At a glance
Here is how the two models stack up on the specs that matter most.
| Specification | GT2 | Phantom |
|---|---|---|
| Range | 90 km | 100 km |
| Battery | 1.5 kWh | 1.6 kWh |
| Efficiency | 1.7 kWh/100km | 1.6 kWh/100km |
| 0-100 km/h | 0 s | 0 s |
| Fast charge 10-80% | ~0 min | ~0 min |
| Seats | 1 | 1 |
| Price | $3,000 | $2,500 |
| Rating | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 |
| Estimated running cost / year | $38 | $36 |
The Phantom wins 4 of 8 categories, making it our pick in this head-to-head.
Range & efficiency
The GT2 is rated for 90 km of range versus 100 km for the Phantom. That is effectively a tie - neither offers a meaningful range advantage.
The GT2 consumes about 1.7 kWh per 100 km versus 1.6 kWh for the Phantom - so the Phantom is the cheaper and greener option per kilometre.
Performance
Acceleration figures vary by trim; check the full spec sheet below for the exact variant tested.
Charging
Charging time depends on the charger and battery temperature; the lower 10-80% figure means shorter stops on long trips.
Space & comfort
The GT2 seats 1 and the Phantom seats 1. Check the full spec sheet for cargo volume.
Price & running costs
The GT2 lists at $3,000 and the Phantom at $2,500. At 15,000 km per year, estimated running costs are about $38/yr versus $36/yr.
Verdict
The Phantom is our pick, taking 4 of 8 categories in this head-to-head. It leads on the longer range (90 km vs 100 km), the larger battery (1.5 kWh vs 1.6 kWh) and the lower consumption (1.7 kWh/100km vs 1.6 kWh/100km). That said, the GT2 is still the better buy if local incentives, dealer offers or brand preference swing it for you.