GAC GN8: Which Version Should You Buy?

The GAC GN8 choice comes down to three entries, all named 2.0 AT: the original-generation version with 201 hp, the original-generation version with 252 hp, and the restyled version with 252 hp. The 201 hp model is the distinct lower-output option, paired with a 6-speed Automatic and a 68 L tank. Both 252 hp entries use an 8-speed Automatic, have 390 Nm, weigh 2006 kg, and carry 65 L of fuel.

The GAC GN8 choice comes down to three entries, all named 2.0 AT: the original-generation version with 201 hp, the original-generation version with 252 hp, and the restyled version with 252 hp. The 201 hp model is the distinct lower-output option, paired with a 6-speed Automatic and a 68 L tank. Both 252 hp entries use an 8-speed Automatic, have 390 Nm, weigh 2006 kg, and carry 65 L of fuel. On the figures available, the 252 hp specification provides the strongest power-to-weight ratio and the highest torque without increasing combined fuel consumption over the 201 hp version.

GAC GN8 generations and version differences

The GAC GN8 is a Minivan represented by one generation and its restyling. The original vehicle ran from 2017 to 2020 and offered two versions, while the restyling started in 2020 and has one listed version. Treating the restyling as part of the first generation is important because it shows the actual purchasing choice: two original specifications versus one later specification, rather than two unrelated generations.

The original first-generation GAC GN8 has two 2.0 AT versions. The 201 hp model produces 320 Nm and uses a 6-speed Automatic. The 252 hp model produces 390 Nm and uses an 8-speed Automatic. Both are Gasoline, FWD minivans with a 1991 cc front, transverse engine, 4 Inline cylinders, 4 valves per cylinder, Direct injection (direct), and Turbo.

The first-generation restyling has one 2.0 AT, rated at 252 hp and 390 Nm and paired with an 8-speed Automatic. It retains the 1991 cc Gasoline engine, FWD, front transverse placement, 4 Inline cylinders, 4 valves per cylinder, and Direct injection (direct). Boost is not measured in the supplied specification for the restyled model, so it should not be assumed from the earlier 252 hp version.

GAC GN8 engine specs compared

Because every entry carries the exact same 2.0 AT name, power output and production phase are the clearest ways to distinguish them.

Production phase and exact versionPowerTorqueDisplacementFuelCylindersLayoutBoostGearboxDrive
2017–2020 2.0 AT, 201 hp201 hp at 5200 rpm320 Nm at 1750–4000 rpm1991 ccGasoline, 954InlineTurbo6-speed AutomaticFWD
2017–2020 2.0 AT, 252 hp252 hp at 5250 rpm390 Nm at 1750–4000 rpm1991 ccGasoline, 954InlineTurbo8-speed AutomaticFWD
From 2020 restyled 2.0 AT, 252 hp252 hp at 5250 rpm390 Nm at 1750–4000 rpm1991 ccGasoline, 954Inlinenot measured8-speed AutomaticFWD

The original 252 hp 2.0 AT has 51 hp more than the 201 hp 2.0 AT, an increase of about 25.4%. Its 390 Nm torque figure is 70 Nm higher, or about 21.9% more than 320 Nm. Both reach their stated torque across the same 1750–4000 rpm range.

Using the listed 1991 cc displacement, the 201 hp 2.0 AT develops approximately 101 hp per litre, while either 252 hp 2.0 AT develops approximately 127 hp per litre. The higher-output specification therefore extracts roughly 26 hp per litre more from the same engine capacity.

The restyled 252 hp 2.0 AT matches the original 252 hp version in every listed engine-output figure: 252 hp at 5250 rpm, 390 Nm at 1750–4000 rpm, and 1991 cc. It also retains the 8-speed Automatic and FWD. The data therefore does not establish a powertrain-output advantage for the restyling over the earlier 252 hp model.

Performance, fuel consumption, and economy

Acceleration from 0–100 is not measured for any GAC GN8 2.0 AT in the supplied data. Top speed is also not measured for all three entries. Their horsepower and weight figures can be compared, but they do not justify inventing acceleration or maximum-speed estimates.

Production phase and exact version0–100Top speedCity consumptionHighway consumptionCombined consumption
2017–2020 2.0 AT, 201 hpnot measurednot measured11.17.78.9
2017–2020 2.0 AT, 252 hpnot measurednot measurednot measurednot measured8.7
From 2020 restyled 2.0 AT, 252 hpnot measurednot measurednot measurednot measured8.7

The original 201 hp 2.0 AT is the only entry with separate city and highway figures: 11.1 and 7.7. Its combined figure is 8.9. Both 252 hp versions are listed at 8.7 combined, which is 0.2 lower than the 201 hp model despite their additional 51 hp and 70 Nm. City and highway consumption for the 252 hp versions is not measured, so their economy cannot be compared with the 201 hp model in those individual driving conditions.

No CO₂ value or environmental class is measured for any version. Engine-oil type and engine-oil capacity are also not measured for every GAC GN8 entry in this data.

GAC GN8 dimensions, weight, and capacity

External length, width, height, and wheelbase are not measured for the original or restyled GAC GN8 in the supplied specifications. Gross weight, ground clearance, and wheel sizes are likewise not measured for all three versions.

Production phase and exact versionKerb weightGross weightGround clearanceFuel tankWheel sizes
2017–2020 2.0 AT, 201 hp2002 kgnot measurednot measured68 Lnot measured
2017–2020 2.0 AT, 252 hp2006 kgnot measurednot measured65 Lnot measured
From 2020 restyled 2.0 AT, 252 hp2006 kgnot measurednot measured65 Lnot measured

The original 252 hp model weighs only 4 kg more than the 201 hp model but supplies 51 hp and 70 Nm more. Its weight-to-power figure is approximately 8.0 kg per hp, compared with approximately 10.0 kg per hp for the 201 hp 2.0 AT. Expressed the other way, the 201 hp version offers about 100 hp per tonne, whereas both 252 hp versions offer about 126 hp per tonne.

The 201 hp 2.0 AT has the larger tank at 68 L, which is 3 L more than the 65 L tank fitted to each 252 hp entry. Range should not be calculated from these figures alone because real driving conditions are not part of the data, and the higher-output versions have no separate city or highway consumption measurements.

All three versions use Independent, spring suspension at the front and rear. Each has Ventilated disc front brakes and Disc rear brakes. The listed chassis hardware therefore does not separate the available versions.

Which GAC GN8 version should you choose?

Choose the original 201 hp 2.0 AT if the larger 68 L fuel tank or the availability of separate 11.1 city and 7.7 highway consumption figures matters more than maximum output. It is also 4 kg lighter than either 252 hp entry. Its trade-offs are 51 hp less power, 70 Nm less torque, a 6-speed rather than 8-speed Automatic, and a combined consumption figure that is 0.2 higher.

Choose the original 252 hp 2.0 AT when the priority is obtaining the strongest measured specification without requiring the restyled production phase. Against the 201 hp version, it adds about 25.4% more horsepower and about 21.9% more torque while increasing kerb weight by only about 0.2%. Its approximate 8.0 kg-per-hp figure is substantially better than the lower-output model’s approximate 10.0 kg per hp. The tank is 3 L smaller, but listed combined consumption improves from 8.9 to 8.7.

Choose the restyled 252 hp 2.0 AT if having the later, from-2020 version is itself the deciding requirement. On measured specifications, it does not outperform the earlier 252 hp 2.0 AT: both have 252 hp, 390 Nm, a 1991 cc Gasoline engine, an 8-speed Automatic, FWD, 8.7 combined consumption, 2006 kg kerb weight, and a 65 L tank. Any differences in price, equipment, interior, dimensions, reliability, or market availability are not measured in the supplied data and cannot support a factual preference here.

For a specification-led decision, the 252 hp 2.0 AT is the more compelling configuration. It combines 51 hp and 70 Nm more than the 201 hp version with only 4 kg of additional kerb weight and a 0.2 lower combined-consumption figure. Choosing between the original and restyled 252 hp entries should then depend on information outside this dataset, because their available numerical specifications are effectively the same.