Print

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

[TheBoy]

Try driving both side by side .  I know GM's figures for the 3.2 were optimistic.  No idea where those dyno figures posted came from, as certainly does not tie in with *ANY* 3.0 or 3.2 I'd ever driven.  I'd I've driven an awful lot of them. And 2.5/2.6. And the poxy little 2.0/2.2, and soot chucker variants.

The 3.0's limitation was the exhaust fanimolds, easily resolved by using some from the 3.2.  The 3.2's limitations where the incredibly low compression ratio that needs stripping and rebuilding to overcome...  ...although as said previously, that low compression might come in handy if you want to bolt some kind of forced induction on.

Therefore, comments still stand, if you just want to drop in an engine, the 3.0 is the best of the V6.  The 3.2 has the potential to be better if you want to through several grand at it (but then I'd argue there are better engines that could be used as a base if spending that much).


And as an added bonus with the 3.0l, you get decent economy off it.  400 miles from a tank doesn't take much effort, even I've managed over 500 miles from a tank. Even trying very hard, I never managed to get less than 330 miles.  With the 3.2, 350 miles from a tank was about the best I ever achieved.


For info, the reason the 3.2 (and 2.6) were enlarged over their original engines was due to cost cutting, which lead to having to reduce the CR, so they had to increase capacity be a noticeable amount to get power back in the same region.  This allowed them to remove the EGR and SAI, and using a (awful&) electronic throttle allowed the removing of the IVC.  For good measure, they also fitted crap, restrictive cats, which anyone with a 3.2 should consider swapping out for 3.0l ones as near bolt on replacements and remaining road legal.


*The electronic throttle was mapped to provide lots of throttle with minimal pedal movement, giving an impression of it being more powerful than it is, where as in reality, further throttle movement shows it to be as flat as a witches tit.

[Raeturbo]

As both graphs cross at 5252 torque and bhp they are probably correct, however I’ve never driven the 3.0. my 3.2  Mv6 estate goes very well for what it is, James was let loose on it 😁

[STEMO]

As both graphs cross at 5252 torque and bhp they are probably correct, however I’ve never driven the 3.0. my 3.2  Mv6 estate goes very well for what it is, James was let loose on it 😁

The difference between the two would be negligible to the average driver, I would think. Let's face it, the average omega driver was quite well off, they were expensive back in the day, and it was classed as an executive saloon, a cruiser not a race car. But Jaime does like to take things to the limit....

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

Either version installed in an Astra van, will make it fly like excrement off a highly polished digging implement.

[Doctor Gollum]

Obviously the 3.2 is far superior 

[YZ250]

Obviously the 3.2 is far superior 

You know it Al, I know it and even TB knows it.    He’s in denial. 

In all honesty, in all of the years that I had mine I looked out for 3.0’s to bait to find out if TB’s theory was right. If one did take the bait, I certainly never had one come past me. 

[Doctor Gollum]

Obviously the 3.2 is far superior 

You know it Al, I know it and even TB knows it.    He’s in denial. 

In all honesty, in all of the years that I had mine I looked out for 3.0’s to bait to find out if TB’s theory was right. If one did take the bait, I certainly never had one come past me. 

Even more so with a light bar fitted

[TheBoy]

As both graphs cross at 5252 torque and bhp they are probably correct, however I’ve never driven the 3.0. my 3.2  Mv6 estate goes very well for what it is, James was let loose on it 😁

The difference between the two would be negligible to the average driver, I would think. Let's face it, the average omega driver was quite well off, they were expensive back in the day, and it was classed as an executive saloon, a cruiser not a race car. But Jaime does like to take things to the limit....

They certainly drive "differently", due to the programming of the throttle on the DBW ones.  Would you notice the difference in reality (ignoring the throttle differences)?  Probably not in performance - we're probably talking less that 5% difference.  2 in a drag race? Been there, done that, you can guess what won.

In economy, though, yes, a massive difference. Somewhere between 100 to 150 miles a tank extra for the 3.0  .  Mostly all down to compression ratio, which is pathetically low on the 3.2.

[TheBoy]

Obviously the 3.2 is far superior 

You know it Al, I know it and even TB knows it.    He’s in denial. 

In all honesty, in all of the years that I had mine I looked out for 3.0’s to bait to find out if TB’s theory was right. If one did take the bait, I certainly never had one come past me. 

Oh dear, YZ250, methinks you are in denial.  That said, had we meet at the lights, I might have had a slight advantage anyway, as I seem to recall the saloon is slightly lighter (more than made up for by my bulk, I'm sure )

[TheBoy]

In fact, the only 3.2 to ever beat my old 3.0l bullet was Hotel21 in his estate.  Possibly because he knows how to drive. Or because I think he had Jura pup in the boot, egging him on

[YZ250]

Obviously the 3.2 is far superior 

You know it Al, I know it and even TB knows it.    He’s in denial. 

In all honesty, in all of the years that I had mine I looked out for 3.0’s to bait to find out if TB’s theory was right. If one did take the bait, I certainly never had one come past me. 

Oh dear, YZ250, methinks you are in denial.  That said, had we meet at the lights, I might have had a slight advantage anyway, as I seem to recall the saloon is slightly lighter (more than made up for by my bulk, I'm sure )

We'll never know now will we, not only because we both no longer own one but because we have both matured enough to refrain from challenging others. 
Anyway, my 3.2 estate had sports cats and big bore dual zorsts so had an extra million bhp. 

I fully agree on fuel economy though, mine was shite on fuel. I never did proper mpg or range checks as I wasn’t that bothered but I never got over 300 miles out of a tank. It may have had something to do with my driving style but I’m not sure.    I would brim the tank, the range would nearly always show 311 range, I’d hoof it down the road and it dropped to 285 within one mile.    I had some really serious attempts at seeing what I could get out of a full tank but I’d get bored after a couple of miles and revert back to my old habits. 

[YZ250]

As both graphs cross at 5252 torque and bhp they are probably correct, however I’ve never driven the 3.0. my 3.2  Mv6 estate goes very well for what it is, James was let loose on it 😁

The difference between the two would be negligible to the average driver, I would think. Let's face it, the average omega driver was quite well off, they were expensive back in the day, and it was classed as an executive saloon, a cruiser not a race car. But Jaime does like to take things to the limit....

They certainly drive "differently", due to the programming of the throttle on the DBW ones.  Would you notice the difference in reality (ignoring the throttle differences)?  Probably not in performance - we're probably talking less that 5% difference.  2 in a drag race? Been there, done that, you can guess what won.

In economy, though, yes, a massive difference. Somewhere between 100 to 150 miles a tank extra for the 3.0  .  Mostly all down to compression ratio, which is pathetically low on the 3.2.

Appreciate your honesty.    I do know that if the owner of a 3.0/3.2 tootled about in it, it would drive like a dog, so you could have a flat 3.2 losing badly to a decent 3.0 and vice versa.
Must have been pure luck that mine and yours went so well.   

[STEMO]

In fact, the only 3.2 to ever beat my old 3.0l bullet was Hotel21 in his estate.  Possibly because he knows how to drive. Or because I think he had Jura pup in the boot, egging him on

You just said a mouthfull. You've admitted that, with a competent driver, even a 3.2 estate can outpace a 3.0 saloon. Case closed.

[Migv6 le Frog Fan]

My 3.2 averages 24.5 mpg. About the same as every 6 cylinder Vauxhall Ive ever owned.
Having said that, the previous ones all got soundly thrashed and this one doesnt, so maybe proves TB,s point.

My old boss reckoned his 3.0 manual Omega (ex plod) averaged 35mpg, but then he also reckoned his Monaro did 185mph and ate M5,s for breakfast. 

[TheBoy]

In fact, the only 3.2 to ever beat my old 3.0l bullet was Hotel21 in his estate.  Possibly because he knows how to drive. Or because I think he had Jura pup in the boot, egging him on

You just said a mouthfull. You've admitted that, with a competent driver, even a 3.2 estate can outpace a 3.0 saloon. Case closed.

Yeah, but the 3.0 saloon had a disability....   ....me

Both of us got beat on most runs by a clapped out MX-5

Was a cracking day, though - hooning around a runway, H21 taught me the intricacies of how to do J-turns properly (a skill I've never, ever had a use for, officer ), followed by an evening with people I'm honoured to call friends, talking shite and supping beverage and eating BBQ.