Print

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

[sounds2k]

well after driving Mick's 2.6 manual today, I can say that it didn't feel quite as quick as my 3.0 auto - but I didn't notice any difference in smoothness between the two engines. It was nice to have a manual box again, the clutch wasn't very heavy which is good news for me!!

... so now I need to find a 3.0 manual estate, hmmm I think that may take a while unless I opt for an ex-plod ...

quite as quick? LOL...after all the grub the extra weight in the car obviously affected the result?.....then again might have just been too much hard work for you, using a manual, after being used to the auto?

ha yeah the grub might have had an influence!! But I do think the 3.0/3.2's do pull more strongly, especially once past the 4k RPM point ... perhaps we should do some 0-60 runs at the track days next year  

I really can't see the point that 2.5/2.6's are smoother than the 3.0/3.2's - what did you think?

[MikeDundee]

well after driving Mick's 2.6 manual today, I can say that it didn't feel quite as quick as my 3.0 auto - but I didn't notice any difference in smoothness between the two engines. It was nice to have a manual box again, the clutch wasn't very heavy which is good news for me!!

... so now I need to find a 3.0 manual estate, hmmm I think that may take a while unless I opt for an ex-plod ...

quite as quick? LOL...after all the grub the extra weight in the car obviously affected the result?.....then again might have just been too much hard work for you, using a manual, after being used to the auto?

ha yeah the grub might have had an influence!! But I do think the 3.0/3.2's do pull more strongly, especially once past the 4k RPM point ... perhaps we should do some 0-60 runs at the track days next year  

I really can't see the point that 2.5/2.6's are smoother than the 3.0/3.2's - what did you think?

You car was smoother but then it is an automatic

[TheBoy]

wereas the auto steps down a gear, and if you want to really gun it, it steps down another gear, and then another one, if you really want to gun it.
There is a very slight delay in that process... hence the requirement to plan...

I think that's just indecision in how much you're pressing the pedal. Just push it right down as far as it'll go. The car will get the correct gear first time.

Mine's also doesn't appear to suffer from the changing at the red-line issue.  

If I floor mine at 15-20mph (edit) it seems to stay in 2nd and slowly winds up from 2-3K rpm.  Bloody useless when pulling out into traffic.  If I accelerate out of a 30 zone into a 60 zone it upshifts to 4th 1-2 secs after I push the pedal down halfway and then struggles to pick up speed without pushing the pedal way down and using a lot of fuel.  If you use sport mode it works better, except that it doesn't go into 4th until over 60 and shunts in with a thunk at very light throttle.  Other than those things it works pretty well for an Auto.

Theolodian, you may find updated gearbox software improves the drivability of it....

[Phil]

Biggest downside of our autos is that the gears are a little long - 50mph in 1st, 85mph in 2nd etc.

.

Thats a good thing, you loose time in changing gear  manually, so auto changes twice instead of manual 3 times, side by side my money would be on the auto!!

Theres also the option of manually dropping it down the box to pre-empt the kick down.

Unless youre constantly caneing the car theres bugger all difference on an auto or a manual on a car of this size.

Proper performance/ sports car is a differnt matter - Porch or Fezza with an auto box is just gay  

[TheBoy]

Biggest downside of our autos is that the gears are a little long - 50mph in 1st, 85mph in 2nd etc.

.

Thats a good thing, you loose time in changing gear  manually, so auto changes twice instead of manual 3 times, side by side my money would be on the auto!!

Theres also the option of manually dropping it down the box to pre-empt the kick down.

Unless youre constantly caneing the car theres bugger all difference on an auto or a manual on a car of this size.

Proper performance/ sports car is a differnt matter - Porch or Fezza with an auto box is just gay  

The shorter gears, and the lack of torque converter slip, does make the manual quicker from slow speed, and nippier around town.

[Andy B]

....
If I floor mine at 15-20mph (edit) it seems to stay in 2nd and slowly winds up from 2-3K rpm.  Bloody useless when pulling out into traffic.  ......

Mine doesn't  :-? Are you sure you're hitting the loud pedal hard enough? b

[theolodian]

....
If I floor mine at 15-20mph (edit) it seems to stay in 2nd and slowly winds up from 2-3K rpm.  Bloody useless when pulling out into traffic.  ......

Mine doesn't  :-? Are you sure you're hitting the loud pedal hard enough? b

Unless the throttle cable has stretched?  Not sure if that would matter.

TB, you said mine should have the updated sw?  No time to come down b4 xmas, but v interested in new sw.

[spiketheskinnydog]

I've never tried a 3.0 Omega, but for sure my old auto 24v Senator 3.0 was much much quicker then my 2.5 manual omega. - in fact, in my usual "banzai" stretch of road the senator could reach 95, whereas the omega manages 85. (for any police officers reading, this of course is on a particular length of unrestricted German Autobahn!). However, the omega is significantly more fuel efficient, revs 500rpm higher, has better initial turn in (I'm assuming due to the engine being far lighter) and seems more stable at higher speeds, so it seems a lot more fun! . Its swings and roundabouts , as per!

As an aside, wasn't there talk of V8 Omegas being produced for the continent?? Did any of these really exist?? and what about all those lovely Omega-esque Holdens from Oz?? Anybody got one here??

[TheBoy]

I've never tried a 3.0 Omega, but for sure my old auto 24v Senator 3.0 was much much quicker then my 2.5 manual omega. - in fact, in my usual "banzai" stretch of road the senator could reach 95, whereas the omega manages 85. (for any police officers reading, this of course is on a particular length of unrestricted German Autobahn!). However, the omega is significantly more fuel efficient, revs 500rpm higher, has better initial turn in (I'm assuming due to the engine being far lighter) and seems more stable at higher speeds, so it seems a lot more fun! . Its swings and roundabouts , as per!

As an aside, wasn't there talk of V8 Omegas being produced for the continent?? Did any of these really exist?? and what about all those lovely Omega-esque Holdens from Oz?? Anybody got one here??

The v8 was dropped, alledgedly shortly before launch, for Omegas.

[Big Rod]

Between myself and SWMBO, we have..........

1x 3.2 auto MV6 estate ('02' plate)
1x 2.5 auto Elite estate ('V' plate)

I have no reservations in saying that the 3.2 is much much faster and noticeably more responsive than the 2.5.

As far as the smoothness of the engine goes, there's nothing in it, however the elite has a much smoother ride I would imagine due to more sympathetic suspension and I assume has more in the way of sound deadening. (This may go some way to making it 'feel' slower too!!)

The 2.5 does make slightly better MPG, but they don't get driven the same. I would say that if I used the 2.5 I'd probably be able to squeeze a fair bit more out of it than the 3.2. We'll see when I take the 2.5 to Bucks next week!!

[Martin_1962]

My test track results

Quite surprising as well

Sunbeam	100
Carlton	90
CD 2.0 Auto	85
MV6	105
CD 2.6	105

The 1600cc car was under a ton and around 115bhp

[Auto Addict]

My test track results

Quite surprising as well

Sunbeam	100
Carlton	90
CD 2.0 Auto	85
MV6	105
CD 2.6	105

The 1600cc car was under a ton and around 115bhp

With or without the caravan.......

[Andy B]

I've never tried a 3.0 Omega, but for sure my old auto 24v Senator 3.0 was much much quicker then my 2.5 manual omega. ..........

I test drove an auto 2.5 when I had my 24v Senator .... [size=14]IMHO[/size] It was pathetic by comparison.

However, the omega is significantly more fuel efficient, revs 500rpm higher, has better initial turn in (I'm assuming due to the engine being far lighter) and seems more stable at higher speeds, so it seems a lot more fun! .

My 3.0 Omega is abysmal compared to the Senator. On a run in the Senator if I really really tried I could see approx 30mpg whereas the best I have ever seen in the Omega is 28. I travel around 45 miles round trip (Bury to Wigan mix of town and B roads) and the trip consumption is at 24.2 and counting ... downwards  

[spiketheskinnydog]

So what we're really saying is that Senators are far better than Omegas???Hmmm, the thought had occured to me, but this didn't seem the place to say so! Shame they've all got terminal rust problems really!

[Andy B]

So what we're really saying is that Senators are far better than Omegas???Hmmm, the thought had occured to me, but this didn't seem the place to say so! Shame they've all got terminal rust problems really!

    Hang your head in shame!!  
You can't come around here actually saying that Senators were far far better car that the Omega could ever aspire to be!!