Imagine the jeers, the scorn. You’re pulling into a classic car show in your gleaming, cherry red ’89 Ford Mustang GT Turbo 2.2. Enthusiasts are giving you the side-eye, muttering under their breath, “That’s not a real Mustang.” That’s if you’re lucky – maybe some crotchety old geezer comes up to you and sneers at you and your front-wheel-drive Mustang. You try to tell them the FWD Mustang kept the nameplate alive, that its performance was class-competitive, that it served roughly the same market niche as the original Mustang had. It’s no use. You’re driving the “loser” Mustang. Even the Mustang II fans at the show chortle they have a V8.
You can stop imagining. That reality never came to pass, though it almost did.
No matter how good a sport coupe the first-generation Probe was – and it was pretty good – it was no Mustang. Sure, a lot of Mustang and Probe buyers alike wouldn’t be able to tell you the difference between front- and rear-wheel-drive and a lot of Mustang buyers didn’t want a big V8. But, likewise, there were plenty of Mustang buyers who specifically bought Ford’s pony car because of its rear-wheel-drive layout and available V8. By switching to front-wheel-drive and four- and six-cylinder engines, Ford would’ve been saying goodbye to a huge chunk of buyers and ceding the Mustang’s segment entirely to GM. The kind of people who bought Mustangs and Camaros were, for the most part, a different group of people to those who bought Celicas and Preludes. Even by targeting Celica and Prelude buyers with an impressive, Japanese-engineered product, Ford had no guarantee they could sway them. Ford was a domestic nameplate, after all, and plenty of buyers had switched to import brands and become loyal to them.
Nevertheless, this was Ford’s plan, conceived during the early 1980s when high fuel prices showed no sign of abating. In 1982, Ford commenced project SN-8 with the intent of developing a compact, front-wheel-drive coupe with four-cylinder engines. Just a year later, they decided to consult Mazda, in whom they had a 24.5% stake. Mazda was developing the next generation of 626 so Ford joined in, the proposed FWD Mustang to share the 626’s underpinnings. In 1985, Mazda commenced construction of a new factory building on the grounds of Ford’s Michigan Casting Center where the new generation of 626 sedan and coupe (the latter renamed MX-6) and the new Ford coupe would be built.
When word got out the new Mustang was going to be little more than a reskinned Mazda – sans V8 and rear-wheel-drive, no less! – Ford hastily retreated amidst the backlash. The ageing Fox Mustang, therefore, earned a stay of execution while its planned successor borrowed the Probe nameplate from a series of aerodynamic Ford concept cars.
Although the Probe was almost entirely Mazda underneath, it didn’t share a single body panel with its cousin (and rival), the MX-6, and owed much visually to Ford’s concept cars of the 1980s. It was aerodynamic like those concepts, too, with a drag coefficient of 0.30 and slinkier than the more butch and upright MX-6.
The Probe reached showrooms in mid-1988 for model year 1989. The range opened with the GL, priced at $10,943. This was almost $2000 higher than the cheapest Mustang, though its Mazda-sourced 2.2 naturally-aspirated, fuel-injected four-cylinder produced 20 more horsepower than the base Mustang’s 2.3 four (for a total of 110 hp at 4700 rpm) albeit the same amount of torque (130 ft-lbs at 3000 rpm). Both Mustang LX 2.3 and Probe GL 2.2 came with a choice of a five-speed manual or four-speed automatic transmission and the same basic array of features.
The mid-level Probe was the LX, which added, from 1990, Ford’s Vulcan V6, making it the only car on this platform to be equipped with a six-cylinder engine. By this point, even the Mustang was no longer available with a six-cylinder engine. Such an engine was rare in this segment as only the Chevrolet Beretta, Dodge Daytona and much pricier Subaru XT6 were available with one. In the Probe, the 3.0 V6 produced 140 hp at 4800 rpm and 160 ft-lbs at 3000 rpm and was available with either a five-speed manual or four-speed automatic.
The LX was much plusher than the spartan GL, adding a leather-wrapped steering wheel and shift knob, upgraded carpet and upholstery, a folding armrest, remote fuel door and liftgate releases, power mirrors and a tilt steering column. Unlike the GL, it was eligible for various option packages that added a raft of power accessories. Four-wheel disc brakes were also standard, with the option of ABS.
The range was topped by the GT, available exclusively with Mazda’s turbocharged 2.2 four-cylinder. Also available with a five-speed stick or four-speed auto, the GT produced 145 hp at 4300 rpm and 190 ft-lbs at 3500 rpm. The GT was actually slightly less slippery than the GL and LX with a drag coefficient of 0.32. It did, however, come with 15-inch alloy wheels, a firmer suspension tune, and speed-sensitive variable assist power steering. Additionally, Ford borrowed Mazda’s Automatic Adjusting Suspension system from the MX-6 GT. This allowed the driver to flick a console-mounted switch to select one of three drive modes – Soft, Normal or Sport – to adjust the firmness of the shock absorbers.
While adaptive shocks weren’t unique to Ford and Mazda, it was another stark contrast to the Mustang across the showroom floor. All Probes came with four-wheel independent suspension, too, unlike the live rear axle-equipped Mustang. Ford’s two coupes were almost identical in length, height and curb weight – if not width where the Mustang had a distinct advantage – but they were two very different cars.
First-year Probe production totalled 133,650 units compared to 209,769 Mustangs, although the latter had the advantage of an available convertible and two different coupe body styles. The Mustang’s advantage diminished shortly thereafter, however. Ford produced 109,898 Probes and 128,189 Mustangs for 1990, followed by 93,737 Probes and 98,737 Mustangs for 1991. It’s hard to extrapolate any cannibalization of the Mustang from those figures.
Of course, the Probe wasn’t intended to rival the Mustang but instead complement it. The real rivals were imported coupes like the Honda Prelude and Toyota Celica and the Probe typically outsold them. Even in the first-generation Probe’s worst year – its last, 1992 – Ford built 50,517 of them. That was more than the Celica (41,598) and the Prelude (36,040) which it undercut on price. The Probe also decisively outsold the ageing Dodge Daytona, perhaps its most conceptually similar domestic rival.
The LX V6 was arguably the sweet spot in the Probe range. The base four-cylinder was willing but rather gruff while the turbocharged four-cylinder suffered from excessive torque steer. The V6, in comparison, was more refined and with more predictable power delivery. It weighed roughly 200 pounds more than the base four-cylinder (or, for that matter, a Toyota Celica) but so did the turbocharged GT and it was still good for a 0-60 time of 9 seconds. That was about the same as a Daytona V6, which had almost identical horsepower, torque and curb weight figures, albeit a less sophisticated rear suspension and a price around $2k lower.
The GT’s performance proved Mustang purists right. In testing, it just couldn’t get its power down satisfactorily due to turbo lag and torque steer. In Motor Trend’s Bang For Your Buck special, the GT and its Mazda MX-6 Turbo cousin posted a 0-60 time at the bottom of the twenty-car pack – 8 seconds, 1.4 seconds slower than the Mustang V8 which cost a cool $2k less. Though the testers had some favourable comments, including praise for its ample torque and slick shifter, the consensus was its limits were low and its fun factor mid-pack at best. The Mustang V8? It was in the Top 5.
Changes were few during the first-generation Probe’s run, kept commendably short thanks to Mazda’s lead. Ford belatedly made a firmer suspension tune and 15-inch wheels available in the LX V6 for 1992, making that model even more appealing.
Though sport coupe sales were declining in the 1990s, the Probe earned a second generation. The first generation had managed to outsell key rivals without stepping on the Mustang’s toes. Despite this, it doesn’t have the same fervent following contemporary Fox Mustangs have today. Fortunately, you won’t be sneered at for taking one to a classic car show.
GTs photographed in San Mateo, CA and Seattle, WA in June 2019. LX photographed in Washington Heights, Manhattan, NY in 2013-14.
Note: a rerun of an older post.
Related Reading:
Curbside Classic: 1988 Toyota Celica GT – Oh What A Feeling!
Curbside Classic: 1987 Dodge Daytona Pacifica – An Impressive Transformation
Curbside Classic: 1991 Honda Prelude Si – Improving The Original
Wonder what would have happened if the Probe actually became the new Mustang? What if Porsche did abandon the 911s?
So pretty, nonetheless..
I liked pretty much everything about the Probe except the name! That made me feel a bit… uncomfortable. I was a fan of Japanese sporty coupes. I had a Civic SI and a couple of Datsun Z cars, and thought that the Prelude was a fine car. The Probe and Mustang were just two different types of cars, with a much different driving experience. Not that early Fox Mustangs were that well developed, they were lacking in many areas, but having a V8 and RWD made up for a lot.
Replacing a well known model with something with a completely different platform and philosophy is quite a difficult stunt to pull off. I had this discussion with the owner of a Mustang Mach E. He had owned earlier Mustangs and remarked that Mustang fans hate his car. I told him that I don’t think that the Mach E is a bad car, it’s a typical five door hatchback. But I don’t like that Ford is trying to pass it off as a Mustang variant, when it’s a completely different type of vehicle. If it just had a Ford blue oval and a Mach E badge there wouldn’t be any controversy. Of course I wouldn’t be a potential buyer for the car in any case. If you think that this is a controversy, you should check out Harley Davidson’s replacement for the traditional Sportster. A modern water cooled V Twin that isn’t even made in the U.S. anymore.
“it’s a typical five door hatchback. But I don’t like that Ford is trying to pass it off as a Mustang variant, when it’s a completely different type of vehicle.”
In Europe, they (Ford) are currently trying the same thing with the Capri E. It’s also a five-door hatchback that bears no resemblance to the original.
Its success has been so “resounding” that I haven’t seen one outside of dealer showrooms yet.
Ford has become a manufacturer and supplier of commercial vehicles in Europe, slightly exaggerated. The Ford Puma is a common sight, but that’s it (when speaking current car models).
Yes, things aren’t looking good for Ford Europe’s passenger car production.
They plan to cut 2,900 jobs in Germany alone by the end of 2027, primarily at the Cologne plant. The assembly plant in Saarlouis (Germany) is scheduled to close at the end of 2025. Currently, the Focus model still is being produced there.
Across Europe, a total of 4,000 jobs are to be eliminated by the end of 2027.
It’s really sad (after the GM/Opel split) how the Americans are leaving the European market to the Wolfsburg-based companies and Japan.
This isn’t going well together with ” … great again.”
I’m not sure what they were thinking with that.. there are already two other ford crossovers using the name of coupes, and the nameplates those use are current, or fairly recent, the capri doesnt have the same familiarity with buyers of new cars, and fans of the original are definetly not the audiance its aimed at., plus the market is oversaturated with crosovers, EV or otherwise. why they couldnt make it an actual coupe, even if it was a 4 door along the lines of the vw Arteon/ cc i’ll never know
I remember seeing sketches of the Probe (as a future Mustang) back in the mid 80’s. I thought it looked good then and good now. If it would’ve been RWD with a V8, I think the most of the Mustang faithful would have been pleased. I especially liked the updated TRX looking rims they went with on the GT model. It was a nice call back to the early 80’s Mustang GTs.
I also remember the uproar over it back then. I’m glad it happened or we wouldn’t have the Mustang we know today.
The wheel design also got revived again with the 94 SN95 generation. Only thing o never got about the Probe wheel are those inserts between spokes that make them look like wheel covers over steel wheels, what was with that??
I’ve wondered the same thing since these were new. I can only assume it was a case of the stylists getting carried away with “futuristic” surface texture.
I rented a 4 cylinder manual transmission Probe in Florida for about a week. Enjoyable car. It was brand new, had a tail lamp out I found a harness disconnected. No other issues for the duration.
The pics being so old now explain why the cars are still in relative, good health.
Don’t recall seeing a green one. The one in the print ad, mid way through the article, is a looker.
Worked, briefly, for a “Ford” dealer “89-90”. Service dept was besieged by owners with “tranny, issues” on their “Probes”.
I really liked the look of the first and second generation Probes. 1995, I was car shopping and looked at the second gen Probes. The interior just looked cheap. I special ordered a 1996 Chrysler Sebring LXI coupe and never had regrets.
Must have had comfortable seats as my neighbor slept drunk in his many a time. Not sure how he managed to drive it home, much less parallel park it before passing out. My grandmother called the cops on a few occasions, thinking he had gone to the saloon in the sky.
….
Sorry for the duplication, that was my fault — I was removing some wrongly trashed posts from the Trash and didn’t see that it was a duplicate.
No apologies needed Aaron.
I had a 1990 Probe LX V6 as a company car in the day. Red over silver/grey interior. I really looked that car!
“Company car”? Quite a choice.
My dad had a ‘90 Probe with the V6 and a 5spd (white with red interior), and I had a ‘90 Mustang GT (5spd). Most days I wouldn’t have traded, but the Probe was a really nice car, especially with the V6.
The subject red Probe was my favorite generation of Probes. The second Probe was based on the Mondeo platform, which underpinned that sedan as well as the north American Contour rebadge, which is fine.
But the exterior simply did not have the saame ‘flow’ from front to rear. How the fenders met and flared out to meet the side view mirrors on the original Probe is timeless!
Sounds like a good daily driver .
-Nate
Back in the day one of my coworkers had a Probe; another had an MX-6. I much preferred the looks and style of the Mazda.
I always assumed that a sleek, brown Probe would be a fine car for a Proctologist.
Probes and Mustangs got a run on the TV Series “In Plain Sight”, when the lead character’s crappy, smoking (’95?) Probe gets replaced by a (’66?) Mustang.
The remarkable thing about the Probe is how scarce they’ve become, I still see SN95s very regularly in daily driver service but Probes? I don’t recall seeing a single one in years, even on marketplace listings.
I like the first gen design and ponder how it would have been received as a Mustang had it retained a RWD platform with the 5.0. Foxbodies we’re looking a little long in tooth by the 87-93 generation but there’s now a charm to them that seemed to make them age better than the sleeker GM F bodies of which the Probe was more aligned with styling wise. As they were having been around a few(my same high school friend I’ve mentioned with the black Mark VII had a Turbo Probe before it), for better or worse they really felt a lot more like Mazdas of the era than Fords, just in the way often common pieces like switches or vents were different, and for me personally I preferred the more traditional Ford bits in Mustangs et al of the era, rubber shift boot for example on the manuals was just plain hideous to me, manual Mustangs had nice leather ones
I remember liking this post a lot the first time I read it, which is still true today. The first Probe was a stylistic knockout, and its looks have held up remarkably well. I owned a ’94 second-gen base-model, but aside from the high cowl and blocky front clip, the first Probe has emerged as the more enduring design.
Looking at some of the commercials for the first Probe, the messaging was all over the map and one gets the impression that Marketing didn’t know what to do with the car. One had a performance angle, another asked repeatedly if you had driven a Ford lately, and yet another attacked with a bunch of screaming voices in what I guess was considered music. But there was one that did stand out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Neo7akVwZY
It communicates modernity, which is the angle that I think Ford, which had just spent a decade learning how to lead in aero, should have taken, promoting it along the lines of GM’s later EV1. Forget the hoi polloi, sell it to people loaded and looking for a commuter that was luxurious and space age. A modern aero wonder and maybe sold with an optional second rear floor pan that dispensed with rear seating and instead packaged a fuel tank 2 or 3X the standard one, so that together with low drag, could have been promoted with 1000 mile range. The engine needed to be efficient.
I loved the 1st gen Probe. It was a revolutionary design outside & inside. And so practical. Erred in buying the 2nd gen new in ’93.
There aren’t many US cars here in my town. However, there’s a Probe parked just around the corner from my house. It’s exactly the same red as the feature car, just with different rims.
Until recently, there was also a white De Ville on the next street. Unfortunately, it disappeared a few months ago.