Kia Besta: which version to buy
If you are choosing a Kia Besta rather than learning what it is, the data set is small and the decision is arithmetic. Production is one generation only (1985–1997), minivan body, five listed versions that collapse to three distinct specs.
If you are choosing a Kia Besta rather than learning what it is, the data set is small and the decision is arithmetic. Production is one generation only (1985–1997), minivan body, five listed versions that collapse to three distinct specs. All of them are Diesel, turbo, front longitudinal, 4 Inline cylinders, 2 valves per cylinder, Direct injection (direct), 5-speed Manual, 60 L tank, 190 mm ground clearance, independent spring front / dependent leaf spring rear, Disc front / Drum rear. What actually changes is displacement, power, drive, and (for the 2.2-litre cars) how completely the sheet is filled in.
Buy `2.2 D MT 4WD` if you need AWD. Buy `2.6 D MT` if you want the most horsepower on RWD. Buy `2.2 D MT` if you want the documented 2.2-litre RWD package and do not need all-wheel drive.
There is no second generation to “wait for” and no restyle coded as a separate generation in this catalogue.
Which Besta version: the three real choices
The five catalogue rows are:
| Version name (exact) | hp | kW | Nm | cc | Drive | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.2 D MT 4WD | 65 | 47 | 151 | 2184 | AWD | 115 km/h |
| 2.6 D MT | 95 | 69 | not measured | 2600 | RWD | not measured |
| 2.2 D MT | 65 | 47 | 151 | 2184 | RWD | 115 km/h |
| 2.2 D MT (second listing) | 65 | 47 | 151 | 2184 | RWD | 115 km/h |
| 2.6 D MT (second listing) | 95 | 69 | not measured | 2600 | RWD | not measured |
The two rows named 2.2 D MT are the same 65 hp / 47 kW package. The two rows named 2.6 D MT are the same 95 hp / 69 kW package. You are not choosing among five engines; you are choosing among AWD 2.2, RWD 2.2, and RWD 2.6.
Specs that actually differ
Shared on every version: Diesel fuel, Turbo, Front, longitudinal, Direct injection (direct), Manual 5, 60 L tank, 190 mm clearance, independent spring front, dependent leaf spring rear, Disc / Drum.
2.2 D MT 4WD and 2.2 D MT share the same engine numbers: 2184 cc, 65 hp (47 kW) at 4000 rpm, 151 Nm at 2500 rpm, compression 22.9, bore × stroke 86 × 94, kerb 1460 kg, gross 2685 kg, top speed 115 km/h. The only drivetrain split is AWD versus RWD.
2.6 D MT is the power outlier: 2600 cc, 95 hp (69 kW). Torque rpm, compression, bore × stroke, kerb, gross, and top speed are not measured. Drive is RWD only — there is no 2.6 AWD in this data.
Engine: 65 hp 2.2 versus 95 hp 2.6
Power: 2.6 D MT has 30 hp more than either 2.2 (95 − 65). That is 46% more horsepower (30 / 65). In kW the gap is 22 kW (69 − 47), about 47% more.
Displacement: 2600 − 2184 = 416 cc extra, about 19% more capacity. The 2.6 therefore makes more power than the extra litres alone would suggest.
Power per litre (hp ÷ litres):
- 2.2 D MT 4WD / 2.2 D MT: 65 / 2.184 ≈ 29.8 hp per litre
- 2.6 D MT: 95 / 2.600 ≈ 36.5 hp per litre
The 2.6 is not only larger; it is denser by about 6.8 hp per litre (36.5 − 29.8).
Torque: 151 Nm is documented only on the 2.2 versions, at 2500 rpm. For 2.6 D MT, Nm is not measured — you cannot claim a torque advantage from this sheet.
Specific output in kW per litre: 47 / 2.184 ≈ 21.5 kW/L on the 2.2; 69 / 2.600 ≈ 26.5 kW/L on the 2.6.
If the question is “which engine pulls harder on paper,” 2.6 D MT is the answer by 30 hp. If the question is “which engine is fully documented,” the 2.2 wins: rpm, Nm, compression, and piston dimensions are present only there.
AWD vs RWD: what 4WD actually buys
2.2 D MT 4WD is the only AWD Besta here. It does not add horsepower, tank size, clearance, or a different gearbox versus 2.2 D MT. Same 65 hp, same 151 Nm, same 1460 / 2685 kg, same 115 km/h, same 190 mm.
What AWD buys, in this catalogue, is drive layout only. There is no measured 0–100, no mpg, no extra ground clearance, and no weight penalty listed: kerb is 1460 kg on both 2.2 cars. You cannot compute a kg/hp penalty for AWD because the masses are equal in the data.
There is no 2.6 AWD. If you want 95 hp and AWD, this generation does not list that combination.
Choose 2.2 D MT 4WD when the split is traction, not speed. Choose 2.2 D MT when RWD is enough and you want the same 65 hp diesel without AWD.
Performance, mpg, and what is not measured
0–100 km/h: not measured on every version, including 2.2 D MT 4WD, 2.2 D MT, and 2.6 D MT. Do not rank sprint from this catalogue.
Top speed: 115 km/h on 2.2 D MT 4WD and 2.2 D MT. Not measured on 2.6 D MT. You cannot say the 95 hp van is faster in a number this sheet does not give.
Fuel consumption (city / highway / combined) and CO2 / eco class: not measured on all five rows. There is no mpg ranking.
Weight-to-power can be computed only where kerb exists:
- 2.2 D MT 4WD and 2.2 D MT: 1460 kg / 65 hp ≈ 22.5 kg per hp
- 2.6 D MT: kerb not measured — kg per hp cannot be calculated
Payload on the documented 2.2: 2685 − 1460 = 1225 kg between kerb and gross. That figure does not exist for 2.6 D MT because both masses are not measured.
Dimensions, weight, tank, wheels
Ground clearance is 190 mm on every version — AWD does not raise the van in this data.
Fuel tank is 60 L on every version. Wheel sizes are not measured on every version.
Kerb 1460 kg and gross 2685 kg apply to 2.2 D MT 4WD and 2.2 D MT. For 2.6 D MT, both are not measured. You cannot pick the 2.6 as “lighter” or “heavier.”
Chassis layout does not change with version: independent spring front, dependent leaf spring rear, Disc front, Drum rear.
Generations: nothing later to wait for
One generation, 1985-01-01 to 1997-12-31, minivan, five modifications. There is no later generation in this data that adds power, AWD on the 2.6, measured 0–100, or mpg. “Which generation” is not a Besta question here; “which of the three specs” is.
Which version to choose
Need AWD: 2.2 D MT 4WD. It is the only AWD listing. Cost in the data is not a price (prices are not in the source) — it is the same 65 hp, 47 kW, 151 Nm, 2184 cc, 115 km/h, 1460/2685 kg package as RWD 2.2 D MT, with AWD instead of RWD.
Need the strongest listed engine on RWD: 2.6 D MT. 95 hp versus 65 hp (+30 hp, +46%), 2600 cc versus 2184 cc (+416 cc), ~36.5 versus ~29.8 hp per litre. Accept that torque, 0–100, top speed, mpg, kerb, and gross are not measured.
Need the documented 2.2 RWD van: 2.2 D MT. Same engine sheet as the 4WD car, RWD, 115 km/h, 22.5 kg/hp, 1225 kg between kerb and gross. The duplicate 2.2 D MT row is the same 65 hp car, not a hidden second tune.
Do not choose on 0–100 or mpg: those figures are not measured. Do not choose on wheels: not measured. Do not invent a 2.6 AWD: it is not in the list.
Short map:
1. Traction first → 2.2 D MT 4WD 2. Peak hp first, RWD acceptable → 2.6 D MT 3. Same 2.2 diesel, no AWD, full 2.2 numbers → 2.2 D MT