Print

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

[JamesV6CDX]

Spares or repairs omegas fetch £500 - £1000 on Ebay

being a 4 banger (so not as thirsty), cheaper to insure ,tax etc) ,runs and drives and it being an estate should make £750 plus if it has decent MOT
IMHO

My 3.0 Elite gave the best all round economy. My 2.0 was good on a long careful run, but general mixed driving I didn’t find it any better than the V6! Maybe because it has to work / rev harder for the same output

[dave the builder]

Spares or repairs omegas fetch £500 - £1000 on Ebay

being a 4 banger (so not as thirsty), cheaper to insure ,tax etc) ,runs and drives and it being an estate should make £750 plus if it has decent MOT
IMHO

My 3.0 Elite gave the best all round economy. My 2.0 was good on a long careful run, but general mixed driving I didn’t find it any better than the V6! Maybe because it has to work / rev harder for the same output

That's interesting 
my 2.0 1993 Carlton CDi(older 2.0 SE replacement engine running on C20NE management with a cat/manual) would do 33 MPG .
My 2.6 V6 Omega CDX (53 plate Y26SE auto) does 23 MPG
progress     

[VXL V6]

Spares or repairs omegas fetch £500 - £1000 on Ebay

being a 4 banger (so not as thirsty), cheaper to insure ,tax etc) ,runs and drives and it being an estate should make £750 plus if it has decent MOT
IMHO

My 3.0 Elite gave the best all round economy. My 2.0 was good on a long careful run, but general mixed driving I didn’t find it any better than the V6! Maybe because it has to work / rev harder for the same output

That's interesting 
my 2.0 1993 Carlton CDi(older 2.0 SE replacement engine running on C20NE management with a cat/manual) would do 33 MPG .
My 2.6 V6 Omega CDX (53 plate Y26SE auto) does 23 MPG
progress     

Always found the 3.2 Y32SE engine Omega's i've had did better on fuel economy in most scenarios than the one 2.6 Y26SE (With G cams) I had ever could.

[TheBoy]

The 2.6 was, IMHO, the worse of all engines fitted to Omegas.  Followed closely by the 3.2.  Buggering up the compression ratio for cost saving being the most likely cause.

The 3.0 was the best.  Similar power levels to the 3.2, but loads more economical - 500 miles from a tank was achievable even by an eedjit like me, on a good run and keeping it mostly out of instant ban speeds.

The 2.5 was a little more economical, but was flat as a witches tit by comparison.

[JamesV6CDX]

The 2.6 was, IMHO, the worse of all engines fitted to Omegas.  Followed closely by the 3.2.  Buggering up the compression ratio for cost saving being the most likely cause.

The 3.0 was the best.  Similar power levels to the 3.2, but loads more economical - 500 miles from a tank was achievable even by an eedjit like me, on a good run and keeping it mostly out of instant ban speeds.

The 2.5 was a little more economical, but was flat as a witches tit by comparison.

I thoroughly agree with all of this.

Although better than the 2.2, the 2.6 is a bit of a pig in lipstick compared to the 3.0.

[Doctor Gollum]

The Desmond is pretty reasonable with a proper gearbox, and it's quite rev happy.

Never owned a 2.5/3.0 but found the 3.2 manual to be pretty decent on fuel using the same criteria as above

[Stu.C]

The 2.6 was, IMHO, the worse of all engines fitted to Omegas. 

That reminds me, I really must get around to disposing of the driveway ornament - mine's been sat there doing nothing for a year and the MOT's due up again... 

[TheBoy]

The Desmond is pretty reasonable with a proper gearbox, and it's quite rev happy.

Never owned a 2.5/3.0 but found the 3.2 manual to be pretty decent on fuel using the same criteria as above

2.2 needs to be a manual*, and you need to rag the nads off it all the time.  It'll never win any races, but can be a laugh.

The 3.0 is in a different league, economy wise, to the 3.2, when driven the same.  And I'd argue slightly better on acceleration as well (with the same gearbox), though not by much.  Still wouldn't use one for a taxi, though!


*The only single exception I've ever driven was Auto Addicts old 2.2 auto, that thing was the best, quickest 2.2 auto I've ever driven.  It went like the clappers, and was clearly driven at 90mph 45mph everywhere.

[Doctor Gollum]

Why not... Cop brakes, cop suspension, cop motor

Oh, and it's not an Octavia

[VXL V6]

Why not... Cop brakes, cop suspension, cop motor

Your gonna have to fix the lighter. 

[Doctor Gollum]

 

[Rangie]

The 2.6 was, IMHO, the worse of all engines fitted to Omegas.  Followed closely by the 3.2.  Buggering up the compression ratio for cost saving being the most likely cause.

The 3.0 was the best.  Similar power levels to the 3.2, but loads more economical - 500 miles from a tank was achievable even by an eedjit like me, on a good run and keeping it mostly out of instant ban speeds.

The 2.5 was a little more economical, but was flat as a witches tit by comparison.

.


I really liked my 2.6 found the power okay,  swmbo had a 2.2 estate which was immaculate but totally underpowered hated driving it, would definitely liked to have tried a 3.0 & 3.2

[iansoutham]

Hi all, looks like the Omega estate is going up for sale soon (possibly as soon as this or next weekend).

What sort of money do they go for now? 1997 MFL 2.0 16v CDX auto estate with 136k on the clock and probably described as average condition?

Well, went up for sale and sold yesterday. Guy collecting this week.

[Rangie]

Went for a good price well done 👍

[iansoutham]

Collected by a guy moving to Northampton area in next few weeks. All gone