Great Wall Steed: Which Version Should You Buy?
The Great Wall Steed version to choose depends chiefly on whether you value lower stated fuel consumption, stronger torque or AWD. Across its two Pickup double-cab generations, every listed version uses a 5-speed Manual gearbox and a front, longitudinal Inline 4-cylinder engine.
The Great Wall Steed version to choose depends chiefly on whether you value lower stated fuel consumption, stronger torque or AWD. Across its two Pickup double-cab generations, every listed version uses a 5-speed Manual gearbox and a front, longitudinal Inline 4-cylinder engine. The strongest option is the second-generation 2.0 MT diesel with 140 hp and 315 Nm, while the lowest stated combined consumption is 9.2 l/100 km for selected 2.2 MT versions. Buyers needing AWD can find it with 2.2 MT, 2.4 MT, 2.8 MT and 2.0 MT powertrains, depending on generation. Price, reliability, problems, parts availability and engine-oil specifications are not measured in the supplied data, so they cannot decide this comparison.
Great Wall Steed generations: what changed?
The first generation was produced from January 2006 through April 2011 as a Pickup double-cab, with 5 listed versions. Its engine choices comprise 2.2 MT gasoline versions producing 106 or 110 hp and 190 Nm, plus 2.8 MT diesel versions producing 95 hp and 225 Nm. RWD and AWD were offered. All first-generation versions have independent torsion front suspension, dependent leaf-spring rear suspension, front Disc brakes and rear Drum brakes. Ground clearance is 194 mm, and the fuel tank holds 70 litres.
The second generation ran from May 2011 through October 2016, again as a Pickup double-cab, but expanded the catalogue to 11 versions. It retained 2.2 MT and 2.8 MT choices while adding 2.4 MT gasoline and 2.0 MT diesel alternatives. Maximum listed output increased from the first generation’s 110 hp to 140 hp, a gain of 30 hp, while maximum torque rose from 225 Nm to 315 Nm, an increase of 90 Nm. Fuel-tank capacity increased from 70 to 73 litres, while ground clearance remained 194 mm. Depending on the engine, the second generation uses independent torsion or independent spring front suspension; every listed version retains dependent leaf-spring rear suspension, front Disc brakes and rear Drum brakes.
Great Wall Steed engine and specs comparison
Repeated version names identify distinct database entries, so they are separated below by generation, power and drive.
| Generation and exact version | Power | Torque | Displacement | Fuel | Cylinders and layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First generation 2.2 MT, 106 hp | 106 hp | 190 Nm | 2237 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| First generation 2.2 MT, 110 hp | 110 hp | 190 Nm | 2237 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | RWD |
| First generation 2.2 MT, 110 hp | 110 hp | 190 Nm | 2237 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| First generation 2.8 MT, 95 hp | 95 hp | 225 Nm | 2771 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | Turbo | 5-speed Manual | RWD |
| First generation 2.8 MT, 95 hp | 95 hp | 225 Nm | 2771 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | Turbo | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| Second generation 2.2 MT, 106 hp | 106 hp | 190 Nm | 2237 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| Second generation 2.2 MT, 110 hp | 110 hp | 190 Nm | 2237 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | RWD |
| Second generation 2.2 MT, 110 hp | 110 hp | 190 Nm | 2237 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| Second generation 2.8 MT, 95 hp, 2771 cc | 95 hp | 225 Nm | 2771 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | RWD |
| Second generation 2.8 MT, 95 hp, 1996 cc | 95 hp | 225 Nm | 1996 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| Second generation 2.4 MT, 125 hp | 125 hp | 210 Nm | 2378 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| Second generation 2.0 MT, 129 hp | 129 hp | 315 Nm | 1996 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | Turbo | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| Second generation 2.4 MT, 125 hp | 125 hp | 210 Nm | 2378 cc | Gasoline | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | RWD |
| Second generation 2.0 MT, 129 hp | 129 hp | 315 Nm | 1996 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | Turbo | 5-speed Manual | RWD |
| Second generation 2.0 MT, 140 hp | 140 hp | 315 Nm | 1996 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | Turbo | 5-speed Manual | AWD |
| Second generation 2.0 MT, 140 hp | 140 hp | 315 Nm | 1996 cc | Diesel | 4, Inline | Turbo | 5-speed Manual | RWD |
On calculated specific output, the second-generation 140 hp 2.0 MT leads at approximately 70.1 hp per litre. The 129 hp 2.0 MT delivers approximately 64.6 hp per litre, the 125 hp 2.4 MT approximately 52.6 hp per litre, the 110 hp 2.2 MT approximately 49.2 hp per litre, and the 106 hp 2.2 MT approximately 47.4 hp per litre. The 95 hp 2.8 MT with 2771 cc produces approximately 34.3 hp per litre, while the unusual second-generation 2.8 MT database entry with 1996 cc produces approximately 47.6 hp per litre.
Performance, fuel consumption and mpg data
The first-generation 2.2 MT with 106 hp and AWD reaches 100 km/h in 15 seconds and has a 150 km/h top speed. Its stated consumption is 10.4 l/100 km urban, 8.7 l/100 km extra-urban and 9.2 l/100 km combined. For the first-generation 110 hp 2.2 MT with RWD, acceleration and top speed are not measured; consumption is also 10.4, 8.7 and 9.2 l/100 km. The 110 hp AWD version takes 15 seconds to reach 100 km/h, has no measured top speed, and records 11.7 l/100 km urban, 8.9 l/100 km extra-urban and 9.5 l/100 km combined.
Both first-generation 2.8 MT diesels reach 100 km/h in 28 seconds and have a 140 km/h top speed. For the RWD version, consumption is 13 l/100 km urban, 9.1 l/100 km extra-urban and 11.3 l/100 km combined. Fuel consumption for the AWD version is not measured.
In the second generation, the 106 hp 2.2 MT AWD reaches 100 km/h in 15 seconds and 157 km/h, with figures of 10.9 l/100 km urban, 8.2 l/100 km extra-urban and 9.7 l/100 km combined. The 110 hp 2.2 MT RWD has acceleration and top speed not measured and returns 10.4, 8.7 and 9.2 l/100 km. The 110 hp AWD version takes 15 seconds to reach 100 km/h, has top speed not measured, and uses 10.9, 8.2 and 9.7 l/100 km.
The second-generation 95 hp 2.8 MT versions both take 28 seconds to reach 100 km/h and reach 140 km/h; all their consumption figures are not measured. Each 125 hp 2.4 MT version has acceleration not measured, a 140 km/h top speed and 12 l/100 km combined consumption, with urban and extra-urban figures not measured. All second-generation 2.0 MT diesels—129 hp or 140 hp, RWD or AWD—have acceleration and top speed not measured. Each records 10.2 l/100 km combined, while urban and extra-urban consumption are not measured. MPG is not measured for any version.
For buyers comparing only published combined figures, the 9.2 l/100 km 2.2 MT RWD is 0.5 l/100 km lower than the 9.7 l/100 km second-generation 2.2 MT AWD entries. The 2.0 MT diesel’s 10.2 l/100 km is 1.8 l/100 km lower than the 2.4 MT gasoline version’s 12 l/100 km, while also providing 105 Nm more torque.
Great Wall Steed weight, dimensions and wheel size
Every listed Great Wall Steed has 194 mm ground clearance. Complete exterior dimensions, tub dimensions and bed size are not measured, and tyre and wheel sizes are not measured.
First-generation kerb weight is 1840 kg for the 106 hp 2.2 MT AWD and the 110 hp 2.2 MT RWD, while the 110 hp 2.2 MT AWD weighs 1860 kg. Both 95 hp 2.8 MT diesels also weigh 1860 kg. Gross weight is 2570 kg for the 106 hp 2.2 MT AWD and 2050 kg for both 2.8 MT diesels; it is not measured for either 110 hp 2.2 MT. All first-generation versions have a 70-litre tank.
In the second generation, measured kerb weights are 1730 kg for the 125 hp 2.4 MT RWD, 1780 kg for both listed 2.2 MT AWD entries, and 1860 kg for the 95 hp 2.8 MT AWD with 1996 cc. Other kerb weights are not measured. Gross weight is 2785 kg for the 106 hp 2.2 MT AWD, 2585 kg for the 110 hp 2.2 MT AWD and 2835 kg for the 140 hp 2.0 MT RWD; other gross weights are not measured. Every second-generation version has a 73-litre tank.
Where both kerb weight and power are available, the second-generation 125 hp 2.4 MT RWD has the best calculated ratio at approximately 13.8 kg per hp. The 106 hp 2.2 MT AWD is approximately 16.8 kg per hp, while the 110 hp 2.2 MT AWD is approximately 16.2 kg per hp. In the first generation, the 106 hp 2.2 MT AWD is approximately 17.4 kg per hp, the 110 hp RWD approximately 16.7 kg per hp, the 110 hp AWD approximately 16.9 kg per hp, and each 95 hp 2.8 MT approximately 19.6 kg per hp.
Which Great Wall Steed version to buy and why
For maximum output and torque, choose a second-generation 2.0 MT with 140 hp. Both drive variants provide 315 Nm and approximately 70.1 hp per litre; the AWD version suits a buyer specifically requiring AWD, while the RWD version is the corresponding RWD choice. Their combined consumption is identical at 10.2 l/100 km. Acceleration, top speed and kerb weight are not measured, so the data cannot establish which is quicker or lighter.
For the lowest stated combined consumption, the 9.2 l/100 km 2.2 MT RWD is the clearest choice in either generation. Both produce 110 hp and 190 Nm. The second-generation model adds a 73-litre tank rather than 70 litres, but its kerb and gross weights are not measured. The first-generation version has a measured 1840 kg kerb weight.
For gasoline power with AWD, the second-generation 2.4 MT offers 125 hp and 210 Nm. Compared with the second-generation 110 hp 2.2 MT AWD, it adds 15 hp and 20 Nm, but its stated combined consumption is 12 l/100 km rather than 9.7 l/100 km. The 2.4 MT therefore prioritizes output over the lower published consumption of the 2.2 MT.
For diesel torque, the second-generation turbo 2.0 MT is substantially stronger than either generation’s 2.8 MT: it provides 315 Nm rather than 225 Nm, a difference of 90 Nm. The 129 hp version adds 34 hp over the 95 hp 2.8 MT, and the 140 hp version adds 45 hp. This makes the 2.0 MT the numerical choice when engine output matters most.
The available data cannot support a recommendation based on Great Wall Steed price, vehicles for sale, parts, engine problems or reliability. On measured specifications alone, the second-generation 2.0 MT with 140 hp is the strongest choice, the 2.2 MT RWD with 9.2 l/100 km is the economy-oriented choice, and the second-generation 2.4 MT RWD offers the best calculated weight-per-horsepower result among versions whose kerb weight is recorded.