LuAZ-969 vs GAZ-69: specs side by side
Quick comparison from catalog data - no editorial review of this pair yet.
LuAZ · 1971–1975
LuAZ-969
- Power
- 22–30 kW30–41 PS
- Top speed
- 90 km/h
- Kerb mass
- 960 kg
GAZ · 1953–1972
GAZ-69
- Power
- 40 kW54 PS
- Top speed
- 90 km/h
- Kerb mass
- -
At a glance
Who suits what, worked out from the catalog figures of the versions above.
- City LuAZ-969 Length: 3,390 mm vs 3,850 mm; Width: 1,610 mm vs 1,750 mm
In plain words
GAZ-69 is 460 mm longer than LuAZ-969 (3,850 mm vs 3,390 mm). GAZ-69 is the older design (from 1953); LuAZ-969 arrived in 1971. On the catalog figures, the LuAZ-969 is the pick for city. Our catalog has no kerb mass for the GAZ-69 yet, so some checks above leave it out.
Size and weight
Side view to scale, all cars from the front bumper.
| LuAZ-969 | GAZ-69 | |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 3,390 mm133.5 in | 3,850 mm151.6 in +460 mm +18.1 in +13.6% |
| Width | 1,610 mm63.4 in | 1,750 mm68.9 in +140 mm +5.5 in +8.7% |
| Height | 1,780 mm70.1 in | 1,950 mm76.8 in +170 mm +6.7 in +9.6% |
| Wheelbase | 1,800 mm70.9 in | 2,300 mm90.6 in +500 mm +19.7 in +27.8% |
| Fits a standard garage? | Yes | Yes |
Difference vs LuAZ-969 (±). Garage check: a standard single garage takes a car up to about 5.0 m (16 ft 5 in) long and 1.9 m (6 ft 3 in) wide (width as listed in the catalog; some makers include the mirrors). Leave about 0.6 m (2 ft) to open the doors.
Full specifications
| LuAZ-969 | GAZ-69 | |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Version | 1.2 · petrol | 2.0 · 40 kW (54 PS) |
| Production years | 1971–1975 | 1953–1972 |
| Body | SUV | SUV |
| Class | SUV / crossover | SUV / crossover |
| Country | Ukraine | Soviet Union (USSR) |
| Performance | ||
| Power Why it matters: More power means stronger acceleration and easier overtaking, especially with a full load. | 22–30 kW (30–41 PS) 30–40 hp | 40 kW (54 PS) 54 hp Better |
| Top speed Why it matters: Top speed hints at how relaxed the car is at motorway speeds, even if you never reach it. | 90 km/h 56 mph | 90 km/h 56 mph |
| Engine and transmission | ||
| Fuel | Petrol | No data |
| Engine | 1,200 cc · 4 cyl 1.2 l | 2,000 cc · 4 cyl 2.0 l |
| Gearbox | manual | 3-speed manual |
| Drive | All-wheel drive | All-wheel drive |
| Dimensions and weight | ||
| Length | 3,390 mm 133.5 in | 3,850 mm 151.6 in |
| Width | 1,610 mm 63.4 in | 1,750 mm 68.9 in |
| Height | 1,780 mm 70.1 in | 1,950 mm 76.8 in |
| Wheelbase | 1,800 mm 70.9 in | 2,300 mm 90.6 in |
| Kerb weight Why it matters: A lighter car is usually more agile and uses less energy. | 960 kg 2,116 lb | No data |
| Fuel tank Why it matters: A larger tank means more distance between fuel stops. | 34 l 9.0 gal US | No data |
| Economy and running costs | ||
| Fuel consumption Why it matters: Lower consumption cuts running costs and CO₂ emissions on every trip. | 15.0 l/100 km 15.7 mpg US | No data |
| Fuel cost per year | €3,940/year estimated | No data |
| Range on a full tank | 227 km 141 mi estimated | No data |
These cars do not differ in the data we have.
Equal rows hidden (4): Body, Class, Top speed, Drive.
Better marks the stronger figure - only for measurable specs (power, torque, 0–100 km/h, consumption, boot, weight).
Estimated at 15,000 km a year with fuel at €1.75/l petrol.