Print

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

[PSABIN8951]

Having now changed from a 3.0 MV6 1998 manual estate to a 2.6 Auto 2002 estate I thought fuel consumption would improve a little but no! MV6 gave between 25 to 38 mpg but the newer car gives 19 to 28 mpg! Ive cleaned out all breathers, changed plugs, fuel & air filters. No codes logged either. Any ideas? Would an oil change to both auto box and engine be worth a try as looking at other items theyve not been done in a while?

[Darth Loo-knee]

Having now changed from a 3.0 MV6 1998 manual estate to a 2.6 Auto 2002 estate I thought fuel consumption would improve a little but no! MV6 gave between 25 to 38 mpg but the newer car gives 19 to 28 mpg! Ive cleaned out all breathers, changed plugs, fuel & air filters. No codes logged either. Any ideas? Would an oil change to both auto box and engine be worth a try as looking at other items theyve not been done in a while?

Are the multi rams working properly?
Is the timing correct?

[geoffr70]

Main reason is probably due to going from manual to autobox I would've thought.

My  3.0 auto Elite is currently averaging 16mpg round town, whereas my 3.0 manual MV6 returns 25 ish. Autoboxes use more fuel.

[Andy B]

.....

My  3.0 auto Elite is currently averaging 16mpg round town, ....

Christ! How heavy is your right foot? Mine does about 21/22  mpg around town 

[aaronjb]

My 3.2 auto also gets 21/22 around town, high 20s on a run - most of the time it's driven fairly gently (largely thanks to all the traffic!) with the occasional blat.

19 to 28 doesn't sound too bad to me.

[danzigfan]

I get 35mpg on longer runs and even as bad as 16mpg  in town, and that's my little grinder 2.0 manual

[geoffr70]

.....

My  3.0 auto Elite is currently averaging 16mpg round town, ....

Christ! How heavy is your right foot? Mine does about 21/22  mpg around town 

The black stuff is there to be used, so let's get it burnt!

That's short, journeys, stop and start (bloody robots from the local 'authority' putting in bus lanes everywhere, that is chock-a-block with buses 24/7 causing traffic chaos everywhere else). Mostly 3 miles then off. Choke is hardly off by then.

I get 34.8 on a run at 80, sometimes lot higher. It thunders down the motorway! No replacement for displacement! All fully serviced up!

Oh yeah, the 16 mpg is the reading from the computer thing, which I noticed give better results than normal calculations.

[geoffr70]

TBH mpg doesn't bother me. There's no payments on the car, and I suppose it costs alot to lug nearly 2 tons of beast around! Omegas rule! Automatics rule!

[Mart280]

My 2.6 auto is the same, 99.9% of my journeys are in town and the onboard display says I'm getting 18.4 

[2woody]

I'd say that's about right. I'd definitely say a 2.6 auto is going to be about 20% worsse than a 3.0 manual.

two things are working against you - the autobox ( probably saps 10% of your power ) and the shorter rear diff - Vauxhall had to fit a much shorter diff to get back some of the lost performance from the auto.

I get the following out of mine :-

2.6 manual - 27
3.2 manual - 30
3.0 auto - 26 ( but it's also got the short diff )

and for reference 5.7 manual - 31

[Stallion]

3.2 manual - 30mpg  sounds very good! As for what i get i dont have the foggiest as my cid aint working 

[Michael2.6]

Omega is a long distance car not for short or town runs

[marrus69]

im waiting for the eletric omega.