Saturn ION: which version to buy
The Saturn ION was sold as one generation (2003–2007), Coupe body, 7 versions. There is no later generation to “wait for,” so the buying choice is only among those seven: 2.0 MT (208 hp), three 2.2 MT trims (140 hp / 140 hp / 147 hp), 2.2 CVT (140 hp), 2.2 AT (140 hp), and 2.4 AT (173 hp). All are Gasoline, Inline 4, Front, transverse, FWD.
The Saturn ION was sold as one generation (2003–2007), Coupe body, 7 versions. There is no later generation to “wait for,” so the buying choice is only among those seven: 2.0 MT (208 hp), three 2.2 MT trims (140 hp / 140 hp / 147 hp), 2.2 CVT (140 hp), 2.2 AT (140 hp), and 2.4 AT (173 hp). All are Gasoline, Inline 4, Front, transverse, FWD. The spread that matters is 68 hp (140 vs 208), 126 Nm (145 vs 271), 57 km/h of top speed (175 vs 232), and 139 kg of kerb weight (1221 vs 1360).
Specs that decide the version
| Version | hp | Nm | cc | Fuel | Cylinders / layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.0 MT | 208 | 271 | 1998 | 92 | 4 Inline | Turbo | Manual 5 | FWD |
| 2.2 MT (140 hp, 2189 cc, 50 L tank) | 140 | 145 | 2189 | 95 | 4 Inline | No | Manual 5 | FWD |
| 2.2 CVT | 140 | 145 | 2189 | 95 | 4 Inline | No | Variable | FWD |
| 2.2 MT (140 hp, 2189 cc, 49 L tank) | 140 | 145 | 2189 | 95 | 4 Inline | No | Manual 5 | FWD |
| 2.2 AT | 140 | 145 | 2189 | 95 | 4 Inline | No | Automatic 5 | FWD |
| 2.2 MT (147 hp) | 147 | 203 | 2198 | not measured | 4 Inline | No | Manual 5 | FWD |
| 2.4 AT | 173 | 220 | 2384 | 92 | 4 Inline | No | Automatic 4 | FWD |
Power per litre (hp ÷ litres): 2.0 MT 104.1 hp/L; 2.4 AT 72.6 hp/L; 2.2 MT (147 hp) 66.9 hp/L; the 140 hp 2.2 engines 64.0 hp/L. Kerb weight per horsepower: 2.0 MT 6.54 kg/hp; 2.4 AT 7.40 kg/hp; 2.2 MT (147 hp) 8.50 kg/hp; 2.2 MT / 2.2 AT at 1221 kg 8.72 kg/hp; 2.2 MT (140 hp, 50 L) and 2.2 CVT 8.91 kg/hp.
Generations: nothing later to pick instead
1 generation (2003-01-01 to 2007-12-31) is the whole catalogue: Coupe, 7 versions, all FWD. Restyling is not listed as a separate generation. You are not choosing “which generation”; you are choosing engine, gearbox, and which 2.2 MT row (they are not the same car on paper).
Engine and gearbox: what the extra output buys
Buy 2.0 MT if the point is the strongest ION in this data. It is the only Turbo, the only 1998 cc unit, and the only 208 hp / 271 Nm. Versus any 140 hp 2.2: +68 hp (+48.6%), +126 Nm (+86.9%), top speed 232 vs 175 (+57 km/h). Versus 2.4 AT: +35 hp, +51 Nm, still +57 km/h (232 vs 175), and a 5-speed Manual instead of a 4-speed Automatic. Versus 2.2 MT (147 hp): +61 hp, +68 Nm, +55 km/h (232 vs 177). The cost on the spec sheet is mass: 1360 kg kerb — 139 kg heavier than the lightest 1221 kg 2.2 MT / 2.2 AT, 112 kg heavier than 2.2 CVT / the 50 L 2.2 MT, 80 kg heavier than 2.4 AT. Fuel is 92 (same label as 2.4 AT). 0–100 for 2.0 MT is not measured.
Buy 2.4 AT if you want automatic and more naturally aspirated power than the 140 hp 2.2s, without the Turbo. 173 hp / 220 Nm / 2384 cc, Automatic 4, fuel 92. Versus 2.2 AT (same 10.2 s 0–100 and 175 km/h): +33 hp, +75 Nm, +195 cc, one fewer gearbox ratio (4 vs 5), +59 kg (1280 vs 1221). The extra 33 hp does not buy a faster 0–100 or a higher top speed in this dataset — both are 10.2 s and 175 km/h. Versus 2.0 MT you give up 35 hp, 51 Nm, 57 km/h of top speed, and the Turbo, and you gain Automatic. Versus 2.2 MT (147 hp) you gain Automatic and +26 hp / +17 Nm, but you lose 0–100 (10.2 vs 8.5 s) and 2 km/h of top speed (175 vs 177).
Buy 2.2 MT (147 hp) if 0–100 is the measured priority among manuals. It is the only 2198 cc / 147 hp / 203 Nm row. 0–100 8.5 s — 1.0 s quicker than 2.2 MT (140 hp, 49 L) at 9.5 s, 1.7 s quicker than 2.2 AT and 2.4 AT at 10.2 s. Top speed 177 km/h is the highest among non-turbo versions (+2 km/h vs 175). Torque 203 Nm is 58 Nm above the 145 Nm 2.2s and 17 Nm below 2.4 AT. Kerb 1250 kg. Rear suspension label is Semi-independent, springorts hélicoïdaux, sem (the 140 hp and 2.0/2.4 cars are Independent, spring at the rear). Ground clearance and fuel grade for this row are not measured. Front brakes: Disc; rear: Drum.
The three 140 hp 2.2s share 140 hp / 145 Nm / 2189 cc / 95 / No boost. Split them by gearbox and by the 49 vs 50 L / 1221 vs 1248 kg split:
- 2.2 MT (140 hp, 50 L, 1248 kg): Manual 5, top speed 175, 0–100 not measured, city/highway/mixed not measured, front Ventilated disc, tank 50 L, kerb 1248 kg, clearance 135 mm. Same powertrain as 2.2 CVT except the gearbox.
- 2.2 CVT: Variable gearbox (gears not measured), same 140/145/2189/175/1248/50 L. 0–100 not measured. Choose this only if Variable is the requirement; it does not add power, speed, or a measured 0–100 versus the matching 2.2 MT.
- 2.2 MT (140 hp, 49 L, 1221 kg): Manual 5, 0–100 9.5 s, 175 km/h, tank 49 L, kerb 1221 kg (lightest in the set, tied with 2.2 AT), front Disc not Ventilated disc. 27 kg lighter than the other 140 hp 2.2 MT. If you want a measured sprint among 140 hp manuals, this is the row that has it.
- 2.2 AT: Automatic 5, 0–100 10.2 s (0.7 s slower than the 49 L 2.2 MT), same 175 km/h, 1221 kg, 49 L, Disc front. Same 0–100 and top speed as 2.4 AT with 33 hp and 75 Nm less.
Performance and mpg: what is measured
0–100: 2.2 MT (147 hp) 8.5 s; 2.2 MT (140 hp, 49 L) 9.5 s; 2.2 AT 10.2 s; 2.4 AT 10.2 s; 2.0 MT, 2.2 MT (140 hp, 50 L), 2.2 CVT — not measured.
Top speed: 2.0 MT 232 km/h; 2.2 MT (147 hp) 177; every other listed version 175.
Fuel consumption is measured only for 2.0 MT: city 8.1, highway 6.3, mixed 10.2. For 2.2 MT (all three), 2.2 CVT, 2.2 AT, and 2.4 AT, city, highway, and mixed are not measured. CO2 and eco class are not measured on every version. Do not treat the 2.0 MT mixed 10.2 as a ranking against the others — they have no figure.
Dimensions, weight, tank
Gross weight: not measured on all seven. Wheel sizes: not measured on all seven.
Kerb: 1221 kg — 2.2 MT (140 hp, 49 L) and 2.2 AT; 1248 kg — 2.2 MT (140 hp, 50 L) and 2.2 CVT; 1250 kg — 2.2 MT (147 hp); 1280 kg — 2.4 AT; 1360 kg — 2.0 MT.
Tank: 50 L on 2.0 MT, 2.2 MT (140 hp, 50 L), 2.2 CVT; 49 L on 2.2 MT (140 hp, 49 L), 2.2 AT, 2.2 MT (147 hp), 2.4 AT.
Ground clearance: 135 mm on six versions; not measured on 2.2 MT (147 hp).
Front brakes: Ventilated disc on 2.0 MT, 2.2 MT (140 hp, 50 L), 2.2 CVT; Disc on 2.2 MT (140 hp, 49 L), 2.2 AT, 2.2 MT (147 hp), 2.4 AT. Rear: Drum on all seven. Front suspension: Independent, spring on all seven.
Which version to choose
1. 2.0 MT — highest hp, Nm, hp/L, top speed, and the only Turbo; heaviest kerb; only version with measured mpg; 0–100 not measured. Arithmetic case: best power-to-weight (6.54 kg/hp). 2. 2.2 MT (147 hp) — best measured 0–100 (8.5 s) and best non-turbo top speed (177). Fuel and clearance not measured; different rear-suspension label. 3. 2.4 AT — strongest Automatic (173 hp / 220 Nm) and 92 fuel like 2.0 MT, but 0–100 and top speed match the weaker 2.2 AT (10.2 s / 175). The extra 33 hp vs 2.2 AT does not show up in those two numbers. 4. 2.2 AT — Automatic 5 at the lowest kerb (1221 kg). Same sprint/speed as 2.4 AT with less output. Choose if Automatic matters more than the 2.4’s 33 hp. 5. 2.2 MT (140 hp, 49 L) — lightest manual with a measured 0–100 (9.5 s). 27 kg lighter than the other 140 hp 2.2 MT. 6. 2.2 MT (140 hp, 50 L) — same 140 hp as the row above, +1 L tank, +27 kg, Ventilated disc front, 0–100 not measured. Prefer only if you specifically want that tank/brake row. 7. 2.2 CVT — same engine and mass as the 50 L 2.2 MT, Variable instead of Manual 5. No extra hp, Nm, or measured 0–100.
There is no second generation in the data, so “newer ION” is not a choice. Reliability and problem lists are not measured here; the comparison above is only the numbers given.