Karma Revero: which version to buy
If the choice is between 2.0 AT, GT 1.5 AT, and GTS 1.5 AT, the data split is simple: one generation (2016-09-01 to 2021-01-31), one body (Sedan), three Plug-in versions, all Automatic with 1 gear and RWD. 2.0 AT and GT 1.5 AT cover the full window. GTS 1.5 AT is the late cut, 2019-11-01 to 2021-01-31.
If the choice is between 2.0 AT, GT 1.5 AT, and GTS 1.5 AT, the data split is simple: one generation (2016-09-01 to 2021-01-31), one body (Sedan), three Plug-in versions, all Automatic with 1 gear and RWD. 2.0 AT and GT 1.5 AT cover the full window. GTS 1.5 AT is the late cut, 2019-11-01 to 2021-01-31. There is no second generation to “wait for.” The decision is which of these three stacks of numbers you actually need.
Fuel use (city, highway, mixed), CO2, eco class, compression ratio, and the rpm at which power or torque are made are not measured on every version. Those gaps are the same for all three, so they do not rank one car over another.
Which Revero version: the ranking in one pass
Buy GTS 1.5 AT if the car can be a 2019-11-01 or later example and the point is the stopwatch. Same 542 hp / 398 kW and 1499 cm³ Plug-in layout as GT 1.5 AT, but 861 Nm instead of 746 Nm (+115 Nm), 3.9 s to 100 km/h instead of 4.5 s (−0.6 s), 209 km/h instead of 201 km/h (+8 km/h). Kerb weight, gross weight, tank, clearance, wheels, gearbox, and drive are identical to GT 1.5 AT. The extra is torque and the two speed figures.
Buy GT 1.5 AT if you want the lighter, higher-output 1.5 Plug-in for the whole 2016–2021 run and do not need the GTS torque step. Versus 2.0 AT you get +139 hp (+34.5%), −153 kg kerb (2296 kg vs 2449 kg), 4.24 kg/hp instead of 6.08 kg/hp, and 4.5 s instead of 5.4 s. You give up 584 Nm of peak torque (746 Nm vs 1330 Nm) and 4 mm of clearance (138 mm vs 142 mm). Top speed is only 201 vs 200 km/h — 1 km/h, not a reason to switch.
Buy 2.0 AT if the number you care about is torque, not horsepower density. 1330 Nm is the catalogue peak: 1.78× GT 1.5 AT (746 Nm) and 1.54× GTS 1.5 AT (861 Nm). Displacement is 1998 cm³ vs 1499 cm³, cylinders 4 vs 3, both Inline, both Turbo, both Front, longitudinal, both Direct injection (direct), both 95. You pay for that torque with 403 hp instead of 542 hp, 5.4 s instead of 4.5 / 3.9 s, 2449 kg instead of 2296 kg, and 318 kg payload (2767 − 2449) instead of 392 kg (2688 − 2296).
There is no measured mpg or l/100 km on any of them. Do not pick a version “for economy”: the field is not measured.
Generations: nothing later to wait for
One generation, 2016-09-01–2021-01-31, Sedan, three versions. Restyling is not a separate generation here. GTS 1.5 AT is not a new generation; it is a 2019-11-01 addition inside the same Sedan run. If the question is “which generation to buy,” the data answer is: the only one. The real question is which of the three modifications.
What changed when GTS 1.5 AT arrived (arithmetic on the same generation):
- Power stayed 542 hp / 398 kW versus GT 1.5 AT.
- Torque rose 746 → 861 Nm.
- 0–100 fell 4.5 → 3.9 s.
- Top speed rose 201 → 209 km/h.
- Kerb 2296 kg, gross 2688 kg, tank 36 l, clearance 138 mm, Automatic 1, RWD — unchanged versus GT 1.5 AT.
What did not change versus 2.0 AT when the GT/GTS 1.5 cars exist: all three stay Plug-in, Automatic, 1 gear, RWD, 36 l tank, the same wheel list, Independent, spring front / Dependent, spring rear, Ventilated disc front and Disc ventilated rear.
Engine specs compared (exact names)
| Version | hp | kW | Nm | cm³ | Fuel | Cylinders | Layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.0 AT | 403 | 296 | 1330 | 1998 | 95 | 4 | Inline | Turbo | Automatic (1) | RWD |
| GT 1.5 AT | 542 | 398 | 746 | 1499 | 95 | 3 | Inline | Turbo | Automatic (1) | RWD |
| GTS 1.5 AT | 542 | 398 | 861 | 1499 | 95 | 3 | Inline | Turbo | Automatic (1) | RWD |
Shared on all three (do not treat as a differentiator): Plug-in; Front, longitudinal; Direct injection (direct); 4 valves per cylinder; 95; rpm for peak power not measured; rpm for peak torque not measured; compression not measured.
Bore × stroke (only as given): 2.0 AT 86 × 86; GT 1.5 AT and GTS 1.5 AT 82 × 94.6.
Power per litre and kg per hp
- 2.0 AT: 403 hp / 1.998 l = 201.7 hp/l; 296 kW / 1.998 l = 148.1 kW/l; 2449 / 403 = 6.08 kg/hp.
- GT 1.5 AT: 542 / 1.499 = 361.6 hp/l; 398 / 1.499 = 265.5 kW/l; 2296 / 542 = 4.24 kg/hp.
- GTS 1.5 AT: same specific power and kg/hp as GT 1.5 AT (same hp and kerb). The GTS difference is torque, not specific output.
GT 1.5 AT / GTS 1.5 AT specific power is 1.79× 2.0 AT (361.6 / 201.7). Mass per horsepower on the 1.5 cars is 0.70× the 2.0 AT figure (4.24 / 6.08). If “which engine” means density of output, the 1499 cm³ pair wins on paper. If it means peak newton-metres, 2.0 AT still leads by 1330 − 861 = 469 Nm even against GTS 1.5 AT.
Nm per hp: 2.0 AT 1330 / 403 = 3.30 Nm/hp; GT 1.5 AT 746 / 542 = 1.38; GTS 1.5 AT 861 / 542 = 1.59. The 2.0 is the torque-heavy calibration; the 1.5s are power-heavy.
Performance: 0–100, top speed, mpg
| Version | 0–100, s | Top speed, km/h | City | Highway | Mixed | CO2 | Eco class |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.0 AT | 5.4 | 200 | not measured | not measured | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| GT 1.5 AT | 4.5 | 201 | not measured | not measured | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| GTS 1.5 AT | 3.9 | 209 | not measured | not measured | not measured | not measured | not measured |
Deltas that actually decide a purchase:
- GT 1.5 AT vs 2.0 AT: −0.9 s to 100 km/h; +1 km/h top speed. The speed cap is a rounding-level gap; the sprint is not.
- GTS 1.5 AT vs GT 1.5 AT: −0.6 s; +8 km/h. This is the only pair where top speed moves in a way the table can show (201 → 209).
- GTS 1.5 AT vs 2.0 AT: −1.5 s (5.4 → 3.9); +9 km/h (200 → 209).
“Which is fastest” in this catalogue is GTS 1.5 AT on both 0–100 and vmax. “Which is slowest” is 2.0 AT, still 5.4 s and 200 km/h — not a slow Sedan on these figures, just last among three. mpg / l/100 km cannot break a tie: not measured.
Dimensions, weight, tank, wheels — what extra mass buys
| Version | Kerb, kg | Gross, kg | Payload, kg | Clearance, mm | Tank, l |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.0 AT | 2449 | 2767 | 318 | 142 | 36 |
| GT 1.5 AT | 2296 | 2688 | 392 | 138 | 36 |
| GTS 1.5 AT | 2296 | 2688 | 392 | 138 | 36 |
- 2.0 AT is the heavy car: +153 kg kerb vs the 1.5 pair, +79 kg gross, −74 kg payload (318 vs 392). The extra mass sits with the 1998 cm³ / 4-cylinder / 1330 Nm package, not with a different body.
- Ground clearance: 2.0 AT 142 mm, the 1.5 cars 138 mm (−4 mm). If the question is “which Revero for a higher ride,” 2.0 AT is the only one that is not 138 mm. Four millimetres is the whole difference.
- Tank is 36 l on all three. Range from fuel volume cannot be ranked: consumption is not measured.
- Wheels (same list on all three): 245/40 R21, 255/40 R21, 265/40 R21, 255/35 R22, 285/35 R22. Tyre size is not a version filter.
- Chassis labels do not split the range: Independent, spring front; Dependent, spring rear; Ventilated disc / Disc ventilated.
Gross-to-kerb headroom is better on GT 1.5 AT and GTS 1.5 AT (392 kg) than on 2.0 AT (318 kg). If the use case is people and luggage against a scale, the 1.5 pair is the one with +74 kg of rated payload.
What the “extra” actually buys (no prices in the data)
Prices are not in this dataset, so “extra money” here means extra specification, not currency.
Moving from 2.0 AT to GT 1.5 AT you buy: 139 hp, 102 kW, 0.9 s off 0–100, 153 kg off kerb, 74 kg more payload, 159.9 hp/l more specific output, 1.84 kg/hp less mass per horsepower. You sell: 584 Nm, 4 mm clearance, 499 cm³, one cylinder (4 → 3, both still Inline Turbo Plug-in). Top speed +1 km/h is not a purchase reason.
Moving from GT 1.5 AT to GTS 1.5 AT you buy: 115 Nm, 0.6 s, 8 km/h. You do not buy more horsepower, a different gearbox, AWD, a larger tank, or a lighter shell — those fields match. You also buy a shorter calendar: GTS 1.5 AT only from 2019-11-01. A 2016–2019 car cannot be this version.
Staying on 2.0 AT you buy: the torque peak (1330 Nm), the 4-cylinder 1998 cm³ Plug-in, 142 mm clearance, availability across the full 2016-09-01–2021-01-31 span. You do not buy the best 0–100 or the best kg/hp.
Reliability, problems, mpg — what this catalogue will not pretend
This source has no failure rates, no recall counts, no battery degradation figures, and no mpg. Reliability and “common problems” are not measured here. mpg is not measured. Do not infer a winner on those headings from horsepower or kerb weight.
What you can check on a specific car without inventing numbers: that the badge matches one of 2.0 AT, GT 1.5 AT, GTS 1.5 AT; that a claimed GTS 1.5 AT is not dated before 2019-11-01; that 0–100 / vmax claims match 5.4 / 200, 4.5 / 201, or 3.9 / 209 respectively.
Which version to choose — decision rules
1. Need the shortest 0–100 and the highest vmax in this model, and the build can be 2019-11-01 or later: GTS 1.5 AT (542 hp, 861 Nm, 3.9 s, 209 km/h, 2296 kg). 2. Need 542 hp and 2296 kg for the whole 2016–2021 window, and 4.5 s / 746 Nm is enough: GT 1.5 AT. Same engine size, cylinders, boost, gearbox, drive, weight, tank, and wheels as GTS; minus 115 Nm, plus 0.6 s, minus 8 km/h. 3. Need peak torque and the 1998 cm³ / 4 Inline Turbo Plug-in, and 5.4 s / 200 km/h is acceptable: 2.0 AT (403 hp, 1330 Nm, 2449 kg, 142 mm). 4. Need a measured fuel figure to choose: none of them. City, highway, mixed, CO2, eco class — not measured. 5. Need a newer generation: there is only generation 1. The late-run change is GTS 1.5 AT inside that generation, not a replacement Sedan.
GT 1.5 AT and GTS 1.5 AT share the name pattern and the 542 hp rating; they are not the same car in this table. Distinguish them by torque (746 vs 861 Nm), 0–100 (4.5 vs 3.9 s), top speed (201 vs 209 km/h), and start date (2016-09-01 vs 2019-11-01). 2.0 AT is the only 403 hp / 1330 Nm / 1998 cm³ line.
If you only remember three numbers: 1330 Nm is 2.0 AT; 4.5 s / 746 Nm is GT 1.5 AT; 3.9 s / 861 Nm is GTS 1.5 AT. Horsepower alone cannot separate the two 1.5 versions.