• Welcome to the ElgrandOC forum.

    You will find that the majority of the forum is locked, but do not worry. You can unlock more content by registering to the forum completely free. Sign up is automatic, does not require email confirmation and is instant. Feel free to browse through the sections to see what topics have been covered before you register.
    You can register for an account by CLICKING HERE

    Once you have registered, you will unlock more of the forum content. You will not unlock all of the content until you have reached 10 posts. This is to give you an opportunity to chat to existing members and help to integrate you into the forum community.
    We are a friendly and helpful community and there is a wealth of infomation contained within the forum. Please feel free to register, introduce yourself and get to know your fellow members.

    Feel free to look at the Frequently Asked Questions section, the Meets/Events section and the Competition Section without having to register.
    We look forward to getting to know you and help you with any questions or problemd you have with your Elgrand.

2.5 or 3.5 V6

Lakshman said:
Hi All,
I just bought the 2.5lt and it works great. I find it has enough power for general use. I gues if you were pulling something then that'd be a different story. Why would they design and sell something that would under perform for standard usage?

My main purpose for going the 2.5 was fuel economy. I know above someone states it would be a negligent gain but does anyone know what the difference is exactly? Even a small difference in the current fuel price climate would make a difference.
Click to expand...
I've got the 3.5 so can't comment on the 2.5, to my mind a smaller motor hauling a heavy body compared to a thirstier engine dragging the same body around is probably negligible. I suppose what we really need is that rare, lucky sod who owns both and can give us a back to back comparison. 👍
 
I've got the 2.5 only reason is it came up for sale close by and was already LPG. Not had any problems with power. It went up Sutton bank which if you're not familiar has a 25% gradient and hairpin bend with four adults and a child in no problem. Also the best it's ever felt driving was when I had six adults and a child in. Having said that I don't feel like I'd be leaving anyone standing still at the lights like some of the 3.5 owners have said they've done. All in all power has been a none issue but I still wish I was telling people it was a 3.5 🤣
 
Lakshman said:
My main purpose for going the 2.5 was fuel economy. I know above someone states it would be a negligent gain but does anyone know what the difference is exactly?
Click to expand...
Difference is 2mpg - see the Fuel Economy (clickable link) thread in the BEFORE YOU ASK - READ IN HERE (FAQ's) (clickable link) forum.

  • E51 VQ25 2.5 V6 - 22mpg average. 18mpg around the doors. 32mpg on long runs at 55.
  • E51 VQ35 3.5 V6 - 20mpg average. 16mpg around the doors. 30mpg on long runs at 55.
The E51 is most fuel efficient at 50mph.

The 3.5l commands a significant price premium, so it's about more than just the 2 mpg.

Both have plenty of power for the job. In my experience, the 3.5l accelerates like an average car. I would expect the 2.5l to accelerate like a reasonably fast van - its 186hp is more than up to the job and I've not seen anyone say it's not powerful enough.
 
Last edited:
Is that 50 mph on the speedo which is more like 45 or, 50 as measured by GPS which will look more like 55?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bal
Nevillerover said:
Is that 50 mph on the speedo which is more like 45 or, 50 as measured by GPS which will look more like 55?
Click to expand...
Good question.

I got the info from the manual, and assume it's the 'true' figure stated (which was 80kph) rather than the indicated speed.

I've got a flat bit on my commute, so will have some tedious fun with the fuel consumption display thingy 👍
 
The 2.5 is lower compression, so you can run any grade of petrol in it which helps. However if you were to compare like with like i.e. two engines of identical capacity, the one with higher compression ratio would be more efficient. So although the 2.5 will get better MPG, it won't be by as much as if it had the same compression ratio of the 3.5, but the cheaper fuel helps make up for it.
 
Lakshman said:
Hi All,
I just bought the 2.5lt and it works great. I find it has enough power for general use. I gues if you were pulling something then that'd be a different story. Why would they design and sell something that would under perform for standard usage?

My main purpose for going the 2.5 was fuel economy. I know above someone states it would be a negligent gain but does anyone know what the difference is exactly? Even a small difference in the current fuel price climate would make a difference.
Click to expand...
My mind would normally work the same “design something that would underperform” I’ve had 2 zafiras my first many years ago 1.6 now this 1.8 pile of tish ! Definitely useless . Lol my worry about buying an Elgrand however is will the cost of petrol come down enough to use my new toy car haha.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bal
Has anyone tested a 2.5 vs 3.5 in a 0-60 or in a drag race type scenario? maybe at a Elgrand club meet or similar. I’m still on the lookout for an Elgrand, I would like the 3.5 but have seen a couple of 2.5’s that would probably do the job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bal
G502 said:
Has anyone tested a 2.5 vs 3.5 in a 0-60 or in a drag race type scenario? maybe at a Elgrand club meet or similar. I’m still on the lookout for an Elgrand, I would like the 3.5 but have seen a couple of 2.5’s that would probably do the job.
Click to expand...
I've looked in vain for this, too: A 0-60 mph time for the 3.5 E51 (and 2.5 for than matter). Other than a few pistonheads dreamers, I've come up with nothing concrete.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bal
MarkT said:
Difference is 2mpg - see the Fuel Economy (clickable link) thread in the BEFORE YOU ASK - READ IN HERE (FAQ's) (clickable link) forum.

  • E51 VQ25 2.5 V6 - 22mpg average. 18mpg around the doors. 32mpg on long runs at 55.
  • E51 VQ35 3.5 V6 - 20mpg average. 16mpg around the doors. 30mpg on long runs at 55.
The E51 is most fuel efficient at 50mph.

The 3.5l commands a significant price premium, so it's about more than just the 2 mpg.

Both have plenty of power for the job. In my experience, the 3.5l accelerates like an average car. I would expect the 2.5l to accelerate like a reasonably fast van - its 186hp is more than up to the job and I've not seen anyone say it's not powerful enough.
Click to expand...
I can confirm the 2.5 does not accelerate like a fast van, I have a middling nv300 it would trounce the 2.5, I've recently driven them and I will be sticking to looking for a 3.5 which is noticeably quicker.
 
Elgraman said:
I've looked in vain for this, too: A 0-60 mph time for the 3.5 E51 (and 2.5 for than matter). Other than a few pistonheads dreamers, I've come up with nothing concrete.
Click to expand...
https://forum.elgrandoc.uk/threads/what-have-you-done-to-your-Elgrand-today.28/page-1370#post-530550
 
I guess its one of those things thats a reflection of personality, if you want the 3.5 I suggest you buy it as you cannot change it later and may always be somewhat disappointed. You can generally change the interior or other bits a lot easier , you are pretty much stuck with the motor you select.
It also depends on where you drive it, the 3.5 is much nicer at highway speeds, if you are in the middle of suburbia and dont get above 60kph very often its probably much of a muchness. I have had a 3.5 Tarago and 2.3-ish Tarago hire car, the 3.5 is a much nicer drive though you pay for the pleasure.

Years ago I had a 4cyl magna as a company car and that thing drank fuel as it was so underpowered I was at full throttle more often than not just trying to get up mild hills. I have seen similar in older cars where the 6 cylinder was a major improvement over the 4 however these were cars from the 90's.
 
Last edited:
Some Guy said:
I guess its one of those things thats a reflection of personality, if you want the 3.5 I suggest you buy it as you cannot change it later and may always be somewhat disappointed. You can generally change the interior or other bits a lot easier , you are pretty much stuck with the motor you select.
It also depends on where you drive it, the 3.5 is much nicer at highway speeds, if you are in the middle of suburbia and dont get above 60kph very often its probably much of a muchness. I have had a 3.5 Tarago and 2.3-ish Tarago hire car, the 3.5 is a much nicer drive though you pay for the pleasure.

Years ago I had a 4cyl magna as a company car and that thing drank fuel as it was so underpowered I was at full throttle more often than not just trying to get up mild hills. I have seen similar in older cars where the 6 cylinder was a major improvement over the 4 however these were cars from the 90's.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's a good assessment. I'm only focused on the 3.5 really, for much of what you say. I like a little performance as, thankfully, the roads where I live (at least currently) allow you to stretch your legs. I think if the 2.5L had, say an early 8 seconds 0-62mph figure and better mpg, compared to a hypothetical 3.5 which had, say 7 seconds and (even) worse mpg I'd consider it, but of course that isn't the reality. I find 0-62mph times not only provide a good indication of poke, but I find a definite correlation to how they manage hills etc, too.
I think you're right though, it is a personality/use/conditions one usually drives in, thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bal
My last Camper van was a VW T4 1.9 diesel!.
It was slow struggled up hills and the brakes were awful but I loved driving it!.
The road ahead always seemed clear, I just didn't look to often in my rear view mirrors! 🤣
My 2.5 Elgrand is faster, doesn't struggle up hills and the brakes are decent!.
I am more than happy with my 2.5.
 
LeStempy said:
Let's be honest, the 2.5 will never be 'just as good' as it has 60 fewer horses pulling it along, but if outright power isn't your main concern then you could grab a high spec 2.5 for a good price. There are a few differences with layout of engine components which can make them harder to work on and spares may be rarer, but you pays your money etc etc.

3.5 shares very few components with the 350z engine but parts are fairly readily available even so.
Click to expand...
How come the 3.5 doesnt share many components with the 350z? I thought it was an identical engine?
 
The engine block is pretty much identical, but the rest isn't, nothing is interchangeable between them.
 
As always the final choice on what you buy has to be your own decision
Toru said:
In a dilemma, want a 3.5 V6 but seem to see more 2.5 V6 with better spec for the interior which I would like.
Is the 2.5 just as good? Sound good, pull well and is the parts easy to source? What other car models does it share the same similar engine with? I've read the 3.5 is similar to the 350z and some Renault's use that engine so guess the parts are quite easy to obtain.

Cheers.
Click to expand...
If you look long enough you will find an Elgrand with all the spec you want, they are out there, the final decision will rest with you. I got a 3.5 Rider S because I knew if I got the 2.5 I would always be thinking I wish I had the 3.5. The Rider has 240 ponies and flys when you floor it, and it sounds great even though mine has the standard Rider exhaust, and I am used to a 5.7 Camaro with straight through exhaust. If you are not in a rush to buy make a list of the options you want and got looking. Happy hunting.
 
Steveonts said:
Im facing this same choice. Leaning more toward the 3.5. They are big vehicles, 2.5 feels a bit small.
Click to expand...
Hello and welcome to the club. Enjoy. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top