PistonHeads.com Forum

No love for quick Vectras?

Author
Discussion

Sparta VAG

Original Poster:

436 posts

56 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
Been doing a little digging around the options for a new family motor recently and noticed just how cheap some of the faster Vectras have become.

250 bhp in the 2.8T engined models and 208bhp from the V6.

Admittedly Vectras aren't the last word in cool or handling but they do seem very quick cars for the money and the Elite spec have leather, cruise, aircon etc as well as an enormous boot.

Quick search and they hardly seem to feature at all on PH? There must be a few PHers who've had one in the past?

pboyd

651 posts

43 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
Personally don't like. Seem to be owned by chats and lorry drivers. I am sure gsi is a good cruiser

VEA

4,404 posts

110 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
pboyd said:
chats

BRMMA

1,133 posts

81 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
I'm sure they go well in a straight line and are probably a nice place to site on a long drive, other than that i don't think they have anything going for them but if those two things are what somebody wants from a car (and there's no reason they shouldn't) then it may be a good choice

KieronGSi

1,053 posts

113 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
Love them, ran a 3.2 V6 GSi for a few years and for me it was brilliant. If I move back to the UK I'd definetly think about getting a 280 VXR.
Advertisement

englisharcher

1,607 posts

73 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
pboyd said:
chats
Is that shorthand for chav t***ts?

pboyd

651 posts

43 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
englisharcher said:
Is that shorthand for chav t***ts?
Meant to write chav

fjord

1,759 posts

46 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
Excellent cars.

The 3.2 gsi was a bit slow, considering the size of the lump and how much power it gave (or didnt) give off.

The 2.8 vxr is rapid. The handling stuff is total top gear bks, and it handles just was well as any other powerful FWD car.

Inside is lovely and overall, a nice car.

The only thing i cant 'unsee' is the distance between the top of the front tyres and the arches. Sounds daft but it makes the proportions look well out of place.

Edited by fjord on Friday 17th May 12:04

djfaulkner

972 posts

127 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
My first car was a Vectra and it was a decent car - done a fair few trips from London to Doncaster quite happyly.

My boss had a 2.6 V6 SRi which at the time were quite limited, ex showroom managers car.

richb77

854 posts

70 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
I dont think there is anything wrong with them apart from the interior.

get behind the wheel to huge flat slabs of silver/grey plastic. i want some curves and for it not to look like a 2 year old designed it.

Devil2575

12,477 posts

97 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
fjord said:
Excellent cars.

The 2.8 vxr is rapid. The handling stuff is total top gear bks, and it handles just was well as any other powerful FWD car.
Indeed, EVO rated it 4 out of 5 and when it took part in a group test with a BMW, EVO and Impreza it gave a good account of itself. Certainly not the car some would have you believe.

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/cargrouptests/6518...

The whole Vectra things strikes me as a decent car with an image problem, largely created by the likes of Clarkson. I drove a Vectra years back and it felt as a good as the contemporary Mondeo.

JohnoVR6

506 posts

121 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
I've always quite liked the older Super Touring edition:



But only because I always wanted to drive about pretending to be Cleland...

I have no idea about that model Vectra at all though, it could be horrific for all I know laugh

rohrl

8,217 posts

54 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
JohnoVR6 said:
I've always quite liked the older Super Touring edition:



But only because I always wanted to drive about pretending to be Cleland...

I have no idea about that model Vectra at all though, it could be horrific for all I know laugh
Those V6 Vectras certainly make a good noise, though that's probably the best thing about them.

s_zigmond

881 posts

95 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
I had a 2.8 elite estate. It was an excellent car once I put a set of Bilstein b12's on it. Mapped to 300+bhp and 400+lbft it was rapid, comfortable and had a huge boot. Given most of my annual mileage is driving to Italy it was perfect.

TameRacingDriver

10,239 posts

181 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
I had a test drive in a 3.2 GSI, not impressed, felt slow, boring and like driving a boat, although I had just got out of a Clio 182 at the time.

That said a guy near me has a 2.6 V6 (I assume, its that shape) and he floors it every time past my flat, and it sounds really bloody nice! Imagine my disappointment when I first heard it, and looked out of the window to see the aging repmobile flying past the window biggrin

Magictrousers

240 posts

83 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
Very happy with my 3.2. Not the most refined thing on four wheels, but nowehere near as bad as the uninitiated would have you believe, based purely on the views of others.

Kateg28

1,149 posts

72 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
We had a 1.9 CDTi 155bhp which I know you are all laughing at but hear me out.

It was quicker then it ought to have been for a 1.9 diesel, it really was, and the fuel consumption was in the early 50's as the long term average. These all seem good points.

The problem was it was epically (is that a word?) unreliable. My OH bought it as an ex demonstrator at 6 months old and it broke down about 6 times in 5 years, with some serious bills, for the warranty company until written off by a inattentive TP.


fjord

1,759 posts

46 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
Kateg28 said:
We had a 1.9 CDTi 155bhp which I know you are all laughing at but hear me out.

It was quicker then it ought to have been for a 1.9 diesel, it really was, and the fuel consumption was in the early 50's as the long term average. These all seem good points.

The problem was it was epically (is that a word?) unreliable. My OH bought it as an ex demonstrator at 6 months old and it broke down about 6 times in 5 years, with some serious bills, for the warranty company until written off by a inattentive TP.
I've heard good things about the 1.9, in terms of performance and MPG. Iirc it's not a GM engine, maybe a fiat one?

I had the 3.0 v6 Diesel. The only car i seriously regret selling. It was as specced up as you could get and the equivalant 3-series would probably cost about £35k.

I got it for 16k with 12,000 miles on the clock.

I miss you so much frown Anyone out there got an Sri XP2 Nav in grey, KY08***? biggrin

KieronGSi

1,053 posts

113 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
JohnoVR6 said:
I've always quite liked the older Super Touring edition:



But only because I always wanted to drive about pretending to be Cleland...

I have no idea about that model Vectra at all though, it could be horrific for all I know laugh
That particular one is an ST200 of which only 38 were sold 192 bhp, Koni adjustable suspension and AP four pot brakes and 17 inch alloys. The other Super Tourings of which there were 500 were just SRis with either a 2.0 or the 2.5.

CrispyMK

173 posts

49 months

Friday 17th May 2013
quotequote all
fjord said:
I've heard good things about the 1.9, in terms of performance and MPG. Iirc it's not a GM engine, maybe a fiat one?
I had the 1.9 in my old Astra, it was quick enough for a diesel and with a remap gave decent performance. It's used in Fiats, SAABs, Alfas and Vauxhalls AFAIK. Not sure where it originated from but I think you might be right with Fiat.

My brother in law has just picked up a Grande Punto with the 1.9 in it and it is giving better MPG (worked out properly) than mine ever did.

Anyway, back to the fast Vectras.