SRI turbo/VXR or SRI 2.2 Direct Injection

[JohnBu]

If you need 4 door get the 2.2.

Turbo if 2 door.

Drive both before you decide.

The 2.0t with it's smallish turbo doesn't have the lag and then torque steering boost of old on/off turbos.

Every euro manufacturer is going low boost turbo for drivability.

As for problems, after 176k, i've only had one CV boot & radiator + 2 coolant expansion tanks replaced.

The rest has been maintenance, i.e. Correct mineral oil & filter change every 7.5km.

Still original turbo & exhaust.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[chrissn89]

No issues with my turbo in the 3 years and 60,000km I've owned it regular servicing for me i do every 5,000km fully sin oil and filter. Only replaced wear and tear items its been a great pleasure owning mine. Mine is re-mapped, 3" BTE, and FMIC and all the other bits and bobs.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk

[gmonkey]

2.2 Astra H not worth it to be honest, not very quick compared to even the 1.8vvt ... get the TURBO!..

[GreyRex]

I've never ever had a single gearbox issue with mine... and mine is for sale

[Wraith]

Ok,

the list has narrowed to the value for money models for comfort, interior and zippyness.

as a previous owner of zippy front wheel bum dragger i am no fan of turbo fwd cars anymore. i like the linearity of the NA cars now. i have also noted a drop in front driveline repair bills with the CDXi we have. However.....i do miss the turbo shove in the back power, but i dont miss the tyre frying 1st to 2nd to 3rd gear torque steer and involuntary lane change antics. for me the 2.2 direct is the only option. from what i have read its only 15NM down on torque compared with the turbo.

so i want to cast out the question to my fellow members, which one would have best cost effectiveness over a 3-4 year period considering, insurance, upkeep and fuel ecnomony not to mention fun factor and looks.

i like the option of the 2.0 litre turbo 4 and with that shove in the back wheni feel like it at the twitch of the right foot, however i like the care free driving of the 2.2 with its fuel and power efficient direct injection motor.

decision decisions.

Hmmm, based simply on what you've writren above and not going with personal choice like everyone else seems to have done the simple answer is to get yourself the 2.2 N/A variant...

You state that you've already had something along the lines of a FWD turbo and your now over it all things considered, so just get the AH 2.2, or other similar vehicle...

[BEK-46P]

Not sure where the idea that the 2.2 Direct is 'fuel-economical' came from.

My 2.2 is currently averaging 10.4L/100km.

[maxrpm]

i would say the economy aspect would be given the size of the motor and how much power it produces comparable to a non DI 2.2, possibly.

so its 50/50 with gearbox issues on the turbo.

ideally something with thats later than 07 model pref 2008 onwards with 60-80thou ks.

right now in perth its a buyers market as there are so many good deals just noone to buy them and no decent turbos.

thanks again for the input fellow members, will need to put the thinking cap on and maybe exercise some patience.

[guy 27]

If your after an everyday type of car go the 2.2. Just bear in mind there isn't much out there tuning wise for it if you wanted more power.
The turbo will give roughly the same fuel economy and has the option to easily tune if wanted.

Like someone said though 2.2 is either 3 or 5 door while the turbo is 3dr only.

Servicing they are much and much but the 2.2 will be slightly less in the long run.

If I was to get an ah it would be a turbo.

[kabel]

Hello all,

many many thanks and keep the info coming, i am still weighn things up with availability as well as i have only spied 1 turbo for sale thats decent year and mileage but i have 3 to 4 2.2 DI to choose from and these also include eastern states cars as well. i find the 2.2 are more common on the ground than the turbos which tells me either of 2 things, they are a pain in the ass to keep or they ar so damn good they are snapped up quickly.

out of the turbo owners how much problems have you guys have had since owenership regarding, exhaust studs, driveline issues ie cvs etc. i mean a turbo is a turbo and is predisposed to a higher level of maintenance inherently than an NA.

part of me wants the 2.2 but the performace part of me wants the turbo but i keep getting reminded by the issues i had with the mx6 turbo. granted they are a different animal all together.

my budget is not up to the VXR level and even if it were it would have to be interstate as there arent any in WA.

Five years of ownership and no issues with anything at all.
Servicing is no more expensive than my Polo GTi and is certainly cheaper than the Audi A3 2.0T I bought for my Mrs.
In fact even with extensive modifications I stll get better economy from the VXR (under 9.0l/100km) than the Audi.
PS
I have NO intention of selling mine :-)

[maxrpm]

hmm starting to lean one way, I now need to test drive the turbo :-)