Print

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

[tunnie]

Well before i sold project A i took it for a litte run.. thought i would waste some of the petrol in it

I took it for a blast around the local roads here... I loved the V6 roar it made thundering though the country side and it put a smile on my face.

Now i had not run my facelift properly for a while, its battery was getting a bit flat due to running my ICE off the battery for too long!

So took that on the same route....

I have to say the 2.2 is no slouch... i know the V6 was an auto and would be slower but the 2.2 is acually really quick in manual form.

Its ride was far superior, it handled the bumps much much better, the ride was sooo smooth compared to the V6 the cabin was quieter and it generally gripped better. The steering also felt sharper and i could 'feel' the road better.

Some little chav in a Saxo VTR tryed to race me, i pulled out from 20mph in second to pass a tractor.. i put my foot down & passed the tractor and moved in after the over-take, but he stayed out and tryed to pass me, but could't! - He had to move back in after a while but he really did try to overtake.

As i turned off i looked back and it looked like a geniune VTR (no body kit & normal zorst) so thats a 1.6 i guess?

God only knows how the 3.2 facelifts are, they must be seriously quick.

So to sum up, the 2.2 is acually very good in manual form and glad I have my 2.2 facelift rather than the V6 Reflection.

[Admin]

Yes the facelift has a better ride and better wind noise reduction.
I am impressed with the improvements they made.

You have to bear in mind though. The older V6 would have rather more worn shocks and springs which will dramatically alter the handling ability.

I would like to try a manual 3.2 also... I think it could be very entertaining.  

[tunnie]

Yes the facelift has a better ride and better wind noise reduction.
I am impressed with the improvements they made.

You have to bear in mind though. The older V6 would have rather more worn shocks and springs which will dramatically alter the handling ability.

I would like to try a manual 3.2 also... I think it could be very entertaining.  

Yep Agreed, the facelift is a huge improvement.

I really want a 3.2 megga for a bit of fun, but can't really get one on my budget at the moment.

[Paul M]

You've just confirmed what everyone who enjoys driving knew... the better car is the one with a manual gearbox, regardless of engine  8-)

The fact VX only sold "public" 3.2s with a sludgebox kinda says it all, they obviously only wanted pensioners to drive them  . It's a waste really cos even the 3.0/3.2 isn't that powerful in a big car like the Omega, certainly I find my manual 3.0 to be a little lacking at times, and that's quicker than a 3.2 sludgey! They should've brought out the planned V8 with a 6-speed manual only

[tunnie]

there are times when i wanted more power under my right foot, but tbh it hasn't been that often.

I have driven a 3.0 auto and that had some real punch, i'd love to thrash a 3.2 manual and compare it with my 2.2

[Admin]

Hmmm, my 3.0 facelift auto is no slouch... actually it is a very rapid motor!

I would certainly not describe it as a "pensioners car"  

As for lacking something? Well compared to what you also drive Paul, most things will be a bit "lacking"  

[Del Boy]

I got an 3.0 MV6 x-plod facelift manual that goes some (it's been chipped to )

[Paul M]

As for lacking something? Well compared to what you also drive Paul, most things will be a bit "lacking"  

Maybe... but I don't find even the 4.4 V8 840Ci to be that fast, prefer to describe it as quick. 315 BHP these days is nothing really, you can buy an Astra out of the box with 240 BHP FFS, just keep it away from any corners and don't use the words "torque steer" too loudly when you're near one  . My WRX was easily quicker 0-60 (4.8 seconds with a proper launch - just don't do it too often!) although the 840 is quicker at the top end, it'll do 173 MPH with the limiter removed.

Where it really shines is the torque spread, it just feels like it wants to pull anywhere in the rev range. I can sit at 30 MPH in built up areas in 6th gear, put the foot down a touch and it happily accelerates without the usual groaning most engines do. Even though it's a 32 valve engine that likes to be revved (the power peaks at 6000 RPM), it's just so much more driveable than the Omega lump - I find mine to be absolutely gutless around town, it really needs to be revved yet the standard gearing makes it difficult to get the revs up!

I have considered dropping a different diff in to lower the gearing a fair bit which would improve the driveability and acceleration no end, but considering it's my luxo-barge that spends 80% of its time on the motorway that would be a bit counter-productive! It really could be doing with a 6-speed box IMO - it works great on the 840 giving the best of both worlds (reasonably low gearing, but keeping the high top gear for cruising) and the Omega would benefit from it even more than the 840 does due to its lack of torque. Not going to happen though, it'd cost more than the whole car did

[Marks DTM Calib]

Your rear multiram isnt working properly then......the thing I find best about my V6 units is that they will pull from 1000rpm in fifth....

[Paul M]

How do I check? I had a look at the vacuum diagram you posted a while ago and all the pipes seemed to be OK. It would be great if it turned out there is something wrong, much as I enjoy peaky engines when on a nice road I could really be doing with a little torque to help with the more mundane stuff - not to mention the fuel economy!