, and wheel sizes are not measured for either version. A dimensions or size comparison cannot be completed from the available figures.
Which Avatr 11 version should you choose?
Choose the AT (313 hp, RWD) if the priority is the less powerful configuration and the available performance is sufficient. It supplies 313 hp, 230 kW, and 370 Nm, accelerates from 0 to 100 km/h in 6.6 seconds, and reaches 200 km/h. It has RWD and weighs 2160 kg.
Choose the AT (578 hp, AWD) if the priority is maximum performance and AWD. It provides 578 hp, 425 kW, and 650 Nm, yet retains the same recorded 2160 kg kerb weight and 200 km/h top speed. Its main measurable benefit is acceleration: 0–100 km/h takes 3.98 seconds instead of 6.6 seconds.
In direct terms, moving from the AT (313 hp, RWD) to the AT (578 hp, AWD) buys 265 additional horsepower, 195 additional kilowatts, 280 additional newton-metres, AWD instead of RWD, and a 2.62-second reduction in the 0–100 km/h time. No price figures are supplied, so it is not possible to calculate the cost of those gains or claim that either version offers better financial value. The final decision therefore rests on whether the AWD version’s extra output and acceleration are useful enough to matter to the buyer.