Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Car Chat => Topic started by: blackviper90210 on 21 November 2011, 18:07:17
-
As above, is there much difference in the real world between these two engines?
Either in CDX/Elite or MV6 guise??
Cheers all :y
-
600 cc :y ;D
-
Who let you loose tonight Rob? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
3.2, if your going to get one of these crappy V6 engines might as well get the biggest!
-
In what way? The bigger engine is clearly, substainially more powerful, but the smaller engine is gear differently to try and make it feel like it has some power. But will never beat a 3.2. A tuned manual 2.6 may get close to an auto 3.2 up to 100mph
Smaller engine should be slightly more frugal, and slightly cheaper to insure.
-
no debate! 3.2 ..
driving a V6 means you want power not economy.. otherwise use a 4 pot.. ;D :P
-
True.
Is there a noticeable difference in the performance and fuel consumption?
Obviously taking into consideration servicing history etc ;)
-
Must type faster ;D ;D ;D ;D
Cheers TB, that's the answer I was looking for :y
-
Right then, just need to keep eyes peeled for the right one now ::)
-
3.2, if your going to get one of these crappy V6 engines might as well get the biggest!
Still not totally converted from the 4-pots yet then Mark ;D ;D
-
3.2, if your going to get one of these crappy V6 engines might as well get the biggest!
Still not totally converted from the 4-pots yet then Mark ;D ;D
Not really, my trusty 4 pot is much, much smoother at idle from inside cabin. Only way you can tell engine is running is rpm reading.
V6 is considerably louder about town, noticed small vibration from brake pedal when stationary. Engine can be quite lumpy at idle at times, been told this is normal for DBW V6 :o
Have to jack up car for an oil change, no need on 4 potter. Ohh and yeh, it uses a shit ton of fuel ;D
However when progress needs to be made, all is forgiven! :D
-
My 3.2 is beautifully smooth and quiet, only 50,000 miles though. :y
-
My 3.2 is beautifully smooth and quiet, only 50,000 miles though. :y
Oh mines smooth once your rolling, mines got 137k on the clock.
Every V6 I've been in (including a 60k one) my 4 potter is quieter :)
Smaller engine so no surprise really.
-
Some 20 horsepower and a few Nm's more in 3,2 with cost of higher consumption (Sadly, :'( :'( :'( :'( we did not get many 3,2's in Finland when Omegas were new so they are not available here :'( :'( :'( :'(, nor seem to be too many in Germany either but you guys have lots of them... Not that I'm jealous or anything)
So, if I had a chance, I'd take the 3,2. More grunt and for fuel economy Omega is not your choice with ANY engine.
-
I thought the difference between the factory figures for 3.0 and 3.2 was only 3? 208 for 3.0 and 211 for 3.2?
-
3.2, if your going to get one of these crappy V6 engines might as well get the biggest!
Still not totally converted from the 4-pots yet then Mark ;D ;D
Not really, my trusty 4 pot is much, much smoother at idle from inside cabin. Only way you can tell engine is running is rpm reading.
V6 is considerably louder about town, noticed small vibration from brake pedal when stationary. Engine can be quite lumpy at idle at times, been told this is normal for DBW V6 :o
Have to jack up car for an oil change, no need on 4 potter. Ohh and yeh, it uses a shit ton of fuel ;D
However when progress needs to be made, all is forgiven! :D
First thing I noticed when upgrading to a 3.2 from a 2.5 was the idle was not as smooth, and turning ac on or off makes no odds to the very slight vibration. I don't think I would ever describe a 3.2 as loud, more of symphony. :) as opposed too the spice girls of the four pot. ;D
-
I thought the difference between the factory figures for 3.0 and 3.2 was only 3? 208 for 3.0 and 211 for 3.2?
I think we are comparing the 2.6 and 3.2 engines, not the 3.0 :y
-
3.2 quite a bit faster and a whole lot more economical.
( I have both )
-
3.2 quite a bit faster and a whole lot more economical.
( I have both )
Lend me your 3.2 then, you can't drive both at the same time ::) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
and the 3.2 motor's coming out soon, too.
but I'll probably put it in the 2.6
-
I don't think I would ever describe a 3.2 as loud, more of symphony. :) as opposed too the spice girls of the four pot. ;D
I was thinking more along the lines of The Village People ;)
-
It does help that a V6 isn't generally revving its' nads off all the time..
Ok. I lied. :-[
-
3.2 quite a bit faster and a whole lot more economical.
( I have both )
How does that work then? :-\
I have a 2.6
-
I thought the difference between the factory figures for 3.0 and 3.2 was only 3? 208 for 3.0 and 211 for 3.2?
I think we are comparing the 2.6 and 3.2 engines, not the 3.0 :y
I know :y
-
2.6 or 3.2? :-\ :-\
Big is best, bigger is better still! :y :y :y :y
-
I don't think I would ever describe a 3.2 as loud, more of symphony. :) as opposed too the spice girls of the four pot. ;D
I was thinking more along the lines of The Village People ;)
...yes I suspected you might be working along those lines. ;D
-
3.2 quite a bit faster and a whole lot more economical.
( I have both )
How does that work then? :-\
I have a 2.6
the gearing of the 2.6 is a lot shorter in an effort to get it to accelerate with 40 less horsepower.
-
3.2 quite a bit faster and a whole lot more economical.
( I have both )
How does that work then? :-\
I have a 2.6
the gearing of the 2.6 is a lot shorter in an effort to get it to accelerate with 40 less horsepower.
What, top end as well?
-
no, 2.6 tops out in 5th, 3.2 tops out in 4th
-
2.6 still goes quite well, but is not very economical.
Not sure if it is gearing or the lower CR, but mist of the 3.x seem to get better consumption than the 2.6s.
The best 2.6s are similar in flat out performance to a 3.0 not in peak condition, but a lot less low end torque.
I have owned a 3.0 and a 2.6, the 3.0 was torquier but flat out the 2.6 is faster on acceleration (3mph on my test road).
HOWEVER
2.6 has 3.0 cams and ported heads, the 3.0 had an LPG ECU clogging the air box.
-
2.6 still goes quite well, but is not very economical.
Not sure if it is gearing or the lower CR, but mist of the 3.x seem to get better consumption than the 2.6s.
The best 2.6s are similar in flat out performance to a 3.0 not in peak condition, but a lot less low end torque.
I have owned a 3.0 and a 2.6, the 3.0 was torquier but flat out the 2.6 is faster on acceleration (3mph on my test road).
HOWEVER
2.6 has 3.0 cams and ported heads, the 3.0 had an LPG ECU clogging the air box.
Assuming both were autos...
Your 3.0l must have been a right dog then ;)
A well serviced 2.6 manual, with all the tweaks (ie, Dundee's) driven by a very capable driver, didn't beat a slightly neglected Silver Bullet (3.0l auto) driven by a fat idiot on that runway, but held it honest until the extra capacity really kicks in hard ;)
-
To coin the Yankee phrase - 'There's no substitute for cubic inches'!
-
2.6 still goes quite well, but is not very economical.
Not sure if it is gearing or the lower CR, but mist of the 3.x seem to get better consumption than the 2.6s.
The best 2.6s are similar in flat out performance to a 3.0 not in peak condition, but a lot less low end torque.
I have owned a 3.0 and a 2.6, the 3.0 was torquier but flat out the 2.6 is faster on acceleration (3mph on my test road).
HOWEVER
2.6 has 3.0 cams and ported heads, the 3.0 had an LPG ECU clogging the air box.
Assuming both were autos...
Your 3.0l must have been a right dog then ;)
A well serviced 2.6 manual, with all the tweaks (ie, Dundee's) driven by a very capable driver, didn't beat a slightly neglected Silver Bullet (3.0l auto) driven by a fat idiot on that runway, but held it honest until the extra capacity really kicks in hard ;)
I am sure the LPG ECU location did not help
Both Autos, one was kept well thrashed and maintained, other was newish to me and had a sheltered life.
-
Well I got a 3.2 elite saloon in the end...collect on Saturday ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Well I got a 3.2 elite saloon in the end...collect on Saturday ;D ;D ;D ;D
Where from Dave? Are you bringing her round for the once over? :y
-
Well I got a 3.2 elite saloon in the end...collect on Saturday ;D ;D ;D ;D
Where from Dave? Are you bringing her round for the once over? :y
Don't laugh......Glasgow, lol.
And yes I'll bring her round for you to run your eye over ::) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
At this time, I don't believe she needs anything as the current owner and the one before have been looking after it. It does need a rear door motor though I believe.
Looking forward to picking her up though!
Hows things your end?
-
Is this one Iain was selling recently??
-
Is this one Iain was selling recently??
Certainly is...... :y
-
The ex plod or the elite ? :-\
-
To coin the Yankee phrase - 'There's no substitute for cubic inches'!
There's no replacement for displacement!
-
The Elite :)
-
I'm very surprised tonight.....not one bad remark or comment ::)