Omega Owners Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Please play nicely.  No one wants to listen/read a keyboard warriors rants....

Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Down

Author Topic: The 3.2's really are crap on fuel  (Read 4321 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

tunnie

  • Get A Life!!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Surrey
  • Posts: 37526
    • Zafira Tourer & BMW 435i
    • View Profile
The 3.2's really are crap on fuel
« on: 08 June 2015, 21:26:53 »

http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/vauxhall/vxr8/vauxhall-vxr8-2007/4291705



That VXR8 is not far off the average (9th pic) I get from the 3.2.

Might as well get a VXR8. Cost same in fuel  ::)
Logged

Field Marshal Dr. Opti

  • Get A Life!!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Utopia
  • Posts: 31658
  • Speaking sense, not Woke PC crap
    • View Profile
Re: The 3.2's really are crap on fuel
« Reply #1 on: 08 June 2015, 21:30:26 »

£12950 for an 8 year old Vauxhall that has been around the world five times. :-\

Sanity starts at £6000. :y



Logged

tunnie

  • Get A Life!!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Surrey
  • Posts: 37526
    • Zafira Tourer & BMW 435i
    • View Profile
Re: The 3.2's really are crap on fuel
« Reply #2 on: 08 June 2015, 21:33:53 »

£12950 for an 8 year old Vauxhall that has been around the world five times. :-\

Sanity starts at £6000. :y

Not interested in the price, more the mpg from an engine almost twice the capacity and 2 extra cylinders.

Logged

Kevin Wood

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Alton, Hampshire
  • Posts: 36284
    • Jaguar XE 25t, Westfield
    • View Profile
Re: The 3.2's really are crap on fuel
« Reply #3 on: 08 June 2015, 21:43:07 »

Manual gearbox versus the Omega's auto and it's also an advert, so probably BS. ;)

Besides, I would expect you to be getting another 10 MPG from a 3.2, so something's not quite right. ::)
Logged
Tech2 services currently available. See TheBoy's price list: http://theboy.omegaowners.com/

chrisgixer

  • Omega Baron
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Woking ham
  • Posts: 2616
  • Banned
    • Irmscher 3.2 Elite lpg
    • View Profile
Re: The 3.2's really are crap on fuel
« Reply #4 on: 08 June 2015, 21:45:07 »

Tunnie thinks a 6.2 is the same on fuel as a 3.2?

Drive everywhere at tick over rpm then maybe. Which is quite possible in a vxr8.


....Oh yes it's A Tunnie talking isn't it ;D


Wonder what speed a vxr8 will do at tick over?
Logged

05omegav6

  • Guest
Re: The 3.2's really are crap on fuel
« Reply #5 on: 08 June 2015, 21:45:40 »

About 50 in top ::)
Logged

chrisgixer

  • Omega Baron
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Woking ham
  • Posts: 2616
  • Banned
    • Irmscher 3.2 Elite lpg
    • View Profile
Re: The 3.2's really are crap on fuel
« Reply #6 on: 08 June 2015, 21:47:32 »

About 50 in top ::)

I rekon Tunster would get away the top gear alone. ;)
Logged

tunnie

  • Get A Life!!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Surrey
  • Posts: 37526
    • Zafira Tourer & BMW 435i
    • View Profile
Re: The 3.2's really are crap on fuel
« Reply #7 on: 08 June 2015, 21:48:12 »

Tunnie thinks a 6.2 is the same on fuel as a 3.2?

Looking at the LPG conversion threads, on petrol it's not far off. 25 average is do able.

Manual gearbox versus the Omega's auto and it's also an advert, so probably BS. ;)

Besides, I would expect you to be getting another 10 MPG from a 3.2, so something's not quite right. ::)

Also shot the tyres in 14k. Not sure what's gotten into me.  ;D

Logged

Mr.OmegaMan

  • Omega Baron
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Middle of nowhere
  • Posts: 4176
    • 3.2 Elite , CLS500
    • View Profile
Re: The 3.2's really are crap on fuel
« Reply #8 on: 09 June 2015, 00:24:54 »

Nice Omega for sale on there also... So happens to be a 3.2  ::) ;D

http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/vauxhall/omega/rare-vauxhall-omega/4244583

240bhp and a claimed 0-62 in 6.5sec Sounds good if true  :y
Logged

Broomies Mate

  • Omega Baron
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Bristol, UK
  • Posts: 3840
    • Stuff!
    • View Profile
Re: The 3.2's really are crap on fuel
« Reply #9 on: 09 June 2015, 01:05:23 »

Nice Omega for sale on there also... So happens to be a 3.2  ::) ;D

http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/vauxhall/omega/rare-vauxhall-omega/4244583

240bhp and a claimed 0-62 in 6.5sec Sounds good if true  :y

OOOOHHHHH!  RARE!  I must have!  ;D
Logged
2004 Saab 9-5 Aero Merlot Red Stg1 noobtune
2009 Saab 9-5 Turbo Edition Titan Grey Stg3 noobtune
2017 Vauxhall Vivaro L1H1 125PS Star Silver

Kevin Wood

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Alton, Hampshire
  • Posts: 36284
    • Jaguar XE 25t, Westfield
    • View Profile
Re: The 3.2's really are crap on fuel
« Reply #10 on: 09 June 2015, 10:08:07 »

About 50 in top ::)

I rekon Tunster would get away the top gear alone. ;)

I had a ride in one of 2woody's when half the gearbox was u/s and it "didn't appear to be holding it back". :o
Logged
Tech2 services currently available. See TheBoy's price list: http://theboy.omegaowners.com/

Kevin Wood

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Alton, Hampshire
  • Posts: 36284
    • Jaguar XE 25t, Westfield
    • View Profile
Re: The 3.2's really are crap on fuel
« Reply #11 on: 09 June 2015, 10:10:07 »

...240bhp and a claimed 0-62 in 6.5sec...

Seller missed the phrase "In my dreams" from the spec., clearly.  ::)

Logged
Tech2 services currently available. See TheBoy's price list: http://theboy.omegaowners.com/

henryd

  • Omega Lord
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • west cornwall
  • Posts: 8766
  • VW Touareg R5 tdi Auto
    • View Profile
Re: The 3.2's really are crap on fuel
« Reply #12 on: 09 June 2015, 12:05:48 »

About 50 in top ::)

I rekon Tunster would get away the top gear alone. ;)

I had a ride in one of 2woody's when half the gearbox was u/s and it "didn't appear to be holding it back". :o

Where did he go ,not seen him on for ages :-\
Logged
other rides 
  mk3 Volvo v70 2.0 Diesel ,Citroen C2, Pug 306 cabriolet
  Sterling elite trekker pikey wagon

chrisgixer

  • Omega Baron
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Woking ham
  • Posts: 2616
  • Banned
    • Irmscher 3.2 Elite lpg
    • View Profile
Re: The 3.2's really are crap on fuel
« Reply #13 on: 09 June 2015, 14:46:08 »

About 50 in top ::)

I rekon Tunster would get away the top gear alone. ;)

I had a ride in one of 2woody's when half the gearbox was u/s and it "didn't appear to be holding it back". :o
Almost impossible to stall, even just letting the clutch out in 5th. Imagine that and with a throttle as well. ;D

I had a ride in it when it had ALL its gears. JeeZUS! with Firm and compliant ride. Wamo brakes. Makes the omega look pathetic tbh.

But it did hatch a cunning plan. Some time ago now though. :-[

And with a big enough wallet and ls2 heads if you can find them good for any amount of tuning.


....sorry this is a Tunnie thread. Right? :-\
Logged

chrisgixer

  • Omega Baron
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Woking ham
  • Posts: 2616
  • Banned
    • Irmscher 3.2 Elite lpg
    • View Profile
Re: The 3.2's really are crap on fuel
« Reply #14 on: 09 June 2015, 14:50:01 »

Obviously depends how it's driven. With a bit of space you can get a stock LSv8 down to single figures quite easily. Try that in an omega. ;D


There really is no point owning a 3.2 if just plodding around or not running lpg, then moaning about fuel bills. If not happy, either gas it or "get off the pot" as they say.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.027 seconds with 22 queries.