Chevrolet Vectra: which version to buy and why

If you are choosing a Chevrolet Vectra from the versions in this catalogue, the decision is not “which year looks newest.” It is which combination of engine, gearbox, and generation matches the job.

If you are choosing a Chevrolet Vectra from the versions in this catalogue, the decision is not “which year looks newest.” It is which combination of engine, gearbox, and generation matches the job. The data covers two generations of Sedan: 1 generation (1993-01-01 to 1996-12-31) with one 2.0 MT, and 2 generation (1996-01-01 to 2002-12-31) with five petrol versions, all FWD, all 57 L tank, all independent spring suspension front and rear. Fuel consumption (city, highway, mixed), CO2, eco class, and wheel sizes are not measured on every version listed. Prices are not in this dataset.

People searching Chevrolet Vectra 2008, Vectra GT, Vectra Elite, Vectra GTX, 2.4, 2010, or 2011 will not find those names here. What is listed is 2.0 and 2.2 gasoline engines from 1993–2002. Chevrolet Astra vs Vectra and Chevrolet Vectra vs Opel Vectra also have no comparison numbers in this file — only the Vectra versions below.

Chevrolet Vectra generations compared (what actually changed)

1 generation (1993–1996), Sedan, 1 version. The only listed car is 2.0 MT at 150 hp (110 kW) at 6000 rpm, 196 Nm at 4000 rpm, 1998 cm³, Gasoline, 4 Inline cylinders, 4 valves per cylinder, boost No, multi-point injection, compression 10.5, bore × stroke 86 × 86, fuel 80. It is the fastest 0–100 km/h figure in the whole model: 8 s, with a 210 km/h top speed. Kerb 1220 kg, gross 1740 kg, ground clearance 140 mm. Front brakes Ventilated disc, rear Disc. Five-speed Manual, FWD.

2 generation (1996–2002), Sedan, 5 versions. Same body type, same FWD, same 57 L tank, but ground clearance drops to 120 mm (−20 mm versus 1 generation). Front brakes become Disc, rear Drum — a step down from the first generation’s ventilated disc / disc pair. Four of five engines are 1998 cm³; one is 2198 cm³. Power in this generation spans 110 hp to 190 hp (80 hp spread). The automatic appears only once: 2.0 AT.

What the second generation did not buy you, on these numbers, is a quicker 0–100 than the first-generation 2.0 MT. The quickest second-generation 0–100 is 10.3 s (2.0 MT 136 hp) — 2.3 s slower than the 1993–1996 2.0 MT. The highest second-generation top speed ties the first generation at 210 km/h (2.0 MT 136 hp). The first generation is the lighter-clearance, stronger-brakes, higher-compression 2.0.

Chevrolet Vectra engine and specs (every listed version)

GenerationVersion (name as in data)hp / kW @ rpmNm @ rpmcm³FuelCylinders / layoutValves / cylBoostGearboxDrive
1 generation2.0 MT 150 hp150 / 110 @ 6000196 @ 40001998Gasoline, 804 Inline4NoManual 5FWD
2 generation2.0 MT 110 hp110 / 81 @ 5200173 @ 26001998Gasoline, 804 Inline2NoManual 5FWD
2 generation2.0 MT 136 hp136 / 100 @ 5600188 @ 40001998Gasoline, 924 Inline4NoManual 5FWD
2 generation2.0 MT 139 hp139 / 102 @ 5400203 @ 28001998Gasoline, 804 Inline4NoManual 5FWD
2 generation2.0 AT 139 hp139 / 102 @ 5400203 @ 28001998Gasoline, 804 Inline4NoAutomatic 4FWD
2 generation2.2 MT 190 hp190 / 140 @ 2800122 @ 52002198Gasoline, 804 Inline2NoManual 5FWD

All use Distributed injection (multi-point). Engine position is not measured on all six. There is no 2.4 motor in this dataset.

Specific output (hp per litre, displacement ÷ 1000):

The 2.2 is 200 cm³ larger than the 2.0s (+10.0%) but 80 hp above the weakest 2.0 (+72.7%) and 40 hp above the first-generation 2.0 (+26.7%).

Performance, mpg, and how the extra horsepower is used

City, highway, and mixed consumption are not measured on any version. MPG cannot be ranked from this file. 0–100 and top speed can.

0–100 km/h, fastest to slowest

1. 1 generation 2.0 MT 150 hp — 8 s 2. 2 generation 2.0 MT 136 hp — 10.3 s (+2.3 s vs first gen) 3. 2 generation 2.0 MT 139 hp and 2.2 MT 190 hp — 10.6 s (tied; 2.2 is +2.6 s vs first gen despite +40 hp) 4. 2 generation 2.0 MT 110 hp — 11.7 s (+3.7 s vs first gen) 5. 2 generation 2.0 AT 139 hp — 12 s (slowest; +1.4 s vs the same 139 hp engine in 2.0 MT, +4 s vs first gen)

Top speed

The 2.2’s peak power is listed at 2800 rpm and peak torque at 5200 rpm (122 Nm). That is the opposite rpm order of every 2.0 here. Torque of the 2.2 is 122 Nm versus 173–203 Nm on the 2.0s: 81 Nm less than the 139 hp 2.0 (−39.9%) and 74 Nm less than the first-generation 2.0 (−37.8%). That is why 190 hp does not buy the shortest 0–100 or the highest top speed in this table: the 2.2 matches the 139 hp Manual at 10.6 s and trails it by 10 km/h at the top.

The 136 hp 2.0 MT is the second-generation performance pick: 10.3 s and 210 km/h, 4 valves, compression 9.6 (highest in generation 2), fuel 92 (the only 92 in the file). It makes 15 Nm less than the 139 hp 2.0 (188 vs 203) and peaks torque 1200 rpm later (4000 vs 2800). The 139 hp 2.0 uses a longer stroke (86 × 94.6 vs 86 × 86) and fuel 80.

The 110 hp 2.0 MT is the low-output 2-valve 2.0: 173 Nm at 2600 rpm (earliest torque peak among all versions), 11.7 s, 187 km/h. Versus the 136 hp 2.0 MT it is −26 hp (−19.1%), −15 Nm, +1.4 s to 100, −23 km/h.

2.0 AT versus 2.0 MT 139 hp is the only gearbox comparison with the same engine: Automatic 4 vs Manual 5, 12 s vs 10.6 s, 200 vs 205 km/h. You pay 1.4 s and 5 km/h for the Automatic. Both: 203 Nm at 2800, 1998 cm³, 4 valves, fuel 80, boost No, FWD.

Dimensions, weight, tank, clearance

Wheel sizes are not measured on any version. Tank is 57 L on all six. Ground clearance: 140 mm (1 generation) vs 120 mm (all 2 generation) — 20 mm less after 1996.

Kerb weight (where measured):

Gross weight:

Payload where both masses exist (gross − kerb):

Mass per horsepower (kerb ÷ hp):

The 136 hp car is 110 kg heavier than the first-generation 150 hp car at the same 210 km/h top speed. The 139 hp Manual is 15 kg heavier than the 136 hp Manual and 5 km/h slower on top, with 0.3 s slower 0–100.

Brakes if you care about stopping hardware rather than 0–100: only 1 generation 2.0 MT has Ventilated disc front and Disc rear. Every 2 generation version is Disc front, Drum rear.

Which Chevrolet Vectra version to choose

If the question is “fastest 0–100 in this catalogue”: 1 generation 2.0 MT 150 hp. 8 s, 210 km/h, 196 Nm, 10.5 compression, 140 mm clearance, ventilated front discs. It is the only 1993–1996 listing. Versus the strongest second-generation 2.0 Manual (139 hp) it is +11 hp, −7 Nm (196 vs 203), −2.6 s to 100, +5 km/h, −125 kg kerb (1220 vs 1345), +20 mm clearance.

If you must have 2 generation (1996–2002) and you want the best measured sprint and top speed: 2.0 MT 136 hp. 10.3 s, 210 km/h, 188 Nm, 4 valves, fuel 92, 9.6 compression, 86 × 86. Versus 2.0 MT 139 hp: −3 hp, −15 Nm, −0.3 s, +5 km/h, −15 kg kerb, −55 kg gross, square stroke instead of 86 × 94.6. The 136 hp car is the only one specified for 92; the 139 hp cars are fuel 80.

If you want peak torque on a second-generation 2.0: 2.0 MT 139 hp (or 2.0 AT if you refuse a Manual). 203 Nm at 2800 rpm — 15 Nm more than the 136 hp 2.0 and 30 Nm more than the 110 hp 2.0. 0–100 is 10.6 s Manual / 12 s Automatic. Gross 1865 kg is the highest.

If you want the Automatic: only 2.0 AT 139 hp. Same engine as 2.0 MT 139 hp. You lose 1.4 s to 100 and 5 km/h. Kerb not measured. Four speeds versus five.

If you want the least power, lightest second-generation 2.0, and earliest torque: 2.0 MT 110 hp. 110 hp, 173 Nm at 2600, 2 valves, 1220 kg kerb (tied with first gen), 530 kg payload, 11.7 s, 187 km/h. Versus 2.0 MT 136 hp: −26 hp, 110 kg lighter, +1.4 s, −23 km/h, fuel 80 instead of 92.

If you want the highest listed horsepower and best kg/hp: 2.2 MT 190 hp. 86.4 hp/L, 6.55 kg/hp, 1245 kg, 550 kg payload. It does not win 0–100 (10.6 s, tied with 139 hp Manual) or top speed (195 km/h). Torque is 122 Nm — the lowest in the file. Two valves, fuel 80, power peak listed at 2800 rpm. Choose this for the 2198 cm³ / 190 hp badge and the weight-to-power ratio, not for the sprint table.

If you searched Chevrolet Vectra motor 2.2: that is this 2.2 MT. There is no 2.4, no GT/GTX/Elite, and no 2005–2011 row in the data.

Reliability / problems: not measured. Do not infer durability from hp or kg.

Short rule using only these numbers. Need 8 s and 140 mm: 1 generation 2.0 MT 150 hp. Need 1996–2002 and 210 km/h: 2.0 MT 136 hp. Need 203 Nm and a stick: 2.0 MT 139 hp. Need two pedals: 2.0 AT 139 hp. Need 190 hp on paper: 2.2 MT. Need the cheapest-feeling 2.0 on power: 2.0 MT 110 hp. Fuel use remains not measured for all of them.