Im my opinion, without upsetting 2.6 Owners, the small difference in MPG gain for a 2.6 isn't worth it it for the extra Torque and Performance you get with the 3.2, only issue with that is the 3.2 will be an Auto
While I agree, anyone looking to buy a v6 omega these days is a begger, not a chooser. And I would reframe the comment as "the extra Torque and Performance you get with the 3.2 isn't worth buying an inferior car for".
It all depends on your requirements, if you just want a cruiser to waft you along at motorway speeds and day to day traffic, the smaller v6 is adequate imho. The 2.2 auto on the other hand, will foster either impotent fury, or zen-like patience in its driver.
Never said the V6 2.6 was an inferior car, or a least didn't mean to imply that, far from it, the point I was making was with reference to the Topic 'V6 MPG', in my view in terms of MPG I dont feel the smaller engine'd 2.6 V6 was worthy of the small mpg savings compared to its sister 3.2.
Also talking of of Motorway cruises, I reckon put 5 people plus some holiday luggage in the 2.6 and 3.2 then both go for a leisurely few hundred mile cruise, your probably find in terms of MPG the 3.2 will come out slightly better.
But hey, its only Petrol money, some aren't bothered about cost per mile, some are, Me, Im a titght bugger, I like to try and squeesh as much as possible for my Buck, hence that's probably why I like my LPG's so much.
On the 2.2 subject, see you brought this one up
, I did have 2.2 Manual LPG to drive around in for a little while, and was quiet surprised how bad it was on MPG compared to the LPG'd V6's Ive driven.