Omega Owners Forum

Omega Help Area => Omega General Help => Topic started by: mosty3 on 18 January 2012, 08:33:31

Title: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: mosty3 on 18 January 2012, 08:33:31
hi every one , after info on omega estate , the 2.5 d is rear wheel drive but is the 2.2 d rear or front, going to be towing a twin axle caravan so i need rear wheel drive and the weight and bhp, the 2.5 is 140 and the 2.2 is 120, not alot in it or is there. any advice chaps. many thanks. mosty3
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: twiglet on 18 January 2012, 08:41:52
All Omegas are rear wheel drive.

The 2.5 is a de-tuned BMW 6-cylinder diesel.  When fitted in a BMW 525tds it produces 170bhp, and this can be achieved in an Omega by chipping the ECU (details on this forum)
The 2.2 is a 4 cylinder Gm engine, and as you say, produces 125bhp.

The 2.5 was fitted to Omegas from 1994 to 2001, it was then replaced by the 2.2 until the end of Omega production.

Personally I would say you'd be better off with the 2.5 if you're towing a heavy caravan, but the choice is yours.  :y
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: mosty3 on 18 January 2012, 08:48:07
many thanks for the info. cheers mosty3
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: Andy B on 18 January 2012, 11:35:23
many thanks for the info. cheers mosty3

Also, 2.5 6 cylinder is available with an auto box, the 2.2 is only available with a third pedal and having towed miles with my auto wouldn't want the hassle of a clutch when towing.  :y :y

But that's up to you.  :y
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: unclelicklug on 18 January 2012, 12:42:02
I like my 2.2 but for towing a heavy van I suspect the 2.5 is the better option.
As stated 2.2 was never offered with auto (AFAIK), I often wondered if this is because the engine is already marginal for the car without losing horses to an auto?

Reports on OOF suggest the 2.5 auto is not all that economical - but doubtless will be nicer for towing.
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: maracus on 18 January 2012, 15:02:38
IMHO??? BMW lump 2.5 all day long :)
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: Marks DTM Calib on 18 January 2012, 15:29:27
IMHO??? BMW lump 2.5 all day long :)

Lol, although the 2.2 certainly seems to be a bit more reliable.
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: deviator on 18 January 2012, 15:52:06
I'd opt for the 2.5 for smoothness and torque. Both of which are important when towing.
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: zirk on 18 January 2012, 15:57:52
Although the 2.5TD are old hats now, my choice would be 2.5 with manual.
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: Michael2.6 on 18 January 2012, 19:11:47
Twiglet I was thinking the 2.5 v6 petrol has 170 bhp not the 2.5 td diesel

2.5 diesel has 133 bhp the 2.2 dti has 120 bhp

I think.
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: hoofing it on 18 January 2012, 19:30:39
Twiglet I was thinking the 2.5 v6 petrol has 170 bhp not the 2.5 td diesel

2.5 diesel has 133 bhp the 2.2 dti has 120 bhp

I think.
He was trying to say that you could get 170bhp if you chipped a 2.5td.
As others have said get a 2.5td manual and chip it :y
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: kcl on 19 January 2012, 13:01:42
many thanks for the info. cheers mosty3

Also, 2.5 6 cylinder is available with an auto box, the 2.2 is only available with a third pedal and having towed miles with my auto wouldn't want the hassle of a clutch when towing.  :y :y

But that's up to you.  :y

That's funny, we have plenty of 2,2 with auto box... and if I'm not completely wrong it's the AR25 box so should be doable to change manual to auto  :-\
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: twiglet on 19 January 2012, 13:40:23
many thanks for the info. cheers mosty3

Also, 2.5 6 cylinder is available with an auto box, the 2.2 is only available with a third pedal and having towed miles with my auto wouldn't want the hassle of a clutch when towing.  :y :y

But that's up to you.  :y

That's funny, we have plenty of 2,2 with auto box... and if I'm not completely wrong it's the AR25 box so should be doable to change manual to auto  :-\

Petrol or diesel?  ???
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: kcl on 16 March 2012, 06:29:35
Sorry, my bad... gasoline ones. No 2,2 disiesals AFAIK here, only 2,5 ones
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: tunnie on 16 March 2012, 08:01:55
2.5 diesel can be chipped to 170 bhp in full BMW spec, manual is best for this. If you chip an auto the gearbox will have to be upgraded to the AR35 fitted to 3.0 & 3.2s as the standard box won't handle the torque. :)
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: VXL V6 on 16 March 2012, 10:09:05
One thing everyone always misses in these conversations is the torque output of diesels......

We tow our 1200Kg Caravan plus gas bottles and all the other junk 270 miles to Newquay in Cornwall with Mrs VXL V6's DTi estate with ease, no problem going over Bodmin and the thing is very reliable, we use a shade over half a tank. When we go down later in the year (we leave the caravan down there all season) solo we obviously go down at a much faster pace.... fuel used - half a tank.


Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: Boiler Man on 16 March 2012, 10:29:08
Everyone is forgetting the rare 2.0 Dti Omega Estate, like my first.

Never towed with it, but going off the poor accelaration. It proberbly couldn't pull the skin of a Rice Puddin :)

Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: VXL V6 on 16 March 2012, 10:42:10
Everyone is forgetting the rare 2.0 Dti Omega Estate, like my first.

Never towed with it, but going off the poor accelaration. It proberbly couldn't pull the skin of a Rice Puddin :)

If I had one criticism of the 2.2DTi is the start from nothing, if you load the revs up it's fine but who wants to start off like that every time. If you decat them though they are much improved.

Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: John-R on 16 March 2012, 12:34:47
I used to tow a 1400kg van with a 2.2Dti with 4 up and the awning etc in the boot. No probs to Plymouth and in France. Averaged 30-35mpg towing.
Tow the same van now with a 2.6 V6 auto and again no problem - would prefer the diesel economy though.
One thing crossed my mind though. You say you're towing a "big twin-axle". Might be worth checking your weights as you don't want the "tail wagging the dog". I'm sure you've thought about this though.
Happy Trails ! !
Title: Re: omega 2.5 diesel verses 2.2 diesel
Post by: Keith ABS on 16 March 2012, 17:43:46
   I can definatly go with the poor fuel consumption with the 2.5 with auto box. I have an average over the last 35k and have 32.2 in standard spec. Cant fault the car otherwise. Keith B