Daihatsu Rocky: Which Version to Buy and Why
Choosing a Daihatsu Rocky from this catalogue is mainly a choice between engine character, transmission type, and weight. Every listed version belongs to the single generation produced from June 1990 through March 1997, uses an SUV 3-doors body, and has AWD. The 1.6 AT is the only Automatic option, while the 1.6 MT, 2.0 MT, 2.2 MT, and every 2.8 MT use a Manual gearbox.
Choosing a Daihatsu Rocky from this catalogue is mainly a choice between engine character, transmission type, and weight. Every listed version belongs to the single generation produced from June 1990 through March 1997, uses an SUV 3-doors body, and has AWD. The 1.6 AT is the only Automatic option, while the 1.6 MT, 2.0 MT, 2.2 MT, and every 2.8 MT use a Manual gearbox. The 1.6 Gasoline versions offer the highest power per litre; the turbocharged 2.8 MT versions provide the strongest torque; and the naturally aspirated 2.8 MT has the lowest output but avoids turbo boost.
Daihatsu Rocky generations and versions
The Daihatsu Rocky has one generation in the supplied data. It ran from June 1990 to March 1997 as an SUV 3-doors. The database contains 13 modification records and shows 12 versions; repeated names must therefore be identified by power and, where necessary, by other specifications.
There is no later generation to compare against, and the data does not identify a restyling. Selection is consequently based on differences among the engines, gearboxes, suspension configurations, brakes, weights, and performance figures offered within this generation.
Engine and specs comparison
| Exact version | Output | Torque | Displacement | Fuel | Cylinders and layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.6 MT (95 hp) | 95 hp (70 kW) at 5700 rpm | 128 Nm at 4800 rpm | 1589 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| 1.6 MT (105 hp) | 105 hp (77 kW) at 6000 rpm | 140 Nm at 3500 rpm | 1589 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| 1.6 AT (105 hp) | 105 hp (77 kW) at 6000 rpm | 140 Nm at 3500 rpm | 1589 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 4-speed Automatic | AWD |
| 2.0 MT (88 hp) | 88 hp (65 kW) at 4600 rpm | 157 Nm at 3000 rpm | 1998 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| 2.2 MT (91 hp, 1380 kg) | 91 hp (67 kW) at 4200 rpm | 179 Nm at 2500 rpm | 2237 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| 2.8 MT (73 hp) | 73 hp (54 kW) at 3600 rpm | 170 Nm at 2200 rpm | 2765 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| 2.8 MT (98 hp, 1620 kg) | 98 hp (72 kW) at 3200 rpm | 245 Nm at 1900 rpm | 2765 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | Turbo | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| 2.8 MT (102 hp, 1615 kg) | 102 hp (75 kW) at 3400 rpm | 249 Nm at 1900 rpm | 2765 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | Turbo | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| 2.8 MT (91 hp) | 91 hp (67 kW), rpm not measured | Torque and rpm not measured | 2768 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | Turbo | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| 2.2 MT (91 hp, 1470 kg) | 91 hp (67 kW) at 4200 rpm | 179 Nm at 2500 rpm | 2237 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| 2.8 MT (98 hp, rear Disc) | 98 hp (72 kW) at 3200 rpm | 245 Nm at 1900 rpm | 2765 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | Turbo | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| 2.8 MT (102 hp, 1725 kg) | 102 hp (75 kW) at 3400 rpm | 249 Nm at 1900 rpm | 2765 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | Turbo | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
The two 1.6 MT records show why power must be checked rather than relying on the name alone. The 105 hp 1.6 MT has 10 hp and 12 Nm more than the 95 hp 1.6 MT. It also reaches peak torque at 3500 rpm instead of 4800 rpm. Both use Distributed injection (multi-point), a compression ratio of 9.5, and a bore and stroke of 76 × 87.6.
The 1.6 MT (105 hp) and 1.6 AT (105 hp) share the same 1589 cc Gasoline output figures, but the transmission changes from a 5-speed Manual to a 4-speed Automatic. The Automatic version weighs 1290 kg, 40 kg more than the comparable 1250 kg Manual version. That equals approximately 12.3 kg per hp for the 1.6 AT and 11.9 kg per hp for the 1.6 MT.
The 2.0 MT makes 88 hp and 157 Nm from 1998 cc. Its Carburetor fuel system distinguishes it from the 2.2 MT, which uses Distributed injection (multi-point) and produces 91 hp and 179 Nm from 2237 cc. Moving from the 2.0 MT to either 2.2 MT specification adds 3 hp and 22 Nm.
The 2765 cc turbocharged 2.8 MT versions are the torque leaders. The 98 hp specification develops 245 Nm, while the 102 hp specification develops 249 Nm. The additional output of the 102 hp version is 4 hp and 4 Nm. Both reach peak torque at 1900 rpm. The naturally aspirated 73 hp 2.8 MT produces 170 Nm at 2200 rpm, so the 98 hp turbo specification adds 25 hp and 75 Nm.
Power per litre is approximately 66.1 hp for each litre in the 105 hp 1.6 versions, compared with 47.5 hp per litre for the 2.8 MT (98 hp) and 36.9 hp per litre for the 2.8 MT (102 hp). The 2.8 MT (73 hp) produces approximately 26.4 hp per litre. These figures describe output relative to displacement; they do not measure durability or fuel economy.
Performance and fuel economy
Performance is measured for only a small part of the range. The 2.8 MT (98 hp) reaches 100 km/h in 18.1 seconds and has a top speed of 135 km/h. The 2.0 MT reaches 100 km/h in 26.4 seconds and has a top speed of 130 km/h. The measured difference is 8.3 seconds to 100 km/h and 5 km/h in top speed.
The 2.2 MT has a measured top speed of 130 km/h, but its 0–100 km/h time is not measured. The naturally aspirated 2.8 MT (73 hp) also has a measured top speed of 130 km/h and an acceleration time that is not measured. The 2.8 MT (102 hp) has a measured top speed of 135 km/h, while its 0–100 km/h time is not measured.
For every 1.6 MT and 1.6 AT record, both acceleration and top speed are not measured. Performance for the 2768 cc 2.8 MT (91 hp) is also not measured.
Fuel-consumption figures are available for one 2.8 MT (98 hp) record: 11.1 l/100 km in the city, 8.3 l/100 km on the highway, and 9 l/100 km combined. Consumption for every other record is not measured. All versions have a 60-litre tank. No consumption comparison should be inferred from engine size or fuel type where measurements are absent.
Dimensions, weight, and ground clearance
Exterior dimensions and wheel sizes are not measured for any listed version. Ground clearance is 205 mm for the 1.6 MT (105 hp) and 1.6 AT (105 hp), while the other measured configurations have 210 mm. The difference is 5 mm.
The lightest recorded Rocky is the 1.6 MT (105 hp) at 1250 kg. The 1.6 AT (105 hp) weighs 1290 kg, and the lighter 2.2 MT record weighs 1380 kg. At the other end, one 2.8 MT (102 hp) weighs 1725 kg, a difference of 475 kg from the lightest 1.6 MT. Its weight-to-power figure is approximately 16.9 kg per hp, compared with approximately 11.9 kg per hp for the 105 hp 1.6 MT.
The 2.8 MT (98 hp) records weigh 1620 kg and have a gross weight of 2510 kg. Their gross-minus-kerb difference is 890 kg. The 2.8 MT (73 hp) weighs 1570 kg with a gross weight of 2250 kg, a difference of 680 kg. The 2.0 MT weighs 1470 kg and has a gross weight of 2200 kg, a difference of 730 kg.
One 2.2 MT weighs 1380 kg with a gross weight of 2125 kg, while the other weighs 1470 kg with a gross weight of 2200 kg. Their power and torque are identical, but the lighter record is 90 kg lighter and has approximately 15.2 kg per hp rather than 16.2 kg per hp.
The 95 hp 1.6 MT is listed at 1490 kg and 2235 kg gross, whereas the 105 hp 1.6 MT is listed at 1250 kg with gross weight not measured. Kerb and gross weight for the 2768 cc 2.8 MT (91 hp) are not measured. Every version uses a 60-litre tank, and wheel sizes are not measured.
Suspension, brakes, problems, and reliability data
All records specify Independent, torsion front suspension and Ventilated disc front brakes. Most use Independent, spring rear suspension. The 1.6 MT (105 hp) and 1.6 AT (105 hp) instead have Dependent, leaf spring rear suspension.
Rear brakes are Drum on most records. One 2.8 MT (98 hp) specifies rear Disc brakes, while the rear-brake type for the 2768 cc 2.8 MT (91 hp) is not measured.
Problems and reliability are not measured in the supplied data. The figures therefore cannot support claims that one engine, gearbox, suspension design, or fuel type is more reliable than another. Inspection and service-history recommendations would require information outside this catalogue record.
Which Daihatsu Rocky version should you buy?
For the strongest measured balance of acceleration and torque, choose the 2.8 MT (98 hp). It has 245 Nm at 1900 rpm, reaches 100 km/h in 18.1 seconds, and has a measured top speed of 135 km/h. It is also the only specification with measured consumption: 11.1 l/100 km city, 8.3 l/100 km highway, and 9 l/100 km combined. Among otherwise matching 98 hp records, the version with rear Disc brakes offers a documented brake-specification difference from the Drum-equipped version.
Choose the 2.8 MT (102 hp) if maximum listed output matters most. Its 102 hp and 249 Nm are the highest figures in the range, exceeding the 98 hp turbo version by 4 hp and 4 Nm. However, its acceleration and fuel consumption are not measured, so the small output advantage cannot be translated into a documented real-world performance or economy gain.
Choose the 1.6 MT (105 hp) if low kerb weight and power per litre are priorities. At 1250 kg, it is 370 kg lighter than the 1620 kg 2.8 MT (98 hp), while producing 7 hp more. Its torque is lower by 105 Nm, and its acceleration, top speed, and consumption are not measured.
Choose the 1.6 AT (105 hp) when Automatic transmission is essential. It is the only 4-speed Automatic in the data, and it retains the same 105 hp and 140 Nm as the equivalent Manual. The trade-off shown by the catalogue is 40 kg of additional kerb weight.
Choose the 2.2 MT over the 2.0 MT if comparing their engine figures alone: the 2.2 MT adds 3 hp and 22 Nm while retaining the 5-speed Manual and AWD. Between the two 2.2 MT records, the 1380 kg specification is 90 kg lighter than the 1470 kg specification.
The 2.8 MT (73 hp) suits a buyer specifically seeking the naturally aspirated Diesel configuration. It has No boost, unlike the other listed Diesel versions, but it also has the lowest output at 73 hp. The 2768 cc 2.8 MT (91 hp) is harder to compare confidently because torque, engine speed, performance, consumption, kerb weight, gross weight, and rear-brake type are all not measured.
On the available numbers, the clearest all-round specification is the 2.8 MT (98 hp): it combines the second-highest torque with the only complete acceleration-and-consumption record. The 1.6 MT (105 hp) is the lighter alternative, the 1.6 AT (105 hp) is the transmission-led choice, and the 2.8 MT (102 hp) is the choice for the highest catalogue output.