Lancia Gamma: Which Version to Choose and Why

The Lancia Gamma catalogue covers a single generation produced from 1976 to 1984, offered exclusively as a Coupe. Its ten listed modifications reduce to four exact version names—2.0 MT, 2.0 AT, 2.5 MT, and 2.5 AT—with repeated entries reflecting differences in weight, fuel system, torque, or suspension data.

The Lancia Gamma catalogue covers a single generation produced from 1976 to 1984, offered exclusively as a Coupe. Its ten listed modifications reduce to four exact version names—2.0 MT, 2.0 AT, 2.5 MT, and 2.5 AT—with repeated entries reflecting differences in weight, fuel system, torque, or suspension data. The clearest choice is the 2.5 MT if performance matters: it has 140 hp, reaches 100 km/h in 10.5 seconds, and has a top speed of 195 km/h. The 2.0 MT is the less powerful measured alternative, with 120 hp, 12 seconds to 100 km/h, and a 177 km/h maximum. Automatic versions offer a 4-speed Automatic gearbox, but their acceleration and top-speed figures are not measured.

Lancia Gamma generation and versions

The 1 generation ran from 1976 to 1984 and used a Coupe body. The database contains ten modifications within this generation; no separate restyled generation is identified. The repeated records comprise two 2.0 MT entries, two 2.0 AT entries, three 2.5 MT entries, and three 2.5 AT entries.

All versions are Gasoline, naturally aspirated, front-wheel-drive cars. Every listed engine has 4 cylinders in an Inline layout and 2 valves per cylinder. The 2.0 versions use a 1,999 cc engine, while the 2.5 versions use a 2,484 cc engine. Transmission choice is consistent across engine sizes: MT means a 5-speed Manual, and AT means a 4-speed Automatic.

Lancia Gamma engine and specs comparison

VersionPowerTorqueDisplacementFuelCylinders and layoutValvesBoostFuel systemGearboxDrive
2.0 MT120 hp / 88 kW172 Nm at 3,500 rpm1,999 ccGasoline4, Inline2 per cylinderNoCarburetor5-speed ManualFWD
2.0 AT120 hp / 88 kW172 Nm at 3,500 rpm1,999 ccGasoline4, Inline2 per cylinderNoCarburetor4-speed AutomaticFWD
2.5 MT140 hp / 103 kW at 5,400 rpm212 Nm at 3,000 rpm2,484 ccGasoline4, Inline2 per cylinderNoDistributed injection (multi-point)5-speed ManualFWD
2.5 AT140 hp / 103 kW at 5,400 rpm212 Nm at 3,000 rpm2,484 ccGasoline4, Inline2 per cylinderNoDistributed injection (multi-point)4-speed AutomaticFWD
2.0 MT120 hp / 88 kW172 Nm at 3,500 rpm1,999 ccGasoline4, Inline2 per cylinderNoCarburetor5-speed ManualFWD
2.0 AT120 hp / 88 kW172 Nm at 3,500 rpm1,999 ccGasoline4, Inline2 per cylinderNoCarburetor4-speed AutomaticFWD
2.5 MT (208 Nm)140 hp / 103 kW at 5,400 rpm208 Nm at 3,000 rpm2,484 ccGasoline4, Inline2 per cylinderNoCarburetor5-speed ManualFWD
2.5 AT (212 Nm)140 hp / 103 kW at 5,400 rpm212 Nm at 3,000 rpm2,484 ccGasoline4, Inline2 per cylinderNoDistributed injection (multi-point)4-speed AutomaticFWD
2.5 AT (208 Nm)140 hp / 103 kW at 5,400 rpm208 Nm at 3,000 rpm2,484 ccGasoline4, Inline2 per cylinderNoCarburetor4-speed AutomaticFWD
2.5 MT (212 Nm)140 hp / 103 kW at 5,400 rpm212 Nm at 3,000 rpm2,484 ccGasoline4, Inline2 per cylinderNoDistributed injection (multi-point)5-speed ManualFWD

The 2.5 engine adds 485 cc, 20 hp, and either 36 Nm or 40 Nm compared with the 2.0. Power output is approximately 60.0 hp per litre for the 2.0 and 56.4 hp per litre for the 2.5. The smaller engine therefore produces about 3.6 more horsepower per litre, while the larger engine provides greater total power and torque.

The 2.5 records need close attention because the exact name alone does not identify every mechanical difference. Most 2.5 MT and 2.5 AT entries have Distributed injection (multi-point) and 212 Nm, but one 2.5 MT and one 2.5 AT use a Carburetor and produce 208 Nm. That is a 4 Nm difference at the same 3,000 rpm. The bore and stroke given for every 2.5 version are 102 × 76; the corresponding 2.0 measurement is not measured.

Lancia Gamma performance and economy

Version0–100 km/hTop speedCity consumptionHighway consumptionCombined consumption
2.0 MT12 seconds177 km/hnot measurednot measurednot measured
2.0 ATnot measurednot measurednot measurednot measurednot measured
2.5 MT10.5 seconds195 km/hnot measurednot measurednot measured
2.5 ATnot measurednot measurednot measurednot measurednot measured

The 2.5 MT reaches 100 km/h 1.5 seconds sooner than the 2.0 MT and has an 18 km/h higher top speed. These measured differences make the 2.5 MT the strongest performance choice in the catalogue. The data does not provide performance results for either Automatic version, so it does not support a numerical claim that a 2.0 AT or 2.5 AT is faster or slower than its Manual counterpart.

Fuel consumption is not measured in city, highway, or combined driving for any version. Consequently, an mpg comparison between the 2.0 and 2.5 engines—or between Manual and Automatic gearboxes—cannot be made from the available figures. CO₂ output and environmental class are also not measured.

Lancia Gamma dimensions, weight, and capacity

The supplied dimensional data concentrates on weight and ground clearance rather than exterior measurements. Every version has 125 mm of ground clearance and a 63-litre fuel tank. Wheel sizes are not measured, and gross weight is not measured for any modification.

Kerb weight for the 2.0 MT is listed as either 1,290 kg or 1,320 kg. At those weights, the 120 hp car carries approximately 10.75 or 11.00 kg per horsepower. Kerb weight for the 2.5 MT is likewise listed as either 1,290 kg or 1,320 kg. With 140 hp, those entries work out at approximately 9.21 or 9.43 kg per horsepower. At an equal listed weight, the 2.5 MT therefore has the more favourable power-to-weight figure.

Kerb weight for 2.0 AT and 2.5 AT is not measured, so their kilograms-per-horsepower figures cannot be calculated. The supplied data gives Independent, spring front suspension for every version. Some records also specify Independent, spring rear suspension, while the rear-suspension value is not measured in the remaining records. All modifications have Disc front brakes and Disc rear brakes.

Which Lancia Gamma version should you buy?

Choose the 2.5 MT when acceleration and maximum speed are the priorities. It combines 140 hp and up to 212 Nm with the only stronger measured performance in the range: 10.5 seconds to 100 km/h and 195 km/h. Compared with the 2.0 MT, it delivers 16.7% more horsepower and between 20.9% and 23.3% more torque, depending on whether the selected 2.5 MT has 208 or 212 Nm.

Within the 2.5 MT listings, the Distributed injection (multi-point) version with 212 Nm is the preferable specification on the numbers alone. It has 4 Nm more than the Carburetor version with 208 Nm, while both produce 140 hp at 5,400 rpm and share the same measured acceleration and top speed.

Choose the 2.0 MT if the 1,999 cc engine is the requirement and you still want fully documented performance. Its 120 hp and 172 Nm produce a measured 12-second run to 100 km/h and a 177 km/h top speed. Its advantage in this comparison is higher specific output—approximately 60.0 hp per litre rather than the 2.5 engine’s 56.4 hp per litre—although its total output and measured performance remain lower.

Choose a 2.0 AT or 2.5 AT only when the 4-speed Automatic gearbox itself is the deciding requirement. The 2.5 AT offers 20 hp more and either 36 or 40 Nm more than the 2.0 AT, but acceleration, top speed, kerb weight, and fuel consumption are not measured for either. Among the 2.5 AT records, the Distributed injection (multi-point) version has 212 Nm, while the Carburetor version has 208 Nm.

There is no evidence here for comparing price, reliability, common problems, or running costs. Those figures are not present in the supplied data. On measurable specifications alone, the 2.5 MT with Distributed injection (multi-point) and 212 Nm is the most capable all-round choice; the 2.0 MT is the clearest alternative for buyers who prefer the smaller-displacement Manual version.