Omega Owners Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Search the maintenance guides for answers to 99.999% of Omega questions

Pages: 1 2 3 [All]   Go Down

Author Topic: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?  (Read 632 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

gazzap

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • colchester essex
  • Posts: 32
    • Omega Estate 2.6 MV6
    • View Profile
2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« on: 03 January 2019, 13:59:53 »

Afternoon, does anyone know cam set up in a 2.6 is better for low end performance increase? I currently have a 2.6 with the original cams in, ( not sure what they are though)
Read up alot of stipulation on what cams to put in, G+A  or G+G, i have 4xG cams already, although im slightly concerned as 2 of the g cams where from my 3.2 and the other 2 i purchased i have no idea what engine they came from. Would the best setup for low end be G+A cams? And does the 2.6 already have A cams in? Cheers!
Logged

VXL V6

  • Omega Lord
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Solihull
  • Posts: 8816
    • 3x 3.2 V6 Elite Saloons
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #1 on: 03 January 2019, 14:42:47 »

Had G cams in my old 2.6, didn't notice much difference to standard to be honest and nowhere near the performance of a standard 3.2 even though the fuel consumption is similar.
Logged

Kevin Wood

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Alton, Hampshire
  • Posts: 34729
    • 3.2 MV6 (LPG), Westfield
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #2 on: 03 January 2019, 16:48:26 »

In my very limited experience of helping out with a few 2.5 / 2.6 cam swaps you will lose low end torque for perhaps a little more go at higher revs.

For more torque you need more cubes. Nothing else will do it and more cam lift and intake breadth above factory gives you less intake swirl at low revs so less performance.
Logged
Tech2 services currently available. See TheBoy's price list: http://theboy.omegaowners.com/

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 97932
  • Millennium Man
    • The missus mad
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #3 on: 03 January 2019, 17:52:48 »

The 2 posts immediately above match my experiences.
Logged
I don't tolerate bickering, and I'm always grumpy.
And Lizzie Zoom says I'm a heartless bastid...and she's absolutely correct!

Migv6

  • Omega Lord
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Webs End.
  • Posts: 5340
    • 3.2 Elite & Merc 190D.
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #4 on: 03 January 2019, 18:11:33 »

Imo, the best option would be to pick up a 3.2 engine for a couple of hundred quid, and drop it in.
Serek might still have a few in a lock up of Noofland.
Logged
Wish I didn't know now, what I didn't know then.

gazzap

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • colchester essex
  • Posts: 32
    • Omega Estate 2.6 MV6
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #5 on: 03 January 2019, 18:24:39 »

Cheers guys for the replys with this, it was only a thought as have seen it discussed in many forums but noone could stipulate if it was worth it or not, i do currently have a 3.2 im rebuilding but looking at insurance quotes for an engine swap just wouldn't be worth it, so may come to sell it, just trying to squeeze as much power of the little 2.6 as i can  :)
Logged

Doctor Gollum

  • Omega Queen
  • ********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • In a colds and darks puddleses
  • Posts: 11607
  • If you can't eat them, join them...
    • Feetses.
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #6 on: 03 January 2019, 19:18:01 »

Fill it with V Power and make sure the timing is absolutely spot on. Fresh plugs and air filter will probably help too.
Logged
Onanists always think outside the box.

gazzap

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • colchester essex
  • Posts: 32
    • Omega Estate 2.6 MV6
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #7 on: 03 January 2019, 19:26:24 »

Fill it with V Power and make sure the timing is absolutely spot on. Fresh plugs and air filter will probably help too.

Yeah she gets run on v power 24/7 , timing should be fine, got a few plans for her this year, building a new induction system for her to replace the dual ram, she's losing a lot of weight, going to get heads ported and polished, lightened flywheel, remap, few other things and then supercharged
Logged

Doctor Gollum

  • Omega Queen
  • ********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • In a colds and darks puddleses
  • Posts: 11607
  • If you can't eat them, join them...
    • Feetses.
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #8 on: 03 January 2019, 19:56:48 »

You'll find most of the crank on the floor...  ;D
Logged
Onanists always think outside the box.

biggriffin

  • Omega Lord
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • huntingdon, Hoof'land
  • Posts: 7565
    • 02 3.2 mv6 estate.
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #9 on: 03 January 2019, 20:40:46 »

Imo, the best option would be to pick up a 3.2 engine for a couple of hundred quid, and drop it in.
Serek might still have a few in a lock up of Noofland.

I think he has  a few, you would need Ar35 as well, ..
Logged
Hoof'land storeman..

Omega is a barge not a dtm-touren-wagen

Raeturbo

  • Intermediate Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • South Wales
  • Posts: 393
    • Mv6 3.2 est 2.2 sl Evo2
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #10 on: 03 January 2019, 21:25:37 »

Will the turbo setup from the Saab  fit on it?  If so maybe you could get it on and run low boost and get it mapped to suit if possible. Is the ecu on your car able to be mapped?  Of course injectors,fuel pump, and the like will have to be uprated if youre looking for big power,  but then you will need to strengthen the internals and update the transmission if you want that too.
Logged

terry paget

  • Omega Baron
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Midsomer Norton Somerset
  • Posts: 3619
    • 5 omegas all petrol & man
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #11 on: 03 January 2019, 22:43:00 »

I have had a couple of Omega V6s, very flat at low revs, that turned out to be suffering from the plenum dual ram stuck open.  It should be open at idle, closed between 900 and about 4000pm, and open above 4000rpm. I'm sure you have checked, just thought I would mention it.
Logged

VXL V6

  • Omega Lord
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Solihull
  • Posts: 8816
    • 3x 3.2 V6 Elite Saloons
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #12 on: 03 January 2019, 23:21:50 »

Easier to check the multiram (front and rear) operation with two people unless you have diag software to operate them.
GM did a very good job of the multiram, many people have tried to better it - Mantzel tuning boxes etc - but the only gains you're likely to find are noise and fuel consumption.
Logged

Nick W

  • Omega Lord
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Chatham, Kent
  • Posts: 6673
  • Rover Metro 1.8VVC
    • 3.0l Elite estate
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #13 on: 03 January 2019, 23:40:57 »

Easier to check the multiram (front and rear) operation with two people unless you have diag software to operate them.
GM did a very good job of the multiram, many people have tried to better it - Mantzel tuning boxes etc - but the only gains you're likely to find are noise and fuel consumption.


Unfortunately, the noise and jerky power 'curves' often convince people that poor modifications are actually an improvement. I know someone who complained after his poorly timed cam was reset even though the car then idled properly, accelerated without stumbling and returned more than 8mpg.
Logged

Raeturbo

  • Intermediate Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • South Wales
  • Posts: 393
    • Mv6 3.2 est 2.2 sl Evo2
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #14 on: 04 January 2019, 00:08:19 »

Yes, earlier setups like on the 3.0 Senator/Carlton 24V were very good too and was noticeable when it was not working (although a more simple version).
Logged

henryd

  • Omega Lord
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • west cornwall
  • Posts: 7922
  • VW Touareg R5 tdi Auto
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #15 on: 04 January 2019, 09:59:32 »

The 2 posts immediately above match my experiences.

And mine  :y
Logged
other rides 
  Focus 1.6 mk2,Pug 306 cabriolet,Merc CLK 2.3 kompressor
  Sterling elite trekker pikey wagon

gazzap

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • colchester essex
  • Posts: 32
    • Omega Estate 2.6 MV6
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #16 on: 04 January 2019, 11:09:17 »

Its okay guys, had a think about it and just gonna stick the 3.2 in, bit more tunable and better gains too , hopefully in the next couple of weeks, will i need the 3.2 ecu and fob ect etc? As I've been told the 2.6 ecu will run it fine :/
Logged

henryd

  • Omega Lord
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • west cornwall
  • Posts: 7922
  • VW Touareg R5 tdi Auto
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #17 on: 04 January 2019, 11:56:58 »

Its okay guys, had a think about it and just gonna stick the 3.2 in, bit more tunable and better gains too , hopefully in the next couple of weeks, will i need the 3.2 ecu and fob ect etc? As I've been told the 2.6 ecu will run it fine :/

If its an auto you'll need the gearbox as well,3.2 will eat the AR25 :'(
Logged
other rides 
  Focus 1.6 mk2,Pug 306 cabriolet,Merc CLK 2.3 kompressor
  Sterling elite trekker pikey wagon

gazzap

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • colchester essex
  • Posts: 32
    • Omega Estate 2.6 MV6
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #18 on: 04 January 2019, 12:15:55 »

Its okay guys, had a think about it and just gonna stick the 3.2 in, bit more tunable and better gains too , hopefully in the next couple of weeks, will i need the 3.2 ecu and fob ect etc? As I've been told the 2.6 ecu will run it fine :/

If its an auto you'll need the gearbox as well,3.2 will eat the AR25 :'(

Nah shes a 2.6 manual wanted to keep the 2.6 gearbox for better gear ratios, so ill need the ecu kit, and that will be it yeah?
Logged

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 97932
  • Millennium Man
    • The missus mad
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #19 on: 04 January 2019, 12:24:12 »

I think the gearbox ratios are the same between all V6s, but the 2.5/2.6 have a low geared diff.
Logged
I don't tolerate bickering, and I'm always grumpy.
And Lizzie Zoom says I'm a heartless bastid...and she's absolutely correct!

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 97932
  • Millennium Man
    • The missus mad
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #20 on: 04 January 2019, 12:28:38 »

I'm 99% certain that the ECU hardware is the same, but there is a config difference.  Whether or not this switches in a different map, I've never bothered to look.

It'll need an authorised Tech2 to change that setting.

I seem to recall the injectors are different as well, so use the injector rail from 3.2.

The 3.2's biggest issue (for NA) is piss poor CR, for emmissions reasons and penny pinching.  You'll probably want to get the CR back up to 3.0 standards if running NA.  If blowing, don't over do the boost. Plus you'll need a custom map.
Logged
I don't tolerate bickering, and I'm always grumpy.
And Lizzie Zoom says I'm a heartless bastid...and she's absolutely correct!

gazzap

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • colchester essex
  • Posts: 32
    • Omega Estate 2.6 MV6
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #21 on: 04 January 2019, 12:40:51 »

I'm 99% certain that the ECU hardware is the same, but there is a config difference.  Whether or not this switches in a different map, I've never bothered to look.

It'll need an authorised Tech2 to change that setting.

I seem to recall the injectors are different as well, so use the injector rail from 3.2.

The 3.2's biggest issue (for NA) is piss poor CR, for emmissions reasons and penny pinching.  You'll probably want to get the CR back up to 3.0 standards if running NA.  If blowing, don't over do the boost. Plus you'll need a custom map.

Well ive just purchased an 3.2 ecu kit just to make sure, only 90 quid, rather be safe than sorry ha, ill stick the 3.0 injectors in as they have a 10cc more spray and then the 2.6/3.2 fuel regulator, as ling as it runs as a standard 3.2, i have a bassline to start from, just reading up on little tricks and tips to increase performance, finding someone to remap is going to be the hardest part :/
Logged

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 97932
  • Millennium Man
    • The missus mad
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #22 on: 04 January 2019, 15:56:59 »

If pissballing around with fuelling on the standard GM map, the trims need to be more or less 0%, as they soon get grumpy if they drift off dramatically.

This is something that a lot of the crap you read on of the internet that shows most people don't know their arse from their elbow. Higher flow injectors, higher pressure FPRs and so on do not help in the slightest if the originals are good enough, all that happens is the ECU has to battle harder to keep everything working right, and every time you clear any codes, the thing will run like a sack of shite.


If you can get more air in (and out - theres another issue though), then increasing fuel flow makes sense, but only if you can keep the trims, long term, around the 0% mark. Try to understand what is going on and why, rather than believe what the bloke down the pub's dogs mums brother says (or what you read on the Internet in this new fangled online world)


Hope that makes sense :)
Logged
I don't tolerate bickering, and I'm always grumpy.
And Lizzie Zoom says I'm a heartless bastid...and she's absolutely correct!

VXL V6

  • Omega Lord
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Solihull
  • Posts: 8816
    • 3x 3.2 V6 Elite Saloons
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #23 on: 04 January 2019, 19:12:24 »

I think the gearbox ratios are the same between all V6s, but the 2.5/2.6 have a low geared diff.
Yes different ratio diff in a 2.6 auto to a 3.2 auto.... That said, I seem to recall Daz's 2.6 MV6 that he bought from Josh with a seized block that was promptly replaced with a 3.0 block and the 2.6 ignition setup was a fantastic sleeper with original 2.6 manual box and diff (I seem to recall the manual diff ratio was different again)...
Logged

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 97932
  • Millennium Man
    • The missus mad
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #24 on: 05 January 2019, 09:49:48 »

I think the gearbox ratios are the same between all V6s, but the 2.5/2.6 have a low geared diff.
Yes different ratio diff in a 2.6 auto to a 3.2 auto.... That said, I seem to recall Daz's 2.6 MV6 that he bought from Josh with a seized block that was promptly replaced with a 3.0 block and the 2.6 ignition setup was a fantastic sleeper with original 2.6 manual box and diff (I seem to recall the manual diff ratio was different again)...
And a hoot to drive.  Unsurprisingly, wasn't hugely different to a 3.0l manual, but the throttle response was different.
Logged
I don't tolerate bickering, and I'm always grumpy.
And Lizzie Zoom says I'm a heartless bastid...and she's absolutely correct!

olm

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • spain
  • Posts: 61
    • 2.6 v6 sport estate
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #25 on: 06 January 2019, 17:08:06 »

If pissballing around with fuelling on the standard GM map, the trims need to be more or less 0%, as they soon get grumpy if they drift off dramatically.

This is something that a lot of the crap you read on of the internet that shows most people don't know their arse from their elbow. Higher flow injectors, higher pressure FPRs and so on do not help in the slightest if the originals are good enough, all that happens is the ECU has to battle harder to keep everything working right, and every time you clear any codes, the thing will run like a sack of shite.


If you can get more air in (and out - theres another issue though), then increasing fuel flow makes sense, but only if you can keep the trims, long term, around the 0% mark. Try to understand what is going on and why, rather than believe what the bloke down the pub's dogs mums brother says (or what you read on the Internet in this new fangled online world)


Hope that makes sense :)

I have a 3.0 block with electronic and fuel system from 2.6, I  have noticed an increase of torque, which was what I was looking for. At the moment it works well but, should I do a ecu remap or is it going well?
Logged

henryd

  • Omega Lord
  • *******
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • west cornwall
  • Posts: 7922
  • VW Touareg R5 tdi Auto
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #26 on: 06 January 2019, 18:17:41 »

If pissballing around with fuelling on the standard GM map, the trims need to be more or less 0%, as they soon get grumpy if they drift off dramatically.

This is something that a lot of the crap you read on of the internet that shows most people don't know their arse from their elbow. Higher flow injectors, higher pressure FPRs and so on do not help in the slightest if the originals are good enough, all that happens is the ECU has to battle harder to keep everything working right, and every time you clear any codes, the thing will run like a sack of shite.


If you can get more air in (and out - theres another issue though), then increasing fuel flow makes sense, but only if you can keep the trims, long term, around the 0% mark. Try to understand what is going on and why, rather than believe what the bloke down the pub's dogs mums brother says (or what you read on the Internet in this new fangled online world)


Hope that makes sense :)

I have a 3.0 block with electronic and fuel system from 2.6, I  have noticed an increase of torque, which was what I was looking for. At the moment it works well but, should I do a ecu remap or is it going well?

If you are happy with it and it runs well there is no need to change anything
Logged
other rides 
  Focus 1.6 mk2,Pug 306 cabriolet,Merc CLK 2.3 kompressor
  Sterling elite trekker pikey wagon

Doctor Gollum

  • Omega Queen
  • ********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • In a colds and darks puddleses
  • Posts: 11607
  • If you can't eat them, join them...
    • Feetses.
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #27 on: 06 January 2019, 18:58:26 »

The ecu has an element of self adaption for emissions reasons, so if it performs with no issues or eml light then I wouldn't worry about it  ;)
Logged
Onanists always think outside the box.

olm

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • spain
  • Posts: 61
    • 2.6 v6 sport estate
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #28 on: 06 January 2019, 19:26:17 »

Yes, its run perfectly and pass ITV (MOT) with 0,0 of CO emissions, better than modern cars  8) Im happy, but if it can be improved...
Logged

zirk

  • Omega Queen
  • ********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Epping Forest
  • Posts: 11008
  • 3.2 Manual Special Saloon ReMapped and LPG'd and
    • 3.2 Manual Special Estate
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #29 on: 07 January 2019, 22:04:19 »

I'm 99% certain that the ECU hardware is the same, but there is a config difference.  Whether or not this switches in a different map, I've never bothered to look.

It'll need an authorised Tech2 to change that setting.

I seem to recall the injectors are different as well, so use the injector rail from 3.2.

The 3.2's biggest issue (for NA) is piss poor CR, for emmissions reasons and penny pinching.  You'll probably want to get the CR back up to 3.0 standards if running NA.  If blowing, don't over do the boost. Plus you'll need a custom map.

Well ive just purchased an 3.2 ecu kit just to make sure, only 90 quid, rather be safe than sorry ha, ill stick the 3.0 injectors in as they have a 10cc more spray and then the 2.6/3.2 fuel regulator, as ling as it runs as a standard 3.2, i have a bassline to start from, just reading up on little tricks and tips to increase performance, finding someone to remap is going to be the hardest part :/
I would get it all running using the original ECU first, then when happy swap out the ECU for your new 3.2 ECU as all 3.2 ECU were set for Autos (Unless Ex Police).

From experience an 3.2 ECU from an Auto will (or should) work in a 3.2 Manual but it does use a different Map. In the Older 3.0/2.5 Auto / Manual Setups there was a Pin on the Main ECU Loom that would be set High/Low for Auto/Manual, I never did get around whether the Loom was similar on the Later 3.2 ECU (poss only the 2.6) but my Chip Man tells me they are configurable within the ECU via a Specialist ReMap or as TB says possibly via Tech 2. So, if need be,  your need to do some Homework on that.

Possible outcomes with a 3.2 Auto ECU in a Manual could be, it will run fine but not quiet be the correct Map, or it may run Rough / not quiet right, or it may just not Start one day as its decided out of the blue it cant see the Auto Box ECU Config.

 
Logged

tunnie

  • Get A Life!!
  • **********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Surrey
  • Posts: 37028
    • 3.2 Elite & Zafira Tourer
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #30 on: 07 January 2019, 23:21:48 »

Sounds like a lot of work, I personally prefer bog standard 3.2 with auto box.

Effortless power and an effortless drive.
Logged
Got a VW, Audi, Skoda or Seat? I have full Diagnostic software VCDS to read and program your car. Need something enabling? Perhaps full diagnostic? Drop me a PM. Can diagnose in Camberley or Osterley Area.

zirk

  • Omega Queen
  • ********
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Epping Forest
  • Posts: 11008
  • 3.2 Manual Special Saloon ReMapped and LPG'd and
    • 3.2 Manual Special Estate
    • View Profile
Re: 2.6 , which cams are better for low end?
« Reply #31 on: 07 January 2019, 23:40:29 »

Sounds like a lot of work, I personally prefer bog standard 3.2 with auto box.

Effortless power and an effortless drive.
3.2 Manual with short shift fitted, Remaped, LSD, Police spec Suspension,  and a good blast tbrough Epping Forest will soon cure those thoughts Mark.  ;)

And bring a Crash Helmet.  ;D
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [All]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.159 seconds with 22 queries.