Daewoo Magnus: Which Version Should You Buy?
The Daewoo Magnus was offered as a Sedan in a single generation from January 1999 to January 2006, with seven listed versions. The main buying decision is between the six 2.0-litre choices and the more powerful 2.5 MT. Every version is Gasoline, naturally aspirated, FWD, and equipped with independent spring suspension and disc brakes at both ends.
The Daewoo Magnus was offered as a Sedan in a single generation from January 1999 to January 2006, with seven listed versions. The main buying decision is between the six 2.0-litre choices and the more powerful 2.5 MT. Every version is Gasoline, naturally aspirated, FWD, and equipped with independent spring suspension and disc brakes at both ends. Buyers prioritising lower stated fuel consumption should compare the 116 hp and 148 hp manual versions, while those seeking the strongest performance should start with the 162 hp 2.5 MT. Automatic buyers can choose among 116 hp, 132 hp, and 148 hp versions, although several economy and acceleration figures were not measured.
Daewoo Magnus generations and versions
The only Daewoo Magnus generation ran from January 1999 through January 2006. It used a Sedan body and contained seven listed versions: three variants named 2.0 MT, three variants named 2.0 AT, and one 2.5 MT. Because several versions share the same database name, power output is essential for distinguishing them: the 2.0 MT versions produce 116 hp, 132 hp, or 148 hp, while the 2.0 AT versions also produce 116 hp, 132 hp, or 148 hp.
There is no second generation in the supplied data, so the choice is entirely between engines, outputs, and transmissions within this generation. The common hardware includes FWD, a 65-litre fuel tank, 164 mm of ground clearance, independent spring suspension front and rear, and front and rear disc brakes.
Engine and gearbox specs
| Exact version name | Distinguishing output | Engine | Power | Torque | Fuel | Cylinders and layout | Valves per cylinder | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.0 MT | 116 hp | 1,998 cc | 116 hp / 85 kW at 5,200 rpm | 178 Nm at 4,000 rpm | Gasoline, 95 | 4, Inline | 2 | No | Manual, 5-speed | FWD |
| 2.0 AT | 116 hp | 1,998 cc | 116 hp / 85 kW at 5,200 rpm | 178 Nm at 4,000 rpm | Gasoline, 95 | 4, Inline | 2 | No | Automatic, 4-speed | FWD |
| 2.0 MT | 132 hp | 1,998 cc | 132 hp / 97 kW at 5,400 rpm | 184 Nm at 4,400 rpm | Gasoline, 95 | 4, Inline | 4 | No | Manual, 5-speed | FWD |
| 2.0 MT | 148 hp | 1,998 cc | 148 hp / 109 kW at 5,400 rpm | 192 Nm at 4,000 rpm | Gasoline, 95 | 4, Inline | 4 | No | Manual, 5-speed | FWD |
| 2.0 AT | 148 hp | 1,998 cc | 148 hp / 109 kW at 5,400 rpm | 192 Nm at 4,000 rpm | Gasoline, 95 | 4, Inline | 4 | No | Automatic, 4-speed | FWD |
| 2.5 MT | 162 hp | 2,492 cc | 162 hp / 119 kW at 5,800 rpm | 226 Nm at 3,800 rpm | Gasoline, 95 | 6, Inline | 4 | No | Manual, 5-speed | FWD |
| 2.0 AT | 132 hp | 1,998 cc | 132 hp / 97 kW at 5,400 rpm | 184 Nm at 4,400 rpm | Gasoline, 95 | 4, Inline | 4 | No | Automatic, 4-speed | FWD |
The 116 hp 2.0-litre engine develops approximately 58.1 hp per litre. The 132 hp unit raises that to about 66.1 hp per litre, while the 148 hp unit reaches approximately 74.1 hp per litre. The 162 hp 2.5 MT produces about 65.0 hp per litre. This means the 148 hp 2.0-litre engine has the highest specific output in the range, whereas the 2.5 MT provides the most absolute power and torque.
Moving from the 116 hp 2.0-litre engine to the 132 hp version adds 16 hp and 6 Nm. Moving from 132 hp to 148 hp adds another 16 hp and 8 Nm. Compared with the 148 hp 2.0-litre engine, the 2.5 MT adds 14 hp and 34 Nm; its peak torque also arrives at 3,800 rpm instead of 4,000 rpm.
Performance, fuel economy, and MPG data
| Exact version name | Output | 0–100 km/h | Top speed | City consumption | Highway consumption | Combined consumption |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.0 MT | 116 hp | 11.3 s | 190 km/h | 13.0 L/100 km | 7.0 L/100 km | 9.1 L/100 km |
| 2.0 AT | 116 hp | not measured | 187 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 2.0 MT | 132 hp | 10.7 s | 206 km/h | 13.7 L/100 km | 8.2 L/100 km | 9.9 L/100 km |
| 2.0 MT | 148 hp | 10.5 s | 206 km/h | 13.0 L/100 km | 8.0 L/100 km | 9.4 L/100 km |
| 2.0 AT | 148 hp | not measured | 194 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 2.5 MT | 162 hp | 9.8 s | 210 km/h | 14.8 L/100 km | 9.5 L/100 km | 11.3 L/100 km |
| 2.0 AT | 132 hp | 10.7 s | 206 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
Among versions with measured consumption, the 116 hp 2.0 MT is the economy choice. Its combined figure of 9.1 L/100 km is 0.3 L/100 km lower than the 148 hp 2.0 MT, 0.8 L/100 km lower than the 132 hp 2.0 MT, and 2.2 L/100 km lower than the 2.5 MT. It also has the lowest measured highway figure at 7.0 L/100 km.
The 148 hp 2.0 MT offers the strongest balance of measured performance and consumption. It is 0.8 seconds quicker from 0 to 100 km/h than the 116 hp 2.0 MT and has a top speed that is 16 km/h higher, while using only 0.3 L/100 km more on the combined cycle. Compared with the 132 hp 2.0 MT, the 148 hp version is 0.2 seconds quicker, has the same 206 km/h top speed, and consumes 0.5 L/100 km less combined.
The 2.5 MT is the performance leader. Its 9.8-second acceleration time beats the 148 hp 2.0 MT by 0.7 seconds, and its 210 km/h top speed is 4 km/h higher. That performance comes with a measured combined consumption of 11.3 L/100 km, which is 1.9 L/100 km above the 148 hp 2.0 MT.
For automatic versions, comparisons are limited by missing measurements. The 116 hp 2.0 AT reaches 187 km/h, which is 3 km/h below the manual version with the same output. The 148 hp 2.0 AT reaches 194 km/h, 12 km/h below the corresponding manual. The 132 hp 2.0 AT has a measured 10.7-second acceleration time and 206 km/h top speed, matching the figures supplied for the 132 hp 2.0 MT. Fuel-consumption figures for all three automatic versions were not measured.
Dimensions, weight, and practical specifications
All seven versions have 164 mm of ground clearance and a 65-litre fuel tank. Wheel sizes were not measured for every version.
| Exact version name | Output | Kerb weight | Gross weight | Weight per horsepower |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.0 MT | 116 hp | 1,305 kg | 1,510 kg | approximately 11.25 kg/hp |
| 2.0 AT | 116 hp | not measured | 1,510 kg | not measured |
| 2.0 MT | 132 hp | 1,305 kg | not measured | approximately 9.89 kg/hp |
| 2.0 MT | 148 hp | 1,310 kg | not measured | approximately 8.85 kg/hp |
| 2.0 AT | 148 hp | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 2.5 MT | 162 hp | 1,400 kg | not measured | approximately 8.64 kg/hp |
| 2.0 AT | 132 hp | 1,305 kg | not measured | approximately 9.89 kg/hp |
The 148 hp 2.0 MT weighs only 5 kg more than the 116 hp and 132 hp manual versions, yet it supplies 32 hp more than the 116 hp car and 16 hp more than the 132 hp car. Its weight-to-power figure improves by approximately 2.40 kg/hp over the 116 hp 2.0 MT.
The 2.5 MT has the best measured weight-to-power figure, but it is 90 kg heavier than the 148 hp 2.0 MT. Its advantage is approximately 0.21 kg/hp, so the difference in weight-to-power ratio is small despite its 14 hp advantage.
Which Daewoo Magnus version should you choose?
Choose the 116 hp 2.0 MT if measured fuel economy matters most. It records the lowest combined and highway consumption, and its 1,305 kg kerb weight is tied for the lowest measured figure. The trade-off is the slowest measured acceleration at 11.3 seconds and a 190 km/h top speed.
Choose the 148 hp 2.0 MT for the best all-round numerical case. It combines 148 hp, 192 Nm, a 10.5-second acceleration time, a 206 km/h top speed, and 9.4 L/100 km combined consumption. Against the 132 hp 2.0 MT, it offers more power and torque, quicker acceleration, equal top speed, and lower measured consumption.
Choose the 2.5 MT when maximum performance is the priority. Its 162 hp, 226 Nm, 9.8-second acceleration time, and 210 km/h top speed lead the range. Buyers must accept the highest measured kerb weight and consumption: 1,400 kg and 11.3 L/100 km combined.
For an Automatic gearbox, the 132 hp 2.0 AT has the most complete measured performance data, at 10.7 seconds to 100 km/h and 206 km/h. The 148 hp 2.0 AT offers 16 hp and 8 Nm more, but its acceleration and fuel-consumption figures were not measured. The 116 hp 2.0 AT has the lowest automatic output and a 187 km/h top speed; its acceleration, consumption, and kerb weight were not measured. Consequently, the data supports a clear manual recommendation, but selecting an automatic requires accepting gaps in the recorded performance and economy figures.
Reliability and problems cannot be compared from the supplied specifications because no reliability or fault data was measured. On the available numbers alone, the 148 hp 2.0 MT is the most balanced purchase, the 116 hp 2.0 MT is the economy-led choice, and the 2.5 MT is the performance-led choice.