Official New astra 1-100 times releasd. Sluggish? You decide

[extralarge]

here are the 0-100 times for the new astra

1.7 59kw deisel 15 sec
1.4 66kw unleaded 13.7sec
1.7 74kw deisel 12.3sec
1.6 77kw unleaded 12.3/13.3autosec
1.8 92kw good old ecotec unleaded 10.8/11.9autosec
2.0 125kw turbo unleaded 8.9sec

the new astra has indeed put on extra weight, refined its design somewhat, is higher, wider and longer, improved its handling, improved on features, but has unfortunately compromised on performance..

what do you guys recon?

prepare for the new slow astra revolution!

Warning: This is an Old Thread This discussion is older than 120 days. information contained in it may no longer be current . Please think of the children before resurrecting this ancient thread!

[Anonymous]

MODIFICATIONS!!!!!

[Vinnie320]

I'm surprised that the turbo only does 0-100 in 8.9. I would've expected at the very least high 7s or very low 8s.

[astra_city]

it is a worry due to the fact that the new generation of Astra competitors all have noticeably better performance. Eg Corolla low 9's 0-100....mazda 3 low 9's 0-100. Many people will be put off the Astra, even though I think it will be a better car than the others, purely because it is over 1.5seconds slower to 100kays!

Is a disappointing in my opinion...the current Astra holds it's own against the new generation cars...(I have beaten 2 new 100kw Corollas) but the new generation Astra will get whipped by them.

[01CDsedan]

10.8s for the 1.8 is considerably slower - more than 10% slower than the current model when compared with figures recorded by Wheels. You'd almost consider buying the diesel given the performance difference would probably be outweighed by far better economy (not that they are likely to sell the diesel here, thank God).

I would wait to see some rolling response times - eg. 40-70 and 80-120 - before making any final judgements though. In my opinion, these times are far more important than 0-100 and 400m times. Why? Because how often do you belt away from the lights at full throttle as opposed to accelerating hard when already on the move?

Has there been any word on whether the H has the 2.2 litre engine available anywhere? I've always found it weird that in Wheels tests at least, the SRi is hardly any quicker than the 1.8 litre cars in the 0-100, 400m, 40-70 or 80-120km/h times. (For example, the SRi's 0-100 is 9.3sec and the CD's time was 9.4 sec).

[extralarge]

the 1.8 which will likely be the main engine that dribbles down here has not been changed at all. given the extra weight the astra has put on, it is likely that the 40-80 etc times will be slower as well.

there have been new 'twinport' engines introduced, but these 2-3kw advancements are only on the smaller 1.4, 1.7 engines.

as for the SRI, it only has slightly more power, but is much heavier thus the same acceleration times accross the board. it is, however, a much better engine.

i was hoping to see a much more tuned and refined car at least performance wise (which to us is a pivotal point of interest) alike the new accord euro, which although is 4cyl manages a 7.x 0-100 time which is mint.

[01CDsedan]

I was hoping to see a much more tuned and refined car at least performance wise (which to us is a pivotal point of interest) alike the new accord euro, which although is 4cyl manages a 7.x 0-100 time which is mint.

I'd have to agree with you on that one - it seems that GM has been left behind as far as engine development goes in the past year or two. While the Japanese in particular have been coming out with some spectacular new engines, GM's engines have been left at late-90s standards. They are still excellent engines, make no mistake, but they could probably use some high-tech updating (eg. variable timing). There is no better example of this than the 'new' 2.2 that came out in 2001 with just 4kW more than the old 2.2 from the Vectra B.

[rjastra]

There is no better example of this than the 'new' 2.2 that came out in 2001 with just 4kW more than the old 2.2 from the Vectra B.

And that is exactly why there is a 2.4L VVT version of the 2.2L coming out.
And it probably explains why the Astra isn't originally released with a 2.2L variant.

[01CDsedan]

And that is exactly why there is a 2.4L VVT version of the 2.2L coming out.
And it probably explains why the Astra isn't originally released with a 2.2L variant.

There is? Good stuff, I didn't know that. Where did you get that info from?

[rjastra]

Good stuff, I didn't know that

It will be an option for the US GM small cars that are based on the Astra chassis.

Equates to about 128kW.

Anyway... Why would Opel expend $$$$$ on redesigning their petrol engine range when diesel is the future for Europe.
The two turbo engines take care of the Astras closest competitors.
The 1.8L is competitive with the opposition in Europe (remember Mazda3 comes with a base 1.6L in Europe!)

The 1.9CDTI looks like a good option. Imagine that with a bit of tweeking!!