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.
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
I must be getting old I remember when these Probe were being touted as the new Mustang, luckily for Mustang fans it didnt happen,
I thoroughly enjoyed this post.
The Probe was a nice car, but I’m glad it wasn’t a Mustang.
It was a strikingly pretty car when it first arrived, and I liked the look of the wheels which resembled the older metric/TRX rims.
It had a decent stereo, too. Around that time factory systems were improving fast.
I was a passenger in a new ’91/V6 when the driver took it up to 120 mph on the now-gone Cline Avenue bridge.
It wasn’t fast, but it was quick enough and drama-free.
I was not enjoying it, because I only like high speeds if I am driving, but I was impressed by the sheer plantedness of the Probe around the curves.
It was also very quiet, with no wind or tire noise.
But another time I was in the backseat, and at 6’0″ I was quite smooshed. I was also getting cooked by the sun by all that rear glass.
But that’s the price for style, and it’s all about the front seats in a car like that anyway.
It’s hard to believe now, but there was widespread perception in the early to mid ’80s that RWD was obsolete. Just about every FWD car of the time bragged of their drivetrain layout in adverts and brochures; if your car had RWD, you just didn’t mention which wheels drove the car.
Two questions: why would you want to close that little flap that covered up some of the dashboard controls, and what are those two little bumps on the hood covering? Did something under there not quite fit?
I’m not positive about this, but I think the (silly) premise behind the little flap was that it covered up unessential controls so that the driver wouldn’t be distracted by them. I don’t know if it was Ford or some other manufacturer who likened it to airplanes where the pilots had the option to just light up essential instruments at night.
But regardless, I’ve never met a driver who was distracted by HVAC controls, so the idea wasn’t terribly useful.
That was the “night panel” or some such found on some late-period GM Saabs that turned off all the gauges except the speedometer unless there was an urgent condition (like the fuel gauge if the tank was low) in which case that would illuminate too. The stated purpose was to reduce distractions; the real purpose was to drive home the “born from jets” airplane connection (do planes even really do this?) to imply Saabs featured aviation-inspired engineering, when in actuality the Saab automotive division split from the Saab aircraft company decades earlier.
Yes, I think you’re right. Guess I’m getting my dashboard gimmicks mixed up!
It was actually a great feature on the Saab. I never realized how much better night visibility could be until I tried out the night panel.
And the blisters allowed for a lower hoodline, while still clearing strut towers’ height.
Long before pedestrian protection with higher hoods allowing for crush space between the top of the engine and underside of hood. Honda was on a mission to lower the hood and cowl but instead of using bumps for clearance they substituted the taller strut suspension with wishbones. The 86 Accord and 83 Prelude had remarkably low cowls and beltlines giving them visibility sorely missing in today’s cars.
”Honda was on a mission to lower the hood and cowl but instead of using bumps for clearance they substituted the taller strut suspension with wishbones.”
Correct, but since Ford was building the Probe off of the 626’s platform and “hard points,” there was probably no practical way to design a different front suspension, or to tilt the strut towers.
Ford did this with the 1989 MN12 Thunderbird’s too, going from struts in the Fox based 88s to double A arms to achieve the low hood lines. The Probe didn’t have the luxury of being a clean sheet platform like that though.
The bumps in the hood are so that the strut towers did not contact the hood
The flap on the dash covers the trip computer controls. This was to allow the dash to have a cleaner look or keep the buttons from accidentally being pressed
The clock above on the center of the dash is the display for the trip computer. There were two types of button setups for this car. The first was for the cars with analog gauges. It had all those buttons on the right of the panel with a space on the left. On the optional digital display cluster, that “naked” part of the panel would have buttons to control the digital gauges.
This car is an analog gauge model
Once they decided it wasn’t a Mustang, they should’ve given it a couple of extra doors. It would’ve been plug-and-play since the cowl height was the same as a Mazda 626 and would’ve filled a product gap in the Ford line for a sedan smaller and sportier than the Taurus and more upscale and refined than the aging Tempo and Erica-platform Escort.
Interestingly, the Probe offered a sliding moonroof, which is something that the Mustang hasn’t offered from the factory since the Mustang II, in 1978.
Due to the short roof of the Probe, it opened upward and over the steel roof, as there wasn’t room for the glass panel to retract into the headliner. All that the Gen3 Fox-body Mustang offered (besides a full convertible, of course) was a manual flip open/lift out glass panel, which I probably took full advantage of in my 1990 a total of two or three times. The SN-95, S-197 and S-550 seem to have offered no optional sliding sunroof, although the S-197 offered a fixed glass roof as a $2,000 option; not many appear to have been built.
CC Effect! I saw a Ford Probe the day this post appeared and the driver had the moonroof open. I spot it occasionally but the moonroof, visible when open, never struck me as anything unusual..before now!
I came close to buying a 91 Probe about 5-6 years ago at a charity. It was a red LX, very similar looking to the featured car. It didn’t have the sunroof but did have the digital dash. As I seem to remember, the secondary controls (at least on the cars with a digital instrument panel) were a bit….unusual.
The car I looked at was in very good condition for a nearly 25 year old car, with only around 90-100K miles on the odometer.
I have been kicking myself for years for not having bought that car.
There are not many around any more in my area. The last one I recall seeing was painted that metallic pink. A little research tells me that makes it a 94 model, and that Ford called that paint “Desert Coral”.
Not long before we met, my Mrs. got one as a rental on a trip she took. There was something about that 4 cyl/auto combo that she decided was the slowest thing she had driven in ages. She didn’t like the car one bit.
I always found these attractive. The Mopar competitor I always slotted against these in my mind was not so much the Daytona but the Diamond Star cars – Plymouth Laser, Mitsu Eclipse and Eagle Talon – which came out right around the same time.
I wouldn’t be surprised that more than a few were sold in California when compared to other states given it’s Japanese heritage. Despite that I haven’t seen one driven on my roads in maybe 20 years. Last time I saw one in the junkyard was 3 years ago. One V6 on Craigslist now, but auto, that someone is trying to flip.To even see a 88-94 Mazda 626 around the Bay Area is incredibly rare on the road outside my 91 626.
I’ve seen one multiple times in the last five years. Every year when I help the wife set up the 4H displays at the county fair, somebody there has their first-generation Probe.
It’s quite rough around the edges but it’s still percolating along. And, it’s an automatic.
The Probe seemed to be a bit more “mature” and “upscale” than the Diamond Star cars – most of which have disappeared due to abuse at the hands of their young owners.
Even the Mazda team referred to the Probe as “the good looking one” during its development.
I liked the more conventional, non-hatchback 626 better. Maybe that’s why Probe sales didn’t infringe too much into Mustang territory; it was definitely a different styling direction from the Fox Mustang and a different buying demographic.
BTW, I didn’t see it mentioned but wasn’t one of the big features of the 1st generation Probe a dash that tilted in conjunction with the steering wheel? Seems like it might also have had that weird twist knob for the turn signals, too.
Yes… the whole instrument cluster binnacle tilted with the steering column, similar to the Porsche 928. This design only existed on the 1st gen Probe.
The 2nd gen 93 Probe had a simpler interior layout and a Honda-like low cowl. I had a GT with its 2.5L and manual trans. It was a fantastic car. It cornered like it was on rails. I wish I kept it.
I have been waiting for the Probe to be profiled here, thanks for a great write-up.
However, I am surprised that you did not mention one of the features of the LX model. Your included picture shows the digital instruments that were, I believe, a standard feature of the LX. I test drove an LX, a twin to the car pictured, and not wanting any surprises I studied the owner’s manual before even starting the car. Probably the only car I ever felt I needed to do that before driving.
I can’t wait for part 2 of the Probe saga.
BTW, I have seen more 1st generation Probes in the last few years than I have seen 2nd generation models.
A friend had one of these in pink. You could see that car from a mile away. It lasted them a good long time, perhaps 10 years I’m guessing.
Surprising the Probe was not a bigger seller back then. Nice shots.
My college roommate had one of these: A black 5-speed with the bordello red interior. Imagine rolling up to Radwood in one of these!
I was living in Michigan at that time, and although everything you wrote is 100% correct, I think you missed a fairly major point about the Probe.
You see, even in the late 80s, Michiganders (and I assume plenty of other Midwesterners) would *never* buy a *gasp* FOREIGN CAR. Although they might privately admit American cars were crap, that was not a statement one could make in public.
Then along comes the Probe, wearing “Ford” badges, made right in Michigan, and built buy UAW workers. Sure, people in the know understood that it was mostly designed by Mazda and used plenty of Japanese-made parts, but the Probe was one of the first “foreign” cars that patriotic Americans could and would buy and not offend their neighbors.
I’ve often wondered if the Probe’s long-term history would have been any different had Ford never had announced that it was an anticipated Mustang replacement. That set many mindsets to be unnecessarily anti-Probe from the beginning… without that negative start, I suspect that many sneers would never have existed.
It’s amusing in retrospect that the Mustang survived its intended replacement, although something that’s interesting is to examine the proportion of Fox Mustangs that were produced with 4-cyl. engines. In the late 1980s, that proportion stood between 50-60%, but in 1990 it suddenly dropped to 20%. Then, it raised again.
I suspect that many of the non-performance-oriented Mustang buyers quickly sprang for the Probe instead, but after it had been out for a year or two, the Probe began losing appeal to that market segment. Just a guess, and I don’t have a full set of production numbers in front of me, but it’s an interesting aspect of the Probe/Mustang interplay.
Great Probe write up, thanks.
Ford was wise listen to Pony Car fans and retain the Fox RWD Mustang and offer the Probe as an alternative.
The Probe was my favorite car to rent, so much nicer than an Escort or Tracer.
Don’t know if this was mentioned, but I believe the Probe was one of the first cars that when you adjusted the steering wheel the instrument panel move with it.
Fox Mustangs were a little long in the tooth by ‘93, but I like them better than the retro style that followed. I would love to get a low mileage second gen Probe GT, although sporty cars like it are often driven hard (maybe not as hard as a Camaro or Firebird).
A simply fantastic piece. For all the world, the first-generation Probes still look great to me (even with quirky details like the “bubbles” on the hood for clearance of the shock towers). They looked much more substantial than many other FWD rivals.
I really liked my second-generation ’94 Probe, but the redesign lost many of the minor (but way cool) design details of the first cars, including the way the side-view mirrors tapered off of that character line that started at the leading edge of the front fenders.
The only design detail of the gen-2 cars that was clearly a visual improvement was the lower cowl and flatter hood.
I tend to disagree here. The second gen interior is ghastly to me (as a ’95 Celica owner), but the exterior lines are pure and clean compared to the “original”, and better integrated from what the eventual ’89 was. Probe was greenlighted for 1986, and that preproduction version is superior to these eyes than the actual first gen. Apparently Flat Rock had to have a major overhaul to build these within Mazda specs, and thrust a 3 year delay onto said gen one Probe… The resulting styling changes reek of their era. Note the October 1982 photo dates:
This car was Ford’s New Coke.
Ford, like Coca-Cola was sweating and in fear of its life in 1982. There was no Aerobird, no Taurus, and no Sable. There was no compact Ranger. Ford was fighting for FOURTH place in the market. GM had peaked at 60% of the market. The Panther wasn’t looking like a winner, the Squarebird was a bomb, and Ford was filled with doubts about its future. Dearborn was financially iffy.
So this car was their New Coke. Their attempt to make a Japanese car. Their “me too” machine. It was born out of a complete lack of confidence in their own legacy. When I see a Probe, I smell Dearborn failure, panic, and self-doubt.
Then there was the awful name. It was a bad one, like Edsel. Probe was a fine name for their prototype cars, but a downright rotten name. No one wants to be probed, unless you are into that kind of thing.
The shape was appropriate for the name. It looked like something a proctologist would use. The next generation looked better, but between that name and that shape?
“Wanna get a Probe?”
“Uh – What?”
Fortunately for Ford – the 1980s became a tremendous success and by the time this car was ready to roll, Ford regained its mojo and rediscovered its cajones. Thankfully, unlike Coca-cola, Ford caught itself before it discontinued the Mustang. The backlash against Coca-cola forced them to reissue their legacy and shoved their New Coke out of focus and into the history of bad product ideas. Ford would have been forced eventually to reissue a Mustang when their dealers, fans and buyers rebelled. Ford caught themselves, so that this car was just a curiosity for a few years.
Yet, Ford still played with their Mazda toys and tried putting a Mazda-ish Capri into the mix for their “lady’s brand”, Mercury. That odd little two seat convertible was another odd chapter during this era.
Keep your Probe away from me, dude.
I think you meant Cougar and not Capri.
What was supposed to be the third generation Probe got rebadged as a Merc for 1999 to 2002….
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Probe#1999%E2%80%932002_Cougar
Of course the Capri name would’ve probably worked out better than the Cougar name for these…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_Cougar#Eighth_generation_(1999%E2%80%932002)
I’m certain this is the Capri in question
Right!
Yes, that one from Australia. A nice enough car, but really, when they had Mazda as a partner, why didn’t they do a version of the Miata as a Ford instead? That makes as much sense as Fiat using the Miata for the 124, if not more. A RWD version would have been a better challenger than this thing based on a 323 sedan ever was.
Ford could have slightly restyled the NA Miata, badged it as whatever model name they wanted to resurrect or start, and sold it at every Ford dealership. The problem is it would have ate up a lot of the 4 and 6 cylinder (non-GT) convertible Mustang convertible sales.
There was an internal competition between Mazda Japan and a Californian team to come up with a roadster to be called Miata. The Japanese team came up with a FWD drop top based on the 323 and the California Team (proper name escapes me) came up with the sensational RWD Miata. The Japanese effort was then put into production in Australia. Obviously, the idea was to recover the development cost and a bit more. I imagine it was not too hard to do considering the parts bin approach.
As I recall, we got those Capris here in the US, too. I don’t recall the years though, and whether the Capri was even concurrent with the Probe/Cougar.
What I was saying was the Cougar (I think it was even called the Ford Cougar in Europe) was what the third generation Ford Probe (that never happened) was supposed to be.
I thought those Capris were on a smaller platform than a Probe.
A trivial note about Ford Probe…
It was first North American Ford vehicle to be exported to Europe in volume and in full ECE configuration since late 1960s. The Probe sold in Germany was stripped version, lacking many of options available in the US.
The subsequent generation (1993-1997) was a considerable success in Europe.
“Fortunately, you won’t be sneered at for taking one to a classic car show.”
True, but they don’t show up in any great numbers. At the last Fabulous Ford’s Show I attended, there was ONE Probe, and a second generation car at that.
I had one as a daily driver for about 2 years, and it represented itself well. The sharp styling entered the purchase (more for my wife than for me), but I’ve since discovered that good styling rarely leads to long term ownership, since newer designs tend to eclipse your current ride, leading to an upgrade.
Being one of those who loved the FWD sports coupes of the eighties and nineties, I was already the happy owner of an ’87 Celica GT with a 2.0L twin-cam four when the Probe came out. Probe’s styling was similar to the Celica’s, especially that blacked-out C-pillar which I like a lot.
When Ford put a 3.0 Vulcan V6 in the Probe it definitely got my attention. My other car was an ’87 Sable, so I already knew and quite liked that engine. Smooth with strong torque and apparently good reliability. A Vulcan V6 Probe must have been a ball to drive. I was tempted but never acted on it, kept the Celica for 11 years instead.
There are two thoughts that come to mind when thinking about the “what if’s” of the intended Mustang badged Probe.
1) Dodge pretty much did just that with the Mitsubishi based Challenger, which like the Probe actually had two styling generations. Granted this was a straight up rebadge job, but as a Japanese product carrying the name and legacy of an American ponycar it would have probably become historically noteworthy for paving the way for a SN8 Mustang, rather than the forgotten footnote it is now.
2) The Probestang would have been the direct spiritual descendant of the Mustang II. This really kind of was the last gasp of “the Mustang should be the secretary’s Mustang” part of the legacy, which from 1969 or so up to this point had been in a tug of war between them and the gearheads on what the Mustang is all about. In my opinion the correct answer is both, which is where the II and Probe fails, and where I feel the 71-73s and ever more supercar like modern iterations also fail. The Mustang’s true legacy is a universally stylish and day to day usable car that has the options for you to make your own, and when Ford comes up with these strategies to make it either a Celica fighter for one generation or a Corvette fighter in another, the options were pretty much decided for you.
The real black mark against the Probe is the Fox Mustang was the Mustang you had options with. Three bodystyles, three engines(until the V6 was dropped), manual or auto, numerous colors inside and out, and notably the performance revival brought about by the 5.0 HO or SVO that didn’t compromise regular models in any way. Not to mention it was practically packaged for a sporty coupe, which I feel was the case for the seminal 65-68s as well. The Probe would have replaced what had arguably been the truest Mustang to the original formula since 1968.
In defense of the Mustang II it at least replaced a design that swung way too far off the pendulum in the other direction, it just overcorrected. The Probe as a full Mustang replacement may very well have spelled death for the nameplate by the late 90s.
I don’t doubt that the Probe as a Mustang would have killed the nameplate, but as a CAR at the time, I found it more pleasant and more agile to drive on a daily basis than the contemporary Fox Mustangs.
A base-model ’94 Probe eventually replaced my base-model ’88 Mustang LX 2.3L (both were used cars). There was no question that, in entry-level form as a mileage-getter with sporty looks, the Probe was the better car by every measure.
However, it was the emotional connection with my Mustang and its past legacy that earned its place in my heart as my favorite car I’ve ever owned.
To be fair that’s what you would expect on a ten year older platform. I don’t think anyone would have objected to a SN95 type updated Fox successor if it were what would have become the Probe.
A FWD transverse 4/V6 car with one bodystyle and mostly Japanese DNA is a hard pill to swallow when in the preceeding 6 years for the Mustang Ford was declaring “the boss is back” with ever stronger V8s and reintroducing convertibles. Had the Probe debuted in 1982 following 80-81’s malaisey powertrains, troublesome early turbochargers and cheesy graphics, it would have had a chance at succeeding, but by 88 the Mustang had become a poster child for the 80s performance V8 revival
I replaced an ’84 Mustang GT with an ’89 Probe GT that looked like the feature car except in a sand metallic color I can’t remember the name of offhand.
The Probe was easily a better car, but it wasn’t nearly as fun as the Mustang. And it was a lot harder to work on. The 2.2 turbo earned a poor reputation. They needed time to cool down before shutting off the ignition when hot and synthetic oil was generally considered to be required according to the mechanic I bought it from. I followed his recommendations and did not have any major trouble, but many people did.
I remember the backlash against the plan to replace the aging Fox-body Mustang with this car. No doubt Ford made the right decision to reverse course and offer both the Probe and the Mustang, although I wish that Ford had come up with a better name for the Probe. This car is handsome, but I find the second-generation to be better-looking than the first.
With the Probe, Mustang and Thunderbird, Ford was trying to cover all of the niches of an already declining segment – two-door coupes. I liked all three cars, but history has shown that one coupe – the Mustang – was enough to meet (dwindling) buyer demand for coupes.
Good points, especially about the name. I’ve thought that Probe has a few connotations: 1) an investigation of suspicious activity (ie: “police probe”), 2) something to prod or dig for and 3) inappropriate touching; “aliens probed me”. In many ways, it’s kind of a spiritual successor to AMC’s Gremlin name plate.
I’ve always found the Probe to be a very attractive car–very well style for its era, and still holds up very well today. Ford was wise not to release it as the Mustang, because it could have killed the Mustang–not because the Probe was a bad car, but because the Fox styling was already fairly controversial in having deviated from the Mustang traditions, especially with some people that grew up loving the first generation. The Probe definitely was too European or foreign looking.
The fact that the Probe GT was much slower than the V8 Mustang GT, had also reinforced the need for immediate off the line torque that wins stoplight drags. Turbo technology had a ways to go, but even if it was faster than the Mustang, anything but a traditional V8 would have been a tough sell. Ford found this out when they had to eventually offer a V8 in the (1991?) Thunderbird….a supercharged V6 just generally still didn’t have the cache and prestige/ bragging rights that many people were looking for.
It didn’t help that you had to buy into the costly SC package in order to get the supercharged V6 in the Thunderbird. Performance wise the SC V6 was a much stronger performing and feeling engine than the 5.0 H.O. in these, unlike the Probe’s turbo 2.2(or previous Turbo Coupe Thunderbird’s).
I actually don’t think the Probe’s styling would have hurt the Mustang. First gen purists have always only begrudgingly accepted the Fox generation in spite of the styling, and the same would most likely have been the case if it looked like the Probe with a V8/RWD. The Foxbody if anything showed a Mustang can be a success without looking like a 1965 imitator like the Mustang II was, it just needed to look that nice, and the Probe styling would have been another natural step in the same direction it paved.
It all boils down to the mechanicals. The foxbody was no stranger to the power train configurations the Probe had – NA I4, six cylinders and turbocharged I4s were available from the start, and the latter even went on to become the flagship engine in the SVO. Initial V8s were clearly carryovers from the late Mustang IIs to be phased out – the 5.0 was dropped for 80 & 81 for the dismal 4.2. The rather parts bin creation of the 5.0 H.O. come along only because the troublesome Turbo 2.3 desperately needed refinement and the 4.2 was uncompetitive as a placeholder engine in a performance package. In 1983 the Turbo 2.3 it was back in much improved fuel injected form(same as the Tbird Turbo Coupe) and used in the GT right along side the successful 5.0 H.O. Imagine the reality that the 5.0 H.O. was a one year wonder and the Turbo GT would be the performance Mustang from 83-86 and the Probe Turbo GT would be a totally uncontrovercial successor.
Of course almost nobody bought the Turbo GT (or were even aware of it) and was quietly dropped for 1984, and the SVO was a performance sales disappointment as well. The 5.0 GT(and LX5.0) dominated them, and it’s easy to see why Mustang fans objected to attempt four in ten years time to yet another Turbo 4 performance Mustang shoved down their throats.
This generation of Probe (and even the second generation, if I’m honest) have all-but disappeared from the roads of Southern California. I’ve photographed just two gen-1s, a red ’89 GT exactly like the two ’89 GTs featured in this article, and a base-model ’91 Probe GL that might be the rarest of the bunch nowadays.
I always wondered why Ford couldn’t be bothered to put alloy wheels on the ’89 GT. Otherwise, I think it’s a fairly handsome sport coupe for its time, but those steel wheels poking out from underneath the wheelcovers throw the visual off for me. Unless they are alloys, and it’s some sort of strange vented brake design underneath? Either way, it seems that someone at Ford agreed with me, because the look was changed starting with the 1990 model year.
I believe they’re alloys, with the little circled parts removed later. I think the ’91 mentioned in my other comment had the cleaner design. But it’s been a long time.
I never got what they were going for with those. My friend in high school had a GT, and they bothered me then, but I never thought to look if they were actually badly designed alloys or steelies with hubcaps. I haven’t seen one in person ever since
Those are alloy wheels. It’s just an ’80s design thing.
I’m surprised that you didn’t mention that the 2nd generation Probe has the distinction of being the first American car design entirely overseen by a female design head. Mimi Vandermolen.
There’s a good article that covers her career at Ford at https://www.core77.com/posts/39532/Mimi-Vandermolen-the-Ergonomics-Genius-Behind-Fords-%E2%80%9CRounded-Edge-Revolution%E2%80%9D
At the time (early 90s) it was widely discussed that the ergonomics of the 2nd generation Probe were created specifically with women in mind.
Obviously because I’m saving that for my upcoming piece on the second-generation Probe…
“first American car design entirely overseen by a female design head.”
This is an interesting claim, but I am not sure if it is completely true. Studebaker credited Helen Dryden for the 36 models. There is some confusion here, some sources say she worked for Raymond Loewy, but he did not get the Stude contract until 1936 and those cars would have been in production by then. He certainly hired her to do interiors on the 38 and beyond, but the 36-37 is a bit of a mystery from what I have seen. Some sources say she did only interiors, but I have never seen any credit for exteriors to anyone in 36-37 (other than Loewy, which I believe is wrong.) I am open to correction if there are any prewar Stude experts out there with more info.
Vandermolen would certainly be the first in the postwar era.
Mimi was not the Probe designer. She led the interior design staff.
Hot Rod spilled Ford’s plans 25 or so years ago.
I was shocked, as I’m sure many readers were, to discover their favorite Fox-body could have given way to a FWD layout. No doubt this became a cautionary tale for all US manufacturers, ensuring a RWD layout in perpetuity for Mustang, Camaro and the rebooted Challenger.
Just remembered an ironic postscript to the Ford-Mazda joint venture to produce the Probe, 626, and MX-6.
These were built in the Flat Rock Assembly Plant, built by Mazda on Ford-owned property, and which is where Ford now builds…Mustangs!
For the bants I’ve been toying turning up at mustang meet-ups Here in Australia in one of these (mustangs are champagne money here due to missing years 74 to 14… and the 15’s havn’t dropped from their original prices (sob)
I don’t get the security on this site, “slow down your posting too fast”
Try this again, I had a 90 Probe GT and an 89 LX 5.0, different cars for sure, the mustang was definitely faster but the Probe was no slouch and defiantly better built
Excellent article Will! The Probe’s conception and history is an interesting story, and undoubtably, Ford made the right decision to ultimately produce the Probe while continuing sales of the Fox-body Mustang. Luckily for Ford, neither bombed, with the Mustang continuing to sell relatively well and the Probe proving highly successful, at least in its early years.
Personally, I’ve always found the design of this first generation Probe (still such a cringeworthy name, by the way) very dramatic and futuristic. By contrast, the second generation Probe’s design was far more generic, and likely a contributing factor towards its fade into oblivion.
Around the same time Ford Australia were looking at a Mazda 626-based replacement for the Ford Falcon, known as Project Capricorn. Like the Mustang they decided against it.
> No matter how good a sport coupe the first-generation Probe was – and it was pretty good – it was no Mustang.
Of course not! We all know a REAL Mustang is a four door, AWD, electrically powered crossover! 🙂
The Mustang Mach-E was the first thing I thought of when I saw this repost, as well. Maybe they should have called the Probe a Mustang Mach-P.
The Mustang Prong would’ve been befitting for their electric Mustang. Since many electrical connectors have prongs.
Maybe if the Probe had been called Mustang Forward or something, alongside a V8-only continuation of the Fox body, it would’ve eased people into the idea of Mustang being a multiplatform sub-brand, rather than throwing it into that at the deep end 30 years later.
Ford had top-notch exteriors during this era.
Even with less-than stellar vehicles (e.g. the Tempo and Escort), the vehicles looked great — even the interiors.
I really like the simplicity of the designs during this era, especially those coming from GM, Toyota, and Ford. I think after about 1992, car design trended downward; cars became bulbous, cheaper-looking, and overwrought.
“Probe”, reminds me I’m due for a colonoscopy.
I remember a friend of mine, who was and still is a Mustang guy, saw that Ford was planning on putting the Mustang name on this car and he went totally ballistic. He wrote at least two letters, one saying he would no longer buy anything Ford makes if it happened, and if I think back at all the Fords he’s owned since them, that would have been a lot of vehicles. When it was announced the Mustang would continue, he ended up buying one and did nothing but complain about what a POS it was the whole 3 years he had it. Eventually, he traded it for a Corvette, which he didn’t like either, so it was to his first F150. He’s had 5 since that first one, and he keeps buying them, even though the last one was what I would consider a “bad player”. He currently has a Bullitt Mustang sitting in his garage, waiting for spring. Winter is F150 weather.
The first generation Probe was a beautiful looking car. It was leaps and bounds better looking than the ancient Mustang. Although the Probe was FWD (not a bad thing) and didn’t have a big, heavy, thirsty V8 the Probe did have a very comfortable roomy interior, superb visibility, excellent ergonomics, excellent build quality, reliable solid Mazda architecture and mechanicals, and superior driving dynamics and refinement compared to the ancient fox Mustang. Ford saw the Probe as the future and the car certainly looked the part and drove the part. I’ve driven 1st gen Probes and late model fox Mustangs and both these cars are world’s apart. The Probes felt tight, connected, light and secure, while the fox Mustangs felt shaky, noisy, disconnected and much less secure in the slalom. The Probe wasn’t a great car but it was very, very good. The fox Mustangs weren’t great cars by any means but the only saving grace is that the Mustang had a V8 optional. If I came across a super clean low mile 1st gen Probe for sale I’d buy it in a heartbeat over any fox body Mustang GT.
It’s now funny how the two most controversial cars in the Mustang’s history up to 2019 really aren’t at all off the formula for the badge, yet the Probe got its last minute rename, and the Mustang II received not only the II prefix, but even changed the galloping horse emblem to respectfully distinguish itself from the true Mustang fans knew and loved(and that wasn’t even even a result of outcry, it was just planned that way).
Now there’s a 4 door crossover with the classic badge front and center and using the unaltered Mustang name. Ford saved that little nugget until the absolute last minute, as it had only been referred to as “Mustang themed” up to that point. Fear that early confirmation that the Mocky would in fact be a full on Mustang might lead to a Probe level backlash mid-development perhaps? Further upping their defenses, it’s an EV too, and if you criticize the idea of a sporty coupe name being used on a milquetoast crossover, you’re criticizing the EV part too, and will be verbally scorned with “ok boomer” until you back off!
Owned a 1991 LX V6 auto, drove it 18 years. Good car, handled great. Always wanted to buy another and hot rod it. Many options, build a ShoGun Probe, build a Pro Stock Probe, Drop a SHO engine in it or 3L 4 cam V6. Hell maybe do what VW did, Drop a SHO drive train in it under the hood an another SHO drive train under the hatch. Twin engine all wheel drive, the return of the Killer Bee.
Still have 1989 probe lx which was actually built in March 1988. 253,000 miles and doesn’t show it’s age. Car was always fun to drive. Gas mileage is incredible, close to 40mpg highway.