Daihatsu Wake

Which Daihatsu Wake version to buy

The Daihatsu Wake has been a single-generation Microvan since November 2014 (production end not measured). All four catalogue versions are named 0.7 CVT. They use the same 658 cc Gasoline inline-3, the same Variable gearbox, the same 36-litre tank, and the same 140 mm ground clearance. What changes is boost, peak power, peak torque, drive, and — where measured — kerb weight.

The Daihatsu Wake has been a single-generation Microvan since November 2014 (production end not measured). All four catalogue versions are named 0.7 CVT. They use the same 658 cc Gasoline inline-3, the same Variable gearbox, the same 36-litre tank, and the same 140 mm ground clearance. What changes is boost, peak power, peak torque, drive, and — where measured — kerb weight.

Buy the 52 hp FWD 0.7 CVT if you want the lightest measured car (1000 kg) and the highest compression (11.3). Buy the 64 hp FWD 0.7 CVT if you want 12 hp and 32 Nm more for 20 kg extra. Buy the 64 hp AWD 0.7 CVT if you want that turbo output with all-wheel drive at 1060 kg. The 52 hp AWD 0.7 CVT is the incomplete card: power matches the FWD naturally aspirated car, drive is AWD, but kerb weight and rear suspension are not measured.

Generations: one generation, four versions

1 generation (from November 2014, end not measured) is a Microvan with four versions, all 0.7 CVT. There is no second generation to compare. Restyling is not listed as a separate generation in the data. Every buy decision is inside this generation: naturally aspirated 52 hp versus turbo 64 hp, FWD versus AWD.

Wake specs: engines, gearbox, drive

All four 0.7 CVT versions: 658 cc Gasoline, 3 cylinders Inline, 4 valves per cylinder, distributed injection (multi-point), bore and stroke 63 × 70.4, fuel 92, Variable gearbox (gear count not measured), 36-litre tank, 140 mm clearance, independent spring front suspension, ventilated disc front brakes, drum rear brakes. Engine location, 0–100, top speed, fuel consumption, CO2, eco class, gross weight, and wheel sizes are not measured on every version.

The turbo pair also drops compression from 11.3 to 9.5 and moves peak torque from 5200 rpm to 3200 rpm. Peak power rpm falls from 6800 to 6400.

Power, torque, and power per litre

The 658 cc displacement is identical, so specific output is a direct ratio of the listed horsepower.

• 0.7 CVT 52 hp FWD and 0.7 CVT 52 hp AWD: 52 hp ÷ 0.658 L = 79.0 hp per litre. Torque is 60 Nm. Specific torque: 60 ÷ 0.658 = 91.2 Nm per litre.
• 0.7 CVT 64 hp FWD and 0.7 CVT 64 hp AWD: 64 hp ÷ 0.658 L = 97.3 hp per litre. Torque is 92 Nm. Specific torque: 92 ÷ 0.658 = 139.8 Nm per litre.

The turbo versions add 12 hp (23% more than 52) and 32 Nm (53% more than 60). In kilowatts the step is 9 kW (47 versus 38). That is the entire engine argument: same capacity, same cylinder count, same layout, same injection type, same fuel grade — more peak output and earlier torque because boost is Turbo rather than No.

The naturally aspirated 0.7 CVT makes its 52 hp at 6800 rpm and its 60 Nm at 5200 rpm. The turbo 0.7 CVT makes 64 hp at 6400 rpm and 92 Nm at 3200 rpm — 2000 rpm earlier for peak torque. If the use case is low-speed pull rather than peak horsepower, the 32 Nm gap at 3200 rpm is the larger change than the 12 hp gap.

Weight per horsepower (where kerb weight is measured)

Kerb weight is measured on three versions; the 52 hp AWD 0.7 CVT is not measured.

• 0.7 CVT 52 hp FWD: 1000 kg ÷ 52 hp = 19.2 kg per hp.
• 0.7 CVT 64 hp FWD: 1020 kg ÷ 64 hp = 15.9 kg per hp.
• 0.7 CVT 64 hp AWD: 1060 kg ÷ 64 hp = 16.6 kg per hp.
• 0.7 CVT 52 hp AWD: kerb weight not measured, so kg per hp is not measured.

The turbo FWD 0.7 CVT is the strongest measured power-to-weight figure. Versus the 52 hp FWD car it is 20 kg heavier (+2.0%) and 12 hp stronger (+23%), so the kg/hp figure improves by 3.3 kg per hp. The turbo AWD 0.7 CVT is 40 kg heavier than the turbo FWD car and 60 kg heavier than the naturally aspirated FWD car. Against the turbo FWD, AWD costs 0.7 kg per hp (16.6 versus 15.9) for the same 64 hp.

Gross vehicle weight is not measured on any version, so payload cannot be calculated from these data.

Performance and economy (mpg)

0–100, top speed, city consumption, highway consumption, mixed consumption, and CO2 are not measured on all four 0.7 CVT versions. Eco class is not measured. There is no mpg figure in the data to rank versions on fuel use. Tank volume is 36 litres on every version, so range cannot be ranked without a consumption number.

What can be ranked without inventing speed or mpg:

• Highest measured specific power: 64 hp 0.7 CVT (97.3 hp/L).
• Lowest measured kg/hp: 64 hp FWD 0.7 CVT (15.9 kg/hp).
• Lightest measured kerb: 52 hp FWD 0.7 CVT (1000 kg).
• Heaviest measured kerb: 64 hp AWD 0.7 CVT (1060 kg).
• Earliest peak torque: both turbo 0.7 CVT versions (92 Nm at 3200 rpm versus 60 Nm at 5200 rpm).

Dimensions, clearance, tank, wheels

Ground clearance is 140 mm on all four versions — AWD does not raise the listed figure. Fuel tank is 36 litres on all four. Wheel sizes are not measured. Rear suspension is independent of the engine choice: the two FWD 0.7 CVT versions list semi-independent, torsion rear suspension; both AWD 0.7 CVT versions have rear suspension not measured. Front suspension is independent, spring on all four. Brakes do not split the range: ventilated disc front, drum rear on every version.

Which version to choose

0.7 CVT, 52 hp, FWD. Lightest measured Wake: 1000 kg, 19.2 kg/hp, compression 11.3, boost No. Rear suspension is listed (semi-independent, torsion). This is the version if the priority is the smallest kerb weight and a complete chassis card, not peak torque. You give up 12 hp and 32 Nm versus turbo.

0.7 CVT, 52 hp, AWD. Same 52 hp, 38 kW, 60 Nm, 658 cc, No boost, Variable gearbox as the FWD naturally aspirated car, but drive is AWD. Kerb weight not measured, rear suspension not measured. You cannot compute kg/hp. Choose this only if AWD is required and turbo is not; the data do not show how much mass AWD adds on the 52 hp engine.

0.7 CVT, 64 hp, FWD. Best measured power-to-weight: 1020 kg, 64 hp, 15.9 kg/hp, 92 Nm at 3200 rpm, Turbo, compression 9.5. Versus the 52 hp FWD 0.7 CVT: +20 kg, +12 hp, +32 Nm, torque peak 2000 rpm lower. Rear suspension listed. This is the version if the question is “what does the extra output buy on FWD”: 23% more horsepower and 53% more torque for 2% more kerb weight.

0.7 CVT, 64 hp, AWD. Same engine as the turbo FWD car (64 hp, 47 kW, 92 Nm, Turbo). Kerb 1060 kg, 16.6 kg/hp. Versus turbo FWD: +40 kg, same horsepower, AWD instead of FWD, rear suspension not measured. Versus 52 hp FWD: +60 kg, +12 hp, +32 Nm, AWD. This is the version if AWD and the 92 Nm turbo are both required. It is not the lightest and not the best kg/hp.

Arithmetic summary (only measured figures). Turbo versus naturally aspirated, same name 0.7 CVT: +12 hp, +9 kW, +32 Nm, compression 9.5 versus 11.3, boost Turbo versus No. FWD turbo versus FWD NA: +20 kg. AWD turbo versus FWD turbo: +40 kg. AWD turbo versus FWD NA: +60 kg. Specific power 97.3 versus 79.0 hp/L. Clearance and tank do not change (140 mm, 36 L). Generation count does not change the choice: there is only 1 generation.

Problems and reliability are not in the supplied data, so they are not measured here. The ranking above uses only listed power, torque, boost, drive, and kerb weight.