Ford Probe

Which Ford Probe to buy: version-by-version comparison

If you are choosing a Ford Probe, the numbers in this catalogue point to one of two cars: the 2.5 MT of 2 generation (1992–1997) if you want the strongest naturally aspirated spec, or the 2.2 MT at 147 hp with Turbo of 1 generation (1988–1992) if you want the most torque and the lowest measured highway consumption. Every Probe in the data is a Coupe with FWD and Gasoline.

If you are choosing a Ford Probe, the numbers in this catalogue point to one of two cars: the 2.5 MT of 2 generation (1992–1997) if you want the strongest naturally aspirated spec, or the 2.2 MT at 147 hp with Turbo of 1 generation (1988–1992) if you want the most torque and the lowest measured highway consumption. Every Probe in the data is a Coupe with FWD and Gasoline. There are 2 generations and 10 versions. Same-name versions must be split by power: two 2.2 MT (111 hp and 147 hp) and two 2.2 AT (111 hp and 147 hp). Prices are not in the data.

Generations: what actually changed between 1 generation and 2 generation

1 generation ran from 1988-01-01 to 1992-12-31 as a Coupe with 6 versions. Ground clearance is 130 mm on every measured version. The tank is 57 L. Front brakes are Disc. Rear brakes are Drum on the 111 hp fours and Disc on the 147 hp and 3.0 versions. Engine placement, where measured, is Front, transverse.

2 generation ran from 1992-01-01 to 1997-12-31 as a Coupe with 4 versions. Clearance rises to 160 mm — 30 mm more than 1 generation. The tank is 59 L — 2 L more. Front brakes become Ventilated disc. Rear brakes stay Drum on both 2.0 versions and become Disc on both 2.5 versions. The naturally aspirated 2.2 / 3.0 / Turbo / Compressor mix of 1 generation is replaced by a 2.0 Inline 4 and a 2.5 V-shaped 6, both with boost No.

Engine options and specs (all versions)

Injection is Distributed injection (multi-point) on every version. Compression ratio is measured only on 2.5 MT of 2 generation: 9.2. Bore × stroke: 2.5 MT 84.5 × 74.2; 2.2 MT (both 111 hp and 147 hp Turbo) 86 × 94; 3.0 MT and 3.0 AT 89 × 80; 2.2 AT 147 hp Compressor, 2.0 MT, 2.0 AT, and 2.5 AT — not measured.

Power per litre (hp ÷ displacement in litres): 2.2 MT 147 hp Turbo 67.3 hp/L; 2.2 AT 147 hp Compressor 66.8 hp/L; 2.5 MT / 2.5 AT 66.1 hp/L; 2.0 MT / 2.0 AT 58.6 hp/L; 2.2 MT / 2.2 AT 111 hp 50.8 hp/L; 3.0 MT / 3.0 AT 46.9 hp/L. The 3.0 V-shaped 6 is the largest engine and the least specific.

Do not mix the two 2.2 AT cars: 111 hp uses 2184 cc, boost No, fuel 92, 176 Nm at 3000 rpm; 147 hp uses 2200 cc, boost Compressor, fuel 95, 227 Nm at 2000 rpm. The two 2.2 MT cars share 2184 cc; the 147 hp car adds Turbo and 258 Nm versus 176 Nm.

On 2 generation, 2.5 AT is not the same engine map as 2.5 MT: peak power is at 6000 rpm instead of 5600, and torque is 211 Nm at 4000 rpm instead of 217 Nm at 4800.

Performance and economy: what the extra power actually buys

Measured 0–100 km/h exists for three manuals only:

• 3.0 MT (1 generation): 8.2 s, top speed 205 km/h. Consumption not measured.
• 2.5 MT (2 generation): 8.5 s, top speed 220 km/h. City 11.2 L/100 km, highway 7.9, mixed 8.9.
• 2.2 MT 147 hp Turbo (1 generation): 8.6 s, top speed 220 km/h. City 11.3, highway 6.1, mixed 8.1.
• 2.0 MT (2 generation): 10.6 s, top speed 190 km/h. Consumption not measured.

3.0 MT is 0.3 s quicker to 100 than 2.5 MT and 0.4 s quicker than Turbo 2.2 MT, despite 140 hp versus 165 and 147. It is also 15 km/h slower at the top than both 220 km/h cars. 2.5 MT is 2.1 s quicker than 2.0 MT and 30 km/h faster at the top for 48 extra hp (165 − 117).

Turbo 2.2 MT uses 1.8 L/100 km less on the highway than 2.5 MT (6.1 versus 7.9) and 0.8 L/100 km less mixed (8.1 versus 8.9). City figures are almost the same (11.3 versus 11.2).

Top speed 190 km/h is also listed for 2.2 MT 111 hp and 2.2 AT 111 hp. 3.0 AT is listed at 205 km/h. Not measured: 0–100 on 2.0 AT, 2.5 AT, both 111 hp 2.2 versions, 2.2 AT 147 hp, and 3.0 AT; top speed on 2.0 AT, 2.5 AT, and 2.2 AT 147 hp; all consumption except Turbo 2.2 MT and 2.5 MT.

Weight, clearance, tank, wheels

Kerb weight, where measured:

• 2.0 MT (2 generation): 1188 kg — lightest Probe in the data.
• 2.2 MT / 2.2 AT 111 hp: 1240 kg.
• 2.5 MT: 1280 kg.
• 2.2 MT 147 hp Turbo: 1340 kg.
• 3.0 MT / 3.0 AT: 1375 kg — heaviest measured.

Not measured: kerb weight of 2.0 AT, 2.5 AT, and 2.2 AT 147 hp Compressor.

kg per hp (kerb ÷ hp): 2.5 MT 7.76; Turbo 2.2 MT 9.12; 3.0 MT 9.82; 2.0 MT 10.15; 111 hp 2.2 MT 11.17. 2.5 MT is the only version under 8 kg/hp.

Gross weight: 2.5 MT 1690 kg; Turbo 2.2 MT and 2.2 AT 147 hp and 3.0 MT 1730 kg. Not measured on 2.0 MT, 2.0 AT, 2.5 AT, both 111 hp 2.2 versions, and 3.0 AT. Payload on 2.5 MT is 1690 − 1280 = 410 kg; on Turbo 2.2 MT 1730 − 1340 = 390 kg; on 3.0 MT 1730 − 1375 = 355 kg.

Clearance: 160 mm on all four 2 generation versions; 130 mm on all six 1 generation versions. Tank: 59 L vs 57 L. Wheel size: not measured on any version. Suspension: Independent, spring front and rear on every version.

Which version to choose

Buy 2 generation 2.5 MT if you want the catalogue’s best power-to-weight and the only 2 generation V-shaped 6 with a full performance set. 165 hp in 1280 kg, 8.5 s, 220 km/h, Ventilated disc front and Disc rear, 160 mm clearance, 59 L tank. Versus 2.0 MT you pay 92 kg and gain 48 hp, 2.1 s to 100, and 30 km/h. Versus Turbo 2.2 MT you gain 18 hp and lose 41 Nm (217 vs 258), with 0–100 only 0.1 s apart.

Buy 1 generation 2.2 MT 147 hp (Turbo) if torque and highway consumption matter more than peak hp. 258 Nm is the highest figure in the model — 41 Nm above 2.5 MT, 34 Nm above 3.0 MT. Highway 6.1 L/100 km is the lowest measured. Same 220 km/h top as 2.5 MT. Trade-offs: 130 mm clearance, 57 L tank, Disc (not ventilated) front, 1340 kg, 3 valves per cylinder.

Buy 1 generation 3.0 MT if the measured 0–100 number is the only criterion. 8.2 s is the quickest in the data, 0.3 s ahead of 2.5 MT, with 140 hp and 1375 kg. Specific output is the worst (46.9 hp/L). Top speed is 205, not 220. 2 valves per cylinder versus 4 on the later 2.5.

Buy 2 generation 2.0 MT if you want the lightest Probe. 1188 kg, 117 hp, 10.6 s, 190 km/h, 4 valves per cylinder, Ventilated disc / Drum, 160 mm. Versus 111 hp 2.2 MT you gain 6 hp, lose 8 Nm (168 vs 176), drop 52 kg, and pick up 30 mm of clearance. Consumption not measured.

Avoid pairing a 2.0 or 2.5 Automatic with a claim of 0–100 or top speed from the matching Manual. 2.0 AT and 2.5 AT have those figures not measured. 2.5 AT also has 211 Nm, not 217. 2.0 AT kerb weight is not measured.

1 generation automatics: 2.2 AT 111 hp matches the 111 hp manual on power, torque, 190 km/h, 1240 kg. 3.0 AT matches 3.0 MT on 140 hp and 205 km/h; 0–100 not measured. 2.2 AT 147 hp is the odd one: Compressor, 2200 cc, fuel 95, 227 Nm at 2000 rpm — the lowest rpm for peak torque in the model. 0–100, top speed, kerb weight, and consumption are not measured. Do not treat it as the Turbo 2.2 MT.

111 hp 2.2 MT / 2.2 AT are the weakest Probe: 50.8 hp/L, 11.17 kg/hp on the manual, 0–100 not measured, Drum rear. They share 190 km/h with 2.0 MT but sit 30 mm lower.

Reliability / problems (from the spec sheet only): every car is FWD Gasoline Coupe. Boost appears only on two 1 generation 147 hp cars (Turbo manual, Compressor automatic). Later cars are boost No. Rear Drum is on all 2.0 and all 111 hp 2.2 cars; the performance versions use rear Disc. Wheel size is not measured, so tyre load cannot be compared. CO2 and eco class are not measured on any version.

Short list: 2.5 MT for 2 generation GT-style numbers; Turbo 2.2 MT for torque and highway mpg; 3.0 MT for the single best 0–100; 2.0 MT for lowest kerb weight. Keep the version string exactly as written — 2.2 MT without the horsepower figure is two different cars.