Haval H2

Haval H2: Which Version Should You Choose?

The Haval H2 range has three listed configurations, all built around the same 1.5-litre turbocharged Gasoline engine with 150 hp and 210 Nm. The meaningful choice is therefore not engine output but transmission and traction: 1.5 MT with FWD, 1.5 MT with AWD, or 1.5 AT with FWD.

The Haval H2 range has three listed configurations, all built around the same 1.5-litre turbocharged Gasoline engine with 150 hp and 210 Nm. The meaningful choice is therefore not engine output but transmission and traction: 1.5 MT with FWD, 1.5 MT with AWD, or 1.5 AT with FWD. Choose the FWD 1.5 MT for the lowest kerb weight and the quickest measured acceleration, the AWD 1.5 MT when AWD matters more than weight or acceleration, and the FWD 1.5 AT when an Automatic gearbox is the priority. All belong to the same generation, produced from 2015 to 2021 as an SUV 5-doors.

Haval H2 versions compared

Because every Haval H2 version has 150 hp and 210 Nm, paying more cannot be evaluated here through additional engine performance: no version provides extra power or torque. Instead, the AWD 1.5 MT adds AWD but carries 80 kg more kerb weight than either FWD version. The 1.5 AT changes the transmission from Manual to Automatic while retaining FWD and the same 1,570 kg kerb weight as the FWD 1.5 MT.

The range contains two versions with the exact name 1.5 MT, so they must be distinguished by drive rather than power: both produce 150 hp. One is FWD and has a 1,570 kg kerb weight; the other is AWD and weighs 1,650 kg. The third version is the FWD 1.5 AT, also with 150 hp.

Generation and body style

The Haval H2 has one generation in the supplied catalogue data. The 1 generation ran from 2015 to 2021, used the SUV 5-doors body, and included three versions. There is consequently no comparison between generations or generation-to-generation change to assess: every listed choice comes from the same production generation and uses the same body type.

Engine and specs

All three versions use a front, transverse, 1,497 cc Gasoline engine. It has 4 cylinders in an Inline layout, 4 valves per cylinder, Turbo boost, and Distributed injection (multi-point). Output is 150 hp at 5,600 rpm, equivalent to 110 kW, while torque is 210 Nm from 2,200 to 4,500 rpm. Each version uses 95 fuel and meets Euro 5.

Using the supplied figures, each version develops approximately 100.2 hp per litre and 140.3 Nm per litre. These ratios are identical across the range because displacement, power, and torque do not change. The engine specification therefore offers no numerical reason to prefer one version over another.

Performance, acceleration and mpg

The FWD 1.5 MT reaches 100 km/h in 13 seconds. The AWD 1.5 MT requires 13.6 seconds, making the FWD Manual 0.6 seconds quicker in the measured acceleration test. That difference accompanies an 80 kg kerb-weight increase for the AWD model, while both retain identical output.

Acceleration to 100 km/h for the FWD 1.5 AT is not measured. Top speed is not measured for the FWD 1.5 MT, AWD 1.5 MT, and FWD 1.5 AT.

City fuel consumption, highway fuel consumption, and combined fuel consumption are not measured for every version. An mpg figure therefore cannot be calculated or used to choose between them. CO₂ emissions are also not measured for all three configurations.

Dimensions, weight and ground clearance

The FWD 1.5 MT has a kerb weight of 1,570 kg and a gross weight of 1,985 kg. The FWD 1.5 AT has the same 1,570 kg kerb weight and 1,985 kg gross weight. The AWD 1.5 MT is heavier at 1,650 kg kerb, although its gross weight remains 1,985 kg.

Those figures give the FWD 1.5 MT and FWD 1.5 AT about 10.47 kg per horsepower. The AWD 1.5 MT carries 11 kg per horsepower. Put another way, the AWD version has 5.1% more kerb weight than either FWD version without gaining any horsepower or torque.

All three versions have 184 mm of ground clearance. Fuel-tank capacity is not measured, and wheel sizes are not measured for every version.

The suspension and brakes do not separate the choices in the supplied specifications. Each Haval H2 version has Independent, spring front and rear suspension, Ventilated disc front brakes, and Disc rear brakes.

Which Haval H2 version should you buy?

Choose the 1.5 MT with FWD for the strongest measured performance

The FWD 1.5 MT is the most convincing specification when low weight and measured acceleration are the deciding factors. It weighs 1,570 kg and reaches 100 km/h in 13 seconds. Compared with the AWD 1.5 MT, it is 80 kg lighter and 0.6 seconds quicker while producing the same 150 hp and 210 Nm.

It also has the best weight-to-power figure jointly with the FWD 1.5 AT, at approximately 10.47 kg per horsepower. Unlike the Automatic, however, the Manual has a measured acceleration result. On the available evidence, this is the clearest choice for a buyer seeking the least weight and the quickest documented acceleration.

Choose the 1.5 MT with AWD when AWD is the requirement

The AWD 1.5 MT is the only listed Haval H2 with AWD. That is what distinguishes it; the engine does not. It has the same 150 hp, 210 Nm, 1,497 cc displacement, and 6-speed Manual gearbox as the FWD 1.5 MT.

The trade-off is visible in the supplied figures. Kerb weight rises from 1,570 to 1,650 kg, while acceleration to 100 km/h changes from 13 to 13.6 seconds. Its 184 mm ground clearance is identical to that of both FWD versions. Buyers should therefore select this version specifically for AWD, not for extra power, torque, ground clearance, or measured acceleration.

Choose the 1.5 AT with FWD for the Automatic gearbox

The FWD 1.5 AT is the sole Automatic option. It combines a 6-speed Automatic gearbox with FWD, the common 150 hp and 210 Nm engine, and a 1,570 kg kerb weight. Its kerb and gross weights exactly match those of the FWD 1.5 MT.

The supplied data do not include its acceleration, top speed, or fuel consumption. It is therefore not possible to claim a performance or economy advantage over either Manual version. The defensible reason to choose it is straightforward: it provides the Automatic transmission without the AWD model’s additional 80 kg.

Reliability and problems

Reliability ratings and recorded problems are not measured in the supplied data. No version can be ranked for durability, repair frequency, or ownership cost from these specifications. Prices are also unavailable, so the extra money required for AWD or Automatic—if any—cannot be quantified.

On specification alone, the decision is unusually clean: the FWD 1.5 MT offers the best measured acceleration, the AWD 1.5 MT buys AWD at the cost of 80 kg and 0.6 seconds in the measured run to 100 km/h, and the FWD 1.5 AT buys an Automatic gearbox while retaining the lighter 1,570 kg kerb weight.