Omega Owners Forum
Omega Help Area => Omega General Help => Topic started by: laney101 on 05 March 2016, 14:42:09
-
Currently got a 2.6 manual low milage elite cracking car with g cams on inlet...
Dads got a 3.2 mv6 auto... On paper the 2.6 manual is not far behind a 3.2 auto however my dads car just goes so much better and done much higher milage...
Reasoon im posting this is i have a chance to fit a 3.2 engine into mine to make a 3.2 manual omega..
In real world not on paper is this actually going to be quicker than a 3.2 auto as auto in first gear is very long over 50mph a manual sod all so your changing gear more plus got to get it of line auto is plant and go ..
What do people feel would actually be quicker
-
Mmmm. Bigger engine, will it go faster? That's a difficult answer. ;D
It will accelerate faster. ::)
-
I've owned a 2.6 manual, 3.2 auto and a 3.2 factory manual. The 2.6 and 3.2 manual do feel very different. I guess in reality, there's not much between the 2.6 manual and 3.2 auto, but the 3.2 manual does feel far quicker. It also pulls better at higher speeds above 60.
-
3.2 manual is lower geared than the auto, so you're not really comparing like with like.
In theory, the auto would probably lose you a bit of performance, but the ratios on the Omega manual boxes are rubbish, IMHO, especially 1st gear, which could do with being a lot taller.
If you don't change the diff on a 2.6 when converting to 3.2, it will be lower geared still.
Driver makes a big difference on a manual, of course. less so an auto.
But.. there is a big difference between the two engines, in my view. More than the difference in capacity might suggest.
-
Can only really comment on Auto's as the only manuals I have had were 2.2 DTi's.
A 2.6 with G cams, AR35 and standard diff (4.22:1) is nowhere even close to a 3.2 with AR35 and standard diff (3.90:1) at any point at all! As Kevin mentions, the 600CC difference between a 2.6 and a 3.2 is far greater in both performance and flexibility than you would ever think!
-
90% of manual cars doesnt win their automatic cousins. Me and my friends had measured accelerations with gps. Manual feels quicker but clutch, sifting etc take time. Even 0.5 seconds miss couple times is big in total time.
Pretty good overall is 1-2s more than factory promises in manual. Depends clutch / manual harshness too.
Automatic wont do mistakes and you can just press more gas...
-
2 pedals good ....... 3 pedals bad ::) ::) ;)
-
3 pedals good ....... 2 pedals lazy ::) ::) ;)
Fixed that for you Andy :P
-
3 pedals good ....... 2 pedals lazy ::) ::) ;)
Fixed that for you Andy :P
;D
-
Can only really comment on Auto's as the only manuals I have had were 2.2 DTi's.
A 2.6 with G cams, AR35 and standard diff (4.22:1) is nowhere even close to a 3.2 with AR35 and standard diff (3.90:1) at any point at all! As Kevin mentions, the 600CC difference between a 2.6 and a 3.2 is far greater in both performance and flexibility than you would ever think!
Agreed. :y
If the 2.5 auto is similar to the 2.6 auto then the 2.6 is leagues apart from a 3.2. :y
Where it was massively, and I mean massively, apparent to me was when I was towing our caravan. Going up long steep hills used to drag the 2.5 back, whereas the same hill with the 3.2 was a breeze.
Having owned both a 2.5 auto and a 3.2 auto I have first hand knowledge that they are worlds apart in pulling power. :y
-
But then how often does the 3.2 have to stop to get more
fuel :D ;D
-
But then how often does the 3.2 have to stop to get more
fuel :D ;D
Every 65-70 litres, same as any other Omega ;D
Joking aside, the 2.6 auto was a pleasant surprise... having not driven a 2.6 before, I figured it would be like a slightly quicker and torquier 2.2 :-\
In fact, it's much better than that... and drives (and goes) like a detuned 3.2... smooth and effortless 8)
Might have summat to do with only having done 83k, and the different diff ratio, but even so...
As for manual auto argument, if you spend your time blasting through the twisties, then fit the manual box, but if your journeys allow for higher average speeds, then get the auto... nothing between them at cruising speed :y
-
I have always believed that fluid flywheel traditional automatic gearboxes, like fitted to Omegas, absorbed 20% more power than manual boxes, making performance and economy inferior Further, automatics are more troublesome and less reliable than manuals. This thread contradicts this belief. Am I labouring under a delusion?
-
Fluid flywheel does absorb energy .... but only when its working and "slipping" once it "locks up" it becomes as efficient as a standard gearbox. "Lock-up" on my omega is around 45 mph under "light footed" driving conditions ... if you concentrate it almost feels like an extra gear change. :)
As to more trouble ... mines done 155,000 and so far no problems.... there are many other AR35s out there with the same or more miles :) and its never had (and never will need) a clutch change, a master cylinder change, a slave cylinder change etc etc etc :)
-
Fluid flywheel does absorb energy .... but only when its working and "slipping" once it "locks up" it becomes as efficient as a standard gearbox. "Lock-up" on my omega is around 45 mph under "light footed" driving conditions ... if you concentrate it almost feels like an extra gear change. :)
As to more trouble ... mines done 155,000 and so far no problems.... there are many other AR35s out there with the same or more miles :) and its never had (and never will need) a clutch change, a master cylinder change, a slave cylinder change etc etc etc :)
mine does the same at 45mph light footed...i used to think that was the box going into top gear :-[
-
Fluid flywheel does absorb energy .... but only when its working and "slipping" once it "locks up" it becomes as efficient as a standard gearbox. "Lock-up" on my omega is around 45 mph under "light footed" driving conditions ... if you concentrate it almost feels like an extra gear change. :)
As to more trouble ... mines done 155,000 and so far no problems.... there are many other AR35s out there with the same or more miles :) and its never had (and never will need) a clutch change, a master cylinder change, a slave cylinder change etc etc etc :)
mine does the same at 45mph light footed...i used to think that was the box going into top gear :-[
It probably was, though it will lock-up in 3rd as well as in 4th
-
Also an epicyclic has more gears in mesh than a synchromesh box, resulting in greater power loss. But, shucks, who cares? I read on this site of auto box problems so have always shunned them. I wonder now if I am making a big mistake. As said, clutch changes, slave cylinder failures, could be a thing of the past. I have read that smartly nipping away is impossible on autos, but I guess cars vary.
-
....
could be a thing of the past. ....
You know it makes sense ;) ;)
-
2.6 puts our 132kw at 6000rpm, 3.2 puts out 160kw at 6000rpm
so if you put a 3.2 into a 2.6 car you will have 21% more power than before.
top speed manual gearbox on 2.6 diff is 3mph more than auto 2.6. i expect the acceleration is a lot better 2.6 man v 2.6 auto because you have an extra gear. i also expect fuel economy will be better on 3.2 manual v 3.2 auto, even with the 2.6 diff. fuel consumption on 2.6 auto is 10% worse than 2.6 man (urban)
-
Keeping the 2.6 diff will make it quicker off the line, but at a price... at 70 it will be pulling an extra 500rpm... which will mean increased consumption, noise and wear...
Your choice, but choose carefully :y
-
Also an epicyclic has more gears in mesh than a synchromesh box, resulting in greater power loss. But, shucks, who cares? I read on this site of auto box problems so have always shunned them. I wonder now if I am making a big mistake. As said, clutch changes, slave cylinder failures, could be a thing of the past. I have read that smartly nipping away is impossible on autos, but I guess cars vary.
May I humbly suggest a ride in a 3.2 auto with sports mode selected and the right foot "planted" (road conditions allowing of course) ... I have a strong feeling you might be very, very surprised ... :) (lots of chavs in pocket rockets who lose the traffic light grande prix are :) )
-
..........
I have read that smartly nipping away is impossible on autos, but I guess cars vary.
For the past few years bmw auto's have been quicker to 60mph AND more economical than their manual equivalent. :y
Shows how things change over the years. :)
To the OP:
Go for the 3.2 and nick your dad's auto box, you know you want to. :y
-
I would go 3.2 Manual all day long, but thats just me, always have preferred Manuals over Auto's, having said that the the AR35 is a good box and is well suited in a 3.2 Omega if you can afford the fuel in heavy traffic.
But driving at an average speed of around 9mph in London Traffic is a no brainier for me.
I drive a couple of 3.2 Manuals, but I really do miss my 3.0 Manual MV6, far better engines for economy and can be brought to 3.2 power spec and beyond very easy.
-
Will you lot stop talking about manual 3.2's ::)
I've been trying to get mine sorted for the last month with no piggin luck :-X :-X
-
....
But driving at an average speed of around 9mph in London Traffic is a no brainier for me.
....
city driving = auto surely ..... ???
-
....
But driving at an average speed of around 9mph in London Traffic is a no brainier for me.
....
city driving = auto surely ..... ???
Auto's / town work are nice if somebody else is paying the fuel bill ;D
-
.....
Auto's / town work are nice if somebody else is paying the fuel bill ;D
but do you buy a 3.2 V6 for fuel economy? ;) My diesel isn't much different from my 3.0 Omega economy wise ..... but hardly unexpected for a 2300kg permanent 4 wheel drive
-
.....
Auto's / town work are nice if somebody else is paying the fuel bill ;D
but do you buy a 3.2 V6 for fuel economy? ;) My diesel isn't much different from my 3.0 Omega economy wise ..... but hardly unexpected for a 2300kg permanent 4 wheel drive
But your fuel spend at the moment is precisely zero ... which is way better than mine even on LPG .. but then again .. I can actually drive mine .. ;D ;D ;D
(sorry .... couldn't resist it !! :) )
-
....
But your fuel spend at the moment is precisely zero ... which is way better than mine even on LPG .. but then again .. I can actually drive mine .. ;D ;D ;D
(sorry .... couldn't resist it !! :) )
That fact has been mentioned ...... so far, the current tank of diesel has lasted nearly two months! ;D ;D
-
Also an epicyclic has more gears in mesh than a synchromesh box, resulting in greater power loss. But, shucks, who cares? I read on this site of auto box problems so have always shunned them. I wonder now if I am making a big mistake. As said, clutch changes, slave cylinder failures, could be a thing of the past. I have read that smartly nipping away is impossible on autos, but I guess cars vary.
Auto box problems depend on the gearbox - the 4L30 fitted to an Omega isn't a problem until really high mileages when it is just worn out; this is borne out by the ready and cheap availability of good used gearboxes. Other boxes aren't as good; the four speed auto fitted to nineties BMWs from is pretty poor, trans failures are also common on E-class Mercs and used ones have always commanded a premium.
As for reliability and performance, just go to a dragstrip: most successful and all big power(and a 500bhp smallblock is a just decent street/strip motor!) will be running autos for durability and drivability reasons.
Personally I would prefer a manual, but the 3.0l auto is such a well-judged combination that I would happily buy another. Smaller engines(not to mention small engines) are and always have been terrible.
-
.....
Auto's / town work are nice if somebody else is paying the fuel bill ;D
but do you buy a 3.2 V6 for fuel economy? ;) My diesel isn't much different from my 3.0 Omega economy wise ..... but hardly unexpected for a 2300kg permanent 4 wheel drive
But your fuel spend at the moment is precisely zero ... which is way better than mine even on LPG .. but then again .. I can actually drive mine .. ;D ;D ;D
(sorry .... couldn't resist it !! :) )
Bitchy Nigel, bitchy ;D ;D ;D
-
Keeping the 2.6 diff will make it quicker off the line, but at a price... at 70 it will be pulling an extra 500rpm... which will mean increased consumption, noise and wear...
Your choice, but choose carefully :y
Yes I have left the 2.6 diff on my 3.2 conversion and using the launch control does make it quick off the lights though you need to be more careful in the wet stuff ;D
-
Keeping the 2.6 diff will make it quicker off the line, but at a price... at 70 it will be pulling an extra 500rpm... which will mean increased consumption, noise and wear...
Your choice, but choose carefully :y
Yes I have left the 2.6 diff on my 3.2 conversion and using the launch control does make it quick off the lights though you need to be more careful in the wet stuff ;D
As said though, your be pulling about 3000rpm at 70 (probably true speed of about 67mph) which can be a be daunting on a Motorway cruise.
-
Keeping the 2.6 diff will make it quicker off the line, but at a price... at 70 it will be pulling an extra 500rpm... which will mean increased consumption, noise and wear...
Your choice, but choose carefully :y
Yes I have left the 2.6 diff on my 3.2 conversion and using the launch control does make it quick off the lights though you need to be more careful in the wet stuff ;D
As said though, your be pulling about 3000rpm at 70 (probably true speed of about 67mph) which can be a be oppsing annoying on a Motorway cruise.
Fixed ::)
-
Forgive me, but the Manual gear change in the Omega is woeful. It's bloody terrible.
The car wasn't designed to be a B Road hack, it was designed to be a cruiser. It handles like a soggy sack of fish........ why would anyone want a Manual Omega? :-*
I really wish the UK market got the later 5 speed Auto transmission. They are a joy to drive.
-
Forgive me, but the Manual gear change in the Omega is woeful. It's bloody terrible.
The car wasn't designed to be a B Road hack, it was designed to be a cruiser. It handles like a soggy sack of fish........ why would anyone want a Manual Omega? :-*
I really wish the UK market got the later 5 speed Auto transmission. They are a joy to drive.
I didnt think it was that bad :D ;D Elite's seem to be the worst for handling imo but like you say they were never designed to be thrown around .
-
Forgive me, but the Manual gear change in the Omega is woeful. It's bloody terrible.
The car wasn't designed to be a B Road hack, it was designed to be a cruiser. It handles like a soggy sack of fish........ why would anyone want a Manual Omega? :-*
I really wish the UK market got the later 5 speed Auto transmission. They are a joy to drive.
I didnt think it was that bad :D ;D Elite's seem to be the worst for handling imo but like you say they were never designed to be thrown around .
Nothing wrong with a manual box on a omega.
3rd can be a bit of a bitch when cold and the throw is a bit long but other then that, no problem ;)
As for the elite
Only ever driven one and that was gixers old gold one with the lpg tank where the spare wheel went ...............
Chucked it into a corner and nearly shit myself :D
Could never live with a elite unless all roads was straight and if you came to a corner you had your man in front with a red flag :P :D :D
-
Whatever the speed range a 3.2 auto will piss all over a 2.6 manual. I've owned both. :y
The manual gearbox on the 2.6 manual is so agricultural it was probably made for Vauxhall by Massey Ferguson. Quick shifting it is not.
-
Rumour has it that the boys from 'Ice Road Truckers' speak highly of the manual box from the Omega. ::) ::) ::) :)
-
Whatever the speed range a 3.2 auto will piss all over a 2.6 manual. I've owned both. :y
The manual gearbox on the 2.6 manual is so agricultural it was probably made for Vauxhall by Massey Ferguson. Quick shifting it is not.
What about a 3.2 with the autos diff :D :D
Anyway, if the tenna pants wearing members of OOF ain't man enough to move the gearstick and press another pedal ::) :-* :-* :D
I await the abuse :P :P
-
Whatever the speed range a 3.2 auto will piss all over a 2.6 manual. I've owned both. :y
The manual gearbox on the 2.6 manual is so agricultural it was probably made for Vauxhall by Massey Ferguson. Quick shifting it is not.
What about a 3.2 with the autos diff :D :D
Anyway, if the tenna pants wearing members of OOF ain't man enough to move the gearstick and press another pedal ::) :-* :-* :D
I await the abuse :P :P
STMO doesn't own an Omega. :D :D ;D
-
Only 1 foot required :D :D :D ;D Get yourself an auto :P
-
Only 1 foot required :D :D :D ;D Get yourself an auto :P
Got one and just can't get on with it :(
The other 4 miggys i've had was all manual and loved them but this one ............ nah :(
I just can't get used to putting my foot down out of a corner and not feeling that "direct connection" to the drive wheels :(
-
........ why would anyone want a Manual Omega? :-*
Obviously it's all down to personal preference, and whilst there are more beaten up Omegas out there for sale than ever before, the availability of auto gearboxes is plentiful which means you don't have to fix them.... just bung another one in :D
But there will come a day I'm sure when they are like rocking horse poo, and although there are plenty of talented enthusiasts on here, an auto box strip down and repair will be beyond the capabilities of most. I'm sure those with manual gearboxes will take a clutch problem with a pinch of salt and be glad of 3-pedals!!
-
Don't know what happened there with the quote boxes >:(
Obviously it's all down to personal preference, and whilst there are more beaten up Omegas out there for sale than ever before, the availability of auto gearboxes is plentiful which means you don't have to fix them.... just bung another one in :D
But there will come a day I'm sure when they are like rocking horse poo, and although there are plenty of talented enthusiasts on here, an auto box strip down and repair will be beyond the capabilities of most. I'm sure those with manual gearboxes will take a clutch problem with a pinch of salt and be glad of 3-pedals!!
-
Not the best of jobs on the driveway, but perfectly doable... :y