Geo Storm

Geo Storm: which version to buy (1990–1993)

There is only 1 generation of the Geo Storm, a Coupe sold from 1990-01-01 to 1993-12-31. The buying decision is not “which generation,” because later years do not add a restyle generation in this data. The decision is which of the 5 versions to take: three 1.6 MT cars that share a name but not power (95, 130, and 160 hp), one 1.6 AT, and one 1.8 MT.

There is only 1 generation of the Geo Storm, a Coupe sold from 1990-01-01 to 1993-12-31. The buying decision is not “which generation,” because later years do not add a restyle generation in this data. The decision is which of the 5 versions to take: three 1.6 MT cars that share a name but not power (95, 130, and 160 hp), one 1.6 AT, and one 1.8 MT. All five use Gasoline, 4 Inline cylinders, FWD, a 47 L tank, and 130 mm ground clearance. Fuel consumption (city, highway, mixed), CO2, eco class, wheel sizes, and gross weight are not measured on every version, so they cannot decide the purchase.

Specs that actually separate the five versions

Engine placement is Front, transverse on all four 1.6 versions; on 1.8 MT it is not measured. Feed is Distributed injection (multi-point) on all five. Compression is 9.8 on every 1.6 and 9.7 on 1.8 MT. Bore × stroke is 80 × 79 mm on the 1.6 line and 80 × 90 mm on 1.8 MT. Fuel grade is 95 throughout.

Power per litre: what the extra output costs in engine size

Specific output (hp ÷ litres of displacement):

• 1.6 MT 95 hp: 95 ÷ 1.588 = 59.8 hp/L
• 1.6 AT: same engine, 59.8 hp/L
• 1.6 MT 130 hp: 130 ÷ 1.588 = 81.9 hp/L — +22.1 hp/L versus the 95 hp pair, still No boost
• 1.8 MT: 140 ÷ 1.809 = 77.4 hp/L — more total power than the 95 hp cars (+45 hp) and +221 cc, but 4.5 hp/L less than the 130 hp 1.6 MT
• 1.6 MT 160 hp: 160 ÷ 1.588 = 100.8 hp/L — the only Turbo Storm; +41.0 hp/L versus 95 hp, +18.9 hp/L versus 130 hp, +23.4 hp/L versus 1.8 MT

If the question is “most power from the smallest engine,” the 1.6 MT 160 hp is the arithmetic winner. If the question is “more power without turbo,” the 1.6 MT 130 hp beats 1.8 MT on specific output even though 1.8 MT has +10 hp over that 130 hp car and +221 cc.

Peak torque, where measured, does not follow displacement:

• 95 hp 1.6 MT / 1.6 AT: 131 Nm at 4800 rpm
• 130 hp 1.6 MT: 138 Nm at 5800 rpm — only +7 Nm, and 1000 rpm higher
• 1.8 MT: 120 Nm at 4600 rpm — 11 Nm less than the weakest 1.6, despite +221 cc
• 160 hp 1.6 MT: torque not measured

The 1.8 therefore buys a longer stroke (90 mm vs 79 mm) and 4 valves per cylinder, not a stronger torque figure in this dataset. The 130 hp 1.6 MT is the measured torque leader; it also peaks power 1200 rpm higher than the 95 hp 1.6 (7000 vs 5800).

Weight per horsepower and dimensions

Kerb weight is measured on four versions and not measured on 1.6 AT. Gross weight is not measured on all five. Ground clearance is 130 mm and the tank is 47 L on all five. Wheel sizes are not measured.

kg per hp (kerb ÷ hp):

• 1.6 MT 95 hp: 1035 ÷ 95 = 10.89 kg/hp (heaviest measured 1.6: 1035 kg)
• 1.6 MT 130 hp: 1010 ÷ 130 = 7.77 kg/hp — 25 kg lighter than the 95 hp manual and +35 hp, so 3.12 kg/hp better
• 1.6 MT 160 hp: 1010 ÷ 160 = 6.31 kg/hp — same 1010 kg as the 130 hp car, +30 hp, another 1.46 kg/hp better
• 1.8 MT: 2480 ÷ 140 = 17.71 kg/hp — +1470 kg versus the 1010 kg 1.6 manuals and +1445 kg versus the 95 hp 1.6 MT. That mass is in the data and it is the worst power-to-weight of the set by a wide margin.

Front suspension is Independent, spring on all five. Rear suspension is Independent, spring on the four 1.6 versions and not measured on 1.8 MT. Front brakes are Ventilated disc and rear brakes Drum on all five — buying a stronger engine does not buy a different brake type in this catalogue.

Performance and mpg: what is measured, what is not

0–100: only 1.8 MT is measured, at 7.1 s. For 1.6 MT 95 hp, 1.6 AT, 1.6 MT 130 hp, and 1.6 MT 160 hp, 0–100 is not measured. You cannot rank the 1.6 cars on sprint time from this data.

Top speed:

• 1.6 MT 95 hp, 1.6 MT 130 hp, 1.6 MT 160 hp: 200 km/h each. The turbo +65 hp over the 95 hp car and +30 hp over the 130 hp car do not raise the listed maximum.
• 1.8 MT: 210 km/h — +10 km/h over those three manuals.
• 1.6 AT: top speed not measured.

Fuel consumption / mpg: city, highway, and mixed are not measured on all five versions. There is no mpg ranking. Tank volume does not change (47 L), so range cannot be compared either.

Which version to choose

Choose 1.6 MT (95 hp) if you want the baseline manual. It is the only 95 hp Manual 5. Versus 1.6 AT it keeps the same 95 hp, 131 Nm, 1588 cc, No boost, and FWD, and it is the only 95 hp car with a measured top speed (200 km/h) and a measured kerb weight (1035 kg). Versus the other two 1.6 MT names it is 35 hp and 65 hp down, 7 Nm down versus the 130 hp car, and 25 kg heavier than both 1010 kg 1.6 manuals.

Choose 1.6 AT if the gearbox is the point of the purchase. It is the only Automatic Storm (4 speeds). Power, torque, displacement, boost, drive, tank, and clearance match the 95 hp 1.6 MT. What you give up in the data: top speed not measured, kerb weight not measured. You do not get the 130 or 160 hp engines with an automatic — those exist only as 1.6 MT.

Choose 1.6 MT (130 hp) if you want more power without Turbo and without growing the engine. +35 hp (+37%) and +7 Nm versus the 95 hp pair, still No boost, still 1588 cc, still Manual 5, still 200 km/h. It is 25 kg lighter than the 95 hp manual. Versus 1.8 MT it has 10 hp less but 18 Nm more, 221 cc less, 77.4 vs 81.9 hp/L in the 1.8’s favour on total litres but not on specific output, and it avoids the 2480 kg kerb figure. Peak power arrives at 7000 rpm, 600 rpm above 1.8 MT (6400) and 1200 rpm above the 95 hp 1.6.

Choose 1.6 MT (160 hp) if maximum listed power and Turbo are the reason to buy. 160 hp / 118 kW is +65 hp versus 95 hp (+68%), +30 hp versus 130 hp, +20 hp versus 1.8 MT. It is the only boosted Storm. Kerb weight matches the 130 hp 1.6 MT at 1010 kg, so you get the best measured kg/hp (6.31). Top speed stays 200 km/h — the same as the 95 and 130 hp manuals, 10 km/h below 1.8 MT. Torque, power rpm, and torque rpm are not measured; 4 valves per cylinder is listed here (and on 1.8 MT), not on the 95/130 hp 1.6 cars.

Choose 1.8 MT only if you specifically need the 1809 cc engine, the only measured 0–100, or the highest listed top speed. 140 hp, 120 Nm, Manual 5, No boost, 4 valves per cylinder, compression 9.7, stroke 90 mm. It is the only version with 0–100 in the data (7.1 s) and the only one at 210 km/h. Engine placement is not measured; rear suspension is not measured. The 2480 kg kerb weight is 2.46× the 1010 kg 1.6 manuals and makes this the worst kg/hp. Torque is the lowest measured (120 Nm). If the goal is a light, high-output Coupe, the numbers point back to a 1.6 MT, not this 1.8.

Generation note (there is nothing later to “wait for”)

Production is one window: 1990–1993, one body (Coupe), five versions in that window. No second generation exists in the data to change drive, tank, clearance, or brake layout. Moving “up” a version is the only upgrade path: Automatic only on 1.6 AT at 95 hp; Turbo only on 1.6 MT 160 hp; 1.8 only as 1.8 MT. Mpg, wheels, gross weight, and most 0–100 times stay not measured, so they cannot override the power, gearbox, boost, and weight arithmetic above.