Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: shyboy on 07 January 2008, 21:18:54
-
I've read many comments about 2.5l/ 2.6l V6 ECU's limiting RPM to 4k/4.5k when certain things go wrong. If I ever reached 4k rpm in 5th. on my manual box wouldn't I be close to 90mph. Am I missing something here? The rpm figure does refer to crankshaft revs., doesn't it?
Also, I've read that the rear multi ram on V6's comes in at around 4k rpm. and that it can be visually checked. I would be very timid about revving the engine at that speed in a stationary car for anything other than a few seconds at the most. From what I can make out, most of my driving, (and I'm not a total slouch), takes place between 2.5 & 3.5k rpm.
Am I totally under-estimating the ruggedness of these engines, and are they really designed to go close to the top end regularly without over-stressing them?
I try to visualise the pistons moving up and down in the bores at such speeds and wonder why everything doesn't just blow apart!
My father (he's 96 and fitter than I am), was an engine fitter in the RAF during WW2 and the principals of internal combustion were taught and practised to a level which modern day mechanics couldn't start to understand. If an aircraft engine was pushed to a very high level, 'through the gate', for longer than a very short period, it had to be completely dismantled and rebuilt. I know the standard of technology was quite different from today, but I still wonder whether some of the problems we have are related to engine 'punishment'.
Am I talking rubbish? I'd love to read the views of the experts.
-
I regularly drive my V6 manual up to the red line at 7+k Rpm
They can definately take it, have you seen how they drive them on Road wars?
-
What speed does that give you James? And can it really take it without protesting?
Haven't seen Road Wars, but I presume that's not the way most of us drive. ??Is it???
-
My v6 frequently spends lots of time in the 4.5 - 6.5k rpm range ::). Until it needs a drink that is ;)
-
Haven't seen Road Wars, but I presume that's not the way most of us drive. ??Is it???
::)
I never drive dangerously, or close to anything etc... but I love to push my car / engine ;D
My RPM also spends most of it's time over the 5k mark....
-
Although it's a V6, the Omega is also not far from a 2 tonne car, so I find it HAS to be pushed up to the red line if you want decent performance....
-
An "Italian Tune Up" I think?
The red line is there for a reason and it's negligent not to use it.. now and then.
Jim
-
OK! If you won't tell me what speeds these rpm entail, I'm just going to have to go out and test it myself.
Spare underpants in the glove compartment! ;D
Hope to speak to you again. Maybe. ;)
-
Aircraft engines and modern car engiens realy air light years apart.
The V6 has a lot of low down grunt and a nice flat torque delivery and hence why they pull well in the low gears and hance also why the ides of soembody putting a close ratio 6 speeder in would be pointless (only requried on peeky engines like modern over blown diesels).
This is all thanks to the multiram.
But it does them good to rev occasionaly as it does any multivalve engines and 8k is not that high, bike engines can rev to 15K (although they dont last much more than 10K miles without work) and some car engines to 9K (eg Honda S2000).
The V6 uses slipper pistons, a well balanced crank, good rods and even has a main bearing girdle for stability....which is hugely different to the engines of old where the piston on its own weighed many pounds and the the stroke was very long (V6 is a square engine by the way stroke is approx equal to the bore)
.
-
Aircraft engines are also designed to run at or very close to their rated power for hours on end. Run an aircraft engine at less than 70 or 80% power and you'll land!
The upshot is that aero engines are huge capacity, low revving devices with big, heavy internals in order to generate high power at low RPM and they can't take high revs. (most are also barely post-war in their design) As Mark said, a long way away from the engine in your Omega.
Give it a run to the red line every so often. It'll love it. So will you ;D
Kevin
-
Aircraft engines are also designed to run at or very close to their rated power for hours on end. Run an aircraft engine at less than 70 or 80% power and you'll land!
The upshot is that aero engines are huge capacity, low revving devices with big, heavy internals in order to generate high power at low RPM and they can't take high revs. (most are also barely post-war in their design) As Mark said, a long way away from the engine in your Omega.
Give it a run to the red line every so often. It'll love it. So will you ;D
Kevin
The way aircraft engines manage to run at rated power for hours on end (reliably) is by being conservatively tuned. If you want the same power as a 2.6 you need over 6.0l of aircraft CC!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lycoming_O-360
-
Was looking at one of them on a bench a few weeks back. Just a (heavily) pregnant beetle engine. ;D
Kevin
-
Other than it's the front multiram that opens at 4K, and you only have to blip it off load to get it to open, go on---Give it some.
She will really take off and start to fly(assuming your vacuum system is intact).
My Missus complained of whiplash in my 2.5 the other week ::)
-
4.5... 6... 7k RPM??? OMG! I never go over 2.5... :-[
-
4.5... 6... 7k RPM??? OMG! I never go over 2.5... :-[
LOL. You are performing a sterling service to the forum group here. Storing all that carbon in your heads, thus allowing us to "offset" our occasional full bore blasts.
We are eternally grateful.
Jim
-
The V6 has a lot of low down grunt and a nice flat torque delivery and hence why they pull well in the low gears and hance also why the ides of soembody putting a close ratio 6 speeder in would be pointless (only requried on peeky engines like modern over blown diesels).
I don't think it's got particularly great low down grunt at all. Maybe in a lighter car, but in the Omega it feels like you have to keep the revs up to make good progress. And yes I think a 6-speed box would be a big improvement, the ratios are too widely spaced on the standard gearbox, it would be far more enjoyable with lower and slightly closer spaced ratios, possibly even a very slightly higher 6th for M-way cruising when you don't need much power.
-
The V6 has a lot of low down grunt and a nice flat torque delivery and hence why they pull well in the low gears and hance also why the ides of soembody putting a close ratio 6 speeder in would be pointless (only requried on peeky engines like modern over blown diesels).
I don't think it's got particularly great low down grunt at all. Maybe in a lighter car, but in the Omega it feels like you have to keep the revs up to make good progress. And yes I think a 6-speed box would be a big improvement, the ratios are too widely spaced on the standard gearbox, it would be far more enjoyable with lower and slightly closer spaced ratios, possibly even a very slightly higher 6th for M-way cruising when you don't need much power.
Paul......it has good low down torque, better than pretty much any other engine in this size and this can be easilt demonstrated by popping it in fifth at 30mph and noting how it still accelerates......dont confuse it with Bhp.....!
And a 6 speed box would not help, it does not need it, its well matched to the torque delivery already. The only thing you would do with a 6th speed is add an over drive.
Unless of course yours has vac problems.
-
The V6 has a lot of low down grunt and a nice flat torque delivery and hence why they pull well in the low gears and hance also why the ides of soembody putting a close ratio 6 speeder in would be pointless (only requried on peeky engines like modern over blown diesels).
I don't think it's got particularly great low down grunt at all. Maybe in a lighter car, but in the Omega it feels like you have to keep the revs up to make good progress. And yes I think a 6-speed box would be a big improvement, the ratios are too widely spaced on the standard gearbox, it would be far more enjoyable with lower and slightly closer spaced ratios, possibly even a very slightly higher 6th for M-way cruising when you don't need much power.
Paul......it has good low down torque, better than pretty much any other engine in this size and this can be easilt demonstrated by popping it in fifth at 30mph and noting how it still accelerates......dont confuse it with Bhp.....!
And a 6 speed box would not help, it does not need it, its well matched to the torque delivery already. The only thing you would do with a 6th speed is add an over drive.
Unless of course yours has vac problems.
Like mine, it wouldn't pull a greasy stick from a dogs bum below 4000RPM :'(
-
Paul......it has good low down torque, better than pretty much any other engine in this size and this can be easilt demonstrated by popping it in fifth at 30mph and noting how it still accelerates......dont confuse it with Bhp.....!
http://www.omegaowners.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1166809964
That's a pretty good torque curve (not really that curved at all) for a heavy car in my book. Low down torque could only be improved on that by tuning it as a 2v engine and forgetting about the region above 5K. And then you'd say it was gutless at the top end! ;)
Kevin
-
mine gets a regular visit to the redline, and it enjoys it :y
the trick is NEVER to do it from cold, the amount of times i have seen people get in a car and rag the nuts out of it from stome cold is unreal.
When i was modifying cars we used to use the Vauxhall 2.0XE engine (red top) this was/is a classic engine but is one that really needs to have had a hard life in order to get the best out of it, we bought one that was 6 years old with 30,000 miles on it, flat as a cowpat, it took weeks to get the thing to 'loosen up' but when it did it was a flyer.
I don't encourage or advocate irresponsible driving, there is a time and a place for everything ;)
-
The V6 has a lot of low down grunt and a nice flat torque delivery and hence why they pull well in the low gears and hance also why the ides of soembody putting a close ratio 6 speeder in would be pointless (only requried on peeky engines like modern over blown diesels).
I don't think it's got particularly great low down grunt at all. Maybe in a lighter car, but in the Omega it feels like you have to keep the revs up to make good progress. And yes I think a 6-speed box would be a big improvement, the ratios are too widely spaced on the standard gearbox, it would be far more enjoyable with lower and slightly closer spaced ratios, possibly even a very slightly higher 6th for M-way cruising when you don't need much power.
Paul......it has good low down torque, better than pretty much any other engine in this size and this can be easilt demonstrated by popping it in fifth at 30mph and noting how it still accelerates......dont confuse it with Bhp.....!
And a 6 speed box would not help, it does not need it, its well matched to the torque delivery already. The only thing you would do with a 6th speed is add an over drive.
Unless of course yours has vac problems.
Maybe I'm spoiled with the M62B44 V8 in my BMW (which has 440 Nm torque compared to the 270 in the X30XE), but it feels to me that I have to keep it revving over 4000 RPM to make good progress. It just feels pretty slow outside that, and with the wide ratios I have to rev to near the red line to keep it in that power band. The BMW engine, while torquey, is still quite peaky in terms of power (peaks at 6000 RPM) and even with all that torque it feels much nicer to drive with the 6-speed box. Admittedly 6th is a bit higher than the 5th in the Omega, but the ratios are all closer together and it's effortless to keep it in the peak power band.
The vac on mine is fine, it drives like it should and to the best of my knowledge everything works OK regarding multi-ram. I've driven a few others and they felt much the same as mine, so I don't think there are any problems.
-
Paul......it has good low down torque, better than pretty much any other engine in this size and this can be easilt demonstrated by popping it in fifth at 30mph and noting how it still accelerates......dont confuse it with Bhp.....!
http://www.omegaowners.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1166809964
That's a pretty good torque curve (not really that curved at all) for a heavy car in my book. Low down torque could only be improved on that by tuning it as a 2v engine and forgetting about the region above 5K. And then you'd say it was gutless at the top end! ;)
Kevin
Yes it's not bad really, certainly pulls reasonably well in the lower revs, but to keep it on song takes a bit of work. I think the confusion here is that I'm talking about driving quickly, which is more about where the power is delivered, than the torque spread. But still, with a multivalve engine it makes sense to match the gearing to the revvy nature of the engine IMO, and a 6sp allows that without compromising the lazy cruising ability.
Oh and I know what you mean about the 2v engines -- I had a 2.0 8v Audi as a runaround for a while, and it was fine in town, actually felt very smooth and pulled well. But on the open road, I'd be driving along thinking I need more power, drop a gear and it would just make more noise! Nothing at the top end, definitely not a car designed for performance, totally gutless ;)
I think overall I like a compromise, that is an engine with reasonable torque for driving round town and times when I can't be bothered, but still with a peaky power delivery for when I want to make progress -- but with a gearbox that facilitates such a revvy nature. Hence why I don't like diesels (no top end) nor VTEC Hondas (gutless unless thrashing them). On a bike it's fine having a peaky engine as it's so light that even when the revs are low it will still out accelerate most things anyway. Even then, I do gravitate towards larger capacity engines as they're more flexible than the smaller more peaky engines.
-
Agreed. My 8v Laguna was the same. It hit a brick wall at around 5000. Between driving that and the Westfield (chalk and cheese) I had no confidence to overtake anything in the Laguna, hence the Omega.
Characteristics need to match weight too. I'd hate to have the engine I have in the Westfield in an Omega. The cams don't really start working until about 3500 RPM but that's fine in a light car because it can still pull strongly from walking pace in 4th gear despite being off-cam. Drop it down a couple and it flies between 3500 and 7200.
Kevin
-
This is fascinating stuff from people who have knowledge of the performance capabilities of different set-ups. I wholly acknowledge that my impressions of the V6 take no account of its real capabilities through lack of in depth knowledge, but I still can't understand how one can achieve 6/7k rpm regularly during conventional driving.
I succumbed to the invitation to 'give it a go' today, and at 90mph (the road wasn't suitable for anything faster), in 5th gear, the counter was reading 3.6k rpm. Just dawdling, did I hear you say? So, without ragging it in a low gear, how the hell do I achieve top end rpm. without driving dangerously, (if only to see what it feels like)?
Surely I'd need to join the aircraft on a runway. ::)
-
This is fascinating stuff from people who have knowledge of the performance capabilities of different set-ups. I wholly acknowledge that my impressions of the V6 take no account of its real capabilities through lack of in depth knowledge, but I still can't understand how one can achieve 6/7k rpm regularly during conventional driving.
I succumbed to the invitation to 'give it a go' today, and at 90mph (the road wasn't suitable for anything faster), in 5th gear, the counter was reading 3.6k rpm. Just dawdling, did I hear you say? So, without ragging it in a low gear, how the hell do I achieve top end rpm. without driving dangerously, (if only to see what it feels like)?
Surely I'd need to join the aircraft on a runway. ::)
We dont do high rpm in top gear......second and third gear yes.....
-
Surely I'd need to join the aircraft on a runway.
Runways are good :y
Wait 'till the aircraft are gone though.
Kevin
-
This is fascinating stuff from people who have knowledge of the performance capabilities of different set-ups. I wholly acknowledge that my impressions of the V6 take no account of its real capabilities through lack of in depth knowledge, but I still can't understand how one can achieve 6/7k rpm regularly during conventional driving.
I succumbed to the invitation to 'give it a go' today, and at 90mph (the road wasn't suitable for anything faster), in 5th gear, the counter was reading 3.6k rpm. Just dawdling, did I hear you say? So, without ragging it in a low gear, how the hell do I achieve top end rpm. without driving dangerously, (if only to see what it feels like)?
Surely I'd need to join the aircraft on a runway. ::)
We dont do high rpm in top gear......second and third gear yes.....
[/highlight]
Right! The penny's dropping. But surely people aren't really serious about most driving being in the 6/7k+ zone. My engine is in good nick, and it did tear away earlier today, and I think I will push it harder from time to time, but I don't envisage too much 7k stuff. I'm nervous about flying. (The real stuff anyway!)
-
I think you need to get Mark to take you out for a drive at some point.....
-
I think you need to get Mark to take you out for a drive at some point.....
;D ;D ;D ::) :-X
-
I think you need to get Mark to take you out for a drive at some point.....
[/highlight]
I wouldn't say No. My Dad could lend me some incontinence pants. 8-)
-
Right! The penny's dropping. But surely people aren't really serious about most driving being in the 6/7k+ zone. My engine is in good nick, and it did tear away earlier today, and I think I will push it harder from time to time, but I don't envisage too much 7k stuff. I'm nervous about flying. (The real stuff anyway!)
It's designed for it, that's why there's a rev limiter at 7000 RPM -- that is a safe speed for the engine to be turning at without damaging it.
If you need to accelerate quickly, you should be using the full power of the engine, which means revving it up over 4500 RPM where it really comes on song. If, for example, you pull out from a side road onto a B-road (60 MPH speed limit), and there is a blind bend 70 metres up the road, once you decide it's safe to pull out you should be accelerating as quickly as possible up to the speed limit. That means revving to 6000+ RPM in 1st gear, quick change to 2nd and do the same. By this time you'll be at (or near) 60 MPH, so you can easily slot it into 5th and cruise happily at 2500 RPM assuming the road is straight.
There is a junction similar to that above near where my sister used to stay, and I wouldn't feel safe pulling out of that and shifting up at 3000 RPM -- it would take so much longer to get up to speed that you're in the danger zone much longer should a car come around the corner rather quickly.
Appropriate gear for the conditions -- if you need to accelerate, use the lower gears and the engine's power as it was designed. Not doing so is akin to only ever using half the travel on the brake pedal, to prevent wearing out the discs & pads too quickly ;)
-
...... revving to 6000+ RPM in 1st gear, quick change to 2nd ......
So ....... when do I change from 'D'? ;) :y :y :y
-
I have had some second hand experience of engine testing, and I understand that with many modern engines, they run them flat out 24/7 for up to a couple of weeks - which is equivalent to 100k miles or something. :o
My figures might be wrong but the point is that if it can take that, then I'm sure it will handle the occasional visit to the red line (as long as engine is at good temp).
-
I think you need to get Mark to take you out for a drive at some point.....
If you are a rear seat passenger, just ensure there actually is a rear seat, else it gets quite uncomfy as the back end goes from side to side :-X
-
...... revving to 6000+ RPM in 1st gear, quick change to 2nd ......
So ....... when do I change from 'D'? ;) :y :y :y
Once someone teaches you the art of driving, and lends you a car that is designed to be driven :P
-
Paul......it has good low down torque, better than pretty much any other engine in this size and this can be easilt demonstrated by popping it in fifth at 30mph and noting how it still accelerates......dont confuse it with Bhp.....!
http://www.omegaowners.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1166809964
That's a pretty good torque curve (not really that curved at all) for a heavy car in my book. Low down torque could only be improved on that by tuning it as a 2v engine and forgetting about the region above 5K. And then you'd say it was gutless at the top end! ;)
Kevin
But still, with a multivalve engine it makes sense to match the gearing to the revvy nature of the engine IMO, and a 6sp allows that without compromising the lazy cruising ability.
Look at the torque curves and Bhp curves posted again....you will see that peek Bhp is over about a 2000rpm rev range.............a 6 speed close ratio box is not going to do a dam thing for you other than add an extra uneccassary gear change.
6 speed boxes only add a benefit to:
1) Engines with a narrow power delivery i.e. bike engines and modern high bhp diesels
2) Very high output engines needing an extra over drive gear.
Its horses for courses adn if you had a 6 speed on a V6 it would most likely be slower due to the extra cog shift that would be offering bugger all benefit.
-
Why does the 2.5 have lower gearing than the 3.0 then? If anything, the torque peak is lower on the 2.5 -- certainly this is supported by the fact that the 2.5 produces less BHP per litre than the 3.0. Official figures for the x25xe are 227Nm at 3200 RPM, and x30xe are 270Nm at 3400 RPM.
So all else being equal (and considering only torque -- they both peak power at 6000 RPM), the 3.0 should have lower gearing than the 2.5 to get it to its higher RPM torque peak quickly, yet the 3.0 has higher gearing. I suspect it's at least partly to do with economy, but I believe the 3.0 would accelerate more quickly with the 2.5's gearing. Hence the benefit of a 6sp -- have the 2.5's existing lower gearing for 1-5, plus an additional 6th for overdrive cruising (say about 2600 RPM at 70 MPH).
-
I should add that, as far as the 0-60 run goes, the current gearing is pretty much ideal as you can reach 60 in 2nd. So lowering the gearing will likely require an extra shift, giving a slower time. But that's not real world, what if you want to accelerate to 70 MPH? Either way you'd need to shift to 3rd. I think overall I'd prefer the arrangement described in my previous post.
-
This is fascinating stuff from people who have knowledge of the performance capabilities of different set-ups. I wholly acknowledge that my impressions of the V6 take no account of its real capabilities through lack of in depth knowledge, but I still can't understand how one can achieve 6/7k rpm regularly during conventional driving.
I succumbed to the invitation to 'give it a go' today, and at 90mph (the road wasn't suitable for anything faster), in 5th gear, the counter was reading 3.6k rpm. Just dawdling, did I hear you say? So, without ragging it in a low gear, how the hell do I achieve top end rpm. without driving dangerously, (if only to see what it feels like)?
Surely I'd need to join the aircraft on a runway. ::)
We dont do high rpm in top gear......second and third gear yes.....
[/highlight]
Right! The penny's dropping. But surely people aren't really serious about most driving being in the 6/7k+ zone. My engine is in good nick, and it did tear away earlier today, and I think I will push it harder from time to time, but I don't envisage too much 7k stuff. I'm nervous about flying. (The real stuff anyway!)
Mine sees the redline a few times a week, i don't live there, just visit it frequently ;D
if i want to pull away quick then i slot it in D select sport mode, bury the fast pedal in the carpet and keep it there for 10/15 seconds or until traffic/speed limits dictate otherwise
-
I should add that, as far as the 0-60 run goes, the current gearing is pretty much ideal as you can reach 60 in 2nd. So lowering the gearing will likely require an extra shift, giving a slower time. But that's not real world, what if you want to accelerate to 70 MPH? Either way you'd need to shift to 3rd. I think overall I'd prefer the arrangement described in my previous post.
No, you get a proper gearbox, that will do 85 in 2nd ;)
As I have said to you before, in real world, in many cases, the proper gearbox is quicker...
-
If you want to
a) have fun
b) give your auto a burst of self cleaning
then, with a nicely warmed up engine, select 2nd / sports mode and don't move either !!
Watch out for slippery surfaces/speed cameras/men in blue/battenburg decorated cars/other folks travelling much slower than you !!!
Seriously, if you do this on a straight open road and just floor the right boot you will be VERY surprised at what 2 Tonne of luxury car can actualy do when she picks up her skirts and runs ... :)
DON'T look at the instant fuel consumption and when you've frightened had enough just drop her into D and turn off sports mode ..... normal service will be resumed
:)
-
Why does the 2.5 have lower gearing than the 3.0 then? If anything, the torque peak is lower on the 2.5 -- certainly this is supported by the fact that the 2.5 produces less BHP per litre than the 3.0. Official figures for the x25xe are 227Nm at 3200 RPM, and x30xe are 270Nm at 3400 RPM.
So all else being equal (and considering only torque -- they both peak power at 6000 RPM), the 3.0 should have lower gearing than the 2.5 to get it to its higher RPM torque peak quickly, yet the 3.0 has higher gearing. I suspect it's at least partly to do with economy, but I believe the 3.0 would accelerate more quickly with the 2.5's gearing. Hence the benefit of a 6sp -- have the 2.5's existing lower gearing for 1-5, plus an additional 6th for overdrive cruising (say about 2600 RPM at 70 MPH).
Its totaly to do with economy on production cars......you seem to have some belief that 6 speed gearboxes are better on all configs.....you are wrong and particularly in the case of the V6.
You seem to be missing the fact that you will get to the torque peek in first gear almost instantly (whilst loosing traction!), if you then rev it just past the peek and change gear, in the next gear you will be just below it again......and so on.
And of course the 3.0 would in theory accelerate quicker with the 2.5 diff (gearbox ratios are actualy fairly similar)...hence why the 3.0 manuals are no quicker than the 2.5 manuals in real terms.
Remember that the number of gears required has nothing to do with the position of the torque in the rev range......its all to do with the width of the torque peek (or bhp) and on high output engines, as already mentioned, you might throw in an extra overdrive gear.
Also, forget bhp.....torque is the useable power.....if I had an engine with 1Nm torque at 100000 rpm I would have a 190Bhp engine (this is part of the principal used with small electric motors to get output up).
-
I should add that, as far as the 0-60 run goes, the current gearing is pretty much ideal as you can reach 60 in 2nd. So lowering the gearing will likely require an extra shift, giving a slower time. But that's not real world, what if you want to accelerate to 70 MPH? Either way you'd need to shift to 3rd. I think overall I'd prefer the arrangement described in my previous post.
No, you get a proper gearbox, that will do 85 in 2nd ;)
As I have said to you before, in real world, in many cases, the proper gearbox is quicker...
In almost all "real world" cases the proper gearbox is quicker... not only because it has more sensible ratios (85 MPH in 2nd!?!) but also because it's not spewing half the engine's power as heat into the transmission fluid :P And that's before we even get into the difference over a twisty B-road, never mind the acceleration difference, the difference in control is where it really counts.
I'm waiting for the argument that the Omega V6 is actually better off with four gears now ;D
-
I'm waiting for the argument that the Omega V6 is actually better off with four gears now ;D
No, just better with a proper gearbox. Why do you think the dear Lord gave you 2 feet?
-
I'm waiting for the argument that the Omega V6 is actually better off with four gears now ;D
No, just better with a proper gearbox. Why do you think the dear Lord gave you 2 feet?
Left foot - brake
Right foot - accelerator
What else ??? who needs a 3rd pedal to confuse the issue ?? :) :) :)
-
Why does the 2.5 have lower gearing than the 3.0 then? If anything, the torque peak is lower on the 2.5 -- certainly this is supported by the fact that the 2.5 produces less BHP per litre than the 3.0. Official figures for the x25xe are 227Nm at 3200 RPM, and x30xe are 270Nm at 3400 RPM.
So all else being equal (and considering only torque -- they both peak power at 6000 RPM), the 3.0 should have lower gearing than the 2.5 to get it to its higher RPM torque peak quickly, yet the 3.0 has higher gearing. I suspect it's at least partly to do with economy, but I believe the 3.0 would accelerate more quickly with the 2.5's gearing. Hence the benefit of a 6sp -- have the 2.5's existing lower gearing for 1-5, plus an additional 6th for overdrive cruising (say about 2600 RPM at 70 MPH).
Its totaly to do with economy on production cars......you seem to have some belief that 6 speed gearboxes are better on all configs.....you are wrong and particularly in the case of the V6.
You seem to be missing the fact that you will get to the torque peek in first gear almost instantly (whilst loosing traction!), if you then rev it just past the peek and change gear, in the next gear you will be just below it again......and so on.
And of course the 3.0 would in theory accelerate quicker with the 2.5 diff (gearbox ratios are actualy fairly similar)...hence why the 3.0 manuals are no quicker than the 2.5 manuals in real terms.
Remember that the number of gears required has nothing to do with the position of the torque in the rev range......its all to do with the width of the torque peek (or bhp) and on high output engines, as already mentioned, you might throw in an extra overdrive gear.
Also, forget bhp.....torque is the useable power.....if I had an engine with 1Nm torque at 100000 rpm I would have a 190Bhp engine (this is part of the principal used with small electric motors to get output up).
I don't think 6 speeds are better on all configs, just many of the ones where the best of the power is at the top of the rev range, and lasts for less than 2000 RPM, which in my experience is how the 3.0 V6 is. I'm talking about keeping it on the boil during spirited driving, not keeping it in the torque band. Power is where it's at to make good progress, I'm sure we all know the reasons why this is the case even though the engine actually produces the most output at peak torque.
For example, the 2.0 8v Audi I used to own would have been totally pointless having a 6 speed gearbox, as there was no incentive to keep the revs up or even within a specific band -- it seemed to pull much the same whether it was at 3000 RPM or 5000 RPM. Other similar "lazy" engines are likely to show no benefit with closer ratios, but I wouldn't describe the 24V V6 as lazy.
You just agreed with me that the 3.0 would be quicker with the 2.5 gearing, so much so that with the standard gearing it is barely quicker despite a 37 BHP and 43 Nm advantage. So what would be the drawback of fitting the 2.5 gearing (overall, inc diff) but add a higher 6th so you don't compromise the long distance cruising refinement and economy, but get the advantage of better acceleration when pressing on?
On your last point, torque may be what the engine actually produces, but BHP is what actually accelerates the car. I can reverse your analogy -- if you have an engine that produces 10000 Nm of torque, but could only turn once a minute (1 RPM), you'd have to gear it so high for it to actually move the car at any reasonable speed that it would be chronically slow accelerating (1.9 BHP actually) :P
As said before I like a nice blend of torque, but also some nice top end. So basically a decent torque curve throughout the rev range, that is maintained enough at high revs to give good peak power. Hence why I'm not so keen on most 2v/cyl engines -- poor top end -- let alone diesels!
-
I'm waiting for the argument that the Omega V6 is actually better off with four gears now ;D
No, just better with a proper gearbox. Why do you think the dear Lord gave you 2 feet?
Don't know about your feet, but mine can operate three pedals simultaneously just fine. I guess it's just one of those skills of driving that you only learn if you actually drive, rather than let the car do a poor job of most of the driving for you ;). Kind of like learning about the workings of a processor by writing some Java ::).
-
this has gone from discussing limp mode RPM to redlining and now to the finer merits of Auto V's Manual gearboxes......
;D
-
I'm waiting for the argument that the Omega V6 is actually better off with four gears now ;D
No, just better with a proper gearbox. Why do you think the dear Lord gave you 2 feet?
Don't know about your feet, but mine can operate three pedals simultaneously just fine. I guess it's just one of those skills of driving that you only learn if you actually drive, rather than let the car do a poor job of most of the driving for you ;). Kind of like learning about the workings of a processor by writing some Java ::).
You are of course forgetting that many of us 'autobox boys' have been driving manuals (often very fast) since way before you were even a smile on your Dad's face ;). Don't worry, you'll probably learn to drive fast/quick/safe as you get older, even with an auto (which if driven properly do have control and speed (though not usually to the finite offered by traditional manuals)) :P
-
:oWow! I actually understood some of this:- Modern diesels, one quick punch & that's your cracker in said gear. Other than mine i've only driven early 2.0's so hard to make a comparison. I've never driven a V6 auto (mig) a 3.0 /3.2 (yet) All i know is mine must be healthy for a 2.5 as it pulls like a train up to 144mph (indicated). I do push up to the red 1st 2nd 3rd here & there but think 6.5 occasionally is enough. No smoke ever. Lots of oil/filter changes. The engine has other qualities, ie only using 3rd on light throttle in town.
Overall from one end of the spectrum to the other you could take Granny to church, do a few trackday laps & take Granny home again!
Not a bad all-rounder i reckon. :y
-
So what would be the drawback of fitting the 2.5 gearing
Economy mostly. Keeping the revs low during cruising cuts down the losses in the engine. Might take a bit off the maximum speed too I suppose.
If the engine's got the grunt, it's much better to cruise with low RPM and a wider throttle opening than at a higher speed where it could potentially generate much more power than required but is being throttled back.
Production cars are about a compromise of all factors, not just fastest to 60 etc. after all.
In fact, my main moan about most manual cars is that first gear is designed to pull away with a caravan on the back, a bootful of luggage and a back seat full of kids, and a less than competent driver at the wheel, without burning the clutch out. Conditions that my car rarely ever sees (ok, maybe the incompetent driver...). I'd say the auto has the upper hand here, because first in a manual will just light up the back tyres when given full bore in first without a full load, whereas in an auto the combination of a higher first and a torque converter that will give a lower ratio for just as long as it takes to get the engine up into the torque means that the initial 30 feet might be slower, but you won't be reaching for another gear at 35 MPH.
So, replace first and second gear with one gear almost as high as second but not quite, and the aforementioned 4 speed Omega would probably do pretty much as well as a 5 speed. Wouldn't be fun with a caravan though. :-X
Kevin
-
...... revving to 6000+ RPM in 1st gear, quick change to 2nd ......
So ....... when do I change from 'D'? ;) :y :y :y
Once someone teaches you the art of driving, and lends you a car that is designed to be driven :P
......You are of course forgetting that many of us 'autobox boys' have been driving manuals (often very fast) since way before you were even a smile on your Dad's face ;). Don't worry, you'll probably learn to drive fast/quick/safe as you get older, even with an auto (which if driven properly do have control and speed (though not usually to the finite offered by traditional manuals)) :P
Thanks Jamie. I was trying to think of a nice way to say that. ;)
-
You are of course forgetting that many of us 'autobox boys' have been driving manuals (often very fast) since way before you were even a smile on your Dad's face ;). Don't worry, you'll probably learn to drive fast/quick/safe as you get older, even with an auto (which if driven properly do have control and speed (though not usually to the finite offered by traditional manuals)) :P
Perhaps, but lack of practice driving proper cars, coupled with the slower reactions of an oldie can't be helping matters :P
I can drive fast/safe/quick perfectly well at the moment, although admittedly only with a real car that is actually under my control. Doubt I'll ever learn to do it with an auto though, as the things bore me to tears to the point where I just can't be bothered pushing on any more, and usually drive it like the old man it was designed to be driven by :P
-
Right! The penny's dropping. But surely people aren't really serious about most driving being in the 6/7k+ zone. My engine is in good nick, and it did tear away earlier today, and I think I will push it harder from time to time, but I don't envisage too much 7k stuff. I'm nervous about flying. (The real stuff anyway!)
It's designed for it, that's why there's a rev limiter at 7000 RPM -- that is a safe speed for the engine to be turning at without damaging it.
If you need to accelerate quickly, you should be using the full power of the engine, which means revving it up over 4500 RPM where it really comes on song. If, for example, you pull out from a side road onto a B-road (60 MPH speed limit), and there is a blind bend 70 metres up the road, once you decide it's safe to pull out you should be accelerating as quickly as possible up to the speed limit. That means revving to 6000+ RPM in 1st gear, quick change to 2nd and do the same. By this time you'll be at (or near) 60 MPH, so you can easily slot it into 5th and cruise happily at 2500 RPM assuming the road is straight.
There is a junction similar to that above near where my sister used to stay, and I wouldn't feel safe pulling out of that and shifting up at 3000 RPM -- it would take so much longer to get up to speed that you're in the danger zone much longer should a car come around the corner rather quickly.
Appropriate gear for the conditions -- if you need to accelerate, use the lower gears and the engine's power as it was designed. Not doing so is akin to only ever using half the travel on the brake pedal, to prevent wearing out the discs & pads too quickly ;)
Jeez.! Don't tell me you use your brakes as well!!
-
So what would be the drawback of fitting the 2.5 gearing
Economy mostly. Keeping the revs low during cruising cuts down the losses in the engine. Might take a bit off the maximum speed too I suppose.
If the engine's got the grunt, it's much better to cruise with low RPM and a wider throttle opening than at a higher speed where it could potentially generate much more power than required but is being throttled back.
Exactly, that was my point about the benefit of a 6 speed box. You can get the benefits of the 2.5 ratios, with the addition of a higher 6th for low RPM cruising, so you're not sacrificing that from the standard 3.0 box.
Production cars are about a compromise of all factors, not just fastest to 60 etc. after all.
In fact, my main moan about most manual cars is that first gear is designed to pull away with a caravan on the back, a bootful of luggage and a back seat full of kids, and a less than competent driver at the wheel, without burning the clutch out. Conditions that my car rarely ever sees (ok, maybe the incompetent driver...). I'd say the auto has the upper hand here, because first in a manual will just light up the back tyres when given full bore in first without a full load, whereas in an auto the combination of a higher first and a torque converter that will give a lower ratio for just as long as it takes to get the engine up into the torque means that the initial 30 feet might be slower, but you won't be reaching for another gear at 35 MPH.
I like the relatively low first gear, in a heavy RWD car with decent tyres it won't spin the wheels much unless you dump the clutch at 4000 RPM. You can accelerate quickly up to 30 MPH, which is surprisingly useful for darting onto busy large roundabouts without causing anyone to brake. One thing I dislike about torque converter autos is that you can't rev it just before making a quick launch, unless you hold it on the brake (which will probably smoke the transmission fluid pretty quickly). I did try revving one in neutral then dropping it into gear, but there's a delay before it engages then it does so with a rather unhealthy clunk ;D
It's one of the reasons I'd like to try an SMG or DSG, I do like the interaction of a normal gearshift and clutch, but I'm prepared to accept that these systems are actually quicker than even the best human at shifting. And the key thing is they have no torque converter, so you can launch it like a manual, and drive it on the limit like a manual, with the paddle shifts being near instantaneous (unlike that steptronic rubbish you get on BMW automatics).
-
:oWow! I actually understood some of this:- Modern diesels, one quick punch & that's your cracker in said gear. Other than mine i've only driven early 2.0's so hard to make a comparison. I've never driven a V6 auto (mig) a 3.0 /3.2 (yet) All i know is mine must be healthy for a 2.5 as it pulls like a train up to 144mph (indicated). I do push up to the red 1st 2nd 3rd here & there but think 6.5 occasionally is enough. No smoke ever. Lots of oil/filter changes. The engine has other qualities, ie only using 3rd on light throttle in town.
Overall from one end of the spectrum to the other you could take Granny to church, do a few trackday laps & take Granny home again!
Not a bad all-rounder i reckon. :y
My Granny was crackers. She'd have said, 'Stuff the church! Get me to the track now!'.
-
Seriously, fellas, I initially wanted to query the wisdom of using very high revs. on my 2.6l. The points raised are fascinating, and I realise that, as one of the oldies, my conception of modern engine capabilities was way wide of the mark. You live and you learn. I think I'm beginning to feel like the oldest swinger in town.
I'm not sure which one of you I'll home in on to blame when I blow the top off my little darling, though. ;D ;D ;D
-
Seriously, fellas, I initially wanted to query the wisdom of using very high revs. on my 2.6l. The points raised are fascinating, and I realise that, as one of the oldies, my conception of modern engine capabilities was way wide of the mark. You live and you learn. I think I'm beginning to feel like the oldest swinger in town.
I'm not sure which one of you I'll home in on to blame when I blow the top off my little darling, though. ;D ;D ;D
Basically, occasional use of the redline does help her clear her throat ;)
-
I'm waiting for the argument that the Omega V6 is actually better off with four gears now ;D
No, just better with a proper gearbox. Why do you think the dear Lord gave you 2 feet?
Don't know about your feet, but mine can operate three pedals simultaneously just fine. I guess it's just one of those skills of driving that you only learn if you actually drive, rather than let the car do a poor job of most of the driving for you ;). Kind of like learning about the workings of a processor by writing some Java ::).
You are of course forgetting that many of us 'autobox boys' have been driving manuals (often very fast) since way before you were even a smile on your Dad's face ;). Don't worry, you'll probably learn to drive fast/quick/safe as you get older, even with an auto (which if driven properly do have control and speed (though not usually to the finite offered by traditional manuals)) :P
I've only had a car for 18 years at his age I owned a bike - not sure if it would have been a GS250T or the GSX600F, I borrowed my mums Avenger estate though
-
I'm waiting for the argument that the Omega V6 is actually better off with four gears now ;D
No, just better with a proper gearbox. Why do you think the dear Lord gave you 2 feet?
Don't know about your feet, but mine can operate three pedals simultaneously just fine. I guess it's just one of those skills of driving that you only learn if you actually drive, rather than let the car do a poor job of most of the driving for you ;). Kind of like learning about the workings of a processor by writing some Java ::).
You are of course forgetting that many of us 'autobox boys' have been driving manuals (often very fast) since way before you were even a smile on your Dad's face ;). Don't worry, you'll probably learn to drive fast/quick/safe as you get older, even with an auto (which if driven properly do have control and speed (though not usually to the finite offered by traditional manuals)) :P
Both are good in the right circumstances.
Stuck on the A30 on a bank holiday - give me an auto any time, even if I did almost overheat the 2.0s once (slow crawl up hill near Fraddon heading towards Goss Moor)
-
So what would be the drawback of fitting the 2.5 gearing
Economy mostly. Keeping the revs low during cruising cuts down the losses in the engine. Might take a bit off the maximum speed too I suppose.
If the engine's got the grunt, it's much better to cruise with low RPM and a wider throttle opening than at a higher speed where it could potentially generate much more power than required but is being throttled back.
Production cars are about a compromise of all factors, not just fastest to 60 etc. after all.
In fact, my main moan about most manual cars is that first gear is designed to pull away with a caravan on the back, a bootful of luggage and a back seat full of kids, and a less than competent driver at the wheel, without burning the clutch out. Conditions that my car rarely ever sees (ok, maybe the incompetent driver...). I'd say the auto has the upper hand here, because first in a manual will just light up the back tyres when given full bore in first without a full load, whereas in an auto the combination of a higher first and a torque converter that will give a lower ratio for just as long as it takes to get the engine up into the torque means that the initial 30 feet might be slower, but you won't be reaching for another gear at 35 MPH.
So, replace first and second gear with one gear almost as high as second but not quite, and the aforementioned 4 speed Omega would probably do pretty much as well as a 5 speed. Wouldn't be fun with a caravan though. :-X
Kevin
The torque converter slip means you can handle quite steep starts, but a 5 speed auto with closer 1 2 3 would be great on hills
-
You are of course forgetting that many of us 'autobox boys' have been driving manuals (often very fast) since way before you were even a smile on your Dad's face ;). Don't worry, you'll probably learn to drive fast/quick/safe as you get older, even with an auto (which if driven properly do have control and speed (though not usually to the finite offered by traditional manuals)) :P
Perhaps, but lack of practice driving proper cars, coupled with the slower reactions of an oldie can't be helping matters :P
I can drive fast/safe/quick perfectly well at the moment, although admittedly only with a real car that is actually under my control. Doubt I'll ever learn to do it with an auto though, as the things bore me to tears to the point where I just can't be bothered pushing on any more, and usually drive it like the old man it was designed to be driven by :P
Erm we have all had "Proper" cars, I have owned a car, not particularly fast but would out handle ANY you have owned, not out corner probably but position accurately and be fun.
And 90mph on loose chippings when you won't do the same road at 80 in the wet and when at 100 a Mondeo I was following was lifting a wheel was fun.
Yes I was looking out of the door windows!
Never take on small Rootes hatches if they are either stripe down side, spoiler fitted, or have large exhaust.
If you want to learn how a car handles buy your self one of the following
1) Mark 1 or 2 Escort 1600 or 2000
2) Hillman/Chrysler/Talbot Avenger
3) Vauxhall Chevette HS
4) Chrysler/Talbot Sunbeam
All are commonly fitted with better suspension and engine mods, and will teach you more about car control than most modern cars.
Note all light, small, RWD, fastish (modified if necessary), and have done well at rallying.
-
Seriously, fellas, I initially wanted to query the wisdom of using very high revs. on my 2.6l. The points raised are fascinating, and I realise that, as one of the oldies, my conception of modern engine capabilities was way wide of the mark. You live and you learn. I think I'm beginning to feel like the oldest swinger in town.
I'm not sure which one of you I'll home in on to blame when I blow the top off my little darling, though. ;D ;D ;D
Mine gets there every day
-
Erm we have all had "Proper" cars, I have owned a car, not particularly fast but would out handle ANY you have owned, not out corner probably but position accurately and be fun.
And 90mph on loose chippings when you won't do the same road at 80 in the wet and when at 100 a Mondeo I was following was lifting a wheel was fun.
Yes I was looking out of the door windows!
Never take on small Rootes hatches if they are either stripe down side, spoiler fitted, or have large exhaust.
If you want to learn how a car handles buy your self one of the following
1) Mark 1 or 2 Escort 1600 or 2000
2) Hillman/Chrysler/Talbot Avenger
3) Vauxhall Chevette HS
4) Chrysler/Talbot Sunbeam
All are commonly fitted with better suspension and engine mods, and will teach you more about car control than most modern cars.
Note all light, small, RWD, fastish (modified if necessary), and have done well at rallying.
I have recently been seriously considering something along those lines, not so much the cars you mention (as they're before my time so I have no knowledge of them other than the Mk2 Escort which I've heard of and seen), more something like a stripped out BMW E30 325i sport coupé with decent suspension. Basically something light, nice handling and of course RWD. Thing is though, it would basically be a track toy as I'm absolutely sick of paying through the nose for insurance, tax etc for cars that sit on the driveway every day, so I'd probably be better off with something a little more basic and even lighter.
The big flaw in this plan is how I'd get it to the track! Knockhill isn't far from me, and an A-frame is an option, but if I end up with the only the 840Ci there's no way I can tow with that so it may not be feasible, at least in the meantime. Unless of course I could come to some arrangement with a mate to tow it for me, in return for some track time in it, hmm got me thinking now :D
-
Tow bar on the MV6
Try to get a go in a 1970s RWD car to see how they go
-
Please mister can I have my Escort Mexico back....... with hindsight the one car I wish I'd never sold, next was the Mk1 Cortina but I did silly things both to and in that one ....
:)
-
Mk1 Cortina GT, had loads of other stuff, bit of a mini fan, mine had been previously ‘sorted’ easily pull 8000rpm, had Lotus Rev Counter in it which IIRC Redlined at 9000.
Han an umbrella handbrake but could still be put to good use in the right roads, did not have Tesco Car parks when I was a lad. There is an old 3 lane road near to me which was bypassed years ago, it only leads to the old garage and a couple of farms. 3 lane, wide grass verge and only the odd tree, you had to be very unlucky!!!!! No I did not but I know a man who did. Great in the wet and FAB in the snow.
Put a 3L V6 into a Mk2 Cortina without up rating the gearbox, not many of today’s ‘boy racers’ could handle that, whatever they think, few have any experience in RWD with cart suspension and no lsd.
-
Mk1 Cortina GT, had loads of other stuff, bit of a mini fan, mine had been previously ‘sorted’ easily pull 8000rpm, had Lotus Rev Counter in it which IIRC Redlined at 9000.
Han an umbrella handbrake but could still be put to good use in the right roads, did not have Tesco Car parks when I was a lad. There is an old 3 lane road near to me which was bypassed years ago, it only leads to the old garage and a couple of farms. 3 lane, wide grass verge and only the odd tree, you had to be very unlucky!!!!! No I did not but I know a man who did. Great in the wet and FAB in the snow.
Put a 3L V6 into a Mk2 Cortina without up rating the gearbox, not many of today’s ‘boy racers’ could handle that, whatever they think, few have any experience in RWD with cart suspension and no lsd.
Similar to the stupidity I did ... Lotus Cortina engine/gearbox in 1600 x-flow car with standard back axle/diff.... accelerated like S*** of a shovel but very limited top speed, handled like a bitch ... fortunately for my longevity, the half shafts didn't last very long and I bent it around a tree .. .. :(
-
Tow bar on the MV6
Try to get a go in a 1970s RWD car to see how they go
The MV6 might be going though, as I do about 4000 miles a year these days since moving into the city centre, and having 3 road legal cars with the associated costs is just madness. So I plan on keeping the 840Ci until I get bored of it, and there's no such thing as a tow bar for one of those.
Wouldn't mind a shot of an old RWD mota with live axle suspension... none of this 50-50 weight distribution either, must be pretty tail happy with sod all weight back there :D
-
With all this talk of Lotuses and Cortinas, I just remembered my dad had a Lotus Cortina back in the day. Bit of a boy racer car of its time I think 8-)
-
Nostalgia time ...
http://www.lotuscortina.net/Story1x.html
-
..... as I do about 4000 miles a year these days ......
No wonder you're such an expert driver with all those miles under your very young belt! :) :) :)
PS I took my test in a Mk1 Escort
-
..... as I do about 4000 miles a year these days ......
No wonder you're such an expert driver with all those miles under your very young belt! :) :) :)
PS I took my test in a Mk1 Escort
I used to do lots more, but living in the city centre brings many benefits such as lots and lots of partying, and I can stagger home afterwards ;) but one of the drawbacks is you have to wade through loads of traffic lights to get to any decent roads, so I hardly use the car now.
Still, once I get out of the city I'm never far from a twisty B-road -- benefit of living in Scotland :). It's usually pissing with rain too which helps fine-tune your skills ;)
-
..... It's usually pissing with rain too which helps fine-tune your skills ;)
I know I've lived there. ;) As long as you only have rain booked for today and not more snow - Sally Traffic mentioned delays yesterday on the A720 - I'm on my way to Edinburgh this afternnoon. Just hope I can keep in control of my auto. ;D ;D :y
-
4.5... 6... 7k RPM??? OMG! I never go over 2.5... :-[
Keep mine below 2k ;)
-
Tow bar on the MV6
Try to get a go in a 1970s RWD car to see how they go
The MV6 might be going though, as I do about 4000 miles a year these days since moving into the city centre, and having 3 road legal cars with the associated costs is just madness. So I plan on keeping the 840Ci until I get bored of it, and there's no such thing as a tow bar for one of those.
Wouldn't mind a shot of an old RWD mota with live axle suspension... none of this 50-50 weight distribution either, must be pretty tail happy with sod all weight back there :D
My Sunbeam (coil sprung live axle & 900kg) had just over 90bhp at the wheels.
It was like a giant go cart ;D
-
Was having a look on Pistonheads last night, you can pick up E30s from around £200 for a 318, but I think I'd be inclined towards the 325i for a little more. Not as light as a Sunbeam, but supposedly they're very entertaining to drive, much more tail happy than newer BMWs as they have less sophisticated rear suspension and don't have the 50/50 weight balance.
Food for thought :)
I wouldn't mind an older car, but I expect any still around that aren't total rust buckets will fetch a premium.
-
if you go for 325 make sure its sports model come with lsd as standard !! :D
-
The 4s are lighter - may be fun to strip out and tune the life out of it
-
Was having a look on Pistonheads last night, you can pick up E30s from around £200 for a 318, but I think I'd be inclined towards the 325i for a little more. Not as light as a Sunbeam, but supposedly they're very entertaining to drive, much more tail happy than newer BMWs as they have less sophisticated rear suspension and don't have the 50/50 weight balance.
Food for thought :)
I wouldn't mind an older car, but I expect any still around that aren't total rust buckets will fetch a premium.
My mum has a K reg 318 (no idea of which model, its crappy BMW so I pay no interest), takes provocation to get back out...
-
Was having a look on Pistonheads last night, you can pick up E30s from around £200 for a 318, but I think I'd be inclined towards the 325i for a little more. Not as light as a Sunbeam, but supposedly they're very entertaining to drive, much more tail happy than newer BMWs as they have less sophisticated rear suspension and don't have the 50/50 weight balance.
Food for thought :)
I wouldn't mind an older car, but I expect any still around that aren't total rust buckets will fetch a premium.
My mum has a K reg 318 (no idea of which model, its crappy BMW so I pay no interest), takes provocation to get back out...
K reg will be an E36, they are a lot more sedate handling wise, tuned for the mass market. Z-axle rear suspension is apparently very good, but a lot less fun (read tail happy) than the E30. Also the extra weight means the 318 just won't cut it, whereas an E30 318is is usually considered quite good fun by those in the know.
Funnily enough you can pick up early E36s cheaper than decent E30s.