Geely FC (Vision): Which Version Should You Choose?
The Geely FC (Vision) was produced from 2006 to 2011 as a Sedan in a single generation. Buyers choosing between its two versions face a straightforward decision: the 1.5 MT prioritizes lower kerb weight and Euro 4 classification, while the 1.8 MT provides 27 hp and 25 Nm more, along with measured performance and fuel-consumption figures.
The Geely FC (Vision) was produced from 2006 to 2011 as a Sedan in a single generation. Buyers choosing between its two versions face a straightforward decision: the 1.5 MT prioritizes lower kerb weight and Euro 4 classification, while the 1.8 MT provides 27 hp and 25 Nm more, along with measured performance and fuel-consumption figures. Both versions use naturally aspirated Gasoline engines, a 5-speed Manual gearbox, FWD, a 50-litre tank, and 160 mm of ground clearance.
Geely FC (Vision) generations compared
There is only one Geely FC (Vision) generation in the supplied catalogue data, so there are no later generations or restylings to compare. The 1 generation ran from 2006 through 2011, used a Sedan body, and included two versions: 1.5 MT and 1.8 MT. The choice is therefore between engines and specifications within the same generation rather than between different production eras.
Engine and specs comparison
| Version | Engine | Power | Torque | Fuel | Cylinders | Layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.5 MT | 1,498 cc | 106 hp (78 kW) at 6,000 rpm | 140 Nm at 4,000 rpm | Gasoline, 95 | 4 | Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1.8 MT | 1,792 cc | 133 hp (98 kW) at 6,200 rpm | 165 Nm at 4,200 rpm | Gasoline, 92 | 4 | Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
The 1.8 MT adds 294 cc of displacement over the 1.5 MT. In return, it produces 27 hp more power and 25 Nm more torque. Its peak power arrives 200 rpm later, while peak torque arrives 200 rpm later.
Calculated from the supplied displacement and output figures, the 1.5 MT develops about 70.8 hp per litre, while the 1.8 MT develops about 74.2 hp per litre. The 1.8 MT therefore has both the greater total output and the higher specific output.
Both engines are naturally aspirated—boost is listed as No—and both use Distributed injection (multi-point). Each has a compression ratio of 9.8. The 1.8 MT is specified with 4 valves per cylinder and a Front, transverse engine position; valves per cylinder and engine position for the 1.5 MT are not measured.
Performance, fuel economy, and mpg data
| Version | 0–100 km/h | Top speed | City consumption | Highway consumption | Combined consumption |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.5 MT | not measured | not measured | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 1.8 MT | 13 seconds | 185 km/h | 10.2 l/100 km | 5.9 l/100 km | 7.5 l/100 km |
The 1.8 MT is the only version for which acceleration, top-speed, and economy results are supplied. It reaches 100 km/h in 13 seconds and has a top speed of 185 km/h. Its consumption is 10.2 l/100 km in the city, 5.9 l/100 km on the highway, and 7.5 l/100 km combined.
For the 1.5 MT, 0–100 km/h acceleration, maximum speed, city consumption, highway consumption, and combined consumption are all not measured. That prevents a numerical claim that the smaller engine is faster or more economical. MPG figures are also not measured for either version.
Dimensions, weight, clearance, and tank capacity
| Version | Kerb weight | Gross weight | Ground clearance | Fuel tank | Wheel sizes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.5 MT | 1,200 kg | not measured | 160 mm | 50 litres | not measured |
| 1.8 MT | 1,305 kg | 1,640 kg | 160 mm | 50 litres | not measured |
The 1.8 MT weighs 105 kg more at the kerb than the 1.5 MT. Despite that difference, its additional power gives it the more favourable calculated weight-to-power ratio: approximately 9.8 kg per hp for the 1.8 MT, compared with approximately 11.3 kg per hp for the 1.5 MT.
Gross weight is 1,640 kg for the 1.8 MT and not measured for the 1.5 MT. Both versions have identical 160 mm ground clearance and identical 50-litre fuel tanks. Wheel sizes are not measured for either version.
The 1.5 MT has Independent, spring front suspension; its rear suspension is not measured. The 1.8 MT combines Independent, spring front suspension with Semi-independent, spring rear suspension. Both versions have Disc front and Disc rear brakes.
Reliability and problems
Reliability records, fault frequencies, repair histories, and model-specific problems are not measured in the supplied data. Consequently, neither 1.5 MT nor 1.8 MT can be presented as the more reliable version from these specifications alone. A purchase decision based on reliability would require evidence outside this catalogue dataset.
Which Geely FC (Vision) version should you buy?
Choose the 1.8 MT if output and documented capability matter most. Compared with the 1.5 MT, it gives you 27 hp more, 25 Nm more, and 294 cc more displacement. It also has the better calculated weight-to-power ratio despite carrying an extra 105 kg. Crucially, it is the only version with measured acceleration, maximum-speed, and consumption data: 13 seconds to 100 km/h, 185 km/h, and 7.5 l/100 km combined.
Choose the 1.5 MT if the lower 1,200 kg kerb weight, 95 fuel specification, and Euro 4 classification better match your priorities. Its 106 hp and 140 Nm are lower than the 1.8 MT figures, but it retains the same 5-speed Manual gearbox, FWD, 160 mm clearance, 50-litre tank, and Disc brakes at both ends. Its economy and performance should not be assumed, because those values are not measured.
There is no purchase-price information in the data, so the literal extra cost of the 1.8 MT cannot be calculated. In specification terms, what the more powerful version buys is clear: 27 additional hp, 25 additional Nm, a better power-per-litre result, and a better calculated kg-per-hp ratio. On the available evidence, the 1.8 MT is the stronger all-round choice; the 1.5 MT is the alternative for buyers who specifically value the 105 kg lower kerb weight or its recorded Euro 4 classification.