166
Omega Electrical and Audio Help / Re: Superunleaded
« on: 10 August 2016, 23:33:46 »Depends what you want... as far as I'm aware there was no specification difference between a 2.6 and a 3.2 Elite etc. If you get a TD, then you lose traction control, but that's it
As I say, what's your criteria? If you want a nice, smooth, V6 engine up front which makes a nice engine note, and a very nice engine note close to the redline, then it doesn't matter 2.6 or 3.0. They will do this the same. A 3.0 with clogged breathers/badly plumbed in vac tubes will produce the same power as a well-serviced 2.5.
However, if your criteria is the above, plus bragging rights and be faster than everyone else in the car park, then.... pick another car other than an Omega! 1.6 ton car with 25 year old engine isn't going to cut it. As has been said in other threads, even a well sorted Omega isn't what you call 'fast' today. Exhibit A...Girl at work is getting her new A1, it's the S1 - 236bhp, 0-60 5.8...that's Lotus Carlton territory...in a ruddy Audi A1!!! And she'll do mpg any Omega can only dream of.
I don't feel in any way short changed because there's other Omegas out there with more displacement, of course there's 'bigger fish' ... and there's far, far bigger fish than even an Omega 3.2 MV6 manual. If you own a 1994 2.0 8v GLS, or a 3.2 Elite manual with brand new LSD, so long as you like what you have that's what matters. I'm not knocking the 3.2 owners here, I'm simply saying it depends what you want from your car and why, that's all.
Certainly not for bragging rights, I'm 36. I was just interested in the difference between the two. Having owned a 3.0 16v Carlton and a 3.0 24v Senator in the past. But then had 4.0 Jags and a 4.0 v8 Lexus LS400, followed by a CDTI Rover 75, so it is difficult to remember the difference in speed between them all
gone down 1p/litre, I noticed, too, now 111.9 near me. 
