Print

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

[MickAP]

Having only owned and driven a TD estate I'm now interested in a 2.2 petrol saloon.
What are they really like on fuel? I asked a guy when filling up next to me recently, he had a 2.2 estate. He wasn't best pleased with his MPG, said low 20's and poss nearer 30 on a long run, is this the norm.

Mick

[Radar]

Around town i'll be lucky to get 20. On a motorway run i get low 30's. Also it feels underpowered for the size of car. I would go for a v6 instead as the economy is very similar.

HTH

[Elite Pete]

A nice 2.5 V6 with a manual box is probably the best way to go

[mathewst]

Radar do you drive like Schumaher??
Don't have to will to calculate excatly but on normal long runs economy on mine is aroun 7,3 litres on open road, combined around 10.5 to 11, and town is around 13.5 to 14 (40, 32, 26 mpg approx).

[Radar]

Radar do you drive like Schumaher??
Don't have to will to calculate excatly but on normal long runs economy on mine is aroun 7,3 litres on open road, combined around 10.5 to 11, and town is around 13.5 to 14 (40, 32, 26 mpg approx).

Unfortunately i do not! and i know the mpg is not good. If I stick it on cruise at 80mph i get about 34mpg. My town figures are based on my daily commute of 2 miles each way so i presume the engine does not have time to warm up which is why the figure is so bad.

[cruisetopoland]

I got the 2.2 auto and get (averages) 22mpg cold/around town, 27mpg mixed around town, 32mpg on a town/rural run, but 35+ using cruise on a run.  Managed 41mpg on a warm run the other day, flat A-road, 55mph.
For the record, my overall average is 31.9mpg-includes stops/start driving and A-roads.

I love the 2.2 16v and think the economy fair for such a heavy car and would disagree that it is underpowered-mine flies when baited and seems a good compromise between power and economy.
A manual would be cheaper to fuel, but auto and cruise suits the car-it is a cruiser.

Economy is down to technique-plan ahead, be smooth, avoid unnecessary stops and starts-it is a heavy car to accelerate!

Before being too hung up on the economy, look at your average mileage per year and work out the actual £/pence fuel cost difference between 25 and 35mpg.  I bought my Omega knowing it would be thirsty-but comfy, safe and big enough for five and luggage.
10mpg difference over say 10,000 miles pa only costs a small amount in the whole scheme of motoring and look at the huge premium to buy a diesel in the first place-if you do sensible miles, the petrol does makes sense.

Note the April 2010 tax increase on cars registered after 1st March 2001-goes up to £245pa for any petrol Omega due to high CO2, instead of the blanket new £205pa on the old system for any car over 1549cc.  Knowing the government, the CO2 based tax will just rise and rise and the pre-2001 should stay the same-perhaps the gap will widen?  I chose a pre-2001 car deliberately.
See: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_172916

So-2.2 16v; 25-35mpg daily if well maintained and driven carefully, quick enough and cheaper to buy than the desirable diesels.

Depends on what the deal is?!  If you find a cheap 2.2 diesel (!), great-but the ££££ difference is a lot of fuel...

[davethediver]

I tend to get around twenty round town and when cold, however as most of my driving is on the motorway at a steady 80 i get 30-35mpg all day long. For such a big comfy cruiser i can't complain.

Have had it as low as 11-12 when in sports round town and a big heavy boot on my right foot 

[tunnie]

i have had a 2.2 for almost 5 years, they are very smooth for 4 pots, easy as pie to work on for most things. Cam cover gaskets are a doddle.

They are however tad underpowered, and a 2.5 V6 manual would be more economical.

My 2.2 has been ultra reliable its never let me down and its cheap to run hardly anything has gone wrong with it.

At the moment all i do is pound up and down the M40, and the 2.2 will sit at 80-90mph alllll day long. So for me a V6 won't offer much more.

I am averaging 34mpg at the moment.

[oceansoul]

I drive around town most of the time, and (according to the screen) get about 21.5ish. Ive just serviced and done the rocker gasket which was simples to do. On my uni day i blast up n down the M4 to reading and the MPG does improve to ~30. I'd say the 2.2 is fairly slow to accelerate but will happly do 100.....+ 


Saying all that, mines a sport so i dont know if it has a CR gearbox or the standard box

[PhilRich]

I average 22mpg around town, but this is because the car never gets warm. On longer local runs it returns ~28mpg. I haven't done a motorway run in mine yet so can't comment on that or the effects of cruise control on mpg. I find the car is more than responsive for its size/weight, it beats my old renault laguna 2.0 auto into a cocked hat!

[Welung666]

I average 22mpg around town, but this is because the car never gets warm. On longer local runs it returns ~28mpg. I haven't done a motorway run in mine yet so can't comment on that or the effects of cruise control on mpg. I find the car is more than responsive for its size/weight, it beats my old renault laguna 2.0 auto into a cocked hat!

A pushbike with 2 flat tyres would too!

[MickAP]

Well thanks for your various replies. Can work out then that the 2.2 driven sensibly can return not bad mpg figures, better obviously on a longer run.
A friend had the 2.2 he swopped it for a Jag and said afterwards the Omega was more comfortable and better mpg.
Going to look at a 2.2 later this week.

Mick

[Radar]

I got the 2.2 auto and get (averages) 22mpg cold/around town, 27mpg mixed around town, 32mpg on a town/rural run, but 35+ using cruise on a run.  Managed 41mpg on a warm run the other day, flat A-road, 55mph.
For the record, my overall average is 31.9mpg-includes stops/start driving and A-roads.

I love the 2.2 16v and think the economy fair for such a heavy car and would disagree that it is underpowered-mine flies when baited and seems a good compromise between power and economy.
A manual would be cheaper to fuel, but auto and cruise suits the car-it is a cruiser.

Economy is down to technique-plan ahead, be smooth, avoid unnecessary stops and starts-it is a heavy car to accelerate!

Before being too hung up on the economy, look at your average mileage per year and work out the actual £/pence fuel cost difference between 25 and 35mpg.  I bought my Omega knowing it would be thirsty-but comfy, safe and big enough for five and luggage.
10mpg difference over say 10,000 miles pa only costs a small amount in the whole scheme of motoring and look at the huge premium to buy a diesel in the first place-if you do sensible miles, the petrol does makes sense.

Note the April 2010 tax increase on cars registered after 1st March 2001-goes up to £245pa for any petrol Omega due to high CO2, instead of the blanket new £205pa on the old system for any car over 1549cc.  Knowing the government, the CO2 based tax will just rise and rise and the pre-2001 should stay the same-perhaps the gap will widen?  I chose a pre-2001 car deliberately.
See: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_172916

So-2.2 16v; 25-35mpg daily if well maintained and driven carefully, quick enough and cheaper to buy than the desirable diesels.

Depends on what the deal is?!  If you find a cheap 2.2 diesel (!), great-but the ££££ difference is a lot of fuel...

Very Good Points. I don't drive like a madman but i still feel for example when joining a motorway or going up a hill it could do with a bit more power. I do approx. 9000 miles/year so the mpg is something i can live with but not everyone would. Afterall the difference between 35mpg and 25mpg is 40% so it does add up quickly. It is good to hear other people's comments and at least MickAP has got some user comments to mull over.

[cruisetopoland]

Depends what you're used to, I suppose?

I was surprised by the uphill and take-off performance of the 2.2-but I have not driven a V6 version.

Sport button, toe to the carpet, kickdown, liftoff!!

[mathewst]

Well mine is manual, and I would never buy a auto petrol cause it can really drink a lot ( speaking generally and not about migs).
Cannot say the 2.2 is underpowered, it just needs higher revs (but this will consume more of course).
Sometimes on open road when driving really fast the difference is only about 1/4 of a gallon on 100 miles.
4pots seem very reliable except blasted belts and tensioners which need to be changed regularly