What do you think of the 3.2 Petrol

[Fidodido]

Hey guys

After looking at a few sheds this week I have found a very good 2001 3.2 Petrol Limited with 79000 miles on it and is Motd until April next year.

I have been assured it is a good motor and can strike the right deal on my Volvo.

Right my only apprehension is fuel, can someone tell me if they are real guzzlers, I consider myself a sensible(ish) driver..Am I going to notice a massive difference between a 2.2 diesel and this?

I know your all probably thinking Im dim but the biggest car I have had was a Saab with full pressure turbo.....

Incidentally believe it or not the insurance on this is the same as my 1.6d volvo, go figure

[justdan]

Iv discussed this subject in the past ! From what I can gather the 3.2 in some cases can be better on fuel than the 2.2 lol
Iv a 2.2 and average around 25-30mpg !!!!

[Fidodido]

[ghosthunter]

3.2 versus 2.2 petrol .....equals ......no difference in the amount of fuel used. I have both and both are daily drivers. It's going to be more expensive than a 2.2 diesel, but against the petrol version your not really going to notice a difference.
In fact my 3.2 is more economical on a run and only slightly worse around town. The 3.2 is the engine it should have. Don't expect rocket performance, after all it's only 200 bhp in a heavy chunk of steel. It's smart but comfortable. It can feel like warp drive compared to a 2.2 petrol, but then so can a electric wheelchair .
My driving opinions are that the 3.2 feels front heavy, whereas the 2.2 feels more balanced......that's why I kept the 2.2 instead of using it as spares for the 3.2.
Now if I could have the power of he 3.2 With the balance of the 2.2 then I would be very happy.
So to sum up.....if you can afford to run a 2.2 petrol then you can afford to run a 3.2
Would I get rid of it............no way.....in fact I'll probably be buried in it.......with the 2.2 on top after a HG change first

[Fidodido]

[jimmybhoy]

i stopped looking @ my fuel consumption when my LPG was Fekt. it is what it is kind of attitude. I do tend to drive like a man on a mission though . I Fixed my gas & now runs 1/2 price. Im looking to spend quite a chunk on mine getting it back up to scratch, however im undecided as ive seen another vehicle .......its another 3.2 . If i buy it i may just keep both,They are fantastic machines, despite a couple of (sometime fustrating) issues.

[rf9rider]

I went from a 2.2dti to a 3.2.

Was getting around 45mpg with the dti, now getting around 20/25mpg with the 3.2.

Don`t do a lot of miles, so mpg isn`t an issue for me.

Issues i`ve had were both front abs sensors needed replacing (very expensive) and i`ve had to replace the complete exhaust sysyem, though i had a complete stainless system fitted with a lifetime guarantee.

Wouldn`t have any other Fronty now, once you get a 3.2 you`re hooked with the motor.

Regular servicing and it will go on for ever.

The road tax goes up after a certain year, so worth checking what the 2001 model will be.

[AskDean]

I am on my second lpg lwb b series and i would not have any other model. the power and towing grunt of the 205bhp motor is great and around town with a vicars foot is as bad as the 2.2 on petrol but in a run is a more ecomnical.

my original 2000 model ran lpg and was remapped for more power and torque and being an auto was a magnificent drive and cheap to run getting 200 miles for £35 even with my lead foot. my current model 51 plate does 270 round town for £43 and has achived 348 miles on a 70l of lpg coming in at £50 and change on a mixed run of motorways down to eastbourne and then spending 4 days driving around the south downs to brighton and hove and places like that up and down the steep hills.

as long as it has a been well serviced and you if an auto change the fluid every few years you wont have many problems with them.

there are nmber of threads on the issue of mpg, 2.2 over 3.2 and so forth most who have owned one love them and will always go for the 3.2 over a 2.2 but its horses for courses a lot of the reviews on websites have said the 3.2 made more sense as the 2.2 labours more with the weight of the b series and so the smaller engine works out less economical over all

[AskDean]

like i said a lpg one would be great as cheap and the power. if the one your not looking at is a minter then consider having the gas fitted cost about a grand but you will make that moeny back in the first 8000 miles you do as i put 20 od petrol in every 6 to 8 weeks and i put 40 to 50 of lpg in every 350 miles as its only 65p a liter here in nottingham at present.

there are places to fill all over the place there is even a app that shows the nearest to you using google maps on your smart phone as a satnav.

take it for a drive and youll love it when the front rises as you dip the gas pedal half way and launch of the lights a little quicker than you thought.

[Fidodido]

Thank guys

Well decided to get the 3.2 this morning. Bodywork and inside was pretty much spotless as good as my volvo and 4 years older. Had a good look at the paperwork and low mileage made my mind up. Had the belt/water pump done 7000 mile ago which I though was another bonus although it has took 4 years to do that 7000 miles from the mileage on the Mots.

Seems a decent motor, stuck it on cruise at 65mph back down the m62 and was showing around 38-40mpg, not sure how accurate that is but it did drop off to low 20's back in the town. Had to get back to work so not really had much chance to look at it but taking a long weekend and will get out somewhere no doubt.

Thanks for all the comments, I lost money on the Volvo but thats what you get from buying from dealers and as we cant go a day without a car it makes it very difficult when looking for something new.

I will stick a pic up later

[Fidodido]

Seriously dont know what the previous owner was thinking with the little spots....but they are bright
I do want the steps and nudge bar but on thing at a time lol