1989 Ford Probe GT Turbo
S. MacQuarrie
particular car has 147 horsepower. Thing is, everyone I've talked to says
that this is WAY low. I would tend to agree after driving my friends Acura
Integra, which apparently has 140 horsepower, give or take. There is WAY
more then a 7 horsepower difference between the two cars. My question is:
What is the TRUE horsepower rating on the 89 Probe GT?
Steven McColl
I know, cool grandmother) has owned a pre-93 GT (turbo) and a 96GT. She
said (much to my surprise) that the pre-93 was a LOT faster than her 96.
So 147 might be 30 or so lower than the truth. The 96 has 163 and she
says it's slower! :)
Steve
S. MacQuarrie <macq...@cadvision.com> wrote:
: I just had a quick question. I know that the "specs" say that this
Hogan Whittall
part, but that kick in the pants is put there by torque.
'89-'92 GT Turbo: 190lb/ft torque
'93-'96 GT V6: 160lb/ft torque
Wanna' know why the older GT is faster? That's the reason right there.
10 to 1 the HP rating is correct for the vehicle, not low like everyone
suggests.
Steven McColl <smc...@umr.edu> wrote:
: I'm not sure the exact answer to your question, but my grandmother (yeah,
: Steve
--
---
Hogan Whittall
ho...@primenet.com
'98 XJ
jason
93 at 156-160.
However, you should note the torque specifications.....
89-92 PGT 190 ftlb at 3500rpm
(93)-97 PGT (156) 160 ftlb at (4000) 4800 rpm.
So... I think the torque helps to accelerate the car more then the extra
10-15 Hp.
I also saw a post on the newsgroup that mentioned that the Hp ratings
are flywheel and the probe has an effecient transmission, therefore,
gets more power to the road.
ref page... http://www.webcentrix.net/probe/specs.html
I should check the weight of my car (89 PGT) and post it to compare with
a 93-97... anybody have the figures... should be in the drivers door...
Jason 'my two cents'
Daryl Mark Krzewinski
<macq...@cadvision.com> wrote:
>I just had a quick question. I know that the "specs" say that this
>particular car has 147 horsepower. Thing is, everyone I've talked to says
>that this is WAY low. I would tend to agree after driving my friends Acura
>Integra, which apparently has 140 horsepower, give or take. There is WAY
>more then a 7 horsepower difference between the two cars. My question is:
>What is the TRUE horsepower rating on the 89 Probe GT?
I remember seeing an actual Mazda spec sheet about 8 years ago that
showed the hp and torque curves for the 2.2 turbo engine (I work for a
company that is a major vendor to most car makers here in the U.S.)..
Although the "145 hp @ 4300 rpm" listing is actually correct, the
catch is that the hp peak of the engine is really closer to 5300 or so
rpm (I'm going on memory here). The listed peak at that engine speed
was about 185 hp under normal conditions. Even better yet, the 2.2 had
an excellent adjustment strategy that was able to take advantage of
ideal conditions (premium fuel, cool ambient temp, low engine temp)
and allow brief periods of overboost that pushed it easily into the
190s for a max of about 7-8 seconds. As this was quite temporary
though, I'd say the true stock peak was about 185 hp.
I definitely believe that figure. When my `89 PGT was new and broken
in 8 years ago I went to the local track with a buddy who had a
similarly new and broken in Shelby Daytona (the 2.2 intercooled 2V
turbo, rated at 174 hp). Not only did I consistently thrash him at the
track, my best run that day was a corrected 14.9 @ 94 mph. My car was
COMPLETELY stock, and if you do the math it's impossible to run that
time on 145 hp with that weight. :)
And I'm still driving her today at 171,000 miles! No way she could run
that time now, but she's been the most trouble-free car I've ever
owned the past 10 years.
Daryl
--
Replace "nobody" with "dmk" to e-mail me personally.
Kallal
"shoot-out" tests has the 1/4 time mile time almost the same as the Eagle
Talon (front drive...which is faster then the AWD model anyway...except for
its launch). The Talon is rated at 190 HP. In these tests the 240SX with a
145 HP rating was no where to be seen in terms of time. I have driven all
three Dodge Daytona turbos, they are Stage I, 145 HP, Stage II 174 HP, and
the 16V 225HP IROC turbo (these all are based on the 2.2 L American built
motor). My probe felt faster than all three models! I am not surprised at
my car feeling faster than the 174 HP Daytona since the Probe has MUCH
tighter gearing, and is a much lower car. However, the 225HP one should have
really impressed me......perhaps the one I drove was a dog. The "old" Probe
GT Turbo is a very much underated car......faster than the newer gen Probes.
<snip>