Mitsubishi Celeste

Mitsubishi Celeste: which version to buy (1 generation, 1975–1981)

If the choice is a Mitsubishi Celeste, there is only 1 generation (1975-01-01 to 1981-12-31), one body — Mini 3-doors — and 5 versions. The decision is not “which generation” but which engine and gearbox: 1.6 MT at 73 hp, two 2.0 MT cars at 90 hp and 97 hp, 2.0 AT at 90 hp, and the top 2.0 MT at 105 hp.

If the choice is a Mitsubishi Celeste, there is only 1 generation (1975-01-01 to 1981-12-31), one body — Mini 3-doors — and 5 versions. The decision is not “which generation” but which engine and gearbox: 1.6 MT at 73 hp, two 2.0 MT cars at 90 hp and 97 hp, 2.0 AT at 90 hp, and the top 2.0 MT at 105 hp. All five are Gasoline, Inline 4, boost No, RWD, ground clearance 160 mm, front suspension Independent, spring, front brakes Disc, fuel 92. What you buy extra for is displacement, horsepower, a 5-speed Manual versus a 3-speed Automatic, and — only on the 105 hp 2.0 MT — measured 0–100, top speed, mpg-style consumption, and weight.

Generations compared: there is nothing later to wait for

1 generation ran 1975–1981, Mini 3-doors, 5 versions. Restyling is not listed as a separate generation. There is no second generation in this catalogue, so “buy the later Celeste” is not a choice here: every version shares the same start 1975-01-01 and stop 1981-12-31. The spread is inside one generation, not across facelifts with different years.

Specs table: engines, gearbox, drive

Nm is not measured on any version. Engine position, fuel system, compression, and bore × stroke are not measured on any version.

Which version: arithmetic on power and displacement

1.6 MT is the only 1597 cc car. 2.0 MT (90 hp), 2.0 AT, 2.0 MT (97 hp) and 2.0 MT (105 hp) all use 1995 cc — 398 cc more than 1.6 MT (24.9% more displacement).

Power per litre (hp ÷ litres):

• 1.6 MT 73 hp / 1.597 L = 45.7 hp/L
• 2.0 MT (90 hp) and 2.0 AT: 90 / 1.995 = 45.1 hp/L
• 2.0 MT (97 hp): 97 / 1.995 = 48.6 hp/L
• 2.0 MT (105 hp): 105 / 1.995 = 52.6 hp/L

The 1.6 is not “weak for its size”: 1.6 MT at 45.7 hp/L beats the 90 hp 2.0 cars at 45.1 hp/L. What the 2.0 buys is cubic centimetres, not a denser engine, until you step to 97 hp and 105 hp.

Horsepower steps:

• 2.0 MT (90 hp) versus 1.6 MT: +17 hp (+23.3%), +12 kW (66 vs 54).
• 2.0 MT (97 hp) versus 2.0 MT (90 hp): +7 hp (+7.8%), +5 kW (71 vs 66).
• 2.0 MT (105 hp) versus 2.0 MT (97 hp): +8 hp (+8.2%), +6 kW (77 vs 71).
• 2.0 MT (105 hp) versus 2.0 MT (90 hp) / 2.0 AT: +15 hp (+16.7%).
• 2.0 MT (105 hp) versus 1.6 MT: +32 hp (+43.8%), +23 kW (77 vs 54).

If the question is “what does the extra displacement buy,” the smallest 2.0 (2.0 MT 90 hp or 2.0 AT) buys 17 hp for 398 cc. The next two 2.0 MT names buy 7 hp then 8 hp on the same 1995 cc. The last step from 97 to 105 is the cheaper power step in hp per extra horse (same displacement, same Manual 5, same RWD).

2.0 MT vs 2.0 AT: same 90 hp, different gearbox

2.0 AT and the 90 hp 2.0 MT share 90 hp, 66 kW, 1995 cc, Gasoline, 4 Inline, 2 valves per cylinder, boost No, RWD, fuel 92, clearance 160 mm. The split is gearbox: Automatic with 3 gears versus Manual with 5.

That is the only 3-speed car in the set. Every Manual Celeste here is 5-speed: 1.6 MT, 2.0 MT (90 hp), 2.0 MT (97 hp), 2.0 MT (105 hp). Choosing 2.0 AT does not buy more power than the matching 2.0 MT (90 hp); it buys fewer gears (3 vs 5) and Automatic instead of Manual. 0–100, top speed, consumption, and weight are not measured on 2.0 AT and not measured on 2.0 MT (90 hp), so the catalogue does not show whether the 3-speed Automatic is slower or thirstier — those figures are not measured.

Performance and economy (mpg / consumption): only one version is measured

0–100 km/h, top speed, and fuel use are not measured on 1.6 MT, 2.0 MT (90 hp), 2.0 AT, and 2.0 MT (97 hp).

Only 2.0 MT (105 hp) has a full set:

• 0–100: 11.9 s
• Top speed: 175 km/h
• City: 11.6 (catalogue units as given)
• Highway: 7.8
• Mixed: 9.7

Highway is 3.8 below city (11.6 − 7.8). Mixed sits 1.9 below city and 1.9 above highway ((11.6 + 7.8) / 2 = 9.7 exactly). If you need a documented 0–100, a documented top speed, or documented consumption for a Celeste, the catalogue only supports 2.0 MT at 105 hp. Buying 1.6 MT or the other 2.0 cars for “better mpg” is not supported: those mpg-style numbers are not measured.

Dimensions and weight: again only the 105 hp 2.0 MT

Kerb weight, gross weight, tank, and wheels:

Ground clearance is 160 mm on all five; it does not change the buy decision. Tank and wheel sizes are not measured on any version.

On 2.0 MT (105 hp) only: 990 kg kerb / 105 hp = 9.43 kg/hp. Gross 1340 / 105 = 12.8 kg/hp. Payload 1340 − 990 = 350 kg (35.4% of kerb). You cannot compute kg/hp for 1.6 MT or the other 2.0 cars: kerb is not measured. Do not assume they are lighter because they have less power.

Rear suspension is not measured on any version. Front is Independent, spring on all five. Front brakes Disc on all five; rear brakes not measured on all five.

Reliability, problems, and what the data does not cover

This catalogue does not list reliability scores, common problems, prices, or used-market supply. Those are not measured. What can be compared is mechanical layout: every version is Gasoline, RWD, boost No, Inline 4, fuel 92. There is no diesel, no AWD, no turbo, and no extra body type. “Problems unique to generation 2” does not apply: there is only 1 generation.

Valves per cylinder: not measured on 1.6 MT; 2 on all four 1995 cc versions. That is a documented difference in the engine description, not a reliability ranking.

Which version to choose

Buy 2.0 MT (105 hp) if you want the only Celeste with measured performance and economy: 105 hp (77 kW), 11.9 s to 100, 175 km/h, mixed 9.7, city 11.6, highway 7.8, kerb 990 kg, gross 1340 kg, Manual 5, RWD. It is the densest 2.0 at 52.6 hp/L and the strongest Celeste here by 8 hp over 2.0 MT (97 hp) and 32 hp over 1.6 MT.

Buy 2.0 MT (97 hp) if you want the same 1995 cc Manual 5 RWD layout as the 105 hp car, 7 hp above the 90 hp 2.0 MT, but you accept that 0–100, top speed, consumption, and weight are not measured. Versus 2.0 MT (105 hp) you give up 8 hp (7.6%) and every measured speed/mpg/weight figure.

Buy 2.0 MT (90 hp) if you want 1995 cc and 5-speed Manual without stepping to 97 or 105 hp. Versus 1.6 MT you gain 17 hp and 398 cc; versus 2.0 AT you keep 90 hp and gain 2 extra gears (5 vs 3). Performance, mpg, and weight are not measured.

Buy 2.0 AT if the requirement is Automatic. It is the only Automatic Celeste (3 gears, 90 hp, 1995 cc). It does not add power over 2.0 MT (90 hp). 0–100, top speed, consumption, and weight are not measured.

Buy 1.6 MT if you want the smallest engine: 1597 cc, 73 hp (54 kW), Manual 5, RWD. Power per litre (45.7 hp/L) is slightly above the 90 hp 2.0 cars (45.1 hp/L). You give up 17 hp versus the weakest 2.0 and 32 hp versus 2.0 MT (105 hp). Valves per cylinder, 0–100, top speed, consumption, kerb, gross, tank, and wheels are not measured.

Same name, different power: three cars are labelled 2.0 MT. Distinguish them as 2.0 MT 90 hp, 2.0 MT 97 hp, and 2.0 MT 105 hp. 2.0 AT is unique. 1.6 MT is unique.

What extra money cannot be priced here: prices are not in the data. What extra specification buys, in numbers: 398 cc and +17 hp from 1.6 MT to either 90 hp 2.0; +7 hp from 90 to 97 on the same 1995 cc 2.0 MT; +8 hp from 97 to 105 on the same 2.0 MT name; Automatic 3 versus Manual 5 at the same 90 hp; and a complete measured sheet only on 2.0 MT 105 hp.