Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: peter the butcher on 13 July 2014, 18:15:01
-
Just thought I would share this snippet
was going to work at 4 the other morning, and slowed down to 30mph for a village, followed by a corner and a hump back bridge, the car behind was tooooo close, so put foot down to pull forward ( in sport mode, as you do ;D) and a skoda estate, new by the looks of it (2013 plate I think) standard by the looks of it, came past me as if I was standing still. I know the 2.6 is not a couch potato, but respect to skoda
peter
-
The VRS's, whilst not exactly quick, should be able to catch and auto 2.6 out.
-
None of the V6 Omega's are quick by modern standards, a half decent diesel will blow even a 3.2 away ::)
-
None of the V6 Omega's are quick by modern standards, a half decent diesel will blow even a 3.2 away ::)
You're driving it wrong. Most modern diesels shove out around 150bhp, and with diesel power delivery. Even supposedly "quick" family diesels, such as a modern 330d can be outpaced by our 20yr old engine
-
None of the V6 Omega's are quick by modern standards, a half decent diesel will blow even a 3.2 away ::)
You're driving it wrong. Most modern diesels shove out around 150bhp, and with diesel power delivery. Even supposedly "quick" family diesels, such as a modern 330d can be outpaced by our 20yr old engine
FatherT's is around 190 and thats only from 4 pots. Bet he would easily keep pace with 3.2, without trying much.
-
autos are slow because of long gear ratios and locking late.. but manuals with shorter diffs are another story :)
-
Our 'New' 530D's (when working or not in the bodyshop ::) ::) ::) ) Are bloody quick, 270ish BHP & sub 6 sec to 60mph and for an autobox that ain't slow. Stick it in 'Sport mode' and they handle too 8) 8) 8) !!!!
-
None of the V6 Omega's are quick by modern standards, a half decent diesel will blow even a 3.2 away ::)
You're driving it wrong. Most modern diesels shove out around 150bhp, and with diesel power delivery. Even supposedly "quick" family diesels, such as a modern 330d can be outpaced by our 20yr old engine
FatherT's is around 190 and thats only from 4 pots. Bet he would easily keep pace with 3.2, without trying much.
Nah. v6 one would just about keep up.
-
Our 'New' 530D's (when working or not in the bodyshop ::) ::) ::) ) Are bloody quick, 270ish BHP & sub 6 sec to 60mph and for an autobox that ain't slow. Stick it in 'Sport mode' and they handle too 8) 8) 8) !!!!
The 5 series ones have an option of twin turbo, don't they, helping remove the lag of simply bolting on a rather great big one
-
Yeah, twin turbo's on the new ones, and ya can't half tell the difference :) :) :) and they're freakily economical too! (mind you not how we drive em) but if you drive normally (I've tried it in one) on the motorway I was getting about 55mpg??? :o :o :o Still not too sure of the reliability though :-\ :-\ but they are on the go 24/7 and not driven like Miss Daisy. Just got 4 back from the shop after being in a 5 car sandwich because someone didn't want to stop when we asked politely :D :D :D
-
..... Just got 4 back from the shop after being in a 5 car sandwich because someone didn't want to stop when we asked politely :D :D :D
Which always makes me smile when you see ex-plod cars of all flavours in the small-ads ....... 'maintained by plod so must be good etc etc' ....... no mention of the abuse they get ;D ;D ;D
-
The VRS's, whilst not exactly quick, ......
Quicker than a Smart Roadster on the straights, but you can't halfpiss an owner off when you catch them back up in the bendy/twisty bits ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Our 'New' 530D's (when working or not in the bodyshop ::) ::) ::) ) Are bloody quick, 270ish BHP & sub 6 sec to 60mph and for an autobox that ain't slow. Stick it in 'Sport mode' and they handle too 8) 8) 8) !!!!
a 270 bhp manual will leave an auto in dust at the blink of an eye.. either be it a bimmer or an omega..
-
a 270 bhp manual will leave an auto in dust ?
530D Manual 6.3 sec
530D 8 speed auto 5.8 sec
-
None of the V6 Omega's are quick by modern standards, a half decent diesel will blow even a 3.2 away ::)
You're driving it wrong. Most modern diesels shove out around 150bhp, and with diesel power delivery. Even supposedly "quick" family diesels, such as a modern 330d can be outpaced by our 20yr old engine
Note to self:
TB's medication has made him deluded. ;) ;D
-
a 270 bhp manual will leave an auto in dust ?
530D Manual 6.3 sec
530D 8 speed auto 5.8 sec
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
None of the V6 Omega's are quick by modern standards, a half decent diesel will blow even a 3.2 away ::)
You're driving it wrong. Most modern diesels shove out around 150bhp, and with diesel power delivery. Even supposedly "quick" family diesels, such as a modern 330d can be outpaced by our 20yr old engine
Note to self:
TB's medication has made him deluded. ;) ;D
I must be pressing pedal wrong ;D
-
a 270 bhp manual will leave an auto in dust ?
530D Manual 6.3 sec
530D 8 speed auto 5.8 sec
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
330D same difference :y
-
None of the V6 Omega's are quick by modern standards, a half decent diesel will blow even a 3.2 away ::)
You're driving it wrong. Most modern diesels shove out around 150bhp, and with diesel power delivery. Even supposedly "quick" family diesels, such as a modern 330d can be outpaced by our 20yr old engine
FatherT's is around 190 and thats only from 4 pots. Bet he would easily keep pace with 3.2, without trying much.
A bit like an MX5 then............... :D :D
-
None of the V6 Omega's are quick by modern standards, a half decent diesel will blow even a 3.2 away ::)
You're driving it wrong. Most modern diesels shove out around 150bhp, and with diesel power delivery. Even supposedly "quick" family diesels, such as a modern 330d can be outpaced by our 20yr old engine
Note to self:
TB's medication has made him deluded. ;) ;D
I must be pressing pedal wrong ;D
He knows I own both Mark, I'm sure it's just his little joke. ;) ;D ;D
-
a 270 bhp manual will leave an auto in dust ?
530D Manual 6.3 sec
530D 8 speed auto 5.8 sec
it doesnt matter.. dont know from where you get those figures.. either the auto is chipped or manual ratios longer..
for what year 530d we are talking ?
-
a 270 bhp manual will leave an auto in dust ?
530D Manual 6.3 sec
530D 8 speed auto 5.8 sec
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
whats so funny about that ?
-
its a prooven fact that slushboxes are always slower.. unless you play with the ratios..
even the best autobox is pumping fluid instead of a direct drive if its a real auto.. ;)
-
Our 'New' 530D's (when working or not in the bodyshop ::) ::) ::) ) Are bloody quick, 270ish BHP & sub 6 sec to 60mph and for an autobox that ain't slow. Stick it in 'Sport mode' and they handle too 8) 8) 8) !!!!
a 270 bhp manual will leave an auto in dust at the blink of an eye.. either be it a bimmer or an omega..
ok..
there is no 530d at 270 bhp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_5_Series_(F10 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_5_Series_(F10))
so that car is obviously non standard ::) ::)
and cancels the claims ;)
-
its a prooven fact that slushboxes are always slower.. unless you play with the ratios..
even the best autobox is pumping fluid instead of a direct drive if its a real auto.. ;)
If that were true, you wouldn't see automatics at the dragstrip.
Whereas the opposite is true, manuals are very rare for a number of very good reasons. Consistency, reliability and ease of use for a start.
-
its a prooven fact that slushboxes are always slower.. unless you play with the ratios..
even the best autobox is pumping fluid instead of a direct drive if its a real auto.. ;)
If that were true, you wouldn't see automatics at the dragstrip.
Whereas the opposite is true, manuals are very rare for a number of very good reasons. Consistency, reliability and ease of use for a start.
By the same token, Slushboxes are not very popular at track days. ;)
Horses for courses. What one does well, the other doesn't. I agree that you can't really say one is better than the other overall.
.. and an auto box isn't significantly different to a manual once the torque converter has locked up since it does offer a direct drive through the gearbox. If the additional losses in an auto box amounted to anything significant we would see much larger ATF coolers on cars so equipped!
Where an auto is poor is that auto boxes of the Omega's era didn't have enough ratios, and they have zero ability to read the road ahead, so are no use on twisty stretches of road.
-
its a prooven fact that slushboxes are always slower.. unless you play with the ratios..
even the best autobox is pumping fluid instead of a direct drive if its a real auto.. ;)
If that were true, you wouldn't see automatics at the dragstrip.
Whereas the opposite is true, manuals are very rare for a number of very good reasons. Consistency, reliability and ease of use for a start.
By the same token, Slushboxes are not very popular at track days. ;)
Horses for courses. What one does well, the other doesn't. I agree that you can't really say one is better than the other overall.
.. and an auto box isn't significantly different to a manual once the torque converter has locked up since it does offer a direct drive through the gearbox. If the additional losses in an auto box amounted to anything significant we would see much larger ATF coolers on cars so equipped!
Where an auto is poor is that auto boxes of the Omega's era didn't have enough ratios, and they have zero ability to read the road ahead, so are no use on twisty stretches of road.
seconded.. :y
there are some special automatic boxes like smg/dsg.. but those boxes are unfortunately eye watering for budgets when repairs about to happen.. and they are never as reliable and cheap as a manual.. and cars having smg/dsg is never prefererred from second hand buyers point of view..
well at least for me ..
-
its a prooven fact that slushboxes are always slower.. unless you play with the ratios..
even the best autobox is pumping fluid instead of a direct drive if its a real auto.. ;)
A few years back I would agree, but the figures for my auto are as below. (Totally standard, as it left the factory) :y
Acceleration 0-62 mph (sec) 5.4 [5.1]
and the 435d auto is 4.7 sec 0-62mph and the manual is definitely not quicker. :y
Figure in brackets is for auto. :y
530d and 535d are bloody quick off the mark. Considering its weight, it matches the lighter models off the lights. :y
-
My brothers '62 330D has the 8 speed auto, and that is sub 6 seconds to 60 8)
-
Think i'm with Tunnie on this. our cars are slow. and the auto box doesnt help. im sure a modern diesel could outdrag the omega quite easily.
having said that i wouldnt swap the old girl for anything. absolute pleasure to drive.
-
Think i'm with Tunnie on this. our cars are slow. and the auto box doesnt help. im sure a modern diesel could outdrag the omega quite easily.
having said that i wouldnt swap the old girl for anything. absolute pleasure to drive.
:y :y :y
Why I still have mine, that plus fact they are dirt cheap to run :D
But I know I won't win much, not even in the 3.2 :)
-
its a prooven fact that slushboxes are always slower.. unless you play with the ratios..
even the best autobox is pumping fluid instead of a direct drive if its a real auto.. ;)
A few years back I would agree, but the figures for my auto are as below. (Totally standard, as it left the factory) :y
Acceleration 0-62 mph (sec) 5.4 [5.1]
and the 435d auto is 4.7 sec 0-62mph and the manual is definitely not quicker. :y
Figure in brackets is for auto. :y
530d and 535d are bloody quick off the mark. Considering its weight, it matches the lighter models off the lights. :y
::) interestingly all given examples are turbo diesels ;D
if a car is turbo where even any slight tuning can bring considerable power gain..
as I said before either turbo pressures are not equal or some other tweak whatever..
now being an engineer I can never understand illogical claims that a slush box operating with oil pressure is faster than a direct physical face to face touch.. if your claims were true all race cars would be equipped with autos..
and if those claims were depending on an auto which is converted from a manual by some means thats funny..
-
Cem
The so called auto boxes that are mostly used now days are of the duel clutch, direct shift type.
These have in effect 2 clutches on a common output drive shaft.
One clutch drives / controls gears 1/3/5/7 ect and the other controls 2,4,6 ect.
This enables the box to pre select the next gear whether going up or down the ratios so the change is just as fast as the best manual boxes / driver interface :y
I believe they do away with the torque convertor too so there is no slack in the drivetrain when you put your foot down :)
-
its a prooven fact that slushboxes are always slower.. unless you play with the ratios..
even the best autobox is pumping fluid instead of a direct drive if its a real auto.. ;)
A few years back I would agree, but the figures for my auto are as below. (Totally standard, as it left the factory) :y
Acceleration 0-62 mph (sec) 5.4 [5.1]
and the 435d auto is 4.7 sec 0-62mph and the manual is definitely not quicker. :y
Figure in brackets is for auto. :y
530d and 535d are bloody quick off the mark. Considering its weight, it matches the lighter models off the lights. :y
::) interestingly all given examples are turbo diesels ;D
if a car is turbo where even any slight tuning can bring considerable power gain..
as I said before either turbo pressures are not equal or some other tweak whatever..
...............
Just to clarify, I used a comparison between two almost identical straight six diesel vehicles, one with auto and one with manual. The auto is definitely quicker on the launch than the manual, it just digs in and goes. :y
I've owned/driven loads of them and you'd be surprised at how the auto puts the power down. It's almost neck breaking from a total standstill. :y
Anyway, what's this got to do with Skoda's. ;) :)
-
I don't subscribe to this 'dieselmania' that is currently sweeping the country.
Soot chuckers are horrible oily things and the diesel engine should stay where it belongs.......it has a natural home in the lorry......coach....taxi....and bus...... :y
Petrol yes :y......derv no :-\.
I remember driving a 2.2 litre X-Type diesel a few years ago and the 'powerband' was painfully narrow. :-\
having said that modern derv drinkers may be better.
-
I don't subscribe to this 'dieselmania' that is currently sweeping the country.
Soot chuckers are horrible oily things and the diesel engine should stay where it belongs.......it has a natural home in the lorry......coach....taxi....and bus...... :y
Petrol yes :y......derv no :-\.
I remember driving a 2.2 litre X-Type diesel a few years ago and the 'powerband' was painfully narrow. :-\
having said that modern derv drinkers may be better.
The latest luxury German cars get around the narrow powerband of overblown tractor units by shoving in lots of ratios into the autoboxes. That's why they can beat their petrol engine siblings.
But a 6 speed auto 2.2 Jag against a 4 speed 3.2 Omega in a straight line to 130mph, nah, I don't buy it. The Omega is also available in manual form, and the 3.0/3.2 manual Omegas are pretty quick, if you can use the agricultural gearbox.
-
Sub 7 seconds to 60, which is nice... 8)
-
I don't subscribe to this 'dieselmania' that is currently sweeping the country.
Soot chuckers are horrible oily things and the diesel engine should stay where it belongs.......it has a natural home in the lorry......coach....taxi....and bus...... :y
Petrol yes :y......derv no :-\.
I remember driving a 2.2 litre X-Type diesel a few years ago and the 'powerband' was painfully narrow. :-\
having said that modern derv drinkers may be better.
The latest luxury German cars get around the narrow powerband of overblown tractor units by shoving in lots of ratios into the autoboxes. That's why they can beat their petrol engine siblings.
But a 6 speed auto 2.2 Jag against a 4 speed 3.2 Omega in a straight line to 130mph, nah, I don't buy it. The Omega is also available in manual form, and the 3.0/3.2 manual Omegas are pretty quick, if you can use the agricultural gearbox.
Neither do I, TB.
My 2.6 MV6 is far faster than the X-Type diesel was........and that was a manual.. :y
-
Cem
The so called auto boxes that are mostly used now days are of the duel clutch, direct shift type.
These have in effect 2 clutches on a common output drive shaft.
One clutch drives / controls gears 1/3/5/7 ect and the other controls 2,4,6 ect.
This enables the box to pre select the next gear whether going up or down the ratios so the change is just as fast as the best manual boxes / driver interface :y
I believe they do away with the torque convertor too so there is no slack in the drivetrain when you put your foot down :)
what about the torque converter locking and how there will be no slack..
-
1. if we compare two cars with same gear ratios (either being auto or manual) , thats a valid comparison otherwise apples and pears..
2. you can easily play with an injection map on a turbo diesel and thats also not valid
3 and if we are comparing turbo diesel auto and petrol manuals, remember petrol manuals are kept athmospheric and gear ratios are longer for cost reasons but also can be converted to a shorter ratio box and also to turbo with custom ecus ..
so briefly autos are faster is nothing more than a empty claim..
-
so briefly autos are faster is nothing more than a empty claim..
Not really. If the manufacturer optimise the gearing for the application, that's perfectly valid.
-
Not to mention DSG boxes can change gear a hell of a lot faster than even the very best driver.. Although I don't consider those "automatic" personally.
-
so briefly autos are faster is nothing more than a empty claim..
Not really. If the manufacturer optimise the gearing for the application, that's perfectly valid.
why not optimise the gearing for manual also ::)
-
Not to mention DSG boxes can change gear a hell of a lot faster than even the very best driver.. Although I don't consider those "automatic" personally.
those are automated manuals actually.. but not a real slush box
-
so briefly autos are faster is nothing more than a empty claim..
Not really. If the manufacturer optimise the gearing for the application, that's perfectly valid.
why not optimise the gearing for manual also ::)
For overblown diesels, they *have* to wedge in as many ratios as possible. For NA petrols, with a much wider power delivery band, the gains aren't as dramatic, and as (on these types of cars) autos are far more popular, I imagine the cost/benefit doesn't work out.
-
Think i'm with Tunnie on this. our cars are slow. and the auto box doesnt help. im sure a modern diesel could outdrag the omega quite easily.
having said that i wouldnt swap the old girl for anything. absolute pleasure to drive.
My 10 year old vauxhall diesel will rip my old Omega in half with torque,not sure if it would "do" a 3.2 but would keep it honest to a ton or so but not top end