Which version to buy: Toyota RegiusAce specs compared
There is only 1 generation, sold from 1998-01-01 to 2005-12-31 as a Minivan, with 4 versions. There is no later generation to “wait for,” so the choice is entirely between the four catalogue names: 2.0 AT (110 hp), 2.0 AT (135 hp), 2.4 AT, and 3.0 AT.
There is only 1 generation, sold from 1998-01-01 to 2005-12-31 as a Minivan, with 4 versions. There is no later generation to “wait for,” so the choice is entirely between the four catalogue names: 2.0 AT (110 hp), 2.0 AT (135 hp), 2.4 AT, and 3.0 AT.
What extra money would buy here is not a newer body or a restyle generation — it is more horsepower, more torque, a different drive layout, or diesel fuel. 0–100, top speed, and fuel consumption are not measured on every version, so the ranking below is power, torque, weight, clearance, and drivetrain from the data only.
Toyota RegiusAce generations: what changed (and what did not)
1 generation (1998–2005), Minivan, 4 versions. All four share the same production window. None of them is a restyle listed as a separate generation. Shared hardware in the data: Automatic, 4 speeds, 65 L tank, Ventilated disc front brakes, Independent, spring front suspension, No boost. Rear brakes are not measured on all four. Wheel sizes are not measured on all four. Gross weight is not measured on all four.
The splits that matter for a purchase:
- Drive: FWD only on 2.0 AT (110 hp); RWD on 2.0 AT (135 hp), 2.4 AT, and 3.0 AT.
- Fuel: Gasoline on the three petrol versions; Diesel on 3.0 AT.
- Cylinders: 4 Inline on three versions; 6 Inline on 2.0 AT (135 hp).
- Kerb weight: 1450 kg on three versions; 1630 kg only on 2.0 AT (135 hp) — 180 kg more.
- Ground clearance: 200 mm on three versions; 195 mm on 2.0 AT (135 hp) — 5 mm less.
Toyota RegiusAce engine specs: four versions, two names that look the same
Two versions are both labelled 2.0 AT. They are not the same car. Separate them by power: 110 hp versus 135 hp.
| Version | hp (kW @ rpm) | Nm @ rpm | Displacement, cm³ | Fuel | Cylinders / layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.0 AT (110 hp) | 110 (81 @ 5200) | 167 @ 2600 | 1995 | Gasoline (92) | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | FWD |
| 2.0 AT (135 hp) | 135 (99 @ 5600) | 177 @ 4400 | 1998 | Gasoline (95) | 6, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | RWD |
| 2.4 AT | 132 (97 @ 5000) | 204 @ 4000 | 2438 | Gasoline (92) | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | RWD |
| 3.0 AT | 91 (67 @ 4000) | 191 @ 2400 | 2975 | Diesel | 4, Inline | No | Automatic, 4 | RWD |
Valves per cylinder: 2 on 2.0 AT (110 hp) and 3.0 AT; 4 on 2.0 AT (135 hp); not measured on 2.4 AT.
Engine position: not measured on 2.0 AT (110 hp); Front, longitudinal on 2.0 AT (135 hp) and 3.0 AT; Central on 2.4 AT.
Injection: Distributed injection (multi-point) on the three Gasoline versions; not measured on 3.0 AT.
Compression: not measured on 2.0 AT (110 hp) and 2.4 AT; 9.6 on 2.0 AT (135 hp); 22 on 3.0 AT. Bore × stroke: 75 × 75 only on 2.0 AT (135 hp); not measured on the other three.
Power per litre (hp ÷ displacement in litres):
- 2.0 AT (110 hp): 110 / 1.995 ≈ 55.1 hp/L
- 2.0 AT (135 hp): 135 / 1.998 ≈ 67.6 hp/L — the densest engine in this generation
- 2.4 AT: 132 / 2.438 ≈ 54.1 hp/L
- 3.0 AT: 91 / 2.975 ≈ 30.6 hp/L — the lowest specific output, as expected from an unboosted Diesel of this size
Torque per litre (Nm ÷ litres):
- 2.0 AT (110 hp): 167 / 1.995 ≈ 83.7 Nm/L, peak at 2600 rpm
- 2.0 AT (135 hp): 177 / 1.998 ≈ 88.6 Nm/L, peak at 4400 rpm
- 2.4 AT: 204 / 2.438 ≈ 83.7 Nm/L, peak at 4000 rpm
- 3.0 AT: 191 / 2.975 ≈ 64.2 Nm/L, peak at 2400 rpm
2.4 AT matches 2.0 AT (110 hp) on torque density but delivers 37 Nm more absolute torque (204 vs 167). 2.0 AT (135 hp) has the best torque density, but that peak sits 1800 rpm higher than the 110 hp 2.0 AT (4400 vs 2600).
Toyota RegiusAce performance, mpg, and reliability of the numbers
0–100 km/h: not measured on 2.0 AT (110 hp), 2.0 AT (135 hp), 2.4 AT, and 3.0 AT.
Top speed: not measured on all four.
City / highway / combined consumption: not measured on all four. There is no mpg figure in the data, so no version can be ranked on economy from measured litres.
CO2 and eco class: not measured on all four.
What you can still rank without inventing times:
Weight per horsepower (kerb kg ÷ hp) — lower is the lighter load on each horsepower:
- 2.4 AT: 1450 / 132 ≈ 11.0 kg/hp — best in this generation
- 2.0 AT (135 hp): 1630 / 135 ≈ 12.1 kg/hp
- 2.0 AT (110 hp): 1450 / 110 ≈ 13.2 kg/hp
- 3.0 AT: 1450 / 91 ≈ 15.9 kg/hp — worst power-to-weight
2.0 AT (135 hp) has 25 hp more than 2.0 AT (110 hp) (+22.7%) but also 180 kg more kerb mass. The extra 25 hp more than covers the extra mass on a kg/hp basis (12.1 vs 13.2), yet 2.4 AT still beats both because it keeps 1450 kg while making 132 hp.
3.0 AT is 19 hp below 2.0 AT (110 hp) and 44 hp below 2.0 AT (135 hp), with 24 Nm more than the 110 hp petrol (191 vs 167) and 13 Nm less than 2.4 AT (191 vs 204). Its torque peak at 2400 rpm is the lowest rpm of the four — useful if you care about low-rpm pull, not peak horsepower.
Problems and reliability are not measured in this dataset. Do not treat silence as a fault list.
Toyota RegiusAce dimensions, weight, and ground clearance
Kerb weight:
- 1450 kg: 2.0 AT (110 hp), 2.4 AT, 3.0 AT
- 1630 kg: 2.0 AT (135 hp) only
Gross weight: not measured on all four.
Ground clearance:
- 200 mm: 2.0 AT (110 hp), 2.4 AT, 3.0 AT
- 195 mm: 2.0 AT (135 hp)
Tank: 65 L on all four — range cannot be compared because consumption is not measured.
Wheel sizes: not measured on all four.
Rear suspension:
- 2.0 AT (110 hp): Semi-independent, springorts hélicoïdaux, sem
- 2.0 AT (135 hp), 2.4 AT, 3.0 AT: Independent, spring
If you want the highest listed clearance and the lightest listed kerb, three versions tie at 200 mm and 1450 kg. The 135 hp 2.0 AT is the only one that trades 5 mm of clearance and 180 kg of mass for the 6-cylinder Inline engine and RWD.
Which Toyota RegiusAce version to choose
Choose 2.0 AT (110 hp) if you want FWD and the smallest petrol engine. It is the only FWD RegiusAce in the data. 110 hp, 167 Nm at 2600 rpm, 1995 cm³, 4 Inline, 2 valves, Gasoline 92, kerb 1450 kg, clearance 200 mm. Versus the other 2.0 AT, you give up 25 hp and 10 Nm and you stay 180 kg lighter. Versus 2.4 AT, you give up 22 hp and 37 Nm at the same 1450 kg. Specific output ≈ 55.1 hp/L; kg/hp ≈ 13.2. Fuel 92 rather than 95.
Choose 2.0 AT (135 hp) if peak power and the only 6-cylinder matter more than mass. 135 hp is the generation maximum — 3 hp above 2.4 AT and 44 hp above 3.0 AT. Displacement is only 3 cm³ larger than the 110 hp 2.0 AT (1998 vs 1995), so almost all of the 25 hp gap is specific output (67.6 vs 55.1 hp/L), not size. You pay 180 kg (1630 vs 1450), 5 mm less clearance, RWD instead of FWD, Gasoline 95 instead of 92, and torque that peaks 1800 rpm later (4400 vs 2600). Compression 9.6 and 75 × 75 are listed only here. Engine: Front, longitudinal. This is the version to pick when the catalogue name 2.0 AT must mean the 135 hp car, not the 110 hp car.
Choose 2.4 AT if you want the best kg/hp and the most torque without diesel. 132 hp is 3 hp short of the 135 hp 2.0 AT but 22 hp above the 110 hp 2.0 AT. 204 Nm is the torque maximum of the generation — 27 Nm above the 135 hp 2.0 AT and 37 Nm above the 110 hp 2.0 AT. Kerb stays 1450 kg, so kg/hp ≈ 11.0, the lowest (best) of the four. Clearance 200 mm. Drive RWD. Engine position Central. Fuel Gasoline 92. Valves per cylinder not measured. For a buyer who would have taken the 135 hp 2.0 AT for “more engine,” 2.4 AT is the arithmetic counter: 443 cm³ more displacement, 27 Nm more torque, 180 kg less mass, 3 hp less peak.
Choose 3.0 AT only if the fuel must be Diesel. 91 hp is the generation minimum — 19 hp below 2.0 AT (110 hp), 41 hp below 2.4 AT, 44 hp below 2.0 AT (135 hp). Displacement 2975 cm³ is the largest, specific output the lowest ≈ 30.6 hp/L. Torque 191 Nm at 2400 rpm sits between the two 2.0 petrols and below 2.4 AT. Same 1450 kg and 200 mm as the 110 hp 2.0 AT and 2.4 AT, so the Diesel does not buy extra listed mass or clearance; it buys Diesel fuel, compression 22, Front, longitudinal, 4 Inline, 2 valves, RWD, No boost. kg/hp ≈ 15.9. Injection system not measured. If horsepower or kg/hp is the criterion, this is the last pick, not the first.
Short ranking by job (from these numbers only):
1. Lightest load per hp, most torque: 2.4 AT (11.0 kg/hp, 204 Nm, 1450 kg). 2. Most hp, only 6 Inline: 2.0 AT (135 hp) (135 hp, 67.6 hp/L, 1630 kg). 3. Only FWD, 92 Gasoline, early torque peak: 2.0 AT (110 hp) (FWD, 167 Nm @ 2600, 1450 kg). 4. Only Diesel: 3.0 AT (91 hp, 191 Nm @ 2400, 2975 cm³).
There is no second generation to compare year-to-year. The “extra money” inside 1998–2005 buys either the 25 hp / 6-cylinder 2.0 AT, the 204 Nm 2.4 AT at the same 1450 kg as the small petrol, or Diesel on 3.0 AT. It does not buy a measured 0–100, a measured top speed, or a measured mpg figure — those stay not measured on every version.