If things go to plan in the new year i want a v6. Whats the pros and cons of each engine please .I think it goes without saying it will be an auto
Opinions greatly appreciated
  Darren

drive-by-wire cars are a lot tidier under the bonnet. No silly tree hugging SAI to unplug etc etc  ;)  ;)  ;)

Andy B wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:03:

drive-by-wire cars are a lot tidier under the bonnet. No silly tree hugging SAI to unplug etc etc  ;)  ;)  ;)

youve lost me Andy ,whats SAI

zippo wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:13:

Andy B wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:03: drive-by-wire cars are a lot tidier under the bonnet. No silly tree hugging SAI to unplug etc etc  ;)  ;)  ;) youve lost me Andy ,whats SAI

And why is it tree hugging :-?

secondary air injection.

Blows air into the exhaust manifolds during warm up to help the catalytic converters warm up more quickly.

Andy H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:16:

secondary air injection. Blows air into the exhaust manifolds during warm up to help the catalytic converters warm up more quickly.

thanks Andy!  :y  :y  :y  :y

Andy H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:16:

secondary air injection. Blows air into the exhaust manifolds during warm up to help the catalytic converters warm up more quickly.

What are they ::)

thanks for clearing that up Andies

Brick Tamland wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:18:

Andy H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:16: secondary air injection. Blows air into the exhaust manifolds during warm up to help the catalytic converters warm up more quickly. What are they ::)

You only need to worry about one on your car!  :y  :y  :y  :y  :y

Brick Tamland wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:18:

Andy H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:16: secondary air injection. Blows air into the exhaust manifolds during warm up to help the catalytic converters warm up more quickly. What are they ::)

Something you don't have  ;)

Del Boy wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:19:

Brick Tamland wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:18: Andy H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:16: secondary air injection. Blows air into the exhaust manifolds during warm up to help the catalytic converters warm up more quickly. What are they ::) Something you don't have  ;)

Doh! http://www.autobahnstormers.org/forum/images/smilies/duh.gif I've missed something!  ::) :y :y

Andy B wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:21:

Del Boy wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:19: Brick Tamland wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:18: Andy H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:16: secondary air injection. Blows air into the exhaust manifolds during warm up to help the catalytic converters warm up more quickly. What are they ::) Something you don't have  ;) Doh! http://www.autobahnstormers.org/forum/images/smilies/duh.gif I've missed something!  ::) :y :y

I do frequently, comes with age  ;D

Del Boy wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:23:

Andy B wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:21: Del Boy wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:19: Brick Tamland wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:18: Andy H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:16: secondary air injection. Blows air into the exhaust manifolds during warm up to help the catalytic converters warm up more quickly. What are they ::) Something you don't have  ;) Doh! http://www.autobahnstormers.org/forum/images/smilies/duh.gif I've missed something!  ::) :y :y I do frequently, comes with age  ;D

I know!   :( :( :(

Where am I?
Who am I?                  ;)

Del Boy wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:19:

Brick Tamland wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:18: Andy H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:16: secondary air injection. Blows air into the exhaust manifolds during warm up to help the catalytic converters warm up more quickly. What are they ::) Something you don't have  ;)

All the better for it. Sounds great 8-)

Brick Tamland wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:32:

Del Boy wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:19: Brick Tamland wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:18: Andy H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:16: secondary air injection. Blows air into the exhaust manifolds during warm up to help the catalytic converters warm up more quickly. What are they ::) Something you don't have  ;) All the better for it. Sounds great 8-)

I can't say my Senator sounded better or performend any better when the cats were sat in the shed & my stainless de-cat pipes were fitted. It was a lot easier to fit/remove on that cat though.  :y  :y  :y

Andy B wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:25:

Del Boy wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:23: Andy B wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:21: Del Boy wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:19: Brick Tamland wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:18: Andy H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:16: secondary air injection. Blows air into the exhaust manifolds during warm up to help the catalytic converters warm up more quickly. What are they ::) Something you don't have  ;) Doh! http://www.autobahnstormers.org/forum/images/smilies/duh.gif I've missed something!  ::) :y :y I do frequently, comes with age  ;D I know!   :( :( :( Where am I? Who am I?                  ;)

;D ;D ;D

My car "should" have two catalytic converters but i decided they were expensive & could cause the car to stop/limp mode?, fail mot on emissions....
    So i fecked 'em off. No condoms on my car! 8-) :D

Amigo MX5 wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:38:

My car "should" have two catalytic converters but i decided they were expensive & could cause the car to stop/limp mode?, fail mot on emissions....     So i fecked 'em off. No condoms on my car! 8-) :D

Forgive me for sounding being ignorant, but I thought cat equipped cars had to have them fitted to pass the MOT? :-?

PhilRich wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:40:

Amigo MX5 wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:38: My car "should" have two catalytic converters but i decided they were expensive & could cause the car to stop/limp mode?, fail mot on emissions....     So i fecked 'em off. No condoms on my car! 8-) :D Forgive me for sounding being ignorant, but I thought cat equipped cars had to have them fitted to pass the MOT? :-?

Only 4 bolts +20 mins ::)

Ah, gotcha now :y ;D

PhilRich wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:40:

Amigo MX5 wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:38: My car "should" have two catalytic converters but i decided they were expensive & could cause the car to stop/limp mode?, fail mot on emissions....     So i fecked 'em off. No condoms on my car! 8-) :D Forgive me for sounding being ignorant, but I thought cat equipped cars had to have them fitted to pass the MOT? :-?

Don't quote me but....

I don't think cats were compulsory before 2000 so if you have a 1990's car you can 'de-cat' the car by fitting a straight through down pipe.

I am not totally sure of the cut off date. My 1972 Range Rover emission test is 'no excessive visible smoke from exhaust' (or something like that). The MOT takes half as long as it does for the Omega  ::)

If you look at your last MOT emissions results you should be able to tell if the criteria require a cat to pass.

Yes a de catted car won't pass the emissions test come mot time.
    As the old saying goes it's not what you know but who.....nuff said. 8-) :y

Andy B wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:35:

Brick Tamland wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:32: Del Boy wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:19: Brick Tamland wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:18: Andy H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:16: secondary air injection. Blows air into the exhaust manifolds during warm up to help the catalytic converters warm up more quickly. What are they ::) Something you don't have  ;) All the better for it. Sounds great 8-) I can't say my Senator sounded better or performend any better when the cats were sat in the shed & my stainless de-cat pipes were fitted. It was a lot easier to fit/remove on that cat though.  :y  :y  :y

Thats because it was a better car altogether Andy. :y :y





Here we go again :D ;D ;D ;D

Andy H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:59:

..... I am not totally sure of the cut off dat .....

K reg! All Most cars Kreg onwards require cats for an MOT test .... unless you know someone  :y  :y

Andy H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:59:

PhilRich wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:40: Amigo MX5 wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:38: My car "should" have two catalytic converters but i decided they were expensive & could cause the car to stop/limp mode?, fail mot on emissions....     So i fecked 'em off. No condoms on my car! 8-) :D Forgive me for sounding being ignorant, but I thought cat equipped cars had to have them fitted to pass the MOT? :-? Don't quote me but.... I don't think cats were compulsory before 2000 so if you have a 1990's car you can 'de-cat' the car by fitting a straight through down pipe. I am not totally sure of the cut off date. My 1972 Range Rover emission test is 'no excessive visible smoke from exhaust' (or something like that). The MOT takes half as long as it does for the Omega  ::) If you look at your last MOT emissions results you should be able to tell if the criteria require a cat to pass.

I think its earlier,around 1993. ;)

Albs wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 23:06:

....... Thats because it was a better car altogether Andy. :y :y Here we go again :D ;D ;D ;D

;D  ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D  :y

Albs wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 23:08:

...... I think its earlier,around 1993. ;)

1st Aug 1992  :y  :y  :y

Stick the pipe up another car that's just passed...sorted! 8-)

Albs wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 23:08:

Andy H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:59: PhilRich wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:40: Amigo MX5 wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 22:38: My car "should" have two catalytic converters but i decided they were expensive & could cause the car to stop/limp mode?, fail mot on emissions....     So i fecked 'em off. No condoms on my car! 8-) :D Forgive me for sounding being ignorant, but I thought cat equipped cars had to have them fitted to pass the MOT? :-? Don't quote me but.... I don't think cats were compulsory before 2000 so if you have a 1990's car you can 'de-cat' the car by fitting a straight through down pipe. I am not totally sure of the cut off date. My 1972 Range Rover emission test is 'no excessive visible smoke from exhaust' (or something like that). The MOT takes half as long as it does for the Omega  ::) If you look at your last MOT emissions results you should be able to tell if the criteria require a cat to pass. I think its earlier,around 1993. ;)

Anything after 1990 H reg had to have cats fitted

i'd take the 3.2 due to the DBW stuff, the 'go' pedal is so much lighter to the touch, the old cable driven ones need a fair bit of weight on them.

Tony H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 23:13:

...... Anything after 1990 H reg had to have cats fitted

No it's not. For all intents & purposes all K reg cars have to have a cat fitted  :y  :y

Andy B wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 23:21:

Tony H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 23:13: ...... Anything after 1990 H reg had to have cats fitted No it's not. For all intents & purposes all K reg cars have to have a cat fitted  :y  :y

Correct :y

Pete. wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 10:18:

Andy B wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 23:21: Tony H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 23:13: ...... Anything after 1990 H reg had to have cats fitted No it's not. For all intents & purposes all K reg cars have to have a cat fitted  :y  :y Correct :y

Been waiting for the forum to come back to say that Pete? ;D

I have owned the 2.5, 3.0 and now have the 3.2 all in Elite spec - and I am no mechanic but the 3.2 has been the  better driving experience with more pull and 22mpg on average, so for me I can't reccomend the 3.2 highly enough  :y

Darren

Regarding this 'cat' business, I remember a discussion on the MR2 forum once, where some post '93 cars had past the MOT without the cat fitted as they passed the emissions test, but others had been failed for no 'cat' even though they past the emission test. Seems the rules here were open to interprtation, or misinterpretation.

3.2 has no sai, egr valve, iac valve, no throttle cable or cruise controle box and cable in the engine bay. All replaced by more advanced(or should i say up to date?) engine management with drive by wire throttle. Not sure on the changes on the previous model years, but 3.0 will have most if not all of the above to replace/clean/blank off/ or unplug.

3.2 also does away with the dis pac and ht leads in favour of a single coil pack per bank, which is far easier to replace but more expensive to buy if it goes tets up i beleive, i've not had to replace one so far so not aware of cost. Less gubbins generally in the engine bay, which is always good when fitting lpg.

Oh, and the pedal trick rather than paper clip test, easier to do, more comprehensive list of codes and  WILL tell you which pot is missfiring! Unlike the 3.0 ecu which probably wont even notice if its lost a cylinder.

Plus being younger, 3.2 hopefully will be in slightly better nic. If you can find one, i guess it will cost more to buy as well though?

A pita that goes against the 3.2 is the pre cat issue, which also affects the 2.6 and 2.2 to a lesser extent. But in real terms the only real annoyance with that is the engine light constantly lit on the dash, but there is a fairly(?) cheap fix.

Hth the op. :-)

Whatever has been said to date, the one consideration in the 3.0 v 3.2 debate is that the latter will be in post 2000 cars and will attract the higher road tax rates ;) ;)

Andy B wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 23:21:

Tony H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 23:13: ...... Anything after 1990 H reg had to have cats fitted No it's not. For all intents & purposes all K reg cars have to have a cat fitted  :y  :y

Thats what I said K is after H :P :P :P

J?  ::)

tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 15:47:

J?  ::)

Think he meant that K is after H but not driectly after it  :y

Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 14:59:

Whatever has been said to date, the one consideration in the 3.0 v 3.2 debate is that the latter will be in post 2000 cars and will attract the higher road tax rates ;) ;)

No they won't.

Taxation for higher rates was moved back to 2006, all Omegas even 2003 3.2's pay no more than fixed rate for older cars

All Omega's are in Band K, on the second table

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_172916

Tony H wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 15:21:

Andy B wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 23:21: Tony H wrote on 12. Dec 2009 at 23:13: ...... Anything after 1990 H reg had to have cats fitted No it's not. For all intents & purposes all K reg cars have to have a cat fitted  :y  :y Thats what I said K is after H :P :P :P

C'mon! Or do you use a different alphabet?  ;) ;) ;)

tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 15:55:

All Omega's are in Band K, on the second table http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_172916

Picky head on .. :)

Not quite true ...  some of us are in the third table and save a WHOLE £10 ....  £235 for 2010-11  :)

Now that £10 is VERY IMPORTANT ... it is nearly 20 ltrs LPG or 4.4 galls which is nearly 80 miles of motoring free from the government .....

I really am very, very, very grateful to Mr Brown for his benevolence ... :)

[sarcastic mode = off]

:)

Entwood wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 16:09:

tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 15:55: All Omega's are in Band K, on the second table http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_172916 Picky head on .. :) Not quite true ...  some of us are in the third table and save a WHOLE £10 ....  £235 for 2010-11  :) Now that £10 is VERY IMPORTANT ... it is nearly 20 ltrs LPG or 4.4 galls which is nearly 80 miles of motoring free from the government ..... I really am very, very, very grateful to Mr Brown for his benevolence ... :) [sarcastic mode = off] :)

All yes... £10. Whoooooo (sarcastic)

But your right....

Del Boy wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 15:51:

tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 15:47: J?  ::) Think he meant that K is after H but not driectly after it  :y

Correct :y

tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 15:52:

Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 14:59: Whatever has been said to date, the one consideration in the 3.0 v 3.2 debate is that the latter will be in post 2000 cars and will attract the higher road tax rates ;) ;) No they won't. Taxation for higher rates was moved back to 2006, all Omegas even 2003 3.2's pay no more than fixed rate for older cars

Sorry Tunnie, but the following tells me, they way I read it, that my 3.0. registered before March 2001 will attract a tax of £190 p.a.
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524

My car (band K?) if it had been registered after March 2001 would have attracted a tax of £215.  So £25 difference, and the way things on the emmissions front, politically, are shapping that is going to become a lot more with a new government, especially for a 3.2 ;) ;) ;)

Lizzie .. your link is to 2009 figures so the numbers are slightly different to tunnies which is the 2010 figures  .. apply from April 1 st I think .. :)

Yours : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524

Tunnies : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_172916

The "pre march 2001" figure will be £205

For post march 2001 but pre 2006 it will be £245

unless you have LPG when it is £235

Entwood wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:28:

Lizzie .. your link is to 2009 figures so the numbers are slightly different to tunniwes which is the 2010 figures  .. apply from April 1 st I think .. :) Yours : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524 Tunnies : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_172916

All I know Entwood is that I have got them direct from the latest DVLA web site, which indeed mentions the new 2006 'deadline' ;) ;)

EDIT:  In fact Tunnie's are the same as my reference, but I have gone on into the "cost" page.

Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:24:

tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 15:52: Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 14:59: Whatever has been said to date, the one consideration in the 3.0 v 3.2 debate is that the latter will be in post 2000 cars and will attract the higher road tax rates ;) ;) No they won't. Taxation for higher rates was moved back to 2006, all Omegas even 2003 3.2's pay no more than fixed rate for older cars Sorry Tunnie, but the following tells me, they way I read it, that my 3.0. registered before March 2001 will attract a tax of £190 p.a. http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524 My car (band K?) if it had been registered after March 2001 would have attracted a tax of £215.  So £25 difference, and the way things on the emmissions front, politically, are shapping that is going to become a lot more with a new government, especially for a 3.2 ;) ;) ;)

3.2's won't be any higher than £245, even a 6.0 V8 registered in 2005 will be £245, they will never reach the £400+ rates of other cars. They will need to be registered after 2006 for that to happen

tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:32:

Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:24: tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 15:52: Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 14:59: Whatever has been said to date, the one consideration in the 3.0 v 3.2 debate is that the latter will be in post 2000 cars and will attract the higher road tax rates ;) ;) No they won't. Taxation for higher rates was moved back to 2006, all Omegas even 2003 3.2's pay no more than fixed rate for older cars Sorry Tunnie, but the following tells me, they way I read it, that my 3.0. registered before March 2001 will attract a tax of £190 p.a. http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524 My car (band K?) if it had been registered after March 2001 would have attracted a tax of £215.  So £25 difference, and the way things on the emmissions front, politically, are shapping that is going to become a lot more with a new government, especially for a 3.2 ;) ;) ;) 3.2's won't be any higher than £245, even a 6.0 V8 registered in 2005 will be £245, they will never reach the £400+ rates of other cars. They will need to be registered after 2006 for that to happen

So I was right Tunnie in my original statement! ::) ::) ::)

My 2000 3.0, at £190 p.a. will be cheaper than a post March 2001 3.0 or 3.2 :D :D ;) ;) ;) ;)

Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:32:

Entwood wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:28: Lizzie .. your link is to 2009 figures so the numbers are slightly different to tunniwes which is the 2010 figures  .. apply from April 1 st I think .. :) Yours : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524 Tunnies : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_172916 All I know Entwood is that I have got them direct from the latest DVLA web site, which indeed mentions the new 2006 'deadline' ;) ;) EDIT:  In fact Tunnie's are the same as my reference, but I have gone on into the "cost" page.

Sorry Lizzie, yours are the old prices. From April 2010 yours will be £205, and 3.0/3.2s post march 2001 will be £245

tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:37:

Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:32: Entwood wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:28: Lizzie .. your link is to 2009 figures so the numbers are slightly different to tunniwes which is the 2010 figures  .. apply from April 1 st I think .. :) Yours : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524 Tunnies : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_172916 All I know Entwood is that I have got them direct from the latest DVLA web site, which indeed mentions the new 2006 'deadline' ;) ;) EDIT:  In fact Tunnie's are the same as my reference, but I have gone on into the "cost" page. Sorry Lizzie, yours are the old prices. From April 2010 yours will be £205, and 3.0/3.2s post march 2001 will be £245

OK, from then yes mine will be £205; still cheaper than post March 2001 cars by £40!!   That is exactly what I originally meant and stated! ::) ::) ::) ::) :D :D :D :D ;)


"Whatever has been said to date, the one consideration in the 3.0 v 3.2 debate is that the latter will be in post 2000 cars and will attract the higher road tax rates"

Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:40:

tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:37: Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:32: Entwood wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:28: Lizzie .. your link is to 2009 figures so the numbers are slightly different to tunniwes which is the 2010 figures  .. apply from April 1 st I think .. :) Yours : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524 Tunnies : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_172916 All I know Entwood is that I have got them direct from the latest DVLA web site, which indeed mentions the new 2006 'deadline' ;) ;) EDIT:  In fact Tunnie's are the same as my reference, but I have gone on into the "cost" page. Sorry Lizzie, yours are the old prices. From April 2010 yours will be £205, and 3.0/3.2s post march 2001 will be £245 OK, from then yes mine will be £205; still cheaper than post March 2001 cars by £40!!   That is exactly what I originally meant and stated! ::) ::) ::) ::) :D :D :D :D ;)

I thought you meant the higher rates of £400+

tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:42:

Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:40: tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:37: Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:32: Entwood wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:28: Lizzie .. your link is to 2009 figures so the numbers are slightly different to tunniwes which is the 2010 figures  .. apply from April 1 st I think .. :) Yours : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524 Tunnies : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_172916 All I know Entwood is that I have got them direct from the latest DVLA web site, which indeed mentions the new 2006 'deadline' ;) ;) EDIT:  In fact Tunnie's are the same as my reference, but I have gone on into the "cost" page. Sorry Lizzie, yours are the old prices. From April 2010 yours will be £205, and 3.0/3.2s post march 2001 will be £245 OK, from then yes mine will be £205; still cheaper than post March 2001 cars by £40!!   That is exactly what I originally meant and stated! ::) ::) ::) ::) :D :D :D :D ;) I thought you meant the higher rates of £400+

lol Tunnie! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D   For me £245 IS a bloody high rate enough!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;) ;)

Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:43:

tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:42: Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:40: tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:37: Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:32: Entwood wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:28: Lizzie .. your link is to 2009 figures so the numbers are slightly different to tunniwes which is the 2010 figures  .. apply from April 1 st I think .. :) Yours : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524 Tunnies : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_172916 All I know Entwood is that I have got them direct from the latest DVLA web site, which indeed mentions the new 2006 'deadline' ;) ;) EDIT:  In fact Tunnie's are the same as my reference, but I have gone on into the "cost" page. Sorry Lizzie, yours are the old prices. From April 2010 yours will be £205, and 3.0/3.2s post march 2001 will be £245 OK, from then yes mine will be £205; still cheaper than post March 2001 cars by £40!!   That is exactly what I originally meant and stated! ::) ::) ::) ::) :D :D :D :D ;) I thought you meant the higher rates of £400+ lol Tunnie! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D   For me £245 IS a bloody high rate enough!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;) ;)

If Omegas were made post 2006 then they would have been £950 a year to tax! Now thats high!

tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:45:

Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:43: tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:42: Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:40: tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:37: Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:32: Entwood wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:28: Lizzie .. your link is to 2009 figures so the numbers are slightly different to tunniwes which is the 2010 figures  .. apply from April 1 st I think .. :) Yours : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524 Tunnies : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_172916 All I know Entwood is that I have got them direct from the latest DVLA web site, which indeed mentions the new 2006 'deadline' ;) ;) EDIT:  In fact Tunnie's are the same as my reference, but I have gone on into the "cost" page. Sorry Lizzie, yours are the old prices. From April 2010 yours will be £205, and 3.0/3.2s post march 2001 will be £245 OK, from then yes mine will be £205; still cheaper than post March 2001 cars by £40!!   That is exactly what I originally meant and stated! ::) ::) ::) ::) :D :D :D :D ;) I thought you meant the higher rates of £400+ lol Tunnie! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D   For me £245 IS a bloody high rate enough!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;) ;) If Omegas were made post 2006 then they would have been £950 a year to tax! Now thats high!

Now that is Tunnie!! :o :o :o :o  What a horrible thought! :'( :'( :'(
:D :D :y :y

tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:45:

Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:43: tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:42: Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:40: tunnie wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:37: Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:32: Entwood wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 17:28: Lizzie .. your link is to 2009 figures so the numbers are slightly different to tunniwes which is the 2010 figures  .. apply from April 1 st I think .. :) Yours : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524 Tunnies : http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_172916 All I know Entwood is that I have got them direct from the latest DVLA web site, which indeed mentions the new 2006 'deadline' ;) ;) EDIT:  In fact Tunnie's are the same as my reference, but I have gone on into the "cost" page. Sorry Lizzie, yours are the old prices. From April 2010 yours will be £205, and 3.0/3.2s post march 2001 will be £245 OK, from then yes mine will be £205; still cheaper than post March 2001 cars by £40!!   That is exactly what I originally meant and stated! ::) ::) ::) ::) :D :D :D :D ;) I thought you meant the higher rates of £400+ lol Tunnie! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D   For me £245 IS a bloody high rate enough!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;) ;) If Omegas were made post 2006 then they would have been £950 a year to tax! Now thats high!

Only for the 1st years its £950

You ask a simple question  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

zippo wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 18:14:

You ask a simple question  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Oh yes Zippo, we never dissappoint on here!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)

Lizzie Zoom wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 18:32:

zippo wrote on 13. Dec 2009 at 18:14: You ask a simple question  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Oh yes Zippo, we never dissappoint on here!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)

i do get that impression  ;D ;D ;D ;D

Fortunately the tax renewal on mine is Dec 31st so i've just had to pay out £215 rather than the £245 from April next year!

If i'd known it was such a bargain I would have bought a five year tax disc!  ;D