Hanomag Rekord

Hanomag Rekord: Which Version to Choose

The Hanomag Rekord catalogue contains one Coupe generation produced from 1934 to 1940 and three listed versions. The choice is between two Gasoline variants both named 1.5 MT, distinguished by outputs of 32 hp and 35 hp, and the Diesel 1.9 MT with 35 hp.

The Hanomag Rekord catalogue contains one Coupe generation produced from 1934 to 1940 and three listed versions. The choice is between two Gasoline variants both named 1.5 MT, distinguished by outputs of 32 hp and 35 hp, and the Diesel 1.9 MT with 35 hp. The 1.5 MT (35 hp) offers the strongest overall figures: it matches the Diesel version’s power, reaches 98 km/h rather than 90 km/h, and has a kerb weight of 1,050 kg rather than 1,250 kg. The 1.5 MT (32 hp) shares the same weight and top speed as the stronger Gasoline version but has 3 hp less.

Hanomag Rekord generations and versions

There is only 1 generation of the Hanomag Rekord in the supplied catalogue, covering 1934–1940. It has a Coupe body and 3 versions. Because no later generation or restyling is listed, the buying decision is entirely between the available engines and outputs rather than between different model eras.

The generation includes the 1.5 MT (32 hp), 1.5 MT (35 hp), and 1.9 MT (35 hp). All three use a front, longitudinal engine, a 4-speed Manual gearbox, and RWD. They also share a 4-cylinder Inline layout, 2 valves per cylinder, and no boost.

Engine specs comparison

The two 1.5 MT Gasoline versions have identical 1,504 cc displacement, 71 × 95 bore and stroke, and Carburetor fuel systems. Their principal engine differences are output and compression ratio: the 32 hp version has a compression ratio of 5.6, while the 35 hp version raises it to 6.2. That is an increase of 3 hp, or about 9.4%, without an increase in displacement.

Power density further distinguishes the engines. The 1.5 MT (32 hp) produces about 21.3 hp per litre, while the 1.5 MT (35 hp) produces about 23.3 hp per litre. The 1.9 MT (35 hp) produces about 18.3 hp per litre from 1,910 cc. On the supplied figures, the 1.5 MT (35 hp) therefore extracts the most power from each litre of displacement.

The Diesel 1.9 MT has an 80 × 95 bore and stroke and a compression ratio of 20. Its 35 hp output equals that of the stronger 1.5 MT, although its displacement is 406 cc larger. Torque is not measured for any version, so the data cannot support a torque-based comparison.

Performance, top speed, and economy

Both Gasoline versions have the same measured maximum speed of 98 km/h, despite their 3 hp difference. The 1.9 MT (35 hp) reaches 90 km/h, making it 8 km/h slower than either 1.5 MT.

Acceleration from 0–100 km/h is not measured for any version. City, highway, and combined fuel consumption are also not measured, so no version can be recommended on quantified economy. CO₂ output and environmental class are not measured for all three versions as well.

These omissions matter when choosing between Gasoline and Diesel. The catalogue confirms their fuel types and performance figures, but it does not quantify fuel use or acceleration. Any claim that the 1.9 MT is more economical or accelerates differently would go beyond the available data.

Dimensions, weight, tank, and wheel sizes

The two 1.5 MT variants are identical by the available weight figures: 1,050 kg kerb and 1,490 kg gross. The difference between those values is 440 kg.

The 1.9 MT weighs 1,250 kg at the kerb and 1,640 kg gross. Compared with either Gasoline version, it is 200 kg heavier at the kerb and 150 kg heavier at gross weight. Its difference between gross and kerb weight is 390 kg, which is 50 kg less than the corresponding difference for the two 1.5 MT versions.

Ground clearance, fuel-tank capacity, and wheel sizes are not measured for any version. Overall exterior dimensions are also not measured in the supplied data, so the versions cannot be compared by length, width, or height.

All three versions have Independent, leaf spring front suspension and Dependent, leaf spring rear suspension. Drum brakes are fitted at both the front and rear in every listed version, leaving no suspension or brake specification difference to decide the purchase.

Weight-to-power comparison

The 1.5 MT (32 hp) carries about 32.8 kg per hp based on its 1,050 kg kerb weight. The 1.5 MT (35 hp) improves this to 30 kg per hp, making it the best power-to-weight choice among the three.

The 1.9 MT (35 hp) has about 35.7 kg per hp. Although it matches the stronger Gasoline version’s 35 hp, it carries 200 kg more kerb weight. It therefore has about 5.7 kg more per hp than the 1.5 MT (35 hp).

Comparing the equal-weight Gasoline variants isolates the value of their power difference. Moving from the 1.5 MT (32 hp) to the 1.5 MT (35 hp) adds 3 hp with no increase from the listed 1,050 kg kerb weight. Their maximum speeds remain equal at 98 km/h, so the stronger output improves the calculated weight-to-power ratio but not the measured top-speed figure.

Reliability and problems: what the data can establish

Reliability, repair history, service intervals, and recorded problems are not measured for any Hanomag Rekord version in the supplied data. It is therefore not possible to rank the 1.5 MT (32 hp), 1.5 MT (35 hp), and 1.9 MT (35 hp) by reliability.

The specification table does show that all three versions have no boost and share a 4-speed Manual transmission and RWD. However, those facts alone do not prove that one version is more dependable or less expensive to maintain. Price data is also not measured, so there is no factual basis here for comparing purchase cost or determining what any extra money buys.

Which Hanomag Rekord version should you buy?

Choose the 1.5 MT (35 hp) if the priority is the strongest combination of power, weight, and measured maximum speed. It provides 35 hp, a 1,050 kg kerb weight, approximately 30 kg per hp, and a top speed of 98 km/h. It is 200 kg lighter than the equally powerful 1.9 MT (35 hp) and 8 km/h faster by the supplied maximum-speed figures.

Choose the 1.5 MT (32 hp) only if the lower-output specification is specifically preferred. It has the same 1,504 cc displacement, 1,050 kg kerb weight, 1,490 kg gross weight, and 98 km/h top speed as the 1.5 MT (35 hp), but produces 3 hp less. Without price, economy, or reliability measurements, the available numbers reveal no compensating advantage for the 32 hp version.

Choose the 1.9 MT (35 hp) when Diesel fuel is the defining requirement. It supplies the same 35 hp and 26 kW as the stronger Gasoline version, but uses 1,910 cc, weighs 1,250 kg, and reaches 90 km/h. Fuel consumption is not measured, so its Diesel specification should not be treated as evidence of a quantified economy advantage.

Based strictly on the catalogue numbers, the 1.5 MT (35 hp) is the clearest all-round choice. The 1.9 MT (35 hp) is the fuel-type alternative, while the 1.5 MT (32 hp) retains the Gasoline versions’ measured top speed but gives up 3 hp and has a weaker weight-to-power result.