Daewoo Tacuma

Which Daewoo Tacuma version to buy (1 generation, 2000–2008)

There is only 1 generation of the Daewoo Tacuma (Compact Van, 2000-01-01 to 2008-06-30) and 11 Gasoline FWD versions.

There is only 1 generation of the Daewoo Tacuma (Compact Van, 2000-01-01 to 2008-06-30) and 11 Gasoline FWD versions. If you are choosing one car, the data split is simple: 2.0 MT 105 hp is the quickest measured 0–100 km/h and the lowest measured mixed consumption; 2.0 MT 136 hp is the highest-power, highest-speed, lightest-per-horsepower 2.0; 1.6 MT 106 hp beats 1.8 MT 101 hp on power despite a smaller engine; Automatic costs 2.7–3.0 s on the 0–100 km/h times that were measured. Prices are not in this catalogue.

Generations: nothing later to wait for

1 generation is the whole model. Body is Compact Van. Production window is 2000-01-01–2008-06-30 for every version listed. There is no second generation in these data, so a “newer generation” is not a choice you can make here — only engine, gearbox, and chassis spec differ.

Specs: every version, distinguished by power

All 11 are Gasoline, Inline 4, boost No, FWD. Fuel is 95 where measured; otherwise not measured. Gearbox is Manual 5 or Automatic 4.

Layout Front, transverse is measured only on 1.6 MT, 2.0 MT 121 hp and 2.0 AT 121 hp; on the other eight it is not measured. Injection is Distributed injection (multi-point) on all 11.

Engine: power per litre and what extra displacement buys

Specific output (hp ÷ litres):

• 2.0 MT / 2.0 AT 136 hp: 136 ÷ 1.998 = 68.1 hp/L (highest)
• 1.6 MT: 106 ÷ 1.598 = 66.3 hp/L
• 2.0 MT / 2.0 AT 128 hp: 128 ÷ 1.998 = 64.1 hp/L
• 2.0 MT / 2.0 AT 121 hp: 121 ÷ 1.998 = 60.6 hp/L
• 1.8 MT / 1.8 AT: 101 ÷ 1.796 = 56.2 hp/L
• 2.0 MT / 2.0 AT 105 hp: 105 ÷ 1.998 = 52.6 hp/L (lowest)

The 1.6 MT is not the weak option. It makes 5 hp more than 1.8 MT (106 vs 101) from 198 cc less (1598 vs 1796), with compression 9.5 vs 8.8, and peak power 400 rpm later (6000 vs 5600). Torque is 4 Nm lower (142 vs 146) and arrives 100 rpm later (3400 vs 3300).

Among 1998 cc engines, torque and peak rpm tell you what you actually buy:

• 105 hp 2.0: 169 Nm at 2800 rpm, 2 valves/cyl, compression 8.8, 86 × 86. Lowest specific power, but the earliest torque peak.
• 121 hp 2.0: 178 Nm at 4000 rpm, 4 valves/cyl, compression 9.6. +16 hp and +9 Nm vs the 105 hp 2.0.
• 128 hp 2.0: 176 Nm at 4000 rpm, 2 valves/cyl, compression 9.6. +7 hp vs 121 hp but −2 Nm.
• 136 hp 2.0: 184 Nm at 4000 rpm, 4 valves/cyl, compression 9.5. +31 hp and +15 Nm vs the 105 hp 2.0; +8 hp and +8 Nm vs 128 hp.

Bore × stroke is 79 × 81.5 on 1.6 MT, 84.8 × 79.5 on both 1.8 versions, 86 × 86 on all eight 2.0 versions.

Performance: 0–100, top speed, and the Automatic tax

Measured 0–100 km/h, fastest to slowest:

1. 2.0 MT 105 hp and 2.0 MT 121 hp: 10.5 s (tied) 2. 2.0 MT 128 hp: 10.8 s (+0.3 s vs the tie) 3. 1.6 MT: 11.8 s 4. 1.8 MT: 12 s (+0.2 s vs 1.6 MT) 5. 2.0 MT 136 hp: 13.4 s 6. 2.0 AT 121 hp and 2.0 AT 128 hp: 13.5 s 7. 1.8 AT: 15 s

Not measured for 0–100 km/h: 2.0 AT 105 hp, 2.0 AT 136 hp.

The Automatic penalty on pairs that share an engine:

• 1.8 AT vs 1.8 MT: +3.0 s (15 − 12), top speed −10 km/h (160 vs 170)
• 2.0 AT 121 hp vs 2.0 MT 121 hp: +3.0 s (13.5 − 10.5), top speed −7 km/h (173 vs 180)
• 2.0 AT 128 hp vs 2.0 MT 128 hp: +2.7 s (13.5 − 10.8); top speed not measured on either
• 2.0 AT 136 hp vs 2.0 MT 136 hp: 0–100 not measured on the Automatic; top speed −15 km/h (185 vs 200)

Highest measured top speed is 200 km/h on 2.0 MT 136 hp. Next: 185 (2.0 AT 136 hp), 180 (2.0 MT 105 hp and 2.0 MT 121 hp), 173 (2.0 AT 121 hp), 170 (1.8 MT), 167 (1.6 MT), 160 (1.8 AT). Not measured top speed: 2.0 AT 105 hp, 2.0 MT 128 hp, 2.0 AT 128 hp.

The 136 hp Manual is the odd one: most power (136 hp, 184 Nm) and highest top speed (200), yet 0–100 km/h is 13.4 s — 2.9 s slower than 2.0 MT 105 hp at 10.5 s. If the buying question is “which is fastest to 100 km/h”, 2.0 MT 105 hp or 2.0 MT 121 hp win; if it is “highest top speed”, 2.0 MT 136 hp wins.

MPG: measured consumption only

City / highway / mixed (L/100 km):

• 2.0 MT 105 hp: 11.5 / 7 / 8.4 — lowest mixed, lowest city, lowest highway among measured rows
• 2.0 MT 128 hp: 12 / 7.2 / 9
• 2.0 MT 136 hp: 12 / 8 / 9 — same mixed as 128 hp Manual, +0.8 highway vs 128 hp Manual
• 1.8 MT: 12.5 / 7.2 / 9.3
• 1.8 AT: 12.9 / 7.9 / 9.7 — +0.4 mixed vs 1.8 MT
• 2.0 AT 128 hp: 15.1 / 8.2 / 10.8 — highest on all three measured axes

Not measured (city, highway, and mixed): 1.6 MT, 2.0 AT 105 hp, 2.0 MT 121 hp, 2.0 AT 121 hp, 2.0 AT 136 hp. CO2 is not measured on all 11. Eco class is not measured on all 11.

Automatic vs Manual on the only 2.0 pair with mixed figures: 2.0 AT 128 hp uses 1.8 L/100 km more mixed than 2.0 MT 128 hp (10.8 − 9), 3.1 more in the city (15.1 − 12), 1.0 more on the highway (8.2 − 7.2).

Tank is 60 L on every version. Range is not a catalogue figure here.

Dimensions and weight: kg per horsepower and payload

Kerb / gross / clearance / wheels:

Lightest measured kerb: 1.8 MT at 1230 kg. Heaviest: 2.0 MT 128 hp at 1392 kg — 162 kg more than 1.8 MT, 122 kg more than 2.0 MT 136 hp (1270).

Best measured mass-to-power: 2.0 MT 136 hp at 9.34 kg/hp. Next: 2.0 MT 121 hp 10.83, 2.0 MT 128 hp 10.88, 2.0 AT 121 hp 10.95, 2.0 MT 105 hp 12.00, 1.6 MT 12.08, 1.8 MT 12.18.

Largest measured payload: 2.0 MT 121 hp 552 kg, then 1.6 MT 548 kg. Smallest measured payload: 2.0 MT 128 hp 470 kg — 82 kg less than the 121 hp Manual despite the same 1862 kg gross, because kerb is 82 kg higher (1392 − 1310).

Ground clearance is 180 mm where measured; not measured on 1.6 MT, 2.0 MT 121 hp, 2.0 AT 121 hp. Wheel sizes are not measured on all 11.

Chassis: disc vs Drum, independent vs semi-independent

Front brakes are Disc on all 11. Rear brakes split:

• Rear Disc: 1.6 MT, 2.0 MT 121 hp, 2.0 AT 121 hp
• Rear Drum: the other eight (1.8 MT, 1.8 AT, both 105 hp 2.0, both 128 hp 2.0, both 136 hp 2.0)

Front suspension is Independent, spring on all 11. Rear:

• Semi-independent, springorts hélicoïdaux, sem: 1.6 MT, 2.0 MT 121 hp, 2.0 AT 121 hp
• Independent, spring: the other eight

Those two groups coincide: the three rear-Disc cars are also the three with the semi-independent rear label in these data.

Problems and reliability: what these numbers do and do not say

This catalogue has no failure rates, recall lists, or service-interval data. Reliability is not measured here. What is measured and relevant to a used-car choice:

• Every engine is naturally aspirated (boost No) with Distributed injection (multi-point).
• Automatic is 4-speed on 1.8 AT and all four 2.0 AT rows; Manual is 5-speed on the six Manual rows.
• The 128 hp pair is the heaviest measured 2.0 Manual (1392 kg) and the thirstiest measured Automatic (10.8 mixed on 2.0 AT 128 hp).
• Compression is 8.8 on 1.8 and 105 hp 2.0; 9.5 on 1.6 MT and 136 hp 2.0; 9.6 on 121 hp and 128 hp 2.0.

Do not treat those as a fault ranking; they are the only hardware differences the table records.

Which version to choose

If the question is 0–100 km/h: buy 2.0 MT 105 hp or 2.0 MT 121 hp (both 10.5 s). The 105 hp Manual also has the best measured mixed consumption (8.4) and the earliest torque peak (169 Nm at 2800). Gross weight and fuel for the 121 hp Manual mixed cycle are not measured on consumption; kerb is 50 kg higher than the 105 hp Manual (1310 vs 1260).

If the question is highest power and highest top speed: 2.0 MT 136 hp — 136 hp, 184 Nm, 200 km/h, 9.34 kg/hp. Accept 13.4 s to 100 km/h (slower than the 105/121 hp Manuals) and mixed 9 (versus 8.4 on 2.0 MT 105 hp). Rear brakes are Drum.

If you want Automatic: the only Automatic with a full measured 0–100 and consumption set is 2.0 AT 128 hp (13.5 s, mixed 10.8) — it is the thirstiest measured Tacuma. 1.8 AT is the slowest measured car in the line (15 s, 160 km/h). 2.0 AT 121 hp matches 13.5 s with 173 km/h and rear Disc, but consumption is not measured. 2.0 AT 105 hp has 0–100, top speed, consumption, kerb and gross all not measured. 2.0 AT 136 hp has top speed 185 and 0–100 not measured.

If you want the small engine: take 1.6 MT, not 1.8 MT. 1.6 MT has +5 hp, −0.2 s to 100 km/h (11.8 vs 12), rear Disc, and 548 kg payload. 1.8 MT is 50 kg lighter (1230 vs 1280), has Independent, spring rear, Drum rear, and the only 1.8 consumption set (9.3 mixed). 1.8 AT gives up 3.0 s and 10 km/h versus 1.8 MT.

If you want payload: 2.0 MT 121 hp (552 kg) or 1.6 MT (548 kg). Avoid 2.0 MT 128 hp if payload is the metric (470 kg) — same 1862 gross as the 121 hp Manual, more kerb.

If you want rear Disc: only 1.6 MT, 2.0 MT 121 hp, 2.0 AT 121 hp.

Versions to skip unless you have a reason outside this table: 2.0 AT 105 hp (performance, mpg, and both masses not measured); 1.8 AT (slowest measured 0–100 and lowest measured top speed). 2.0 MT 128 hp is 0.3 s slower than the 105/121 hp Manuals, 122 kg heavier than 2.0 MT 136 hp, and 2 Nm below the 121 hp engine — it is not the power pick, not the economy pick, and not the payload pick.

Exact names to match listing pages: 1.6 MT, 1.8 MT, 1.8 AT, 2.0 MT (105 hp / 121 hp / 128 hp / 136 hp), 2.0 AT (105 hp / 121 hp / 128 hp / 136 hp).