Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Car Chat => Topic started by: SJKOO01 on 23 February 2012, 13:28:14
-
As per title.
As anyone ever owned one of these, are they a decent car and is the engine and gearbox reliable.
I know there was a common problem with the 2.2 getting water into the autobox and kaputting them, but was there ever the same issue with the 3.0.
I would appreciate any advise on running costs (I do a mixture of town & motorway), parts costs, insurance, etc.
Have the chance to purchase one and quite keen to have a diesel but would like something with a bit of go at the same time. And it also needs to be an auto.
Any advise would be appreciated please - Thanks :y
-
Being a Vectra C, my experiences (and many others on here!) are that they don't like corners very much ::)
As long as you don't compare it to an Omega for comfort then you won't be too disappointed ;)
Must admit, I've always fancied the V6 CDTi auto combo, but ISTR that real world economy isn't that good on them :-\ :-\
-
They're lovely cars, engine is very good, gearboxes aren't brilliant, but they're a nice car.
-
I recall master saying that post 2007 ish, they had much stronger autoboxes.
-
I recall master saying that post 2007 ish, they had much stronger autoboxes.
They did, but it's rare to find a V6 CDTi 2007 onwards. They're rare anyway, because the 1.9 150 engine is a powerful engine, there wasn't much call for the V6.
-
I recall master saying that post 2007 ish, they had much stronger autoboxes.
They did, but it's rare to find a V6 CDTi 2007 onwards. They're rare anyway, because the 1.9 150 engine is a powerful engine, there wasn't much call for the V6.
That was the other thing I had meant to post... IIRC the performance figures aren't dramatically different to the 1.9 150 but the economy was nearly halved :-\
-
Always thought it'd make a cracking engine transplant into a Mig...
-
Always thought it'd make a cracking engine transplant into a Mig...
Yes, looks like it was meant to fit nicely ::) :)
-
That big diesel would have been a much better choice than the 2.2 DTi
-
Not sure they had it available at the time.
DTi isn't that bad IMHO, suffers the same image problem as the 4 cylinder petrol models and is a bit rattley when cold but people forget that the torque figure is practically the same as a 3.2 V6.
-
So if I'm reading the response's correctly then... the opinion seems to be that give the 3.0 V6 CDTi a wide birth and go for 1.9 150 engine as it's pretty much the same power output, is that because the 1.9 is Turbo diesel where as the 3.0 isn't? ???
Take it the 2.2 DTi is different engine altogether and dosn't have a good torque output or not as refined then? ???
-
No idea where people are getting the handling thing from on the Vec C, the B was not great but the C is pretty good.
Its a strong engine is the Isuzu V6 diesel (note it is a half belt and half chain driven cam setup).
The autobox issue was more to do with the oil cooler failing and dumping water into the gearbox.....later rads sorted this or an air/oil cooler is easily fitted.
Economy wise, the 1.9 is a bit better but not that much. The V6 has the edge power wise but is nowhere near as tuneable.
-
So if I'm reading the response's correctly then... the opinion seems to be that give the 3.0 V6 CDTi a wide birth and go for 1.9 150 engine as it's pretty much the same power output, is that because the 1.9 is Turbo diesel where as the 3.0 isn't? ???
Take it the 2.2 DTi is different engine altogether and dosn't have a good torque output or not as refined then? ???
The 3.0 is a turbo, but there are so many tuning options available on the 1.9 it's unreal, I mean I had an Astra Van with the 1.9 engine, that had a remap, exhaust & an air filter, that was genuinely producing 205 bhp, that's before you start messing with intercoolers and stuff. Even standard the 150 1.9 is a very strong engine, but it isn't as smooth as the V6 for obvious reasons. I have to agree with Mark too on the Vectra C handling front, never did think it was bad :-\.
-
Thanks for the input Del.
Well after doing a lot of research on the net (and here), it seems that me going the Mig 2.2 sport or the Vectra route isn't looking good for me personally in the end :-\ . So looking like the Motability route for me from now on, seems to be less hassle via using a car over a x3 year lease period. Oh well, the sport and vectra was an idea at the time. :-\
Thanks for the help though gents, it's appreciated :y
-
So if I'm reading the response's correctly then... the opinion seems to be that give the 3.0 V6 CDTi a wide birth and go for 1.9 150 engine as it's pretty much the same power output, is that because the 1.9 is Turbo diesel where as the 3.0 isn't? ???
Take it the 2.2 DTi is different engine altogether and dosn't have a good torque output or not as refined then? ???
In Y22DTH (Omega) form it produces 280Nm Torque whereas a Y32SE (V6 Petrol) produces 290Nm.
-
And the 1.9 a nice 320Nm
-
No idea where people are getting the handling thing from on the Vec C, the B was not great but the C is pretty good.
Having covered a fair few miles in a Vec-B V6 and 3 Vec-C GSi, the Vec-B behaved better in corners. The Vectra-C GSi is a hoot in a straight line, and stops well, but seems so unbalanced in corners - it searches out the ditches under acceleration or reasonably heavy braking with any steering angle. Very heavy braking brings the back round, not unsurprisingly, which is difficult to control.
My biggest complaint of Vectra-B is it feels cramped. Vectra-C feels much more spacious, and feels a nicer car, but I couldn't live with the handling on the more powerful ones. I've done Lyon to the Spanish border in a Vectra-C DTi, and that was a good combo. I struggle with the GSi suspension - my fillings fall out over every undulation in the road ;D