Print

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

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

There are some traitorous dogs here at OOF who have described the performance of the Omega as 'slow by modern standards'......you know who you are.....

What is even worse is that these same traitorous dogs dare to suggest that Vauxhall's finest would be humbled by just about every turbo-diesel on the planet. Balls.

In defence of the mighty Omega I have just run some performance tests on my totally stock 88000 mile MV6.

I have chosen acceleration through the gears between 30 MPH and 70 MPH as this the yardstick that most magazines use........0-60MPH is more about traction an gearing than outright power.

Here goes........My car recorded a 30-70 mph time of 7.9 secs........taking 184.4 metres.

Competitors.....BMW 320D....................................7.6 secs
                     Jaguar XF 2.2D..............................8.0
                    Vauxhall Insignia 2.0CDTI 160............8.4
                    Golf 2.0 TDi....................................8.6
                    Mazda MX5 2.0................................7.2
                    Merc C220 CDI.................................8.5

So, in summary, this 20 year old engine even in it's smaller (2.6) form can still cut it with the modern derv drinker.

* performance figures for the smoky belching diesels have been taken from Autocar magazine road tests.








     

[05omegav6]

The 130 2.0 cdti insignia couldn't keep up with the E Class on a cruise, no chance against the Omega

[Rog]

I'm not a numbers nut, but I don't see how or why I would require any more than my 3.2 MV6 Auto provides in terms of performance  Particularly if filled with Shell V Power or the Tesco 99.

 

 

[zirk]

My 25 year old 2.0 Sapphire Cossie (300 bhp) would give most modern a good run for there money 

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

My 25 year old Sapphire Cossie (300 bhp) would give most a good run for there money 

Indeed it would.

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

I'm not a numbers nut, but I don't see how or why I would require any more than my 3.2 MV6 Auto provides in terms of performance  Particularly if filled with Shell V Power or the Tesco 99.

Does this make a difference, Rog. I'm too tight and too poor to use fancy gasoline.

[Taxi_Driver]

Apparently 7.6s for mine 

[Rods2]

And how many of the others, will take you and swmbo in such luxury, your chauffeur and butler in the front while you and swmbo lounge in the back on the way for a round of golf, with two sets of clubs in the boot, with champagne fridge, picnic hamper, table and chairs for your butler to set up for a rest and refreshment at hole 9.

[Rog]

I'm not a numbers nut, but I don't see how or why I would require any more than my 3.2 MV6 Auto provides in terms of performance  Particularly if filled with Shell V Power or the Tesco 99.

Does this make a difference, Rog. I'm too tight and too poor to use fancy gasoline.

This causes quite some debate and argument. I believe they are better both for performance and economy, however it depends on the cost. Typically V Power is around 6p per litre more expensive than normal unleaded BUT I have seen it as much as 15p per litre more, and I never ever buy it on motorways.

The new Tesco 99 Ron has some fance name ( Millenium or similar ?) I've used it a few times and it seems ok, and being Tesco it's cheaper.

But some here, I think TB has an opposing view, will disagree. My Mrs '97 Volvo 940 certainly benefits from 99 Ron, without a doubt 

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

I'm not a numbers nut, but I don't see how or why I would require any more than my 3.2 MV6 Auto provides in terms of performance  Particularly if filled with Shell V Power or the Tesco 99.

Does this make a difference, Rog. I'm too tight and too poor to use fancy gasoline.

This causes quite some debate and argument. I believe they are better both for performance and economy, however it depends on the cost. Typically V Power is around 6p per litre more expensive than normal unleaded BUT I have seen it as much as 15p per litre more, and I never ever buy it on motorways.

The new Tesco 99 Ron has some fance name ( Millenium or similar ?) I've used it a few times and it seems ok, and being Tesco it's cheaper.

But some here, I think TB has an opposing view, will disagree. My Mrs '97 Volvo 940 certainly benefits from 99 Ron, without a doubt 

Mrs Opti once owned a Mazda RX8, the 40th anniversary model. That seemed to run better on premium fuel.

13 MPG was hard to stomach though.

[tunnie]

So in your stats a 2.0 diesel in a BMW is faster?  Scared to post 330d time?

Why XF 2.2, why not the 2.7d? Much closer to a 2.6

Picking smaller engines than yours I see

I have a full fat V6, if you are going to have a V6 you need full fat version, no point getting the diet version 

But nope, not even 3.0/3.2's (real V6's) are really that fast. Granted most diesels cannot beat them, but you don't exactly blow them away.

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

So in your stats a 2.0 diesel in a BMW is faster?  Scared to post 330d time?

Why XF 2.2, why not the 2.7d? Much closer to a 2.6

Picking smaller engines than yours I see

I have a full fat V6, if you are going to have a V6 you need full fat version, no point getting the diet version 

But nope, not even 3.0/3.2's (real V6's) are really that fast. Granted most diesels cannot beat them, but you don't exactly blow them away.

You are one of the traitorous dogs I speak of, Mr Tunnie. .....hang your head in shame.
Of course, as a 2.2 'reduced cylinder owner'  just about everything on four wheels is faster than your particular Omega......mobility scooter included.

 

[tunnie]

Maybe. But its cost of 55mpg on the wallet. 

Least my V6 is not 'The Vegetarian Version' you need full meat eating 3,200ccs of GMs finest 

[Magwheels]

My 25 year old 2.0 Sapphire Cossie (300 bhp) would give most modern a good run for there money 

Now there was a quick car on its day and still not shoddy even by todays "fast" car standards and most of all bloody good fun to drive.

[omega3000]

So in your stats a 2.0 diesel in a BMW is faster?  Scared to post 330d time?

Why XF 2.2, why not the 2.7d? Much closer to a 2.6

Picking smaller engines than yours I see

I have a full fat V6, if you are going to have a V6 you need full fat version, no point getting the diet version

But nope, not even 3.0/3.2's (real V6's) are really that fast. Granted most diesels cannot beat them, but you don't exactly blow them away.

Get a 3.0 then