Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Terbs]

Hi all

Hope this is the right place as I suppose it could be in any of three But I thought its more of a discussion !!!

Basically, I have seen an Omega saloon today in Dunstable. Its a 2.2 16 valve CD. Now what I want to know is what mileage do the cambelts want doing, can cruise control be fitted. I have not got a clue about modern engines, but I could not see any camcovers. Battery was a flat as a witches tit, but once pack started it seemed to run fine.

Thing is....when I got back in my Elite estate, it seemed like I was going up in the world a notch. Are the 2.2's as good as the V6 Elite. Would I be disappointed with a 2.2....should I go for an Elite. BTW this is not 'instead of'...its 'aswell as'.

I have got so used to the 'toys' but economics have to come into it. This 2.2 had a few faults...the common top of door card, but that is easily fixed, and a small piece out of a vent. Most impressed that there was no rust I could find..

I don't know what to do....opinions please.
The car is at a place called Bedfordshire Cars....anyone had any dealings ?
Lastly....does anyone know if Josh has anything for sale

Sorry this is drawn out, but if you don't ask, you don't get.!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tony

[JamesV6CDX]

If it's a 4 pot and needs a cambelt... bring it over to Aylesbury (I'm there again in November) - I'll do it for a drink

[JamesV6CDX]

to answer other questions..

If it's a 2.2, it will be nasty compared to a V6. There IS no comparison. That said, it's a practical, good engine. So as long as you have a V6 for enjoyment... the 2.2 will make a mighty fine workhorse..

they are also easy to work on, reliable, and cheap parts

[Terbs]

Thanks James

How do you know if its a 4 pot....sorry for ignorance

[Steve B]

to answer other questions..

If it's a 2.2, it will be nasty compared to a V6. There IS no comparison. That said, it's a practical, good engine. So as long as you have a V6 for enjoyment... the 2.2 will make a mighty fine workhorse..

they are also easy to work on, reliable, and cheap parts

[the alarming man]

well first of all tony my 2.2 is not nasty at all..does the job but i think a 2.6 would be better on fuel as the omega is a big car

[JamesV6CDX]

well first of all tony my 2.2 is not nasty at all..does the job but i think a 2.6 would be better on fuel as the omega is a big car

My comment about a 2.2 being "nasty" is obviously somewhat of a joke.

In reality though, a 2.2 will not be anywhere near as smooth as a V6, or sound as nice. It does the job, but that's about it. Basic engine, reliable, but won't make you grin and has to work quite hard to get the lump of a car to make good progress.

All 2.0 and 2.2 engines are 4 pots..... (hence they'yre not V6's)

[JamesV6CDX]

I agree with Alarming man that a V6 will be better on fuel.

The 2.2 just has to work too hard to power the big Omega, in my opinion...

[SIR Philbutt]

to answer other questions..

If it's a 2.2, it will be nasty compared to a V6. There IS no comparison. That said, it's a practical, good engine. So as long as you have a V6 for enjoyment... the 2.2 will make a mighty fine workhorse..

they are also easy to work on, reliable, and cheap parts

[the alarming man]

my 2.2 is plenty fast enough to get you into trouble with your mates james but no its not going to sound like a v6 as its not 

but tony if you are down this way at your cousins you are welcome to have a drive of mine

[D]

I disagree. I have a 3.2, 2.6 and 2.2. All automatics. I love the 2.2. It idles better, pulls pretty well for the cars weight and on a long run the economy is much much better than my 3.2. But then I have lpg'd the 3.2 due to its drinking habit.

I have no idea about the ability to tow. But to call the 2.2 nasty or grossly underpowered is not at all fair. It just doesnt have the top end of a 3.2.

I am not sure my 3.2 sounds much different from the 2.2. Both have pretty silent exhausts and the engine note is pretty well muted in the cabin.

[JamesV6CDX]

I disagree. I have a 3.2, 2.6 and 2.2. All automatics. I love the 2.2. It idles better, pulls pretty well for the cars weight and on a long run the economy is much much better than my 3.2. But then I have lpg'd the 3.2 due to its drinking habit.

I have no idea about the ability to tow. But to call the 2.2 nasty or grossly underpowered is not at all fair. It just doesnt have the top end of a 3.2.

I am not sure my 3.2 sounds much different from the 2.2. Both have pretty silent exhausts and the engine note is pretty well muted in the cabin.

You make a fair point, D. I'm just unfairly biased against any Omega with 4 cylinders.

Just to re-iterate, as long as you don't expect to win any races.. the 2.2 is a good, reliable car. My posts are purely based on my own personal preference

[joshwyatt]

Tony...I suppose the best way, is to work out what you'll be using it for?

I've privately run a 2.2 manual, 2.6 manual and 3.2 manual, and sold auto variants of each engine.

If it's a supplemental car, I think the 2.2 would be fine. However, a V6 spoils you somewhat. If you're used to a V6 the 2.2 can feel a touch underpowered.
I enjoyed my 2.2 CDX, but personally feel the V6 is a better option as an all rounder for me.
But what's right for me, may not be for you.
The 2.2 is easier to work on, but the MPG isn't going to be vastly different from a V6.
If you need help picking up a vehicle, or general advice, feel free to PM me.
This morning at an invitation only auction there was an Omega, a 2003 '03' 2.2 CDX auto saloon in black with 75,000 miles. It sold for £375...so there are cheap yet good one's out there.

[Terbs]

OK fellas.....we all have likes and dislikes....

Right...I think your replies have been really helpful, as gleaning bits from each post is building to a conclusion....

Lets take these facts into consideration........
Firstly.....swmbo will probably use the 2.2 more than me. She is not going to race it, obviously, nor will I come to that.
We are using a P reg Laguna 2.0ltr Estate at the moment as second car. It seems to me that we will get basically the same....with a few extras as to spec.
Secondly....we have to go to Brackley every Monday, (round trip about 100 miles) I assume the consumption would be better than the 2.5 V6 Estate.

Thirdly....engine reliability. My son in law is usually the man who's head goes under the bonnet.....after his las explosion (fitting ABS ECU) of ' Inever want to see this ******* ******* car again' so hopefully, my needing him will be less.

The expected milage will be about 3000 to 4000 per year

[Terbs]

Thanks Josh.....

I did think straight off whether you had anything