Which Ford Contour Version Should You Buy?
The Ford Contour in this catalogue is a Front-wheel-drive Sedan offered in one generation, including its restyling, from 1994 to 2000. The choice comes down to two Gasoline engine families: 2.0 versions with 4 Inline cylinders and 2.5 versions with 6 V-shaped cylinders.
The Ford Contour in this catalogue is a Front-wheel-drive Sedan offered in one generation, including its restyling, from 1994 to 2000. The choice comes down to two Gasoline engine families: 2.0 versions with 4 Inline cylinders and 2.5 versions with 6 V-shaped cylinders. The clearest economy-oriented choice is the restyled 2.0 MT, while the strongest performance choice is the restyled 2.5 MT with 200 hp. Buyers seeking a middle ground can consider the 2.5 MT with 173 hp: it reaches 100 km/h in 7.9 seconds and has the highest listed top speed, 220 km/h.
Ford Contour generations and versions
The original Ford Contour generation covers 1994–1997 and has a Sedan body with 8 listed modifications. Its 2.0 engine options produce 125 or 132 hp, while the 2.5 options produce 165 or 172 hp. Both 5-speed Manual and 4-speed Automatic transmissions are available, and every version uses FWD.
The restyling belongs to the same generation and covers 1997–2000. It remains a Sedan and contains 6 modifications. The restyled 2.0 MT and 2.0 AT produce 131 hp, while the 2.5 range includes 173, 195, and 200 hp versions. The strongest options are available only as 5-speed Manual versions in the supplied data.
Ford Contour engine options and specs
Identical database names are distinguished below by production period and horsepower.
| Period and version | Power | Torque | Displacement | Fuel | Cylinders and layout | Boost | Gearbox | Drive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1994–1997 2.0 AT, 125 hp | 125 hp | 176 Nm | 1982 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 4, Inline | No | 4-speed Automatic | FWD |
| 1994–1997 2.0 MT, 125 hp | 125 hp | 176 Nm | 1982 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1994–1997 2.0 MT, 132 hp | 132 hp | 174 Nm | 1988 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1994–1997 2.0 AT, 132 hp | 132 hp | 174 Nm | 1988 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 4, Inline | No | 4-speed Automatic | FWD |
| 1994–1997 2.5 MT, 165 hp | 165 hp | 217 Nm | 2497 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 6, V-shaped | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1994–1997 2.5 AT, 165 hp | 165 hp | 217 Nm | 2497 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 6, V-shaped | No | 4-speed Automatic | FWD |
| 1994–1997 2.5 MT, 172 hp | 172 hp | 224 Nm | 2544 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 6, V-shaped | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1994–1997 2.5 AT, 172 hp | 172 hp | 224 Nm | 2544 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 6, V-shaped | No | 4-speed Automatic | FWD |
| 1997–2000 2.0 MT, 131 hp | 131 hp | 178 Nm | 1988 cc | Gasoline, 92 | 4, Inline | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1997–2000 2.0 AT, 131 hp | 131 hp | 178 Nm | 1988 cc | Gasoline, 92 | 4, Inline | No | 4-speed Automatic | FWD |
| 1997–2000 2.5 MT, 173 hp | 173 hp | 224 Nm | 2544 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 6, V-shaped | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1997–2000 2.5 AT, 173 hp | 173 hp | 220 Nm | 2544 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 6, V-shaped | No | 4-speed Automatic | FWD |
| 1997–2000 2.5 MT, 195 hp | 195 hp | 265 Nm | 2544 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 6, V-shaped | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
| 1997–2000 2.5 MT, 200 hp | 200 hp | 265 Nm | 2544 cc | Gasoline, 95 | 6, V-shaped | No | 5-speed Manual | FWD |
The 1994–1997 2.0 engines deliver approximately 63.1 hp per litre in 125 hp form and 66.4 hp per litre in 132 hp form. The restyled 2.0 versions produce approximately 65.9 hp per litre. Among the 2.5 engines, output rises from approximately 66.1 hp per litre for the 2497 cc, 165 hp unit to approximately 67.6–68.0 hp per litre for the 2544 cc, 172–173 hp units. The restyled 195 and 200 hp versions reach approximately 76.7 and 78.6 hp per litre respectively.
Ford Contour performance and fuel economy
| Period and version | 0–100 km/h | Top speed | City | Highway | Combined |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1994–1997 2.0 AT, 125 hp | not measured | not measured | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 1994–1997 2.0 MT, 125 hp | 12 s | 170 km/h | 9.7 l/100 km | 7.2 l/100 km | 8.5 l/100 km |
| 1994–1997 2.0 MT, 132 hp | 15 s | 180 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 1994–1997 2.0 AT, 132 hp | 15 s | 180 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 1994–1997 2.5 MT, 165 hp | 10 s | 190 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 1994–1997 2.5 AT, 165 hp | 10 s | 190 km/h | not measured | not measured | not measured |
| 1994–1997 2.5 MT, 172 hp | 10 s | 190 km/h | 11.2 l/100 km | 7.8 l/100 km | 9.8 l/100 km |
| 1994–1997 2.5 AT, 172 hp | 10 s | 190 km/h | 11.2 l/100 km | 7.8 l/100 km | 9.8 l/100 km |
| 1997–2000 2.0 MT, 131 hp | not measured | 170 km/h | 9.8 l/100 km | 6.7 l/100 km | 8.4 l/100 km |
| 1997–2000 2.0 AT, 131 hp | not measured | 170 km/h | 10 l/100 km | 6.8 l/100 km | 8.7 l/100 km |
| 1997–2000 2.5 MT, 173 hp | 7.9 s | 220 km/h | 11.8 l/100 km | 8.1 l/100 km | 9.6 l/100 km |
| 1997–2000 2.5 AT, 173 hp | 9.6 s | 210 km/h | 11.8 l/100 km | 8.1 l/100 km | 9.6 l/100 km |
| 1997–2000 2.5 MT, 195 hp | 7.1 s | 175 km/h | 12.1 l/100 km | 9.2 l/100 km | 10.4 l/100 km |
| 1997–2000 2.5 MT, 200 hp | 7.1 s | 175 km/h | 12.1 l/100 km | 9.2 l/100 km | 10.4 l/100 km |
For fuel economy, the restyled 2.0 MT has the lowest measured combined consumption at 8.4 l/100 km. Its 2.0 AT counterpart uses 8.7 l/100 km combined, an increase of 0.3 l/100 km. Both share 131 hp, 178 Nm, a 170 km/h top speed, and a 57 l tank, so the Manual is the stronger choice when measured consumption matters more than transmission preference.
The restyled 2.5 MT with 173 hp is the performance-value option in the measured data. Compared with the 2.5 AT with 173 hp, it is 1.7 seconds quicker to 100 km/h, has a 10 km/h higher top speed, and produces 4 Nm more torque. Both record the same consumption: 11.8 l/100 km in the city, 8.1 l/100 km on the highway, and 9.6 l/100 km combined.
The 195 and 200 hp 2.5 MT versions are the quickest, each reaching 100 km/h in 7.1 seconds. However, both have a listed top speed of 175 km/h and combined consumption of 10.4 l/100 km. The 200 hp version therefore adds 5 hp over the 195 hp version without changing the supplied torque, acceleration, top-speed, or consumption figures.
Ford Contour weight, ground clearance, tank and wheel sizes
| Period and version | Kerb weight | Gross weight | Weight per hp | Ground clearance | Tank | Wheel sizes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1994–1997 2.0 AT, 125 hp | not measured | not measured | not measured | 160 mm | 57 l | not measured |
| 1994–1997 2.0 MT, 125 hp | 1257 kg | not measured | 10.1 kg/hp | 160 mm | 57 l | not measured |
| 1994–1997 2.0 MT, 132 hp | 1320 kg | 1600 kg | 10.0 kg/hp | 120 mm | 57 l | not measured |
| 1994–1997 2.0 AT, 132 hp | 1320 kg | 1600 kg | 10.0 kg/hp | 120 mm | 57 l | not measured |
| 1994–1997 2.5 MT, 165 hp | 1400 kg | 1600 kg | 8.5 kg/hp | 120 mm | 57 l | not measured |
| 1994–1997 2.5 AT, 165 hp | 1400 kg | 1600 kg | 8.5 kg/hp | 120 mm | 57 l | not measured |
| 1994–1997 2.5 MT, 172 hp | 1358 kg | not measured | 7.9 kg/hp | not measured | 57 l | not measured |
| 1994–1997 2.5 AT, 172 hp | 1378 kg | not measured | 8.0 kg/hp | not measured | 57 l | not measured |
| 1997–2000 2.0 MT, 131 hp | 1275 kg | 1500 kg | 9.7 kg/hp | 120 mm | 57 l | not measured |
| 1997–2000 2.0 AT, 131 hp | 1275 kg | 1500 kg | 9.7 kg/hp | 120 mm | 57 l | not measured |
| 1997–2000 2.5 MT, 173 hp | 1375 kg | 1600 kg | 7.9 kg/hp | 120 mm | 57 l | not measured |
| 1997–2000 2.5 AT, 173 hp | 1375 kg | 1600 kg | 7.9 kg/hp | 120 mm | 57 l | not measured |
| 1997–2000 2.5 MT, 195 hp | 1400 kg | not measured | 7.2 kg/hp | 160 mm | 57 l | not measured |
| 1997–2000 2.5 MT, 200 hp | 1400 kg | not measured | 7.0 kg/hp | 160 mm | 57 l | not measured |
The restyled 2.0 versions weigh 1275 kg, while the restyled 173 hp 2.5 versions weigh 1375 kg, a difference of 100 kg. In return, the 2.5 models add 42 hp. The 195 and 200 hp 2.5 MT versions weigh 1400 kg and have the best calculated power-to-weight results: approximately 7.2 and 7.0 kg per hp. All listed versions use a 57 l tank. Wheel sizes are not measured for any version, and no exterior dimensions are supplied.
Which Ford Contour version to choose
Choose the 1997–2000 2.0 MT with 131 hp if measured fuel economy is the priority. It records 8.4 l/100 km combined, the lowest figure in the data, and weighs 1275 kg. The 2.0 AT with 131 hp offers the Automatic transmission but consumes 0.3 l/100 km more combined.
Choose the 1997–2000 2.5 MT with 173 hp for the strongest balance of speed and consumption. It reaches 100 km/h in 7.9 seconds, runs to 220 km/h, and uses 9.6 l/100 km combined. Against the restyled 2.0 MT, it adds 42 hp and 46 Nm, cuts measured combined consumption efficiency by 1.2 l/100 km, and adds 100 kg.
Choose the 1997–2000 2.5 MT with 200 hp when maximum listed output and the best calculated weight-per-horsepower figure matter most. It provides 5 hp more than the 195 hp 2.5 MT at the same 1400 kg kerb weight. Their other supplied performance and economy figures are identical, so the data gives no numerical advantage to the 195 hp version.
For an earlier car, the 1994–1997 2.5 MT with 172 hp is the most compelling measured compromise. It weighs 1358 kg—42 kg less than the 165 hp 2.5 MT—while adding 7 hp and 7 Nm. Its combined consumption is 9.8 l/100 km. The corresponding 2.5 AT with 172 hp weighs 20 kg more, with the same listed power, torque, acceleration, top speed, and consumption.