Omega Owners Forum
Omega Help Area => Omega General Help => Topic started by: Big_Mart on 07 December 2007, 21:21:25
-
HI THERE CAN ALL YOU OMEGA DRIVERS GIVE ME YOUR OPINION`S ON WHAT IS THE BEST V6 FOR RELIABILITY,PERFORMANCE AND ECONOMY BECAUSE ALL THE "OFFICIAL" FIGURES ARE NEVER A REFLECTION ON REALITY SO IN YOUR REPLYS CAN YOU ALSO GIVE YOUR MPG CHEERS. :o
-
The 2.5 / 2.6 is reckoned to be the best balance of performance and economy. If you're going to be doing a lot of urban / town driving a manual will be significantly more economical and quicker and the auto gearboxes can give trouble. Other than that reliability probably isn't significantly different across the range. The engines are practically identical apart from bore, stroke and cams being different.
The 2.6 and 3.2 models do away with the EGR and air injection systems which can be problematic and also the plug leads are eliminated by the coil-per-plug ignition system but they have a drive by wire throttle which, if problems occur, can be expensive to fix. On balance not a lot to choose between them.
Then again, the official fuel consumption figures are only a couple of MPG different between 2.5/2.6 and 3.0/3.2 which is why I went for the latter, which has a good bit more power.
I get about 27-28 MPG on my commute to work (single carriageway B roads with a little urban). It'll do 30 MPG on a run at fast motorway cruising speeds and if you stick to 70 I have seen up to 35 MPG. This is from a 3.2 MV6 auto.
Kevin
-
CHEERS FOR THE REPLY MATE VERY USEFULL.ITS STRANGE COS I DRIVE A VECTRA 2.0 SRI AT THE MO AND YOU GET BETTER MPG THAN ME!!!!!!!!!!!!! I GET 24.9 AT THE MO AND I DO 3 MILES URBAN 5 MILES DUAL CARRAGE WAY THEN 3 MILES URBAN (TRAFFIC).
-
The 2.5 / 2.6 is reckoned to be the best balance of performance and economy. If you're going to be doing a lot of urban / town driving a manual will be significantly more economical and quicker and the auto gearboxes can give trouble. Other than that reliability probably isn't significantly different across the range. The engines are practically identical apart from bore, stroke and cams being different.
The 2.6 and 3.2 models do away with the EGR and air injection systems which can be problematic and also the plug leads are eliminated by the coil-per-plug ignition system but they have a drive by wire throttle which, if problems occur, can be expensive to fix. On balance not a lot to choose between them.
Then again, the official fuel consumption figures are only a couple of MPG different between 2.5/2.6 and 3.0/3.2 which is why I went for the latter, which has a good bit more power.
I get about 27-28 MPG on my commute to work (single carriageway B roads with a little urban). It'll do 30 MPG on a run at fast motorway cruising speeds and if you stick to 70 I have seen up to 35 MPG. This is from a 3.2 MV6 auto.
Kevin
Yep, 2.5/2.6 ;)
Don't listen to them MV6 racers talking about 3.0/3.2L ::)
On another note, the 2.5 and 2.6 are very similar in terms of real-life performance in spite of what the official figures claim, and this is also true for the 3.0 and 3.2, but the reason that the 2.6&3.2 are preferable to the 2.5&3.0 is mainly due to better engine setup, i.e. the new engines have no ICV, EGR, DIS, TPS, etc and as such are much easier to work on and also potentially more reliable ans there are less mechanical parts. You also get a newer (flashable) ECU and this can't be a bad thing.... but other than that you will not feel much difference driving the two engines. I know, I had both...
-
CHEERS FOR THE REPLY MATE VERY USEFULL.ITS STRANGE COS I DRIVE A VECTRA 2.0 SRI AT THE MO AND YOU GET BETTER MPG THAN ME!!!!!!!!!!!!! I GET 24.9 AT THE MO AND I DO 3 MILES URBAN 5 MILES DUAL CARRAGE WAY THEN 3 MILES URBAN (TRAFFIC).
Well, my commute is 20 miles each way, so you're doing a greater proportion of your driving on a cold engine. My driving style is a bit Jekyll and Hyde too. I'm either pootling along being as efficient as possible or (occasionally) caning it!
Kevin
-
CHEERS FOR THE REPLY MATE VERY USEFULL.ITS STRANGE COS I DRIVE A VECTRA 2.0 SRI AT THE MO AND YOU GET BETTER MPG THAN ME!!!!!!!!!!!!! I GET 24.9 AT THE MO AND I DO 3 MILES URBAN 5 MILES DUAL CARRAGE WAY THEN 3 MILES URBAN (TRAFFIC).
Stop SHOUTING please
-
The 2.6 is plenty fast, I see about 22-23mpg, but that's a lot of town driving, and plenty of "enthusiastic" B-roads... Had it up to 33mpg on a motorway run.
-
I have seen 40mpg from my 3.0...that was at 60mph for 80 miles.
-
CHEERS FOR THE REPLY MATE VERY USEFULL.ITS STRANGE COS I DRIVE A VECTRA 2.0 SRI AT THE MO AND YOU GET BETTER MPG THAN ME!!!!!!!!!!!!! I GET 24.9 AT THE MO AND I DO 3 MILES URBAN 5 MILES DUAL CARRAGE WAY THEN 3 MILES URBAN (TRAFFIC).
Stop SHOUTING please
[/highlight]
;D ;D Amazing how CAPITALS can seem so 'agressive'.
I've recently acquired a 2.6 and am pleasantly surprised at the MPG I get. Better than my 2.0 most of the time. Mind you, I do tend to tootle about at my age.
-
CHEERS FOR THE REPLY MATE VERY USEFULL.ITS STRANGE COS I DRIVE A VECTRA 2.0 SRI AT THE MO AND YOU GET BETTER MPG THAN ME!!!!!!!!!!!!! I GET 24.9 AT THE MO AND I DO 3 MILES URBAN 5 MILES DUAL CARRAGE WAY THEN 3 MILES URBAN (TRAFFIC).
Stop SHOUTING please
[/highlight]
;D ;D Amazing how CAPITALS can seem so 'agressive'.
I've recently acquired a 2.6 and am pleasantly surprised at the MPG I get. Better than my 2.0 most of the time. Mind you, I do tend to tootle about at my age.
heard much the same about the 2.0 being less economical than the V6s, i desperately need a V6 but i worry i wont do it much good since i do a hell of a lot of short journeys in a week, in the region of 15 a week at less than half a mile!
-
heard much the same about the 2.0 being less economical than the V6s, i desperately need a V6 but i worry i wont do it much good since i do a hell of a lot of short journeys in a week, in the region of 15 a week at less than half a mile!
The one thing I've noticed is that lots of short journeys really clobber the fuel consumption on a V6. :(
Kevin
-
heard much the same about the 2.0 being less economical than the V6s, i desperately need a V6 but i worry i wont do it much good since i do a hell of a lot of short journeys in a week, in the region of 15 a week at less than half a mile!
The one thing I've noticed is that lots of short journeys really clobber the fuel consumption on a V6. :(
Kevin
same on my 2.0
when i sell mine and find an elite, i'm seriously considering getting a £200 piece of 1.0 crap to use for work, thinking my fuel costs and insurance costs might drop a hell of alot if i only do 3000 miles a year in the omega!!
-
On the MV6 I drive (3.0 Manual Estate, Chipped) I average 28 Mpg mostly driving around in London, on a nice run or Motorway up to 36 Mpg, even stuck in heavy traffic for a few hours never seen it drop below 22 Mpg.
I tend to drive ‘all or nothing’ depending what mode I’m in and do tend to use the Cruise Control a lot (takes a while to get used to it and to drive it safely).
I think if you’re doing a lot of town and urban driving then it’s definitely got to be the Manual for good Mpg as in my experience Auto’s really don’t lock up much below 50 Mph? (Despite that aching left foot in heavy traffic).
Chris.
-
heard much the same about the 2.0 being less economical than the V6s, i desperately need a V6 but i worry i wont do it much good since i do a hell of a lot of short journeys in a week, in the region of 15 a week at less than half a mile!
The one thing I've noticed is that lots of short journeys really clobber the fuel consumption on a V6. :(
Kevin
Could not agree more. I do 6 miles to work and 6 miles home again, my old 2.0 did 21.mpg on trip meter thingy, my 2.5 is doing about 20.1 on trip thingy.
On a good run (not very often) I got up to 35mpg out of the 2.0 and about 30mpg out of the 2.5.
Virtually all my driving is on 30mph roads to from work and a lot of stop start traffic.
Can't comment on the 3.6/3.0/3.2 as never even driven one.
HTH
Mike
-
heard much the same about the 2.0 being less economical than the V6s, i desperately need a V6 but i worry i wont do it much good since i do a hell of a lot of short journeys in a week, in the region of 15 a week at less than half a mile!
The one thing I've noticed is that lots of short journeys really clobber the fuel consumption on a V6. :(
Kevin
Could not agree more. I do 6 miles to work and 6 miles home again, my old 2.0 did 21.mpg on trip meter thingy, my 2.5 is doing about 20.1 on trip thingy.
On a good run (not very often) I got up to 35mpg out of the 2.0 and about 30mpg out of the 2.5.
Virtually all my driving is on 30mph roads to from work and a lot of stop start traffic.
Can't comment on the 3.6/3.0/3.2 as never even driven one.
HTH
Mike
I get the impression that manuals are much more economical than auto on stop start driving.
I'd be interested to know if the software update on the auto box improves economy (as well as smoother running )
-
Strange isn't it? the main benefit of an auto is to make stop start driving almost tolerable.
-
Cheers to you all for your replys think i started an interesting thread? i think based on what you guys have said i`ll go for the 2.6 auto MV6 i`ve seen and fallen in love with just gotta get rid of the veccy sri anyone interested?
P.S IV`E TURNED OFF THE CAPS LOCK SO IT DON`T LOOK LIKE I`M SHOUTING HA HA. ;D
-
Cheers to you all for your replys think i started an interesting thread? i think based on what you guys have said i`ll go for the 2.6 auto MV6 i`ve seen and fallen in love with just gotta get rid of the veccy sri anyone interested?
P.S IV`E TURNED OFF THE CAPS LOCK SO IT DON`T LOOK LIKE I`M SHOUTING HA HA. ;D
Bad time of the year to sell cars. I only just flogged my 2.0 GLS LPG for £1600 notes, not bad as it had 156k on the clock, although it was in good shape and had excellent service history with thanks to the help of OOF.
If i had to buy/sell again i would wait until march/april as teh market picks up a bit.
-
P.S IV`E TURNED OFF THE CAPS LOCK SO IT DON`T LOOK LIKE I`M SHOUTING HA HA. ;D
At last!!
-
Took my dear old mum down to Swindon yesterday from Tunbridge Wells which is more or less dual carriageway all the way and the average consumption didn't get over 25mpg and that's at 70mph on cruise! My car's a 3.0 manual but I was hoping for more than that. My Monza's do better than that and they weigh a ton. Well, closer to two tons actually!
Fortunately I don't use my car very much as I have a company van for work so it's not as bad as it sounds but.....
Humpy
-
heard much the same about the 2.0 being less economical than the V6s, i desperately need a V6 but i worry i wont do it much good since i do a hell of a lot of short journeys in a week, in the region of 15 a week at less than half a mile!
The one thing I've noticed is that lots of short journeys really clobber the fuel consumption on a V6. :(
Kevin
Could not agree more. I do 6 miles to work and 6 miles home again, my old 2.0 did 21.mpg on trip meter thingy, my 2.5 is doing about 20.1 on trip thingy.
On a good run (not very often) I got up to 35mpg out of the 2.0 and about 30mpg out of the 2.5.
Virtually all my driving is on 30mph roads to from work and a lot of stop start traffic.
Can't comment on the 3.6/3.0/3.2 as never even driven one.
HTH
Mike
I get the impression that manuals are much more economical than auto on stop start driving.
I'd be interested to know if the software update on the auto box improves economy (as well as smoother running )
no it doesn't :(
-
heard much the same about the 2.0 being less economical than the V6s, i desperately need a V6 but i worry i wont do it much good since i do a hell of a lot of short journeys in a week, in the region of 15 a week at less than half a mile!
The one thing I've noticed is that lots of short journeys really clobber the fuel consumption on a V6. :(
Kevin
Could not agree more. I do 6 miles to work and 6 miles home again, my old 2.0 did 21.mpg on trip meter thingy, my 2.5 is doing about 20.1 on trip thingy.
On a good run (not very often) I got up to 35mpg out of the 2.0 and about 30mpg out of the 2.5.
Virtually all my driving is on 30mph roads to from work and a lot of stop start traffic.
Can't comment on the 3.6/3.0/3.2 as never even driven one.
HTH
Mike
I get the impression that manuals are much more economical than auto on stop start driving.
I'd be interested to know if the software update on the auto box improves economy (as well as smoother running )
no it doesn't :(
Agreed Jay, I would go so far as to say that it's even slightly worse. Definately worse with cruise control and when towing. :(