Renault Samsung SM7

Renault Samsung SM7: which version to buy and why

If you are choosing a Renault Samsung SM7 rather than reading a model overview, the decision is narrow: one generation, one body, two named versions. The 1 generation Sedan was in production from 2004-12-01 to 2011-08-31. Inside it sit 2.4 AT (170 hp) and 3.5 CVT (218 hp).

Renault Samsung SM7: which version to buy and why

If you are choosing a Renault Samsung SM7 rather than reading a model overview, the decision is narrow: one generation, one body, two named versions. The 1 generation Sedan was in production from 2004-12-01 to 2011-08-31. Inside it sit 2.4 AT (170 hp) and 3.5 CVT (218 hp). There is no second generation in these data to “wait for,” no restyle listed as a separate generation, and no extra body type. The useful comparison is arithmetic on those two versions: how much extra power, torque, and displacement the 3.5 CVT carries, how little extra kerb weight it adds, and which measured fields stay identical so they cannot break the tie.

Specs that actually differ between SM7 versions

Both versions are Gasoline, 6 cylinders, V-shaped, 4 valves per cylinder, boost No, engine Front, transverse, Distributed injection (multi-point), compression 9.8, drive FWD, tank 70 L, Independent, spring suspension front and rear, Disc brakes front and rear. Those shared labels are not a reason to pick one car over the other.

What does change:

Bore × stroke is 85 × 69 on 2.4 AT and 95.5 × 81.4 on 3.5 CVT. Fuel grade, 0–100, top speed, city / highway / mixed consumption, CO2, eco class, gross weight, ground clearance, and wheel size are not measured on either version.

Engine: what the extra 1149 cc buys

3.5 CVT displaces 3498 versus 2349 on 2.4 AT — 1149 more, or about 1.49 times the smaller engine. Peak output is 218 hp versus 170 hp: +48 hp, which is 28.2% more. In kW the same gap is 160 versus 125 (+35 kW). Peak torque is 314 Nm versus 225 Nm: +89 Nm, or 39.6% more. The torque gain is larger in percentage terms than the power gain, so the 3.5 CVT case is stronger if you care about pull than about peak horsepower.

Specific output runs the other way. 2.4 AT makes 170 hp from 2349, or 72.4 hp per litre. 3.5 CVT makes 218 hp from 3498, or 62.3 hp per litre. Torque density is 95.8 Nm/L on 2.4 AT versus 89.8 Nm/L on 3.5 CVT. The smaller engine is the more densely loaded of the two; the larger one buys total output, not more output per litre.

Rev points also differ. 2.4 AT peaks power at 6000 and torque at 4400. 3.5 CVT peaks power at 5600 and torque at 3500. The 3.5’s torque peak sits 900 rpm lower; its power peak sits 400 rpm lower. If you want the extra 89 Nm available earlier in the rev range, that is the 3.5 CVT. If you want the engine that is asked to work harder per litre and to keep making peak power higher up, that is the 2.4 AT.

Both stay naturally aspirated (boost No) with the same compression 9.8 and the same injection label. There is no turbo versus non-turbo fork in this catalogue row. Cylinder count and layout do not change: 6, V-shaped, 4 valves per cylinder on both.

Gearbox: Automatic 4 versus Variable

2.4 AT is Automatic with 4 gears. 3.5 CVT is Variable; gear count is not measured. You cannot treat them as the same transmission with different engines. The 4-speed Automatic is a counted ratio set. The Variable unit is not given a gear count in these data, so do not invent one.

That pairing is locked in the names: there is no 2.4 with Variable and no 3.5 with Automatic 4 in this generation. Choosing displacement also chooses gearbox. If you specifically want a 4-speed Automatic, the only version that matches is 2.4 AT. If you specifically want Variable, the only version that matches is 3.5 CVT.

Drive is FWD on both. There is no AWD or RWD SM7 in these data to pay extra for.

Weight, tank, and what does not change the choice

Kerb weight is 1555 kg on 2.4 AT and 1580 kg on 3.5 CVT: +25 kg, or 1.6% more, for 48 extra hp and 89 extra Nm. Mass per horsepower is 9.15 kg/hp on 2.4 AT versus 7.25 kg/hp on 3.5 CVT. The 3.5 is the lighter car per horsepower even though it is the heavier car on the scale.

Tank volume is 70 L on both. Ground clearance is not measured on either. Wheel sizes are not measured on either. Gross weight is not measured on either. You cannot pick a version for ground clearance, tyre size, or payload from these figures.

Front and rear suspension labels match: Independent, spring. Front and rear brakes match: Disc. Chassis specification in this dataset does not separate the two versions.

Performance and mpg: not measured, so do not pretend

0–100 is not measured for 2.4 AT and not measured for 3.5 CVT. Top speed is not measured for either. City, highway, and mixed consumption are not measured for either. CO2 is not measured. Eco class is not measured. Fuel grade is not measured.

You cannot rank these versions on 0–100, top speed, or mpg from this catalogue. The 48 hp and 89 Nm gaps, and the 1.90 kg/hp gap in mass per horsepower, are the performance-related numbers that are measured. Inferring seconds to 100 km/h or litres per 100 km would be numbers that are not in the data.

Generations: there is only one, so “which generation” is already answered

Renault Samsung SM7 has 1 generation in these data. Years: 2004-12-01 to 2011-08-31. Body: Sedan. Versions in the generation: 2.

There is no later generation with different power, weight, or gearbox to wait for. There is no earlier generation with a different kerb weight to prefer. Modification dates on both 2.4 AT and 3.5 CVT are listed as 2004-01-01 to 2011-12-31; the generation window itself is 2004-12-01 to 2011-08-31. Do not treat those date rows as a second generation.

Because generation count is 1, “which generation changed what” reduces to: nothing in a later generation changed displacement, hp, Nm, gearbox, or kerb weight relative to this one — there is no later generation in the file. The only intra-model change you can buy is 2.4 AT versus 3.5 CVT.

Which version to choose

Choose 2.4 AT if you want the smaller 2349 engine, the Automatic 4 gearbox (the only counted gearset in this model), higher specific output (72.4 hp/L versus 62.3), lower kerb weight (1555 versus 1580), and you accept 170 hp / 225 Nm instead of 218 / 314. Power peaks later (6000 versus 5600) and torque peaks later (4400 versus 3500). Per litre it is the harder-working Gasoline V-shaped 6.

Choose 3.5 CVT if you want the larger 3498 engine, Variable gearbox, 48 more hp, 89 more Nm, torque peak 900 rpm lower, and better mass per horsepower (7.25 kg/hp versus 9.15) for only 25 kg extra kerb weight. You give up the 4-speed Automatic and you accept lower hp per litre.

Do not choose on 0–100, top speed, mpg, CO2, eco class, fuel grade, ground clearance, wheels, or gross weight: all not measured on both versions. Do not choose on body, drive, tank, suspension, brakes, cylinder count, layout, valves, boost, injection, compression, or engine position: those English labels match.

There is no third named version. If two cars are both labelled 2.4 AT, they are not split by a second power figure in these data — 2.4 AT is 170 hp only. 3.5 CVT is 218 hp only. Name the version exactly as in the table when you search a listing: 2.4 AT or 3.5 CVT.

Prices are not in these data, so “what the extra money buys” can only be stated in hardware: the step from 2.4 AT to 3.5 CVT buys +1149 displacement, +48 hp, +35 kW, +89 Nm, a Variable gearbox instead of Automatic 4, and +25 kg kerb weight, with tank, FWD, Sedan body, and the unmeasured performance/economy fields unchanged in status. That is the whole fork.