Opel Calibra

Which Opel Calibra version to buy (1990–1997)

The Opel Calibra exists as 1 generation only (1990-01-01 to 1997-12-31), Coupe, 12 versions. There is no later generation to wait for. The buying choice is which of those 12 to take: 2.0 MT at 115, 136, 150 or 204 hp, 2.0 AT at 115 or 136 hp, and 2.5 MT / 2.5 AT at 170 hp — each distinguished by power, FWD versus AWD, Manual versus Automatic, and Turbo versus No.

The Opel Calibra exists as 1 generation only (1990-01-01 to 1997-12-31), Coupe, 12 versions. There is no later generation to wait for. The buying choice is which of those 12 to take: 2.0 MT at 115, 136, 150 or 204 hp, 2.0 AT at 115 or 136 hp, and 2.5 MT / 2.5 AT at 170 hp — each distinguished by power, FWD versus AWD, Manual versus Automatic, and Turbo versus No. On the measured numbers the 2.0 MT 204 hp AWD Turbo is the fastest (6.8 s to 100 km/h, 245 km/h) and the lightest per horsepower (1285 kg / 204 hp = 6.3 kg/hp). The 2.0 MT 115 hp FWD is the lightest car (1190 kg) and the lowest mixed consumption among versions with a figure (8.2 l/100 km). The 2.0 MT 150 hp FWD is the strongest naturally aspirated 1998 cm³ FWD (8.5 s, 223 km/h, 8.1 kg/hp). The 2.5 MT 170 hp FWD sits between 150 and 204 hp on acceleration (7.8 s) but is the heaviest kerb weight measured (1355 kg).

Generations: one generation, twelve versions

1 generation (1990–1997) is the whole model: Coupe, 12 versions, all Gasoline, all Front, transverse, all Distributed injection (multi-point), all 95 fuel, all 63 l tank, all 140 mm ground clearance. Wheel sizes are not measured on every version. Restyling is not a separate generation in this data.

Because there is only 1 generation, “which generation” is not a choice. The arithmetic below is version versus version inside that span.

Specs: engines, gearbox, drive

All 2.0 versions use 1998 cm³. The 2.5 versions use 2498 cm³. Cylinder layout is Inline 4 except the 2.5 pair (6, V-shaped). Boost is No except the 204 hp 2.0 MT (Turbo).

Power per litre (hp ÷ displacement in litres): 2.0 MT 115 = 57.6 hp/l; 2.0 MT 136 = 68.1 hp/l; 2.5 MT 170 = 68.1 hp/l; 2.0 MT 150 = 75.1 hp/l; 2.0 MT 204 Turbo = 102.1 hp/l. The 136 hp 2.0 and the 170 hp 2.5 land on the same specific output; the Turbo 2.0 is 1.5 times the 136/2.5 figure (102.1 − 68.1 = 34.0 hp/l more).

Compression ratio is measured only on 2.0 MT 136 AWD (10.8), 2.0 AT 136 FWD (10.8), 2.0 AT 136 AWD (10.8), and 2.5 AT 170 (10). Bore × stroke is measured only on 2.5 AT 170: 81 × 79.6. On every other version both are not measured.

Performance and mpg: 0–100, top speed, fuel

CO2 and eco class are not measured on all 12.

Automatic versus Manual (same engine, FWD): 2.0 AT 115 is 2.0 s slower to 100 than 2.0 MT 115 FWD (12 − 10) and 5 km/h slower (205 − 200). Mixed consumption is the same 8.2. 2.0 AT 136 FWD is 2.0 s slower than 2.0 MT 136 FWD (11.5 − 9.5) and 10 km/h slower (215 − 205); mixed rises 1.0 l (9.8 − 8.8). 2.5 AT 170 is 1.0 s slower than 2.5 MT 170 (8.8 − 7.8) and 3 km/h slower (237 − 234). Mixed on 2.5 AT is 8.5 against 10.2 on 2.5 MT (−1.7), while city is higher (15.9 − 14.4 = +1.5) and highway is higher (11.2 − 7.8 = +3.4). If the Automatic is chosen, the 2.5 pair loses less time to 100 (1.0 s) than the 2.0 pairs (2.0 s).

AWD versus FWD (same power, Manual): 2.0 MT 115 AWD is 1.0 s slower than 2.0 MT 115 FWD (11 − 10) and 7 km/h slower (205 − 198). Mixed is the same 8.2. 2.0 MT 150 AWD is 1.0 s slower than 2.0 MT 150 FWD (9.5 − 8.5) and 8 km/h slower (223 − 215); mixed is the same 12.1. 2.0 MT 136 AWD matches 2.0 MT 136 FWD at 9.5 s but is 10 km/h slower (215 − 205); its fuel is not measured. AWD is not offered on the 2.5 versions in this data.

Stepping up 2.0 FWD Manual power: 115 → 136 is +21 hp, +18 Nm, −0.5 s (10 → 9.5), +10 km/h (205 → 215), mixed +0.6 l (8.2 → 8.8). 136 → 150 is +14 hp, +8 Nm, −1.0 s (9.5 → 8.5), +8 km/h (215 → 223), mixed +3.3 l (8.8 → 12.1). 115 → 150 is +35 hp, −1.5 s, +18 km/h, mixed +3.9 l. The 150 hp step buys more acceleration than the 136 hp step and costs more mixed fuel than both lower 2.0 manuals combined.

2.5 versus 2.0: 2.5 MT 170 versus 2.0 MT 150 FWD: +20 hp, +34 Nm, +500 cm³, −0.7 s (8.5 → 7.8), +14 km/h (223 → 237), mixed −1.9 l (12.1 → 10.2). Versus 2.0 MT 136 FWD: +34 hp, −1.7 s, +22 km/h, mixed +1.4 l (8.8 → 10.2). Versus 2.0 MT 204 Turbo: −34 hp, −50 Nm, +1.0 s (6.8 → 7.8), −8 km/h (245 → 237), mixed +1.3 l (8.9 → 10.2). The 2.5 beats every naturally aspirated 2.0 on 0–100 and top speed; it does not beat the Turbo.

Turbo 2.0 versus the rest: 2.0 MT 204 versus 2.0 MT 150 FWD: +54 hp, +84 Nm, −1.7 s, +22 km/h, mixed −3.2 l (12.1 → 8.9) despite more power. Versus 2.0 MT 115 FWD: +89 hp, +110 Nm, −3.2 s, +40 km/h, mixed +0.7 l (8.2 → 8.9). Peak torque arrives at 2400 rpm versus 2600 on 115, 3200 on 136/2.5, and 4600 on 150 — the Turbo is the only version whose torque peak is below 2500 rpm.

Dimensions and weight

Ground clearance is 140 mm on all 12. Tank is 63 l on all 12. Wheel size is not measured on all 12.

AWD adds 95 kg on the 115 2.0 MT (1285 − 1190) and 85 kg on the 150 2.0 MT (1300 − 1215). 2.0 AT 136 FWD is 5 kg heavier than 2.0 MT 136 FWD (1255 − 1250). 2.5 MT 170 is 140 kg heavier than 2.0 MT 150 FWD (1355 − 1215) and 165 kg heavier than 2.0 MT 115 FWD (1355 − 1190). The Turbo 2.0 MT 204 at 1285 kg matches 2.0 MT 115 AWD and is 70 kg heavier than 2.0 MT 150 FWD (1285 − 1215), yet 3.8 kg/hp lighter than that 150 FWD (8.1 − 6.3).

Front suspension is Independent, spring on all 12. Rear is Independent, spring on every AWD version (115, 136, 150, 204) and Semi-independent, springorts hélicoïdaux, sem on every FWD version. Front brakes are Ventilated disc on all 12. Rear brakes are Disc where measured; on 2.0 MT 136 AWD and 2.0 AT 136 AWD rear brakes are not measured.

Range at mixed figure × 63 l (where mixed is measured): 2.0 MT/2.0 AT 115 ≈ 768 km (63 / 8.2 × 100); 2.0 MT 136 FWD ≈ 716 km; 2.0 AT 136 FWD ≈ 643 km; 2.0 MT 150 ≈ 521 km; 2.0 MT 204 ≈ 708 km; 2.5 MT 170 ≈ 618 km; 2.5 AT 170 ≈ 741 km. The 150 hp 2.0 has the shortest calculated mixed range; the 115 hp 2.0 has the longest among measured mixed figures.

Problems and reliability

This dataset does not measure faults, rust, or service intervals. Reliability is not measured. What is measured and relevant to upkeep is hardware spread: 2 versus 4 valves per cylinder on the 115 versus 136/150/204 2.0; Turbo only on 2.0 MT 204; AWD plus Independent, spring rear on four Manual/Automatic 2.0 versions; 6 cylinders V-shaped only on 2.5 MT and 2.5 AT. Missing figures cluster on the 136 hp AWD pair (fuel, kerb, gross, rear brakes not measured). Those gaps are not evidence that the parameters do not exist; they are not measured here.

Which version to choose

Lowest mass, lowest mixed fuel, FWD Manual: 2.0 MT 115 hp. 1190 kg, 10.3 kg/hp, 8.2 l/100 km mixed, 10 s, 205 km/h. 2 valves per cylinder, No boost. This is the baseline.

Same engine, Automatic: 2.0 AT 115 hp. Same 1190 kg and 8.2 mixed, +2.0 s and −5 km/h versus the Manual. Choose this only if Automatic 4 is required; it does not change consumption in the data.

AWD on the 115: 2.0 MT 115 hp AWD. +95 kg, +1.0 s, −7 km/h, mixed unchanged at 8.2. Rear becomes Independent, spring. The AWD tax is mass and speed, not the mixed litre figure given here.

Smallest useful power step, still economical: 2.0 MT 136 hp FWD. +21 hp and 4 valves versus 115 FWD, −0.5 s, +10 km/h, mixed +0.6 l, kerb +60 kg. Specific output matches the 2.5 (68.1 hp/l). 2.0 AT 136 FWD gives up 2.0 s and 10 km/h and 1.0 l mixed versus that Manual. The 136 AWD 2.0 MT / 2.0 AT pair keep 9.5 / 11.5 s but fuel and weight are not measured — do not treat those as zero.

Strongest naturally aspirated 2.0 FWD: 2.0 MT 150 hp. 8.5 s, 223 km/h, 8.1 kg/hp, 1215 kg. Mixed 12.1 is 3.9 l above the 115 and 3.3 l above the 136 FWD — the largest fuel jump on the 2.0 ladder. Torque peaks at 4600 rpm, 2000 rpm higher than the 136. 2.0 MT 150 AWD costs 85 kg, 1.0 s, and 8 km/h for AWD; mixed stays 12.1.

Six-cylinder FWD without Turbo: 2.5 MT 170 hp. 7.8 s and 237 km/h beat every 2.0 except the 204 Turbo. Mixed 10.2 beats the 150’s 12.1 and loses to the 115/136 manuals. Kerb 1355 kg is the highest measured; kg/hp 8.0 is almost the 150 FWD (8.1). 2.5 AT 170: 8.8 s, 234 km/h, mixed 8.5 (city 15.9, highway 11.2). Pick 2.5 MT if the extra 500 cm³ and 6 V-shaped cylinders are the point; pick 2.5 AT if Automatic is required and a 1.0 s gap versus its Manual is acceptable.

Fastest, highest specific output, AWD only: 2.0 MT 204 hp Turbo. 6.8 s, 245 km/h, 102.1 hp/l, 6.3 kg/hp, 280 Nm at 2400, mixed 8.9 — 0.7 l above the 115 and 3.2 l below the 150. There is no FWD and no Automatic of this engine in the data. What the Turbo buys versus 2.0 MT 150 FWD is 1.7 s, 22 km/h, 54 hp, and lower mixed fuel, at +70 kg and AWD. Versus 2.5 MT 170 it buys 1.0 s and 8 km/h at −70 kg kerb (1285 versus 1355).

Decision in one pass: daily FWD and lowest litres → 2.0 MT 115. Need Automatic on the same economy → 2.0 AT 115. Need AWD without Turbo → 2.0 MT 115 AWD (measured fuel) or 2.0 MT 150 AWD (more speed, 12.1 mixed). Want more speed without the 12.1 mixed of the 150 → 2.0 MT 136 FWD. Want 6 cylinders FWD → 2.5 MT 170 (or 2.5 AT 170). Want the top of the table → 2.0 MT 204 Turbo AWD. Prices are not in this data; the gaps above are time, km/h, kg, and l/100 km only.