Datsun Urvan

Which Datsun Urvan version to buy

Buy 2.0 MT if the numbers that matter are power density and how little mass each horsepower has to move. Buy 2.3 MT if the brief is Diesel fuel and a larger 2289 cm³ engine, accepting 16 hp and 22 Nm less.

Buy 2.0 MT if the numbers that matter are power density and how little mass each horsepower has to move. Buy 2.3 MT if the brief is Diesel fuel and a larger 2289 cm³ engine, accepting 16 hp and 22 Nm less.

2.0 MT makes 85 hp (63 kW) at 4600 rpm and 192 Nm at 2500 rpm from 1982 cm³. 2.3 MT makes 69 hp (51 kW) at 4400 rpm and 170 Nm at 2400 rpm from 2289 cm³. Peak power arrives 200 rpm later on 2.0 MT; peak torque arrives 100 rpm later. Neither version has a measured 0–100 figure, top speed, or fuel consumption, so the buy decision cannot rest on sprint or mpg numbers that are not in the data.

Power per litre: 2.0 MT is 85 ÷ 1.982 ≈ 42.9 hp/L. 2.3 MT is 69 ÷ 2.289 ≈ 30.1 hp/L. The Gasoline version extracts about 12.8 hp more from each litre. Kilowatts per litre: 63 ÷ 1.982 ≈ 31.8 kW/L versus 51 ÷ 2.289 ≈ 22.3 kW/L.

Weight per horsepower (kerb 1325 kg on both): 2.0 MT is 1325 ÷ 85 ≈ 15.6 kg/hp. 2.3 MT is 1325 ÷ 69 ≈ 19.2 kg/hp. That is about 3.6 kg more mass per horsepower on the Diesel. Per kilowatt: 1325 ÷ 63 ≈ 21.0 kg/kW versus 1325 ÷ 51 ≈ 26.0 kg/kW.

Torque per litre: 2.0 MT is 192 ÷ 1.982 ≈ 96.9 Nm/L. 2.3 MT is 170 ÷ 2.289 ≈ 74.3 Nm/L. The smaller Gasoline engine still has the higher specific torque. Absolute torque still favours 2.0 MT by 22 Nm.

There is no second generation to “step up to.” Generation count is 1. Years, body, gearbox, drive, weights, tank, suspension, and brakes do not change between versions. Extra spend, if any, is not in this dataset; what the numbers buy is 16 hp, 12 kW, 22 Nm, carburetor Gasoline on 92 fuel, and a published 85 × 86 mm bore × stroke on 2.0 MT.

Generations compared with the versions inside them

1 generation (1982–1988)

1 generation ran 1982-01-01 to 1988-12-31 as a Minivan with 2 versions: 2.0 MT and 2.3 MT. There is no restyling generation in the data and no later generation to compare year-over-year. What changed between the two versions is the engine and fuel path, not the chassis figures listed below.

Both versions: 4 cylinders, Inline layout, 2 valves per cylinder, boost No, Manual, 5 gears, RWD, tank 52 L, kerb 1325 kg, gross 2565 kg, front suspension Dependent, spring, rear suspension Dependent, spring, front brakes Ventilated disc, rear brakes Drum.

2.0 MT adds Carburetor, fuel 92, bore × stroke 85 × 86, 1982 cm³ Gasoline. 2.3 MT is Diesel, 2289 cm³; fuel-system type, compression ratio, and bore × stroke are not measured.

Payload from the two masses: 2565 − 1325 = 1240 kg on both 2.0 MT and 2.3 MT. Gross is about 1.94 × kerb (2565 ÷ 1325). Ground clearance is not measured on either version. Wheel sizes are not measured on either version.

Engines and specs

2.0 MT also lists 63 kW at 4600 rpm, 192 Nm at 2500 rpm, Carburetor, 2 valves per cylinder, fuel 92, bore × stroke 85 × 86. Engine location, compression ratio, 0–100, top speed, consumption, CO2, eco class, ground clearance, and wheels are not measured.

2.3 MT also lists 51 kW at 4400 rpm, 170 Nm at 2400 rpm, 2 valves per cylinder, fuel Diesel. Fuel-system type, engine location, compression ratio, bore × stroke, 0–100, top speed, consumption, CO2, eco class, ground clearance, and wheels are not measured.

Displacement gap: 2289 − 1982 = 307 cm³, or about 15.5% more volume on 2.3 MT. Power gap the other way: 85 − 69 = 16 hp, about 23.2% more on 2.0 MT. Torque gap: 192 − 170 = 22 Nm, about 12.9% more on 2.0 MT.

Performance and economy (mpg, 0–100, top speed)

0–100 km/h for 2.0 MT: not measured. 0–100 km/h for 2.3 MT: not measured. Top speed for 2.0 MT: not measured. Top speed for 2.3 MT: not measured. City, highway, and combined consumption for 2.0 MT: not measured. City, highway, and combined consumption for 2.3 MT: not measured. CO2 for both: not measured. Eco class for both: not measured.

A buyer looking up Urvan mpg or 0–100 will not find those figures in this catalogue. The only performance-adjacent numbers that are measured are power, torque, and the rpm at which they occur.

What can be compared without inventing a sprint time: 2.0 MT has 16 hp more and about 3.6 kg/hp less kerb mass per horsepower. 2.3 MT peaks 200 rpm earlier for power and 100 rpm earlier for torque, with Diesel fuel. Tank volume is 52 L on both, so range cannot be ranked until consumption is measured.

Dimensions and weight

Kerb weight 2.0 MT: 1325 kg. Kerb weight 2.3 MT: 1325 kg. Difference: 0 kg. Gross weight both: 2565 kg. Difference: 0 kg. Payload both: 1240 kg. Ground clearance both: not measured. Wheel sizes both: not measured. Tank both: 52 L.

The chassis side of the buy decision is a tie. Dependent, spring suspension front and rear, Ventilated disc front brakes, Drum rear brakes — identical labels on 2.0 MT and 2.3 MT. Choosing a version does not change listed mass, tank, or brake type.

Kerb per litre of tank: 1325 ÷ 52 ≈ 25.5 kg per litre of fuel capacity, same on both. Gross per litre of tank: 2565 ÷ 52 ≈ 49.3 kg/L, same on both.

Reliability and problems: what the spec sheet does and does not settle

The data do not list failure rates, recall counts, or common faults. Reliability cannot be scored from this table. What is specified and can be used as a mechanical difference:

• 2.0 MT is Gasoline, Carburetor, 85 hp, 192 Nm, 1982 cm³, 85 × 86 bore × stroke, fuel 92, no boost.
• 2.3 MT is Diesel, 69 hp, 170 Nm, 2289 cm³, fuel Diesel, no boost; fuel-system type not measured.

Both are 4-cylinder Inline, 2 valves per cylinder, Manual 5, RWD, 1982–1988 Minivan. Compression ratio is not measured on either, so a “high-compression vs low-compression” argument is not supported.

Which version to choose — number-by-number

Choose 2.0 MT when: you want the higher output in this catalogue: 85 hp / 63 kW / 192 Nm, ~42.9 hp/L, ~15.6 kg/hp, Gasoline on 92, Carburetor, and a measured 85 × 86 mm bore × stroke. You accept that 0–100, top speed, and mpg are not measured.

Choose 2.3 MT when: the fuel type must be Diesel and displacement must be the larger 2289 cm³. You accept 69 hp / 51 kW / 170 Nm, ~30.1 hp/L, ~19.2 kg/hp, and not-measured fuel-system, bore × stroke, 0–100, top speed, and mpg.

Do not choose on generation: there is only 1 generation (1982-01-01 to 1988-12-31). There is no later Urvan generation in this dataset to buy for “what changed.”

Do not choose on weight, tank, drive, or gearbox: 2.0 MT and 2.3 MT are equal at 1325 / 2565 kg, 52 L, RWD, Manual, 5 gears.

Do not choose on wheels or clearance: both not measured.

Arithmetic summary

If the decision is “more measured power and torque for the same 1325 kg,” the version is 2.0 MT. If the decision is “Diesel and 2289 cm³ for the same 1325 kg,” the version is 2.3 MT. Those are the only two Urvan versions in the data.