Geely Emgrand GT

Geely Emgrand GT: Which Version Should You Buy?

The Geely Emgrand GT was produced as a Sedan from March 2015 to November 2019. Its single generation offers two FWD versions, both with a 6-speed Automatic gearbox: 2.4 AT and 1.8 AT. The choice is straightforward on paper. The 1.8 AT is the stronger and quicker option, producing 163 hp and 250 Nm and reaching 100 km/h in 9 seconds.

The Geely Emgrand GT was produced as a Sedan from March 2015 to November 2019. Its single generation offers two FWD versions, both with a 6-speed Automatic gearbox: 2.4 AT and 1.8 AT. The choice is straightforward on paper. The 1.8 AT is the stronger and quicker option, producing 163 hp and 250 Nm and reaching 100 km/h in 9 seconds. The 2.4 AT develops 148 hp and 215 Nm and takes 12.8 seconds to reach 100 km/h. However, the 2.4 AT is also 125 kg lighter and uses a non-turbo, multi-point-injection engine. The available data therefore favors the 1.8 AT for performance, while the 2.4 AT is the alternative for buyers who prefer the less powerful non-turbo configuration. Prices and reliability figures are not measured, so the data cannot show whether the quicker version costs more or which engine is more dependable.

Generation and version choice

The Emgrand GT has one generation in the supplied catalogue data. The 1 generation ran from March 2015 through November 2019 and was offered as a Sedan with two versions: 2.4 AT and 1.8 AT. Both versions share the same production period, body type, FWD layout, 6-speed Automatic gearbox, 70-litre fuel tank, 130 mm ground clearance, independent spring suspension at both ends, ventilated front disc brakes, and rear disc brakes.

Because there is only one generation, there is no earlier-versus-later generation decision to make. No restyling is identified in the data, and no generational changes can be compared. The meaningful buying decision is entirely between the two engines available within 1 generation.

Engine specs comparison

The 1.8 AT produces 15 hp and 35 Nm more than the 2.4 AT, despite having 579 cc less displacement. Its calculated specific output is approximately 90.6 hp per litre, compared with approximately 62.2 hp per litre for the 2.4 AT. That gives the 1.8 AT about 28.4 additional hp per litre.

The torque delivery also separates the versions. The 1.8 AT reaches its stated 250 Nm across 1500–4500 rpm, whereas the 2.4 AT delivers 215 Nm across 4000–4500 rpm. On the supplied figures, the 1.8 AT combines greater torque with a much lower starting point for its stated peak-torque range. The 2.4 AT uses no boost and Distributed injection (multi-point); the 1.8 AT uses Turbo and Direct injection (direct).

Performance, acceleration, top speed, and mpg

The 1.8 AT reaches 100 km/h 3.8 seconds sooner than the 2.4 AT. That is the clearest reason to choose it: the improvement is substantial, while both versions have the same stated top speed of 210 km/h.

Fuel consumption is not measured for either version in city, highway, or combined driving. Consequently, no supported mpg comparison can be made, and the smaller displacement of the 1.8 AT must not be treated as proof that it consumes less fuel. Both engines specify 95 fuel and comply with Euro 5. The listed CO₂ figure is 204 for the 1.8 AT and 213 for the 2.4 AT, a difference of 9 in favor of the 1.8 AT on the supplied values.

Dimensions, weight, clearance, tank, and wheel sizes

Exterior length, width, height, and wheelbase are not measured in the supplied data. Gross weight is also not measured for either version.

The 2.4 AT is 125 kg lighter than the 1.8 AT. Even so, its lower output gives it a calculated weight-to-power figure of approximately 11.0 kg per hp. The 1.8 AT carries approximately 10.8 kg per hp. The difference is only about 0.3 kg per hp, but the measured acceleration result is much wider: 9 seconds for the 1.8 AT versus 12.8 seconds for the 2.4 AT.

Neither version gains an advantage in the listed clearance or tank capacity. Both have 130 mm of ground clearance and a 70-litre tank. Wheel sizes are not measured, so they cannot be used to distinguish the versions.

Reliability and problems

Reliability ratings, failure records, repair costs, service intervals, and model-specific problems are not measured. The engine hardware differs—the 2.4 AT has no boost and uses Distributed injection (multi-point), while the 1.8 AT has Turbo and Direct injection (direct)—but those facts alone do not establish which version is more reliable or less expensive to maintain.

A purchase inspection should therefore treat condition and service history as separate questions that cannot be resolved from these specifications. The catalogue data supports a comparison of engine configuration and performance, not a prediction of faults or ownership costs.

Which Emgrand GT version should you buy?

Choose the 1.8 AT if acceleration and engine output matter most. It has 163 hp rather than 148 hp, 250 Nm rather than 215 Nm, and a 9-second 0–100 km/h time rather than 12.8 seconds. It also delivers its stated peak torque from 1500 rpm, while the 2.4 AT reaches its stated torque range from 4000 rpm. Its calculated specific output is approximately 90.6 hp per litre, around 28.4 hp per litre higher than that of the 2.4 AT.

Choose the 2.4 AT if your preference is specifically for the available non-turbo, Distributed injection (multi-point) configuration. It is 125 kg lighter, yet it does not match the 1.8 AT for power, torque, acceleration, or calculated power per litre. Both versions otherwise share a 6-speed Automatic gearbox, FWD, a 210 km/h top speed, a 70-litre tank, 130 mm ground clearance, and the same listed suspension and brake types.

Overall, the 1.8 AT is the stronger specification-led purchase. It buys 15 additional hp, 35 additional Nm, and a 3.8-second improvement in the 0–100 km/h result, with no loss in stated top speed, tank capacity, or ground clearance. Whether those advantages justify any price difference cannot be answered because prices are not measured; fuel economy and reliability are likewise not measured.