Mercedes Vaneo

Mercedes Vaneo: which version to buy

The Mercedes Vaneo exists as one generation of Compact Van, sold from 2001-09-01 to 2005-07-31, with nine versions in the catalogue. Every version is FWD, every gearbox has 5 gears, and every engine sits Front, transverse.

The Mercedes Vaneo exists as one generation of Compact Van, sold from 2001-09-01 to 2005-07-31, with nine versions in the catalogue. Every version is FWD, every gearbox has 5 gears, and every engine sits Front, transverse. The buying question is therefore not “which generation” — there is only one — but which of the nine: two 1.6 MT petrols (82 hp and 102 hp), 1.6 AT 102 hp, 1.9 MT 125 hp, 1.9 AT 125 hp, two 1.7 MT diesels (75 hp and 91 hp), and two 1.7 AT diesels (75 hp and 91 hp). Differences that decide the choice are power, torque, 0–100, top speed, mixed consumption, kerb weight, ground clearance, and whether the rear suspension is Independent, spring or Semi-independent, spring.

Generations: what one generation actually offers a buyer

1 generation (2001-09-01–2005-07-31) is a Compact Van with 9 versions. Individual versions in the data run 2002-03-01–2005-07-31. There is no second generation and no restyling listed as a separate generation, so a later Vaneo is not a different car in this catalogue — it is one of the nine powertrains below.

What changes between versions is not the body type. Petrol engines are Gasoline, inline 4, 2 valves per cylinder, No boost, multi-point injection, 95 fuel. Diesel engines are Diesel, inline 4, 4 valves per cylinder, Turbo, Diesel fuel. Five manuals and four automatics share the 5-speed count. Two automatics — 1.9 AT 125 hp and 1.7 AT 75 hp — are the only versions with 140 mm ground clearance and Independent, spring at the rear; the other seven sit at 120 mm with Semi-independent, spring at the rear (except those two). That split is the only chassis fork a buyer can pick.

Engines and specs

Specific output from the same displacement: 1.6 MT 82 hp makes 51.3 hp per litre (82 / 1.598); 1.6 MT 102 hp and 1.6 AT make 63.8 hp/l; 1.9 MT and 1.9 AT make 65.9 hp/l (125 / 1.898); 1.7 MT/1.7 AT 75 hp make 44.4 hp/l; 1.7 MT/1.7 AT 91 hp make 53.9 hp/l. The 102 hp 1.6 is therefore almost as densely powered as the 1.9, while the 75 hp diesel is the least dense. Compression: petrol 10.8 on 1.6 MT 82 hp and both 1.9s, 11.0 on both 102 hp 1.6s; all four diesels 19.0. Bore × stroke is 80 × 79.5 on every 1.6, 84 × 85.6 on every 1.9, 80 × 84 on every 1.7.

Performance and economy (mpg-style figures as L/100 km)

0–100 km/h. Fastest measured: 1.9 MT and 1.9 AT, both 10.8 s. Next: both 102 hp 1.6s at 13.5 s — 2.3 s slower than the 1.9, 2.3 s faster than 1.6 MT 82 hp (15.8 s). Diesels: 1.7 MT 91 hp and 1.7 AT 91 hp both 16.0 s; 1.7 MT 75 hp 19.5 s, which is 8.7 s slower than the 1.9 and 3.7 s slower than the 82 hp petrol. 1.7 AT 75 hp: 0–100 not measured.

Top speed. Peak is 1.9 MT at 180 km/h. 1.9 AT loses 4 km/h (176). 1.6 MT 102 hp 167; 1.6 AT 163 (−4 vs the same-engine manual). 1.6 MT 82 hp 154. Diesels: 1.7 MT 91 hp 158; 1.7 AT 91 hp 156; 1.7 MT 75 hp 150. 1.7 AT 75 hp: top speed not measured. Automatics that have a figure are 2–4 km/h slower than the matching manual.

Fuel consumption (city / highway / mixed, L/100 km). Lowest mixed: 1.7 MT 75 hp 5.7, then 1.7 MT 91 hp 5.9. Petrol mixed: 1.6 MT 102 hp 8.0, 1.9 MT 8.2, 1.6 AT 8.3, 1.6 MT 82 hp 8.4, 1.9 AT 8.5. The 82 hp petrol is not the thriftiest petrol: mixed 8.4 versus 8.0 on the 102 hp manual — 0.4 L/100 km more for 20 hp less. City petrol sits 10.4–11.5; city diesel 7.3–7.4 where measured. Highway petrol 6.4–6.8; highway diesel 4.9–5.1. 1.7 AT 75 hp and 1.7 AT 91 hp: city, highway and mixed not measured. CO2 and eco class: not measured on all nine.

Tank is 54 L on every version. Mixed range from that tank (54 / mixed × 100), using only measured mixed figures: 1.7 MT 75 hp about 947 km, 1.7 MT 91 hp about 915 km, 1.6 MT 102 hp 675 km, 1.9 MT 659 km, 1.6 AT 651 km, 1.6 MT 82 hp 643 km, 1.9 AT 635 km. The diesel manuals add roughly 260–300 km of mixed range versus the petrols.

Dimensions and weight

Wheel sizes: not measured on all nine.

Kerb weight. Petrol 1.6s (all three with a figure): 1295 kg. 1.9 MT: 1305 kg (+10 kg). 1.9 AT: kerb not measured. Diesel manuals and 1.7 AT 91 hp: 1425 kg — 130 kg heavier than the 1.6 petrols, 120 kg heavier than 1.9 MT. 1.7 AT 75 hp: kerb not measured.

Gross weight. 1.6s 1910 kg; both 1.9s 1920 kg; all four 1.7s 1980 kg. Payload from kerb where both exist: 1.6s 615 kg (1910−1295); 1.9 MT 615 kg (1920−1305); diesel 75/91 MT and 1.7 AT 91 hp 555 kg (1980−1425). The heavier diesel kerb cuts payload by 60 kg versus the petrols that publish both masses.

Ground clearance. 120 mm on seven versions. 140 mm on 1.9 AT 125 hp and 1.7 AT 75 hp — 20 mm more, and those two are also the only Independent, spring rear setups. If clearance is the buying criterion, the catalogue only offers those two automatics; they do not share an engine family.

kg per hp (kerb / hp, where kerb is measured): 1.9 MT 10.4 kg/hp; 1.6 MT 102 hp and 1.6 AT 12.7; 1.6 MT 82 hp 15.8; 1.7 MT 91 hp and 1.7 AT 91 hp 15.7; 1.7 MT 75 hp 19.0. The 75 hp diesel is the heaviest per horsepower; the 1.9 manual is the lightest.

Which version to choose

If the goal is the shortest 0–100 and highest top speed: 1.9 MT 125 hp. It matches 1.9 AT on 10.8 s but is 4 km/h faster (180 vs 176), uses 0.3 L/100 km less mixed (8.2 vs 8.5), and publishes kerb 1305 kg. Torque 180 Nm @ 4000 is the petrol peak and equals the 91 hp diesel’s 180 Nm, but the diesel makes that torque at 1600 rpm. The 1.9 costs 10 kg of kerb versus a 1.6 and 0.2 L/100 km mixed versus 1.6 MT 102 hp, for 23 hp and 2.7 s off 0–100.

If the goal is petrol pace without the 1.9: take 1.6 MT 102 hp, not the 82 hp twin. Same 1598 cc, same Manual 5, same 1295 kg. You gain 20 hp (+24%) and 10 Nm, cut 0–100 by 2.3 s (13.5 vs 15.8), gain 13 km/h (167 vs 154), and mixed falls from 8.4 to 8.0. Compression 11.0 versus 10.8. Peak torque moves from 2500 to 4000 rpm. 1.6 AT 102 hp is the same engine with Automatic 5: identical 13.5 s, 4 km/h less top speed (163), mixed 8.3 (+0.3 vs the 102 hp manual, still 0.1 better than the 82 hp manual). Choose AT only if you want the automatic; it does not buy performance.

If the goal is lowest measured consumption: 1.7 MT 75 hp, mixed 5.7, city 7.3, highway 4.9. That is 2.3 L/100 km less mixed than the thriftiest petrol (1.6 MT 102 hp at 8.0) and 2.8 less than 1.9 AT. The price is the slowest measured 0–100 (19.5 s), the lowest top speed among measured cars (150 km/h), 1425 kg kerb, and 19.0 kg/hp. 1.7 MT 91 hp spends 0.2 L/100 km more mixed (5.9) for 16 hp, 20 Nm, 3.5 s off 0–100 (16.0 vs 19.5), and 8 km/h more (158 vs 150). For a diesel manual, 91 hp is the rational step unless mixed litres are the only score.

If the goal is diesel with Automatic: 1.7 AT 91 hp has measured 0–100 16.0 s and top 156 km/h (2 km/h below 1.7 MT 91 hp). Consumption on this automatic is not measured, so you cannot claim a fuel saving versus the 91 hp manual from this catalogue. 1.7 AT 75 hp is the weakest documented buy: 0–100 not measured, top speed not measured, all three consumption figures not measured, kerb not measured. What it does document is 140 mm clearance, Independent, spring rear, gross 1980 kg, 160 Nm @ 1500, Turbo Diesel 1689 cc. Buy it only for that chassis package, not for a complete performance picture.

If the goal is extra ground clearance: only 1.9 AT 125 hp and 1.7 AT 75 hp. They are not comparable as engines: 125 vs 75 hp, Gasoline vs Diesel, 10.8 s and 176 km/h versus not measured / not measured, mixed 8.5 versus not measured. Clearance 140 mm is the shared extra. 1.9 AT is the only clearance car with a full performance set.

What extra displacement buys (petrol). 1898 vs 1598 cc is +300 cc. Versus 1.6 MT 102 hp, 1.9 MT adds 23 hp, 30 Nm, 2.7 s on 0–100, 13 km/h, 10 kg kerb, mixed +0.2 (8.2 vs 8.0). Versus 1.6 MT 82 hp the same 1.9 adds 43 hp, 40 Nm, 5.0 s, 26 km/h, mixed −0.2 (8.2 vs 8.4). The 102 hp 1.6 already captured most of the 1.9’s specific output (63.8 vs 65.9 hp/l); the 1.9’s advantage is torque and 0–100, not efficiency.

What the automatic “buys” in numbers. On 102 hp 1.6: −4 km/h, +0.3 mixed, 0–100 unchanged. On 125 hp 1.9: −4 km/h, +0.3 mixed, 0–100 unchanged, plus the 140 mm / independent-rear package that the 1.9 manual does not have. On 91 hp 1.7: −2 km/h, 0–100 unchanged at 16.0 s, consumption not measured on the AT. On 75 hp 1.7: almost every dynamic and economy number not measured. The automatic does not add gears (still 5) and does not add drive (still FWD).

What Turbo on the 1.7 buys versus No-boost petrol. The 91 hp diesel matches 1.9 petrol torque (180 Nm) at 1600 rpm instead of 4000, undercuts petrol mixed by about 2.1–2.6 L/100 km, and gives up 0–100 (16.0 vs 10.8–15.8) and top speed (156–158 vs 154–180). The 75 hp diesel undercuts petrol mixed further (5.7) and is the slowest measured car in the line.

Practical shortlist (from these numbers only). Daily petrol, manual: 1.6 MT 102 hp — better mixed and far stronger than 1.6 MT 82 hp, close on litres to 1.9 MT. Fastest petrol: 1.9 MT. Petrol automatic with a complete sheet: 1.6 AT 102 hp, unless you need 140 mm, then 1.9 AT. Diesel manual: 1.7 MT 91 hp unless you lock mixed at 5.7, then 1.7 MT 75 hp. Skip 1.7 AT 75 hp if you need 0–100, top speed, consumption, or kerb — those are not measured. There is no second generation to “wait for”; the choice is only among these nine.