Maserati 420

Maserati 420: which version to buy

If you are choosing a Maserati 420, the catalogue gives one generation (1985–1994), one body (Sedan), and three versions: 2.0 MT at 180 hp, 2.0 MT at 190 hp, and 2.8 MT at 279 hp. Every version is Gasoline, Turbo, V-shaped 6-cylinder, Front, longitudinal, Manual 5, RWD, ground clearance 125 mm.

If you are choosing a Maserati 420, the catalogue gives one generation (1985–1994), one body (Sedan), and three versions: 2.0 MT at 180 hp, 2.0 MT at 190 hp, and 2.8 MT at 279 hp. Every version is Gasoline, Turbo, V-shaped 6-cylinder, Front, longitudinal, Manual 5, RWD, ground clearance 125 mm. 0–100, top speed, mpg, kerb weight, gross weight, tank, and wheel size are not measured on all three, so the buy decision is engine size, power, fuel system, and the few extra numbers on 2.8 MT — not economy or acceleration times.

Which 420 version: the three choices

2.0 MT (180 hp) is the lowest-output car: 1996 cc, 180 hp (132 kW) at 6500 rpm, Carburetor, Turbo. Torque is not measured.

2.0 MT (190 hp) is the same 1996 cc Gasoline Turbo 6 V-shaped layout with 10 hp more (190 vs 180, +5.6%) and 8 kW more (140 vs 132). Peak-power rpm is not measured. Fuel system is Central injection (single-point or single- point) instead of Carburetor.

2.8 MT (279 hp) is the only larger engine: 2790 cc, 279 hp (205 kW) at 6000 rpm, Distributed injection (multi-point), Turbo, 4 valves per cylinder, compression 7.6, bore × stroke 82 × 63. Versus 2.0 MT (180 hp) that is +99 hp (+55%) and +73 kW; versus 2.0 MT (190 hp) +89 hp (+47%) and +65 kW. Displacement is 794 cc larger than either 2.0 MT (+40%).

There is no second generation in the data, so you are not choosing “old vs new 420.” You are choosing among three Sedan manuals of the 1 generation (1985–1994).

Engine specs compared (hp, Nm, displacement)

Power per litre (hp ÷ litres from the given cc): 2.0 MT (180 hp) 90.2 hp/L (180 ÷ 1.996); 2.0 MT (190 hp) 95.2 hp/L (190 ÷ 1.996); 2.8 MT 100.0 hp/L (279 ÷ 2.790). The 2.8 MT is both the largest engine and the highest specific output. The two 2.0 MT cars share displacement; the 10 hp gap is the whole difference in specific output (+5.0 hp/L).

Peak power on 2.8 MT is listed at 6000 rpm, 500 rpm below 2.0 MT (180 hp) at 6500. 2.0 MT (190 hp) has no rpm figure (not measured). Torque (Nm) is not measured on all three, so you cannot rank pull at low rpm from this catalogue.

Fuel: all three list 95. Induction: all Turbo. Cylinder count and layout: all 6, V-shaped. Engine position: all Front, longitudinal. Valves per cylinder: not measured on both 2.0 MT versions; 4 on 2.8 MT. Compression and 82 × 63 bore × stroke: given only for 2.8 MT (7.6); not measured on both 2.0 MT.

What the extra output buys (same generation)

Chassis items that do not change between versions: Manual 5, RWD, Independent, spring front suspension, Ventilated disc front brakes, 125 mm clearance. Rear suspension, rear brakes, wheels: not measured on all three. You are not buying a different drivetrain or a later generation — only a different Gasoline Turbo engine and fuel system on the same Sedan pattern.

2.0 MT (180 hp) vs 2.0 MT (190 hp): same 1996 cc. You buy +10 hp and +8 kW and a change from Carburetor to Central injection (single-point or single- point). That is the smallest step in the range. Nothing in the data says the 190 hp car is heavier, faster to 100, or uses more fuel — those figures are not measured.

2.0 MT (190 hp) vs 2.8 MT: you buy +794 cc, +89 hp, +65 kW, Distributed injection (multi-point) instead of Central injection (single-point or single- point), 4 valves per cylinder, listed compression 7.6, and 82 × 63. Specific output rises from 95.2 to 100.0 hp/L. Peak power rpm is 6000 on 2.8 MT vs not measured on 2.0 MT (190 hp).

2.0 MT (180 hp) vs 2.8 MT: +99 hp, +73 kW, +794 cc, carburetor vs Distributed injection (multi-point), and the only listed valve, compression, and bore × stroke figures in the line. This is the largest arithmetic gap in the catalogue.

Prices are not in the data, so “what the extra money buys” can only mean what the extra hp, kW, and cc buy. Weight per horsepower cannot be calculated: kerb and gross mass are not measured on every version.

Generations: nothing later to wait for

1 generation (1985–1994) is the only generation: Sedan, 3 versions, all three dated 1985-01-01 to 1994-12-31. There is no restyling listed as a separate generation. Choosing a 420 is not “which generation”; it is which of the three 2.0 MT / 2.8 MT engines in that window.

Shared across the generation: Gasoline, Turbo, 6, V-shaped, Front, longitudinal, Manual 5, RWD, 125 mm, Independent, spring front, Ventilated disc front. Differences sit only in displacement (1996 vs 2790), power (180 / 190 / 279 hp), fuel system (Carburetor / Central injection (single-point or single- point) / Distributed injection (multi-point)), and the extra engine geometry on 2.8 MT.

Performance and mpg: not measured

0–100: not measured for 2.0 MT (180 hp), 2.0 MT (190 hp), and 2.8 MT. Top speed: not measured for all three. City, highway, and combined consumption: not measured for all three. CO2 and eco class: not measured for all three.

You cannot pick a 420 on mpg or on a published sprint. The 99 hp gap from 2.0 MT (180 hp) to 2.8 MT is a power ranking only. Fuel grade is 95 on all three, so octane does not separate them.

Dimensions and weight (same gaps on every version)

Kerb weight: not measured (all three). Gross weight: not measured (all three). Tank: not measured (all three). Wheel sizes: not measured (all three). Ground clearance: 125 mm on 2.0 MT (180 hp), 2.0 MT (190 hp), and 2.8 MT.

There is no lighter or heavier version in the numbers, and no different tank or tyre listing. Ground clearance does not break the tie. Weight-to-power is not measured because mass is not measured.

Reliability and problems

The data do not list reliability, known problems, service intervals, or failure rates. Those are not measured here. What you can compare is mechanical specification: Carburetor on 2.0 MT (180 hp), Central injection (single-point or single- point) on 2.0 MT (190 hp), Distributed injection (multi-point) on 2.8 MT; all Turbo; all Manual 5 RWD. Do not treat that as a reliability ranking — it is only the fuel-system difference given.

Which version to choose

Choose 2.0 MT (180 hp) if you want the smallest listed output and the only Carburetor 420: 1996 cc, 180 hp / 132 kW at 6500 rpm, 90.2 hp/L. You give up 10 hp versus the other 2.0 MT and 99 hp versus 2.8 MT. Same Manual 5, RWD, 125 mm, Turbo, Gasoline, 95.

Choose 2.0 MT (190 hp) if you want the same 1996 cc as the 180 hp car with +10 hp / +8 kW and Central injection (single-point or single- point) instead of Carburetor. Specific output 95.2 hp/L sits between the 180 hp 2.0 MT and 2.8 MT. Peak rpm, torque, 0–100, mpg, and weight remain not measured. This is the middle step without leaving the 2.0-litre displacement.

Choose 2.8 MT (279 hp) if the ranking is power and displacement: 2790 cc, 279 hp / 205 kW at 6000 rpm, 100.0 hp/L, Distributed injection (multi-point), 4 valves per cylinder, compression 7.6, 82 × 63. Versus 2.0 MT (190 hp): +89 hp, +65 kW, +794 cc. Versus 2.0 MT (180 hp): +99 hp, +73 kW, +794 cc. Gearbox, drive, clearance, and the unmeasured 0–100 / mpg / mass figures do not change in the table.

If you need a published 0–100, top speed, mpg, kerb weight, or tank size to decide, none of the three versions supplies it (not measured). The only fully numbered split is 180 vs 190 vs 279 hp, 1996 vs 2790 cc, and carburetor vs central vs multi-point injection on one 1 generation Sedan (1985–1994).