Plymouth Laser

Plymouth Laser specs by version: what actually differs

Three engines, two gearboxes. That is the whole matrix.

Three engines, two gearboxes. That is the whole matrix.

Engine comparison: litres, valves, turbo, power per litre

1.8 MT and 1.8 AT share the 1755 cc engine: 94 hp (69 kW) at 5000 rpm, 142 Nm at 3500 rpm, 2 valves per cylinder, compression 9, bore × stroke 80.6 × 86, boost No. Specific output is 94 ÷ 1.755 ≈ 53.6 hp per litre. Peak torque arrives 1500 rpm earlier than peak power, which is the only 1.8-specific argument for daily driving.

2.0 MT (137 hp) and 2.0 AT (137 hp) share 1997 cc: 137 hp (101 kW) at 6000 rpm, 169 Nm at 5000 rpm, 4 valves per cylinder, compression 9, bore × stroke 85 × 88, boost No. Versus the 1.8 that is +43 hp and +27 Nm on +242 cc — about 46% more power and 19% more torque for 14% more displacement. Specific output rises to 137 ÷ 1.997 ≈ 68.6 hp per litre. The extra 2 valves per cylinder is the mechanical reason that jump is larger than the extra 242 cc alone.

2.0 MT (195 hp) and 2.0 AT (195 hp) keep 1997 cc, 4 valves per cylinder, and 85 × 88, but add Turbo, drop compression to 7.8, and make 195 hp (143 kW) at 6000 rpm and 276 Nm at 3000 rpm. Versus the naturally aspirated 2.0 that is +58 hp and +107 Nm on the same displacement — about 42% more power and 63% more torque. Specific output is 195 ÷ 1.997 ≈ 97.6 hp per litre, almost double the 1.8. Peak torque at 3000 rpm is the earliest of the three engines; the 137 hp 2.0 does not make its 169 Nm until 5000 rpm.

Arithmetic across the range: Turbo 2.0 versus 1.8 is +101 hp and +134 Nm — more than double the power (195 / 94 ≈ 2.07) and nearly double the torque (276 / 142 ≈ 1.94) — on 242 cc more and a turbocharger.

Same fuel (92) and same injection on all six. You are not buying a different fuel grade when you step up.

Manual vs Automatic: the same engine, not the same car

Every engine is sold as Manual 5 and Automatic 4. The gearbox is the second buying axis.

On the 1.8, 1.8 MT is rated 175 km/h; 1.8 AT is 170 km/h — 5 km/h given up for the Automatic 4. 0–100 km/h is not measured for either.

On the naturally aspirated 2.0, the gap is measured twice. 2.0 MT (137 hp) does 0–100 km/h in 8.7 s and 195 km/h. 2.0 AT (137 hp) does 0–100 in 11.4 s and 182 km/h. That is +2.7 s to 100 km/h and −13 km/h top speed for the same 137 hp and 169 Nm. If this engine is the one you want, the Manual 5 is the version that uses it.

On the Turbo 2.0, 2.0 MT (195 hp) is rated 230 km/h. 2.0 AT (195 hp) has top speed not measured and 0–100 km/h not measured. The Automatic 4 Turbo is the least documented of the six: same 195 hp and 276 Nm on paper, no speed figures to prove what the gearbox leaves on the table.

Rule from the numbers: Manual 5 is the faster of each pair wherever both speeds exist. Automatic 4 is the slower, documented path on 1.8 and on 137 hp 2.0, and an undocumented path on 195 hp.

Performance and mpg: what is measured, what is not

0–100 km/h:

• 1.8 MT: not measured
• 1.8 AT: not measured
• 2.0 MT (137 hp): 8.7 s
• 2.0 AT (137 hp): 11.4 s
• 2.0 MT (195 hp): not measured
• 2.0 AT (195 hp): not measured

The only timed pair is the 137 hp 2.0. The Turbo 2.0 MT’s 230 km/h is 35 km/h above the 137 hp MT (195) and 55 km/h above the 1.8 MT (175), which is consistent with +58 hp and +101 hp, but there is no 0–100 figure to convert that into a sprint.

Top speed, complete list: 175 / 170 / 195 / 182 / 230 / not measured.

Fuel consumption (city, highway, combined) is not measured on all six. CO2 is not measured. Eco class is not measured. There is no mpg ranking in this dataset. A 60 L tank is the only fuel-system number that exists for every version; range cannot be calculated without consumption.

Do not infer economy from power. The catalogue does not measure it.

Dimensions and weight: kg per horsepower

Gross weight is not measured on all six. Wheel size is not measured on all six. Ground clearance is 160 mm on all six. Tank is 60 L on all six. Body is Coupe on all six. You are not choosing a different size of Laser.

Kerb weight is measured on the three manuals only:

• 1.8 MT: 1190 kg → 1190 ÷ 94 ≈ 12.7 kg per hp
• 2.0 MT (137 hp): 1215 kg → 1215 ÷ 137 ≈ 8.9 kg per hp
• 2.0 MT (195 hp): 1245 kg → 1245 ÷ 195 ≈ 6.4 kg per hp

2.0 MT (137 hp) is 25 kg heavier than 1.8 MT and 43 hp stronger: you add 2.1% mass for 46% more power. 2.0 MT (195 hp) is 30 kg heavier than the 137 hp MT and 55 kg heavier than the 1.8 MT: 2.5% more mass than the NA 2.0 for 42% more power.

Automatic kerb weights are not measured. You cannot compute kg/hp for 1.8 AT, 2.0 AT (137 hp), or 2.0 AT (195 hp). Treat those three as “same engine, unknown extra mass.”

Generations: there is nothing to compare across years

One generation, 1 January 1989 to 31 December 1994, Coupe, six versions, no restyling listed as a separate generation. Every modification in the data uses the same start and stop dates. There is no later generation with more valves, more gears, or a different drive layout. Buying “the last Laser” does not buy a different engine family than buying “the first Laser” in this catalogue. The choice is version, not year of generation.

Reliability and problems: not in the data

There are no failure rates, recall counts, or service intervals in the source. Reliability cannot be ranked. What can be ranked is mechanical complexity that is in the table: Turbo versus No, 4 valves per cylinder versus 2, Automatic 4 versus Manual 5. Those are specification differences, not durability scores.

Which version to choose

Choose 1.8 MT if you want the lightest measured Laser (1190 kg), the simplest head (2 valves per cylinder), boost No, and a documented 175 km/h. You accept 94 hp, 53.6 hp/L, and 12.7 kg/hp. 0–100 km/h is not measured.

Choose 1.8 AT if you want that same 94 hp / 142 Nm engine with Automatic 4. You give up 5 km/h (170 vs 175) versus 1.8 MT. Kerb weight and 0–100 km/h are not measured.

Choose 2.0 MT (137 hp) if you want the only version with both a timed sprint and a high naturally aspirated top speed: 8.7 s to 100 km/h and 195 km/h, 137 hp, 169 Nm, 4 valves per cylinder, boost No, 1215 kg, 8.9 kg/hp. Versus 1.8 MT that is +43 hp, +27 Nm, +25 kg, +20 km/h. This is the version where the extra displacement is fully documented.

Choose 2.0 AT (137 hp) only if you need Automatic 4 on the 1997 cc NA engine and accept the measured cost: 11.4 s to 100 km/h (2.7 s slower than the matching MT) and 182 km/h (13 km/h slower). Same 137 hp and 169 Nm; the gearbox is the entire difference. Kerb weight is not measured.

Choose 2.0 MT (195 hp) if the catalogue’s peak numbers are the point of a Coupe: 195 hp, 276 Nm at 3000 rpm, Turbo, 97.6 hp/L, 6.4 kg/hp, 1245 kg, 230 km/h. Versus 2.0 MT (137 hp) that is +58 hp, +107 Nm, +30 kg, +35 km/h, compression 7.8 instead of 9. Versus 1.8 MT that is +101 hp, +134 Nm, +55 kg, +55 km/h. 0–100 km/h is not measured; the speed rating is the proof, not a sprint time.

Choose 2.0 AT (195 hp) only if you specifically need Automatic 4 on the Turbo engine. Output is the same 195 hp and 276 Nm. Top speed is not measured. 0–100 km/h is not measured. Kerb weight is not measured. Among the six, this is the version with the most missing performance figures.

A short decision path using only these numbers:

1. If you want Automatic 4, pick the engine first, then accept that every AT in this model is the slower or undocumented twin of its MT. 2. If you want a measured 0–100 km/h, the list collapses to two cars: 2.0 MT (137 hp) at 8.7 s and 2.0 AT (137 hp) at 11.4 s. 3. If you want the highest documented top speed, it is 2.0 MT (195 hp) at 230 km/h. 4. If you want the lowest measured mass, it is 1.8 MT at 1190 kg. 5. If you want the most torque per litre and the earliest peak torque, it is the Turbo pair: 276 Nm at 3000 rpm on 1997 cc.

There is no AWD, no extra generation, and no consumption figure to break a tie. The Laser you buy is one of six FWD Coupes from 1989–1994; the numbers above are the whole difference between them.