Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mantaray]

Ok looking for a bit of advise here.
I currently run a 1999 2.5TD manual estate with upgraded ecu, and 200358 on the clock. I do really like the car and engine. However the body is starting to show it's age, along with my left foot, and so have been thinking of getting an auto.
Due to the current arguments on how polluting diesel are deemed to be, I can see restrictions on use being introduced in the future, and so have also been thinking about changing to petrol.
I have been offered an 02, 2.6 CDX  auto estate for around £250, it does need the oil cooler sorting, but that's not a big job for me. I've just been to have a look at the car today, and it is in very good condition. Doors and rear aches are all rot free, interior is very clean with leather seats.
 I find the mpg of the 2.5 TD quite good, around 25/28mpg when towing, 30/35 mpg around town and 40/45 mpg on a long run. How would the 2.6 compare to these figures?
My2.5 has been a very reliable car, needing very little work over the 6 years I've owned her, are the V6's the same or do they have any issues.
I suppose what I'm asking is, should I buy the 2.6 or are other omegas a better choose .

[Nick W]

The biggest difference will be the economy: 25 to 28MPG is likely in general use. It might manage low 30s on a run.


The V6 issues are well documented - assorted oil leaks mainly, and sympathetic maintenance reduces them considerably.

[TheBoy]

2.6 is the worse of the lot. Thirsty, gutless, and early ones have stem seal issues.

[zirk]

If youve been driving around in a 2.5TD Manual Estate, your not going to happy with the Economy of a 2.6 Auto Estate, especially if you plane to tow with or or load up the back of it with Stuff and people.

If you are planning on a V6, go for a 3.0 Manual, can be chipped for a bit more economy and even in standard form will out perform a 2.6 Auto on Economy and performance.

[Doctor Gollum]

Coming from 3.2s, (and a 2.0 manual and a 2.2 auto), I was pleasantly surprised by a 2.6 saloon I picked up as a project...

They aren't great on fuel, but apart from manual diesels, no Omega is... an mpg or two either way really isn't worth worrying about imho... but it goes well enough and still makes all the v6 noises 

If it's rust free, buy it if you fancy it. Sounds a fair price assuming it has an MoT.

[Andy H]

I have done 100,000 miles so far in my 2.6 (bought it with 111,000 miles on it). Would happily buy another.

[Kevin Wood]

... an mpg or two either way really isn't worth worrying about imho...

Exactly why you might as well have a 3.2. Not much penalty in fuel consumption (on paper. I've never owned a 2.6) and a much nicer engine on the road, IMHO.

Plus, as said, 2.6s often have valve stem seal issues (avoid anything around 2001 vintage) and they suffer as soon as the MAF sensor starts to degrade. Despite having the same part, I've seen very few failures on a 3.2 so can only assume the engine mapping isn't so accommodating of sensor ageing.

Any Omega with an auto box will be disappointing on fuel compared to the figures from your 2.5TD, however.

[omegod]

From my experience, 2.6's have a tendency to lunch their crankshaft bearings through oil starvation more than other models

[Andy H]

From my experience, 2.6's have a tendency to lunch their crankshaft bearings through oil starvation more than other models

Any Omega V6 that has suffered from main dealer service intervals will need to have the oil pan dropped and the strainer checked/cleaned for peace of mind.

What mileage should I start worrying about the crankshaft bearings? It is on 215,000 now (and my previous 2.5 was on 210,000 before it succumbed to tin worm). I think the key for long life is to use fully synthetic oil - I don't think it is a coincidence that those who advocate using semi-synthetic oil seem to be the same people who complain about crank bearing failure

[TheBoy]

I think the key for long life is to use fully synthetic oil - I don't think it is a coincidence that those who advocate using semi-synthetic oil seem to be the same people who complain about crank bearing failure

I think its not so much the oil, but the service regime.

My 232k (3.0) example has never seen fully synth, and has had a hard life.  But its always had fresh oil fairly regularly in my ownership (from 88k).  The Mr DTM fella has been in the bowels of that engine far too often, and always commented how clean it all is, with very little wear.

[mantaray]

Thanks for all the replies.

Another question, how much of the F/L car could be swoped over on to my TD ?
My thinking is, that if I do buy it and then find that i don't like it, could I use it as donner parts to tidy up my TD.

Thinking about the doors, as the doors on my TD have seen better days and if I do keep the TD, it would be nice to give it a bit of TLC.

With transport ect. I'm looking at around £500 to get the car home and sort out the oil cooler, my thinking is, If I don't get on with it, then I should be able to sell on without too much loss or I could use it as a donner for my TD.

Thanks for any advice.

[2boxerdogs]

I bought a 1 owner 2.6 CDX in December 2010 with 51,000 miles with full service history  I sold it last December with just over 90,000 miles apart from routine servicing & an exhaust it was a brilliant car , in no stretch of the imagination are they underpowered , it cruised effortlessly at an indicated 125mph when I took it through Germany & was extremely comfortable it was manual and averaged 27-33 mpg. The only reason I sold it was that I have always hankered after a V8 which I now have ,had I had a double garage I would have kept it. They are in my opinion an excellent vehicle.

[polilara]

I bought my 2.6 (year model 2001) when 45 000 km was behind (in 2004). Today it has 235 000 km behind.

Crank sensor once
MAF once
Cylinder head gasket back corner in oil filter side started to leak very long time ago (I use chemicals, not recommended)
Plastic valve covers (both) due to oil leak (about 200 000 km)
Alternator once
Crank oil seal back side started to leak some years ago
Both coil backs during last two years due to water leak from scuttle, misfire
Power steering hose leaking (not pressured side)
Morning smoker (stem seal case)
Creates mayonnaise in city driving
Thirsty, yes indeed
Autobox AR 26 "positioning box" beside the gear box once
HBV 5 times
Reliable
Perhaps I forgot something

[Doctor Gollum]

I bought my 2.6 (year model 2001) when 45 000 km was behind (in 2004). Today it has 235 000 km behind.

Crank sensor once
MAF once
Cylinder head gasket back corner in oil filter side started to leak very long time ago (I use chemicals, not recommended)
Plastic valve covers (both) due to oil leak (about 200 000 km)
Alternator once
Crank oil seal back side started to leak some years ago
Both coil backs during last two years due to water leak from scuttle, misfire
Power steering hose leaking (not pressured side)
Morning smoker (stem seal case)
Creates mayonnaise in city driving
Thirsty, yes indeed
Autobox AR 26 "positioning box" beside the gear box once
HBV 5 times
Reliable
Perhaps I forgot something

All pretty standard Omega stuff

[polilara]

I bought my 2.6 (year model 2001) when 45 000 km was behind (in 2004). Today it has 235 000 km behind.

Crank sensor once
MAF once
Cylinder head gasket back corner in oil filter side started to leak very long time ago (I use chemicals, not recommended)
Plastic valve covers (both) due to oil leak (about 200 000 km)
Alternator once
Crank oil seal back side started to leak some years ago
Both coil backs during last two years due to water leak from scuttle, misfire
Power steering hose leaking (not pressured side)
Morning smoker (stem seal case)
Creates mayonnaise in city driving
Thirsty, yes indeed
Autobox AR 26 "positioning box" beside the gear box once
HBV 5 times
Reliable
Perhaps I forgot something

All pretty standard Omega stuff

Yes but the list is, However, short I think, after 12 years and almost 200 000 km. So "How good are 2.6 Omegas?" Would like to say: Not that bad.