Daewoo Racer

Daewoo Racer: which version to buy

If you are choosing a Daewoo Racer, the useful split is not generation — there is only 1 generation (January 1986–January 1994, Sedan, 13 versions in the catalogue, 12 listed here). It is engine output, gearbox, and how complete the measured figures are.

If you are choosing a Daewoo Racer, the useful split is not generation — there is only 1 generation (January 1986–January 1994, Sedan, 13 versions in the catalogue, 12 listed here). It is engine output, gearbox, and how complete the measured figures are. For a measured mix of pace, weight, and fuel use, the 1.5 MT at 89 hp (Carburetor or Distributed injection (multi-point), 4 gears) is the default: 12 s to 100 km/h, 170 km/h, 970 kg kerb, 6.5 L/100 km mixed. The 2.0 MT at 97 hp matches that 12 s and 170 km/h but adds 33 Nm and 75 kg. The 1.6 MT at 75 hp is the measured economy pick at 6.0 L/100 km mixed. The 1.5 AT at 75 hp is the only automatic with a full 0–100 figure, and it is the slowest at 15.9 s.

There are no later generations to “step up to.” Every comparison below is inside this one Sedan run. All versions are Gasoline, Inline 4, 2 valves per cylinder, boost No, FWD, 50 L tank. Fuel grade, where measured, is 95. Wheel sizes are not measured on every version. CO2 and eco class are not measured on every version.

Generations (only one to pick)

1 generation (January 1986–January 1994): Sedan, 13 versions, 12 shown. Years and body do not change between 1.5 AT, 1.5 MT, 1.6 MT, 1.6 AT, 2.0 AT, and 2.0 MT. What changes is displacement (1498, 1598, or 1998 cm³), power (75, 89, or 97 hp), gearbox (Automatic 3 gears vs Manual 4 or 5), injection (Carburetor, Distributed injection (multi-point), or Central injection (single-point or single- point)), and how many numbers were actually measured.

If two cars share the same name — several 1.5 MT and two 1.5 AT, two 2.0 MT — separate them by power, feed, gears, and front brakes, not by generation.

Engines and specs (what you are actually buying)

Specific output from the same table: 1.5 MT / 1.5 AT at 89 hp make 59.4 hp per litre (89 / 1.498). The 75 hp 1.5 pair make 50.1 hp/L. The 2.0 MT / 2.0 AT at 97 hp make 48.5 hp/L. The 1.6 MT / 1.6 AT at 75 hp make 46.9 hp/L — the lowest density, even though displacement is 100 cm³ above the 1498 engines.

Torque per litre: 1.5 89 hp 84.8 Nm/L (127 / 1.498); 1.5 75 hp 82.1 Nm/L; 2.0 80.1 Nm/L (160 / 1.998); 1.6 76.3 Nm/L. The 2.0 still has the largest absolute torque: 160 Nm, 33 Nm above the 89 hp 1.5 and 37–38 Nm above the 75 hp engines.

Peak rpm also sorts the engines: 2.0 power at 4800 rpm, 1.5 75 hp at 5400, 1.5 89 hp at 5500, 1.6 at 5600. Torque peaks earliest on the 1.6 (2800 rpm), then 1.5 89 hp (3000), 1.5 75 hp (3200), 2.0 (3600).

Compression: 1.5 75 hp 9.5; 1.5 89 hp 9; 2.0 8.8; 1.6 8.6. Bore × stroke, where measured: 1.5 76.5 × 81.5; 1.6 79 × 81.5; 2.0 86 × 86. On the 1.5 MT 89 hp Carburetor 5-speed, bore × stroke is not measured.

Performance and economy (mpg / L/100 km)

Measured 0–100 km/h is only on manuals plus one automatic:

• 1.5 AT 75 hp: 15.9 s, 156 km/h — slowest measured car in the line, 3.4 s behind the matching 1.5 MT 75 hp.
• 1.5 MT 75 hp: 12.5 s, 163 km/h.
• 1.6 MT 75 hp: 12.5 s, 165 km/h — same sprint as the 75 hp 1.5 MT, +2 km/h top speed.
• 1.5 MT 89 hp Carburetor 4-speed: 12 s, 170 km/h.
• 1.5 MT 89 hp Distributed injection (multi-point): 12 s, 170 km/h.
• 2.0 MT 97 hp (both brake listings): 12 s, 170 km/h.

The extra 8 hp and 33 Nm of the 2.0 MT versus the 89 hp 1.5 MT do not improve the measured sprint or top speed. Versus the 75 hp 1.5 MT, the 89 hp manuals cut 0.5 s and add 7 km/h.

Not measured for 0–100 km/h: 1.5 AT 89 hp Carburetor, 1.5 AT 89 hp Distributed injection (multi-point), 2.0 AT, 1.6 AT, 1.5 MT 89 hp Carburetor 5-speed. Not measured for top speed: both 1.5 AT 89 hp cars, 2.0 AT, 1.6 AT. The 1.5 MT 5-speed does have 170 km/h measured.

Fuel (L/100 km), where measured:

The 1.6 MT uses 0.3 L/100 km less mixed than the 1.5 MT 75 hp, 0.5 less than the 89 hp 1.5 MT, and 0.9 less than the 2.0 MT. City: 1.6 MT 9.0 vs 2.0 MT 9.6. Highway is 5.1 on both 75 hp manuals and 5.4 on the 89 hp and 2.0 manuals.

Fuel use is not measured on every Automatic and on the 1.5 MT 89 hp Carburetor 5-speed. Do not treat those as “unknown engines”; treat them as versions without a catalogue mpg figure.

With a 50 L tank and mixed 6.0 L/100 km, the 1.6 MT is 0.9 L/100 km better than the 2.0 MT at 6.9. That is the largest measured economy gap in the model.

Dimensions and weight

Ground clearance is 160 mm on every version where it is listed. On the 1.5 MT 89 hp Carburetor 5-speed it is not measured. Wheels are not measured on all 12 listed versions. Tank is 50 L on all 12.

Kerb weight, measured:

• 1.5 MT 75 hp: 969 kg → 12.92 kg/hp (969 / 75).
• 1.5 MT 89 hp (Carburetor 4-speed, Carburetor 5-speed, Distributed injection (multi-point)): 970 kg → 10.90 kg/hp (970 / 89).
• 1.6 MT 75 hp: 990 kg → 13.20 kg/hp (990 / 75) — heaviest kg/hp among measured kerbs.
• 2.0 MT 97 hp (both): 1045 kg → 10.77 kg/hp (1045 / 97) — lightest kg/hp, 75 kg heavier than the 89 hp 1.5 MT.

Kerb is not measured on 1.5 AT 75 hp, both 1.5 AT 89 hp, 2.0 AT, and 1.6 AT. Gross weight is measured only on 1.5 AT 75 hp and 1.5 MT 75 hp: 1460 kg both. Payload from those two: 1460 − 969 = 491 kg on the 1.5 MT 75 hp; payload on the matching automatic is not measured because kerb is not measured. Gross is not measured on the 89 hp, 1.6, and 2.0 versions.

Front suspension is Independent, spring on all 12. Rear: Semi-independent, springorts hélicoïdaux, sem on 1.5 AT 75 hp and 1.5 MT 75 hp; Independent, spring on the 89 hp, 1.6, and 2.0 cars where listed; not measured on the 1.5 MT 5-speed. Front brakes: Ventilated disc on the 75 hp 1.5 pair, both 89 hp Carburetor 4-speed / AT, 2.0 AT, and one 2.0 MT; Disc on the 5-speed 1.5 MT, the 89 hp Distributed injection (multi-point) 1.5 MT and 1.5 AT, 1.6 MT, 1.6 AT, and the second 2.0 MT. Rear brakes: Drum on all 12.

Engine position is Front, transverse only on the 1.5 MT 89 hp Carburetor 5-speed; it is not measured on the other eleven.

Which version to choose

Default daily manual: 1.5 MT 89 hp. Take the Carburetor 4-speed or the Distributed injection (multi-point) 4-speed: both 12 s, 170 km/h, 9.5 / 5.4 / 6.5, 970 kg, 160 mm, 50 L. They differ in feed and front brakes (Ventilated disc vs Disc), not in the measured pace or mpg. The Carburetor 5-speed 1.5 MT 89 hp adds a fifth gear and Front, transverse in the data, but 0–100, fuel, clearance, rear suspension, bore × stroke, and fuel grade are not measured — you are buying an extra ratio without a measured economy or sprint figure.

If you want the lowest measured fuel use: 1.6 MT 75 hp. Mixed 6.0 vs 6.3 on 1.5 MT 75 hp and 6.5 on 1.5 MT 89 hp. Same 12.5 s as the 75 hp 1.5 MT, 165 vs 163 km/h. Cost in the numbers: 21 kg extra kerb vs 1.5 MT 75 hp, 20 kg vs 89 hp 1.5 MT, and 14 hp less than those 89 hp cars. Specific output is the weakest (46.9 hp/L). 1.6 AT uses the same 75 hp / 122 Nm engine but 0–100, top speed, fuel, and kerb are not measured.

If you want maximum torque and the best kg/hp: 2.0 MT 97 hp. 160 Nm, 10.77 kg/hp, 5 Manual gears. Sprint and top speed match the 89 hp 1.5 MT (12 s, 170 km/h). Mixed fuel is 6.9, 0.4 L/100 km above the 89 hp 1.5 MT and 0.9 above the 1.6 MT. Kerb 1045 kg is 75–76 kg above the 1.5 manuals. The two 2.0 MT listings share every measured performance and economy number; they split only on front brakes (Ventilated disc vs Disc). 2.0 AT keeps 97 hp and 160 Nm with Automatic 3 gears, but 0–100, top speed, fuel, and kerb are not measured.

If you need Automatic: the only automatic with a measured sprint is 1.5 AT 75 hp: 15.9 s, 156 km/h, 1460 kg gross. That is 3.4 s and 7 km/h worse than 1.5 MT 75 hp. Fuel and kerb on this 1.5 AT are not measured. The two 1.5 AT 89 hp cars (Carburetor and Distributed injection (multi-point)) and 1.6 AT / 2.0 AT have no measured 0–100. On paper they add 14 hp (89 vs 75) or 22 hp (97 vs 75) over the measured automatic, without a catalogue time to prove it.

If you want the lightest measured car: 1.5 MT 75 hp at 969 kg. It is 1 kg under the 89 hp 1.5 MT and 76 kg under the 2.0 MT. Power-to-weight is poorer than the 89 hp 1.5 (12.92 vs 10.90 kg/hp). Mixed 6.3 sits between 1.6 MT 6.0 and 89 hp 6.5.

What the “bigger” engine buys in arithmetic, not price (no prices in the data):

• 89 hp vs 75 hp on 1.5 MT: +14 hp, +4 Nm, −0.5 s, +7 km/h, +1 kg, mixed +0.2 L/100 km. Compression drops from 9.5 to 9.
• 2.0 MT 97 hp vs 1.5 MT 89 hp: +8 hp, +33 Nm, 0 s, 0 km/h, +75 kg, mixed +0.4 L/100 km, +1 gear (5 vs 4 on the 4-speed 1.5).
• 1.6 MT 75 hp vs 1.5 MT 75 hp: 0 hp, −1 Nm, 0 s, +2 km/h, +21 kg, mixed −0.3 L/100 km.

Problems and reliability (what the specs allow you to say): this dataset does not measure failure rates. What it does measure is mechanical layout. Automatic is always 3 gears; Manual is 4 except both 2.0 MT and the 1.5 MT 89 hp 5-speed. Feed is three-way: Carburetor on three 89 hp 1.5 cars, Distributed injection (multi-point) on the 75 hp 1.5 pair and two 89 hp 1.5 cars, Central injection (single-point or single- point) on both 1.6 and both 2.0 families. Rear Drum is universal. If you want the version with the most filled-in catalogue row, pick 1.5 MT 75 hp or 1.5 MT 89 hp 4-speed — those rows have 0–100, top speed, three fuel figures, kerb, clearance, and tank. If a row is mostly not measured, the buying risk is missing numbers, not a later generation you can wait for.