User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: 3.0 CDTi after 12000 miles

  1. #1
    Regular Member Maverick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Leicester
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default 3.0 CDTi after 12000 miles

    After now covered 15000 miles in the 3.0, 12000 since I have had it, I thought I would write a little about my thoughts, the good and the bad. This is based on my over all experiences with all types of driving.

    I am comparing this to my previous 1.9 150's. The engine itself is a gem and sounds fantastic, unfortunatly the 1.9 will never sound as good. If you drive it like Miss Daisy it can also be just as economical as the 1.9, but in reality I would say on average I am losing 8-10mpg if you take in the big picture.

    But the Vectra 3.0 may lose less as it is a lighter car than the Signum. For motorway cruising, it is one of the best out there, but then again so is the 1.9 so equal score there. I think I find that the 3.0 does not like to be thrashed about where the 1.9 screams to be driven hard, but in my circumstances, this is a good thing.

    As some of you know I do alot of towing and the 3.0 is the far better car, tows with much less fuss.

    Performance wise, the 3.0 is not as quick a I expected, on paper, the official 0-60 times are only 0.2 sec's quicker than a standard Vectra 1.9 150. I would say this is true in reality as well, from 30 to 70 mph the 3.0 Signum and standard 1.9 150 Vectra are evenly matched, the Vectra 1.9 with a re-map is a quicker car over the same speed (30-70), then the 3.0 Signum will walk away with it.

    Would I have another 3.0? In all honesty, not sure, the 3.0 is a much more fuss free rapid mode of transport where the 1.9 with a re-map is more aggressive. I would not rule out another 3.0, nor would I rule out a 1.9 re-mapped.

    I would like to see what mine is like with a re-map.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Harry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Uxbridge, London
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick View Post
    I would like to see what mine is like with a re-map.
    why have i always thought that yours has had a remap at some point?

    Matt - you need to drive a remapped 3.0 before comparing the two. a completely different beast all together, and with a remap it yearns to be driven hard all the time - it's awesome.

  3. #3
    Regular Member VectraV6CDTi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Wilts
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Good write up Matt. I would agree with that.
    I think the reason why the 3.0 doesnt feel as quick also is the linear delivery of power. I find it does get up to speed very quickly, but does not feel it. The 3.0 is 184PS against a 1.9 150's 150PS and because of the weight difference, this brings both cars much closer together on performance.

    In fact the power to weight ratio is:
    Vec 1.9 150: 103bhp/tonne
    Signum 3.0: 110bhp/tonne

    So not a lot in it Given there is 34bhp difference between the two engines.

    Have you tried a Vec 3.0? I would imagine its a tad quicker than the Sig due to being lighter.
    You didnt mention the handling, that does lose out to the 1.9, also due to the weight disadvantage.
    Having said all of that, I really love my 3.0 and personally prefer it to a 1.9.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Harry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Uxbridge, London
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    good point Andy about the handling, alot of roll even on sri springs. eibachs help alot though!

  5. #5
    Regular Member nutron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    South Central England
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats

    Vehicle : Vauxhall

    Trim : very

    Engine : Z19DTH

    Year : Nosey

    Default

    On the other hand, Harry has 220 horses under his hood and I have 213 under mine. When you take into account the extra 150KG of Harry's, his actually has less bhp/tonne and less lbft/tonne... Infact mine has more lbft full stop. What's more, there isn't as much research going into 3ltr tuning.

    But all this may be completely irellevent next year if they do bring out the twin turbos (both 1.9 and 2.9).

  6. #6
    Regular Member BigLad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    30,000ft by day, bed at night
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nutron View Post
    On the other hand, Harry has 220 horses under his hood and I have 213 under mine. When you take into account the extra 150KG of Harry's, his actually has less bhp/tonne and less lbft/tonne... Infact mine has more lbft full stop. What's more, there isn't as much research going into 3ltr tuning.

    But all this may be completely irellevent next year if they do bring out the twin turbos (both 1.9 and 2.9).


    Surely the 3.0 has less 'stress' on the engine at those sort of power outputs than the 4 cylinder 1.9?

  7. #7
    Full Member Big Sig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Is a very naughty boy
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nutron View Post
    On the other hand, Harry has 220 horses under his hood and I have 213 under mine. When you take into account the extra 150KG of Harry's, his actually has less bhp/tonne and less lbft/tonne... Infact mine has more lbft full stop. What's more, there isn't as much research going into 3ltr tuning.

    But all this may be completely irellevent next year if they do bring out the twin turbos (both 1.9 and 2.9).
    The problem is a tuned 1.9 will die faster then a standard 3.0 or a remapped one due to the stresses on the engine and gearbox. I agree the 1.9 has more development potential. If anyone looks at past tuned cars they expire very quickely compared to a standard one.
    Now I need a turbo to keep up!

  8. #8
    Regular Member nutron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    South Central England
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats

    Vehicle : Vauxhall

    Trim : very

    Engine : Z19DTH

    Year : Nosey

    Default

    The 1.9 won't put any more stress on transmission components, only the engine itself. Don't know how long it will last but it's managed 18 months at this level and is still in good working order, passed MOT emissions test last month and still gets good economy.

  9. #9
    Full Member Big Sig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Is a very naughty boy
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats





    Default

    Yes it will due to the punch of the torque loading. The 1.9 is far more savage in the power delivery than the 3.0. The sudden loading WILL cause a higher shock loading on the gearbox internals.
    There was a thread on this the other day.
    Now I need a turbo to keep up!

  10. #10
    Regular Member nutron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    South Central England
    Problems Posted
    0
    Problems Solved
    0
    Best Answers
    0
    Good Answers
    0
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Vehicle InfoStats

    Vehicle : Vauxhall

    Trim : very

    Engine : Z19DTH

    Year : Nosey

    Default

    That's not true of the remaped cars, the tuning boxes yes but on the maps alone they aren't like that.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 1.9 CDTi: 3,000 miles later and the oil is still clean
    By Barlow in forum Engine & Drivetrain
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 6th June 2012, 13:29
  2. 1.9 CDTi: 3,000 miles later and the oil is still clean
    By Barlow in forum Vectra C / Signum Car Chat
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 6th June 2012, 00:08
  3. Any CDTI 150's with 150k + miles
    By galway1 in forum Vectra C / Signum Car Chat
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 14th August 2011, 03:52
  4. cutting out after 15+ miles ??? 1.9 cdti
    By vtec mini man in forum Engine & Drivetrain
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 9th June 2010, 12:19
  5. 12000 members now
    By soulman in forum General Chat
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 14th January 2009, 20:14

Visitors found this page by searching for:

Nobody landed on this page from a search engine, yet!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •