Omega Owners Forum
Omega Help Area => Omega General Help => Topic started by: elddis on 05 June 2012, 13:19:45
-
Hi!...What are the main points of difference between 3.0 and 3.2 engine?...Is one any better than the other?...Any suggestions?...Cheers,Rew.
-
Both have plus points both have negatives, 3.0 is more economical, I like the lighter DBW throttles of 3.2, nothing in it performance wise
-
Suspect you'll get answers according to what people own.
So naturally the 3.2 as far superior. IMO. ;)
There is considerably less gubbins In the 3.2 engine bay though. No EGR,ICV,SAI, to mess about with and maintain. Obd2 compliant with easier pedal trick to read the codes.
-
3.2 engine bay is a bit tidier, but there's nothing much in it. Look at both and buy the best you can afford :y
-
Sorry,can't agree about performance,my 3.0 ltr engine is in top condition with 3.2 manifolds fitted and gets down the road pretty well,but my 3.2 will leave it in the weeds when given the beans :o I'm expecting to get my kahoonas chewed on this one but it's based on my own two cars which are both autos and as Tunnie says both models have different attributes, but when the loud pedal is mashed they'll both bring a smile to you're face which ever you choose ::) :y
-
Having both a 3.0l and a 3.2, my preference, purely on engine, is the 3.0l. Moreso if its an auto, due to more refined ECUs on the 3.0l.
Although this means its an older car.
Not much in it performance wise, although certainly my 3.0l has faster legs than my 3.2. 3.0l returns better mpg.
-
Theorericaly the 3.0 facelift should be the slowest of the bunch as it has the 'disadvantage' of 210ps and the +50kg of the facelift.
However I doubt that many of the 3.2's still have all their additional horses so a duff 3.2 could well be slower than a good 3.0.
See what you can find and get a good 'en.
-
3.0 OR 3.2......They both sound bloody awesome...especially if you let the horses loose...Never tire of seeing the looks on the faces of the youngsters as the "big old bulky" looking car shoots away from them...Even those in the company BMW's look staggered !
-
3.2 is best. Sorry. Just is. :)
-
3.0 pre/facelift is best ...much better looking too ;D :y
-
3.2 is best. Sorry. Just is. :)
I can't help but think GM had too many compromises to get the emmissions down for the new emmissions standards... ;)
-
3.2 is best. Sorry. Just is. :)
I can't help but think GM had too many compromises to get the emmissions down for the new emmissions standards... ;)
oh pfaf. Your 3.0 needs a chip to fail to keep up. :P
-
3.2 is best. Sorry. Just is. :)
I can't help but think GM had too many compromises to get the emmissions down for the new emmissions standards... ;)
oh pfaf. Your 3.0 needs a chip to fail to keep up. :P
My 3.0l needs a chip to put back in a few ponies that have gone astray in the last 188k ;).
Although personalities aside, I do genuinely think the 2.5/3.0l are significantly more economical and similar power to the 2.6/3.2. Though without doubt, the 2.6/3.2 is marginally easier to work on, although prone to expensive TB faults.
-
Having had both a 3.0 and a 3.2 there's very little in it performance wise and I must admit that the 3.0 Saloon was a little better on fuel than the 3.2 Estate ::)
Put them on the road and I didn't find the 3.2 could pull away from the 3.0 dramatically, as has been tested a few times :-X ::) They'll both (if well maintained) keep the majority of motors honest :y
-
Having owned both, in my experience not much in it performance wise, although a chipped 3.0 wins hsnds down on better than normal mpg.
My first 3.2 I thought was not as quick off the mark as my older chipped 3.0 MV6.
The only exception to this is my more recent remaped 3.2 manual with some exhaust mods, that is quick.
-
I must say I do like the 3.0 myself.. I have a 2.6 at the minute I also drove a 3.0 tonight and could easily tell the difference in speed...
You can remove egr, sai etc which also looks nice especially with some nice Magnacore Leads on...
I am toying with keeping a 3.0 engine for myself then doing some nice mods :y
-
Economy wise I felt the 3.2 was better around town with 19-20mpg compared to the 3.0 at 17-18mpg. I really like the more angular wheels of 3.2.
-
Performance specification
3.0i bhp 211 mpg 24 0-60 8.9 secs top speed 141 mph
3.2i bhp 218 mpg 24 0-60 8.8 secs top speed 143 mph
-
:y 3.2 all the way. It doesn't matter what car you buy if you drive it like a idiot it will cost u in fuel.. Drive it and look after it well and it will look after you 8)
-
Performance specification
3.0i bhp 211 mpg 24 0-60 8.9 secs top speed 141 mph
3.2i bhp 218 mpg 24 0-60 8.8 secs top speed 143 mph
something wrong with those figures.. even autos are faster than this.. :-\
my manual 2.5 v6 can easily beat an E92 320 manual which is 8.1 secs.. although mine is a bit modded ;)
-
Performance specification
3.0i bhp 211 mpg 24 0-60 8.9 secs top speed 141 mph
3.2i bhp 218 mpg 24 0-60 8.8 secs top speed 143 mph
These figures are all wrong, my 2.2 could do the 60 dash in 9 seconds!
-
I have all the figures here in black and white had them for years
2.0i bhp 136 mpg 29 0-60 10,2 secs top speed 124 mph
2.2i bhp 145 mpg 28 0-60 9.8 secs top speed 128 mph
2.5i bhp 170 mpg 25 0-60 9.2 secs top speed 132 mph
2.6i bhp 180 mpg 25 0-60 9.1 secs top speed 134 mph
2.5td bhp 133 mpg 37 0-60 13.7 secs top speed 119 mph
2;2dti bhp 120 mpg 39 0-60 11.2 secs top speed 122 mph
Any problems with these figures tunnie you should contact Car Mechanics magazine who supplied the figures
-
I have all the figures here in black and white had them for years
2.0i bhp 136 mpg 29 0-60 10,2 secs top speed 124 mph
2.2i bhp 145 mpg 28 0-60 9.8 secs top speed 128 mph
2.5i bhp 170 mpg 25 0-60 9.2 secs top speed 132 mph
2.6i bhp 180 mpg 25 0-60 9.1 secs top speed 134 mph
2.5td bhp 133 mpg 37 0-60 13.7 secs top speed 119 mph
2;2dti bhp 120 mpg 39 0-60 11.2 secs top speed 122 mph
Any problems with these figures tunnie you should contact Car Mechanics magazine who supplied the figures
Not really fussed who supplied them, but they are wrong :)
-
What are your figures could you give me an example
-
Your figures don't quote manual or auto for starters, but a 3.0 manual is around 7.5, auto tad slower around 8.0 seconds.
Got the official specs somewhere, but you V6 data is way off
-
Various figures on the ABS site http://www.autobahnstormers.org/ Michael's figures don't look far off on the 0-60 times, maybe a tad slow for top end. :-\
-
Another set ....
http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/facts-and-figures/vauxhall/omega/saloon-1994
:)
-
Another set ....
http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/facts-and-figures/vauxhall/omega/saloon-1994 (http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/facts-and-figures/vauxhall/omega/saloon-1994)
:)
these are more realistic figures Entwood :y
-
Anyone fancy a game of Top Trumps? ;D
-
I have all the figures here in black and white had them for years
2.0i bhp 136 mpg 29 0-60 10,2 secs top speed 124 mph
2.2i bhp 145 mpg 28 0-60 9.8 secs top speed 128 mph
2.5i bhp 170 mpg 25 0-60 9.2 secs top speed 132 mph
2.6i bhp 180 mpg 25 0-60 9.1 secs top speed 134 mph
2.5td bhp 133 mpg 37 0-60 13.7 secs top speed 119 mph
2;2dti bhp 120 mpg 39 0-60 11.2 secs top speed 122 mph
Any problems with these figures tunnie you should contact Car Mechanics magazine who supplied the figures
are those auto or manual ???
-
These are the official VX figures, taken from my facelift guide;
http://www.omegaowners.com/forum/index.php?topic=90488.0
The 2.2 4 cylinder petrol has a displacement of 2198cc and produces 144 bhp. The manual 2.2 saloon accelerates to 60mph in 9.5 seconds and has a top speed of 130mph, with a combined mpg figure of 29.4
The 2.6 V6 petrol has a displacement of 2597cc and produces 179 bhp. The manual 2.6 saloon accelerates to 60mph in 8.5 seconds and has a top speed of 142mph, with a combined mpg figure of 26.4
The 3.2 V6 petrol has a displacement of 3175cc and produces 211 bhp. The automatic 3.2 saloon accelerates to 60mph in 8.0 seconds and has a top speed of 149mph, with a combined mpg figure of 23.9
The 2.2 DTI (diesel) has a displacement of 2171cc and produces 120 bhp. The manual 2.2 saloon accelerates to 60mph in 11.5 seconds and has a top speed of 121mph, with a combined mpg figure of 39.8
-
These are the official VX figures, taken from my facelift guide;
http://www.omegaowners.com/forum/index.php?topic=90488.0 (http://www.omegaowners.com/forum/index.php?topic=90488.0)
The 2.2 4 cylinder petrol has a displacement of 2198cc and produces 144 bhp. The manual 2.2 saloon accelerates to 60mph in 9.5 seconds and has a top speed of 130mph, with a combined mpg figure of 29.4
The 2.6 V6 petrol has a displacement of 2597cc and produces 179 bhp. The manual 2.6 saloon accelerates to 60mph in 8.5 seconds and has a top speed of 142mph, with a combined mpg figure of 26.4
The 3.2 V6 petrol has a displacement of 3175cc and produces 211 bhp. The automatic 3.2 saloon accelerates to 60mph in 8.0 seconds and has a top speed of 149mph, with a combined mpg figure of 23.9
The 2.2 DTI (diesel) has a displacement of 2171cc and produces 120 bhp. The manual 2.2 saloon accelerates to 60mph in 11.5 seconds and has a top speed of 121mph, with a combined mpg figure of 39.8
stock engine and stock differential values.. (all are facelift so heavier)
-
The 2.5 and 2.6 are identical performance, and the 3.0 and 3.2 the same.
GM quote 3.0l auto 0-60 is 8.5, 149mph. I can't vouch the latter, but the former is conservation by 1.2s going by my 3.0l
Manual Omegas are quoted as being 0.5s quicker on GM figures.
-
get a 2.2 petrol ,auto....TB recommends them as the best omega :y
-
if it hasnt got 6 cylinders its not a proper miggy lol
-
easy to work on
-
get a 2.2 petrol ,auto....TB recommends them as the best omega :y
I've driven a 2.2 auto that went like the clappers - speed straight up to 90mph, and stayed there. It was the Pikey Pensioner's old one. By far the best 2.2 auto (or manual) I think I'd driven.
-
had no problems doing the jobs on mine, and goes like a rocket too
-
get a 2.2 petrol ,auto....TB recommends them as the best omega :y
I've driven a 2.2 auto that went like the clappers - speed straight up to 90mph, and stayed there. It was the Pikey Pensioner's old one. By far the best 2.2 auto (or manual) I think I'd driven.
one day you will meet mine 53 on clock and drives like new sometimes
-
if tb drives it i bet it would blow up, maybe not used to reving that high
-
Never did get to own a 3.2 sadly, however I had two 3.0's, and they're one of the best engines I've come across :y :y
-
i for one always laughed at omegas, but trust me one of the best cars ive had, in 7 months its done 12k miles and never missed a beat, taken a good thrashing too, missis loves it too, many a time shes nicked it to go work in and left me her vectra 2.2
-
im peved off now ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D TB ..are you trying to say that my car is a pattern car in the omega world ;D ;D ;D
-
im peved off now ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D TB ..are you trying to say that my car is a pattern car in the omega world ;D ;D ;D
Arrhh that word again ;D