Great Wall Socool: which version to buy (2.2 MT RWD vs 2.2 MT AWD)
The Great Wall Socool catalogue lists one generation (2006-01-01 to 2008-12-31), one body (Pickup double-cab), and two versions that share the same name: 2.2 MT. They are not two engines. Both 2.2 MT units are Gasoline, 2237 cm³, 105 hp (77 kW) at 4600 rpm, 190 Nm at 3200 rpm, Inline 4, 2 valves per cylinder, No boost, Front, longitudinal, Distributed injection (multi-point), fuel 92, Manual 5.
The Great Wall Socool catalogue lists one generation (2006-01-01 to 2008-12-31), one body (Pickup double-cab), and two versions that share the same name: 2.2 MT. They are not two engines. Both 2.2 MT units are Gasoline, 2237 cm³, 105 hp (77 kW) at 4600 rpm, 190 Nm at 3200 rpm, Inline 4, 2 valves per cylinder, No boost, Front, longitudinal, Distributed injection (multi-point), fuel 92, Manual 5. The only drivetrain split in the data is RWD versus AWD. If you are choosing a Socool, you are choosing that split — not a different displacement, not a different gearbox, not a restyle generation.
Specs: the two 2.2 MT versions side by side
| Version | Drive | hp | kW | Nm | Displacement (cm³) | Fuel | Cylinders | Layout | Boost | Gearbox | Gears |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.2 MT | RWD | 105 | 77 | 190 | 2237 | Gasoline | 4 | Inline | No | Manual | 5 |
| 2.2 MT | AWD | 105 | 77 | 190 | 2237 | Gasoline | 4 | Inline | No | Manual | 5 |
Engine architecture is identical: Front, longitudinal; Distributed injection (multi-point); 2 valves per cylinder (8 valves on 4 cylinders); fuel 92. Compression ratio is not measured on either 2.2 MT. Bore × stroke is not measured on either 2.2 MT.
Which generation changed what
There is 1 generation only. Start 2006-01-01, stop 2008-12-31, 2 modifications, body Pickup double-cab. No second generation exists in the data, so there is no later gearbox, no later power figure, and no later body type to “wait for.” The generation does not split the two 2.2 MT versions in time: both start 2006-01-01 and both stop 2008-12-31. Buying “later generation” is not an option here; buying RWD or AWD is.
Engine math on the shared 2.2 MT (same for RWD and AWD)
Displacement 2237 cm³ is 2.237 litres.
- Power per litre: 105 hp ÷ 2.237 L = 46.94 hp/L
- Power per litre (kW): 77 kW ÷ 2.237 L = 34.42 kW/L
- Torque per litre: 190 Nm ÷ 2.237 L = 84.94 Nm/L
- Peak power rpm vs peak torque rpm: 4600 − 3200 = 1400 rpm between the two peaks
- hp to kW check on the same row: 105 hp and 77 kW are the pair given; 105 ÷ 77 ≈ 1.36 hp per kW as listed
Because both 2.2 MT rows use 105 hp, 77 kW, 190 Nm, 2237 cm³, Gasoline, Inline 4, No boost, these ratios do not change when you pick AWD. The extra drivetrain does not buy extra horsepower in this catalogue.
Performance and economy (mpg, 0-100, top speed)
On 2.2 MT RWD: 0–100 is not measured; top speed is not measured; city consumption is not measured; highway consumption is not measured; combined consumption is not measured; CO2 is not measured; eco class is not measured.
On 2.2 MT AWD: 0–100 is not measured; top speed is not measured; city consumption is not measured; highway consumption is not measured; combined consumption is not measured; CO2 is not measured; eco class is not measured.
You cannot rank the two versions on acceleration, top speed, or mpg from this dataset. Any “AWD uses more fuel” claim would be a number that is not in the data. The honest ranking on economy is: not measured vs not measured.
Dimensions, weight, ground clearance, tank
| Version | Drive | Kerb weight (kg) | Gross weight (kg) | Payload from listed masses (kg) | Ground clearance (mm) | Tank | Wheels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.2 MT | RWD | 1500 | 2325 | 2325 − 1500 = 825 | 170 | not measured | not measured |
| 2.2 MT | AWD | not measured | 2325 | not measured (kerb missing) | 170 | not measured | not measured |
Ground clearance is 170 mm on both. The AWD 2.2 MT does not list a higher clearance in the data; 170 − 170 = 0 mm difference.
Gross mass is 2325 kg on both. 2325 − 2325 = 0 kg. Whatever the AWD hardware weighs, the catalogue still caps both at the same gross figure.
Kerb mass is the one weight that is not shared. RWD 2.2 MT is 1500 kg. AWD 2.2 MT kerb is not measured. You can compute weight per horsepower only for RWD:
- RWD 2.2 MT: 1500 kg ÷ 105 hp = 14.29 kg/hp
- RWD 2.2 MT: 105 hp ÷ 1500 kg = 0.070 hp/kg
- RWD 2.2 MT at gross: 2325 kg ÷ 105 hp = 22.14 kg/hp
- AWD 2.2 MT: kg/hp at kerb is not measured
Front suspension is Independent, spring on both. Rear suspension is not measured on both. Front brakes are Ventilated disc on both. Rear brakes are Drum on both. Wheel sizes are not measured on both. Tank is not measured on both.
Payload 825 kg is an arithmetic fact only for RWD 2.2 MT, because only that row has both 1500 and 2325. For AWD, payload from kerb is not measured.
2.2 MT RWD vs 2.2 MT AWD: what the extra drivetrain buys
What is the same (difference = 0 on every listed engine and chassis figure except drive and kerb):
- Name: both 2.2 MT
- Years: both 2006-01-01 to 2008-12-31
- Body: Pickup double-cab
- Power: 105 hp / 77 kW at 4600 rpm
- Torque: 190 Nm at 3200 rpm
- Displacement: 2237 cm³ Gasoline
- Cylinders: 4 Inline, 2 valves per cylinder, No boost
- Layout: Front, longitudinal
- Injection: Distributed injection (multi-point)
- Fuel: 92
- Gearbox: Manual 5
- Gross: 2325 kg
- Clearance: 170 mm
- Front brakes: Ventilated disc
- Rear brakes: Drum
- Front suspension: Independent, spring
What actually differs in the data:
1. Drive: RWD vs AWD. That is the buying decision. 2. Kerb weight: 1500 kg vs not measured. You cannot prove from this table that AWD is heavier; you also cannot prove it is 1500 kg.
There is no price in the data. “What the extra money buys” cannot be stated in currency. The extra item on the AWD 2.2 MT row is the AWD label, not extra hp (105 − 105 = 0 hp), not extra Nm (190 − 190 = 0 Nm), not extra gears (5 − 5 = 0), not extra clearance (0 mm), not a different Manual, not a different Pickup double-cab body.
Which version to choose
Choose 2.2 MT RWD if you want the only row with a complete kerb mass. You get 1500 kg kerb, 2325 kg gross, 825 kg between those two figures, 14.29 kg/hp, and the same 105 hp / 190 Nm / 2237 cm³ Gasoline Inline 4 Manual 5 package as the other truck. Rear-wheel drive is the listed drivetrain. 0–100, top speed, mpg, tank, and wheels remain not measured.
Choose 2.2 MT AWD if the catalogue requirement is all-wheel drive on this Pickup double-cab. You do not get more power (still 105 hp, 77 kW), you do not get more torque (still 190 Nm), you do not get a different gearbox (still Manual 5), and you do not get a measured kerb, so you cannot compute kg/hp or payload the way you can on RWD. Gross stays 2325 kg; clearance stays 170 mm. 0–100, top speed, mpg, tank, and wheels remain not measured.
Do not choose by generation. There is 1 generation and 2 versions, both 2.2 MT, both 2006–2008. There is no restyle generation and no later engine family in this dataset.
Do not choose by “the 105 hp 2.2 vs the other 2.2.” Both 2.2 MT versions are 105 hp. Distinguish them as 2.2 MT (RWD) and 2.2 MT (AWD) — same name, same power, different drive.
Reliability / problems: no failure rates, no service intervals, and no defect counts are in the data. Those topics are not measured here. The mechanical comparison that is measured is the table above: identical engine and gearbox figures, identical 2325 kg gross, identical 170 mm clearance, split only on RWD vs AWD, with kerb 1500 kg on RWD 2.2 MT and kerb not measured on AWD 2.2 MT.