Great Wall Hover H6

Great Wall Hover H6: Which Version to Buy and Why

The Great Wall Hover H6 range presents three distinct choices: the 1.5 MT Gasoline version prioritizes lower measured fuel consumption, the 2.0 MT Diesel combines the quickest measured acceleration with the most torque, and the 2.4-litre Gasoline versions offer Automatic gearbox options and up to 164 hp. Buyers also need to choose between FWD and AWD.

The Great Wall Hover H6 range presents three distinct choices: the 1.5 MT Gasoline version prioritizes lower measured fuel consumption, the 2.0 MT Diesel combines the quickest measured acceleration with the most torque, and the 2.4-litre Gasoline versions offer Automatic gearbox options and up to 164 hp. Buyers also need to choose between FWD and AWD. Every Hover H6 in the supplied catalogue belongs to the same generation and uses an SUV 5-doors body, so there is no later generation to compare here.

Great Wall Hover H6 generations and versions

The 1 generation ran from June 2012 through October 2016. It was offered solely as an SUV 5-doors and contains 14 modifications in the catalogue, of which 12 are represented in the supplied version data. No separate restyling or second generation is identified.

The listed versions are 1.5 MT with 143 hp in FWD or AWD form; 2.4 MT with 136 hp or 147 hp; 2.4 AT with 136 hp, 147 hp, or 164 hp, with the 164 hp version available as FWD or AWD; 2.0 MT Diesel with 140 hp and FWD or AWD; and 2.0 AT Diesel with 150 hp and FWD or AWD. Identical version names must therefore be distinguished by power and drive.

Engine and transmission specs

Power per litre separates these engines more clearly than displacement alone. The 1.5 MT produces about 95.5 hp per litre, compared with approximately 70.1 hp per litre for the 2.0 AT Diesel, 70.0 for the 2.0 MT Diesel, and between 57.2 and 69.0 hp per litre for the 2.4-litre Gasoline versions. The 1.5 MT is therefore the strongest specific-output choice, while the Diesel versions lead on torque: their 310 Nm exceeds the 1.5 MT by 108 Nm and the most powerful 2.4 AT by 100 Nm.

Within the 2.4-litre group, moving from 136 hp to 147 hp adds 11 hp and 5 Nm. Moving from 147 hp to 164 hp adds another 17 hp without increasing the listed 210 Nm torque output. The 164 hp 2.4 AT is consequently the power-led option rather than the torque-led one.

Performance and fuel economy

The 2.0 MT Diesel is the strongest measured all-round performer. Its 11.4-second acceleration time is 0.7 seconds quicker than the 12.1-second FWD 1.5 MT and measured 2.4-litre versions, and 1.1 seconds quicker than the AWD 1.5 MT. Its 180 km/h maximum is also 4 km/h higher than their 176 km/h figure.

Measured combined consumption is lowest for the 2.0 MT Diesel at 7.8 l/100 km. That is 0.1 l/100 km below the 1.5 MT and 0.7 l/100 km below the measured 2.4-litre versions. The 1.5 MT uses 0.2 l/100 km less than the 2.0 MT Diesel in city running, while both record 7.2 l/100 km on the highway. Fuel economy for the 164 hp 2.4 AT and both 150 hp 2.0 AT versions was not measured, so their running costs cannot be ranked from the supplied figures.

Dimensions, weight, tank and wheel sizes

All listed versions have a 70-litre fuel tank. Ground clearance is either 185 mm or 190 mm. The 143 hp 1.5 MT, 147 hp 2.4 MT, 147 hp 2.4 AT, and 140 hp 2.0 MT are listed at 185 mm. The 136 hp 2.4 MT, 136 hp 2.4 AT, 164 hp 2.4 AT, and 150 hp 2.0 AT are listed at 190 mm.

Kerb weight is 1606 kg for the 1.5 MT, the 136 hp and 147 hp 2.4-litre versions, and the 2.0 MT Diesel. Their gross weight is 2116 kg. The 164 hp 2.4 AT weighs 1690 kg, while its gross weight was not measured. Kerb and gross weights for both 150 hp 2.0 AT Diesel versions were not measured. Wheel sizes were not measured for any listed version.

Using the available kerb weights, the 147 hp 2.4 versions carry about 10.9 kg per horsepower, compared with approximately 11.2 kg/hp for the 1.5 MT, 11.5 kg/hp for the 2.0 MT Diesel, and 11.8 kg/hp for the 136 hp 2.4 versions. Despite weighing 84 kg more, the 164 hp 2.4 AT has the best calculated ratio at about 10.3 kg/hp. Its acceleration figure, however, was not measured, so the ratio cannot be treated as proof that it is the quickest version.

Reliability and problems

Reliability results, failure rates, repair histories, and model-specific problems are not measured in the supplied data. No version can therefore be recommended on reliability grounds. The available comparison is limited to engines, transmissions, drive systems, performance, fuel consumption, weight, ground clearance, and fuel capacity.

Which Great Wall Hover H6 version should you buy?

Choose the 2.0 MT Diesel with 140 hp if the priority is the best documented combination of acceleration, torque, and consumption. Both its FWD and AWD forms provide 310 Nm, an 11.4-second 0–100 km/h time, a 180 km/h top speed, and 7.8 l/100 km combined consumption. The choice between them is therefore about FWD versus AWD rather than a measured performance difference.

Choose the 1.5 MT with 143 hp if you want a Gasoline engine with the lowest measured consumption among the Gasoline versions. Its 7.9 l/100 km combined figure is 0.6 l/100 km below the measured 2.4-litre alternatives. The FWD version reaches 100 km/h in 12.1 seconds, whereas the AWD version takes 12.5 seconds; all other listed engine, consumption, weight, clearance, and top-speed figures are identical.

Choose the 2.4 AT with 147 hp if an Automatic Gasoline configuration is more important than achieving the lowest measured consumption. It supplies 11 hp and 5 Nm more than the 136 hp 2.4 AT while retaining a 6-speed Automatic, although both record the same 12.1-second acceleration, 176 km/h top speed, and 8.5 l/100 km combined consumption. The 136 hp 2.4 AT instead offers 190 mm of clearance, 5 mm more than the 147 hp version.

Choose the 2.4 AT with 164 hp if maximum listed Gasoline power is the main requirement. It adds 17 hp over the 147 hp 2.4 AT and reaches a listed 180 km/h rather than 176 km/h. It is available with FWD or AWD, but its acceleration and fuel-consumption figures were not measured, and it uses a 4-speed Automatic instead of the 147 hp version’s 6-speed Automatic.

Choose the 2.0 AT Diesel with 150 hp when both Diesel and Automatic are essential. It adds 10 hp over the 2.0 MT while retaining 310 Nm and offering FWD or AWD, but acceleration, top speed, consumption, kerb weight, and gross weight were not measured. On the evidence available, the 2.0 MT Diesel is the clearest data-led choice; the Automatic versions require accepting substantially more uncertainty in the specification record.