cat_logo
HomeOpel

Omega

Opel Omega Trunk Space in Quick-to-Read Graphs

Average space for all generations

Choose Generation

Quick notes on Opel Omega trunk space

    • Trunk capacity for generation: 530 L
    • Amount of carry-on suitcases: 11.8 pcs
    • Amount of average suitcases: 5.3 pcs
    • Trunk space per 1 passenger: 106 L
    • Max trunk load: 96 kg
    • Interior transformation: limited
    • Horsepower to trunk space: 3.1 L to 1 hp
    • Torque to trunk capacity: 2 to 1 Nm
    • Trunkley rating: 8 / 10

Trunk space to engine power ratio

  • 3.0i V6 : 2.5 L/hp (3.4 L/kW)
  • 2.5 TD : 4 L/hp (5.5 L/kW)
  • 2.5i V6 : 3.1 L/hp (4.2 L/kW)
  • 2.2i : 3.7 L/hp (5 L/kW)
  • 2.6 V6 : 2.9 L/hp (4 L/kW)
  • 2.0 DTI 16V : 5.2 L/hp (7.2 L/kW)
  • 2.2 DTI : 4.4 L/hp (6 L/kW)
  • 2.5 V6 TDI : 3.5 L/hp (4.8 L/kW)
  • 3.2i V6 : 2.4 L/hp (3.3 L/kW)
  • 5.7i V8 : 1.7 L/hp (2.3 L/kW)

    Trunk size and maximum speed comparison

  • 3.0i V6 : 2.23 L/km-h (1.39 L/mph)
  • 2.5 TD : 2.65 L/km-h (1.65 L/mph)
  • 2.5i V6 : 2.32 L/km-h (1.44 L/mph)
  • 2.2i : 2.52 L/km-h (1.57 L/mph)
  • 2.6 V6 : 2.31 L/km-h (1.44 L/mph)
  • 2.0 DTI 16V : 2.85 L/km-h (1.77 L/mph)
  • 2.2 DTI : 2.21 L/km-h (1.37 L/mph)
  • 2.5 V6 TDI : 2.55 L/km-h (1.58 L/mph)
  • 3.2i V6 : 2.21 L/km-h (1.37 L/mph)
  • 5.7i V8 : 2.12 L/km-h (1.32 L/mph)

    Trunk capacity to fuel consumption ratio

  • 2.5 TD : 66.3x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.5i V6 : 48.6x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.2i : 56.4x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.6 V6 : 50x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.2 DTI : 74.6x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.5 V6 TDI : 69.7x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 3.2i V6 : 44.9x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 5.7i V8 : 37.9x (Trunk/Consumption)

    • Vehicle Trunk space Trunk to acceleration ratio Trunk space to tank size Trunk space to engine capacity Difference with world average
    3.0i V6 530 L 57 L to 1 s 7.1x 179x +52L
    2.5 TD 530 L 46 L to 1 s 7.1x 212x +52L
    2.5i V6 530 L 59 L to 1 s 7.1x 212x +52L
    2.2i 530 L 53 L to 1 s 7.1x 241x +52L
    2.6 V6 530 L 59 L to 1 s 7.1x 204x +52L
    2.0 DTI 16V 530 L 37 L to 1 s 7.1x 266x +52L
    2.2 DTI 530 L 45 L to 1 s 7.1x 244x +52L
    2.5 V6 TDI 530 L 53 L to 1 s 7.1x 212x +52L
    3.2i V6 530 L 62 L to 1 s 7.1x 167x +52L
    5.7i V8 530 L 79 L to 1 s 7.1x 94x +52L
    Vehicle 3.0i V6
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 57 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 179x
    Difference with world average +52L
    Vehicle 2.5 TD
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 46 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 212x
    Difference with world average +52L
    Vehicle 2.5i V6
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 59 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 212x
    Difference with world average +52L
    Vehicle 2.2i
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 53 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 241x
    Difference with world average +52L
    Vehicle 2.6 V6
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 59 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 204x
    Difference with world average +52L
    Vehicle 2.0 DTI 16V
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 37 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 266x
    Difference with world average +52L
    Vehicle 2.2 DTI
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 45 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 244x
    Difference with world average +52L
    Vehicle 2.5 V6 TDI
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 53 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 212x
    Difference with world average +52L
    Vehicle 3.2i V6
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 62 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 167x
    Difference with world average +52L
    Vehicle 5.7i V8
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 79 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 94x
    Difference with world average +52L

    Quick notes on Opel Omega trunk space

      • Trunk capacity for generation: 540 L
      • Amount of carry-on suitcases: 12 pcs
      • Amount of average suitcases: 5.4 pcs
      • Trunk space per 1 passenger: 108 L
      • Max trunk load: 101 kg
      • Interior transformation: flexible
      • Horsepower to trunk space: 3.1 L to 1 hp
      • Torque to trunk capacity: 2 to 1 Nm
      • Trunkley rating: 8 / 10

    Trunk space to engine power ratio

  • 3.0i V6 : 2.6 L/hp (3.5 L/kW)
  • 2.5i V6 : 3.2 L/hp (4.3 L/kW)
  • 2.5 TD : 4.1 L/hp (5.6 L/kW)
  • 2.2i : 3.8 L/hp (5.1 L/kW)
  • 2.6 V6 : 3 L/hp (4.1 L/kW)
  • 2.5 V6 TDI : 3.6 L/hp (4.9 L/kW)
  • 2.0 DTI 16V : 5.3 L/hp (7.3 L/kW)
  • 2.2 DTI 16V : 4.5 L/hp (6.1 L/kW)
  • 3.2 V6 : 2.5 L/hp (3.4 L/kW)
  • 5.7 V8 : 1.7 L/hp (2.4 L/kW)

    Trunk size and maximum speed comparison

  • 3.0i V6 : 2.35 L/km-h (1.46 L/mph)
  • 2.5i V6 : 2.45 L/km-h (1.52 L/mph)
  • 2.5 TD : 2.84 L/km-h (1.76 L/mph)
  • 2.2i : 2.67 L/km-h (1.66 L/mph)
  • 2.6 V6 : 2.44 L/km-h (1.52 L/mph)
  • 2.5 V6 TDI : 2.7 L/km-h (1.68 L/mph)
  • 2.0 DTI 16V : 3 L/km-h (1.86 L/mph)
  • 2.2 DTI 16V : 2.77 L/km-h (1.72 L/mph)
  • 3.2 V6 : 2.33 L/km-h (1.45 L/mph)
  • 5.7 V8 : 2.16 L/km-h (1.34 L/mph)

    Trunk capacity to fuel consumption ratio

  • 3.0i V6 : 39.4x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.6 V6 : 49.5x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.5 V6 TDI : 69.2x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.2 DTI 16V : 74x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 3.2 V6 : 45.4x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 5.7 V8 : 38.6x (Trunk/Consumption)

    • Vehicle Trunk space Trunk to acceleration ratio Trunk space to tank size Trunk space to engine capacity Difference with world average
    3.0i V6 540 L 55 L to 1 s 7.2x 182x +62L
    2.5i V6 540 L 57 L to 1 s 7.2x 216x +62L
    2.5 TD 540 L 42 L to 1 s 7.2x 216x +62L
    2.2i 540 L 51 L to 1 s 7.2x 246x +62L
    2.6 V6 540 L 57 L to 1 s 7.2x 208x +62L
    2.5 V6 TDI 540 L 51 L to 1 s 7.2x 216x +62L
    2.0 DTI 16V 540 L 36 L to 1 s 7.2x 271x +62L
    2.2 DTI 16V 540 L 44 L to 1 s 7.2x 249x +62L
    3.2 V6 540 L 60 L to 1 s 7.2x 170x +62L
    5.7 V8 540 L 81 L to 1 s 7.2x 95x +62L
    Vehicle 3.0i V6
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 55 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 182x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.5i V6
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 57 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 216x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.5 TD
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 42 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 216x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.2i
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 51 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 246x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.6 V6
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 57 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 208x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.5 V6 TDI
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 51 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 216x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.0 DTI 16V
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 36 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 271x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.2 DTI 16V
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 44 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 249x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 3.2 V6
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 60 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 170x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 5.7 V8
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 81 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 95x
    Difference with world average +62L

    Quick notes on Opel Omega trunk space

      • Trunk capacity for generation: 530 L
      • Amount of carry-on suitcases: 11.8 pcs
      • Amount of average suitcases: 5.3 pcs
      • Trunk space per 1 passenger: 106 L
      • Max trunk load: 93 kg
      • Interior transformation: limited
      • Horsepower to trunk space: 3.7 L to 1 hp
      • Torque to trunk capacity: 2.3 to 1 Nm
      • Trunkley rating: 8 / 10

    Trunk space to engine power ratio

  • 3.0i V6 : 2.5 L/hp (3.4 L/kW)
  • 2.5 TD : 4 L/hp (5.5 L/kW)
  • 2.5i V6 : 3.1 L/hp (4.2 L/kW)
  • 2.5 V6 TDI : 3.5 L/hp (4.8 L/kW)
  • 2.0i 16V : 3.9 L/hp (5.3 L/kW)
  • 2.0i : 4.6 L/hp (6.2 L/kW)
  • 2.0 DTI 16V : 5.2 L/hp (7.2 L/kW)

    Trunk size and maximum speed comparison

  • 3.0i V6 : 2.18 L/km-h (1.35 L/mph)
  • 2.5 TD : 2.65 L/km-h (1.65 L/mph)
  • 2.5i V6 : 2.32 L/km-h (1.44 L/mph)
  • 2.5 V6 TDI : 2.57 L/km-h (1.6 L/mph)
  • 2.0i 16V : 2.52 L/km-h (1.57 L/mph)
  • 2.0i : 2.72 L/km-h (1.69 L/mph)
  • 2.0 DTI 16V : 2.85 L/km-h (1.77 L/mph)

    Trunk capacity to fuel consumption ratio

  • 2.5 TD : 66.3x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.5i V6 : 48.6x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.5 V6 TDI : 61.6x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.0i 16V : 58.2x (Trunk/Consumption)

    • Vehicle Trunk space Trunk to acceleration ratio Trunk space to tank size Trunk space to engine capacity Difference with world average
    3.0i V6 530 L 65 L to 1 s 7.1x 179x +52L
    2.5 TD 530 L 46 L to 1 s 7.1x 212x +52L
    2.5i V6 530 L 59 L to 1 s 7.1x 212x +52L
    2.5 V6 TDI 530 L 50 L to 1 s 7.1x 212x +52L
    2.0i 16V 530 L 50 L to 1 s 7.1x 265x +52L
    2.0i 530 L 43 L to 1 s 7.1x 265x +52L
    2.0 DTI 16V 530 L 37 L to 1 s 7.1x 266x +52L
    Vehicle 3.0i V6
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 65 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 179x
    Difference with world average +52L
    Vehicle 2.5 TD
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 46 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 212x
    Difference with world average +52L
    Vehicle 2.5i V6
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 59 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 212x
    Difference with world average +52L
    Vehicle 2.5 V6 TDI
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 50 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 212x
    Difference with world average +52L
    Vehicle 2.0i 16V
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 50 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 265x
    Difference with world average +52L
    Vehicle 2.0i
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 43 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 265x
    Difference with world average +52L
    Vehicle 2.0 DTI 16V
    Trunk space 530 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 37 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.1x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 266x
    Difference with world average +52L

    Quick notes on Opel Omega trunk space

      • Trunk capacity for generation: 540 L
      • Amount of carry-on suitcases: 12 pcs
      • Amount of average suitcases: 5.4 pcs
      • Trunk space per 1 passenger: 108 L
      • Max trunk load: 96 kg
      • Interior transformation: flexible
      • Horsepower to trunk space: 3.7 L to 1 hp
      • Torque to trunk capacity: 2.5 to 1 Nm
      • Trunkley rating: 8 / 10

    Trunk space to engine power ratio

  • 3.0i V6 : 2.6 L/hp (3.5 L/kW)
  • 2.5i V6 : 3.2 L/hp (4.3 L/kW)
  • 2.5 TD : 4.1 L/hp (5.6 L/kW)
  • 2.0i : 4.7 L/hp (6.4 L/kW)
  • 2.0i 16V : 4 L/hp (5.4 L/kW)
  • 2.0 DTI 16V : 5.3 L/hp (7.3 L/kW)

    Trunk size and maximum speed comparison

  • 3.0i V6 : 2.3 L/km-h (1.43 L/mph)
  • 2.5i V6 : 2.45 L/km-h (1.52 L/mph)
  • 2.5 TD : 2.77 L/km-h (1.72 L/mph)
  • 2.0i : 2.89 L/km-h (1.8 L/mph)
  • 2.0i 16V : 2.67 L/km-h (1.66 L/mph)
  • 2.0 DTI 16V : 3 L/km-h (1.86 L/mph)

    Trunk capacity to fuel consumption ratio

  • 3.0i V6 : 39.4x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.0i : 56.3x (Trunk/Consumption)

    • Vehicle Trunk space Trunk to acceleration ratio Trunk space to tank size Trunk space to engine capacity Difference with world average
    3.0i V6 540 L 71 L to 1 s 7.2x 182x +62L
    2.5i V6 540 L 57 L to 1 s 7.2x 216x +62L
    2.5 TD 540 L 44 L to 1 s 7.2x 216x +62L
    2.0i 540 L 41 L to 1 s 7.2x 270x +62L
    2.0i 16V 540 L 50 L to 1 s 7.2x 270x +62L
    2.0 DTI 16V 540 L 36 L to 1 s 7.2x 271x +62L
    Vehicle 3.0i V6
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 71 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 182x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.5i V6
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 57 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 216x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.5 TD
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 44 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 216x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.0i
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 41 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 270x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.0i 16V
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 50 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 270x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.0 DTI 16V
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 36 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.2x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 271x
    Difference with world average +62L

    Quick notes on Opel Omega trunk space

      • Trunk capacity for generation: 531 L
      • Amount of carry-on suitcases: 11.8 pcs
      • Amount of average suitcases: 5.3 pcs
      • Trunk space per 1 passenger: 106.2 L
      • Max trunk load: 81 kg
      • Interior transformation: flexible
      • Horsepower to trunk space: 4.2 L to 1 hp
      • Torque to trunk capacity: 2.8 to 1 Nm
      • Trunkley rating: 8 / 10

    Trunk space to engine power ratio

  • 3.0i 3000 V6 : 3.1 L/hp (4.2 L/kW)
  • 3.0 3000 V6 24V : 2.7 L/hp (3.7 L/kW)
  • 3.0 3000 CAT V6 : 2.9 L/hp (4 L/kW)
  • 2.0i CAT : 5.4 L/hp (7.3 L/kW)
  • 2.4i : 4.2 L/hp (5.7 L/kW)
  • 3.0 CAT V6 : 2.9 L/hp (4 L/kW)
  • 2.3 TD Interc. : 5.2 L/hp (7 L/kW)
  • 2.0i : 4.4 L/hp (6 L/kW)
  • 2.6 i : 3.5 L/hp (4.7 L/kW)
  • 2.3 D : 7.4 L/hp (10 L/kW)
  • 1.8i : 4.7 L/hp (6.4 L/kW)
  • 1.8 N : 6.3 L/hp (8.7 L/kW)
  • 1.8 : 6.1 L/hp (8.3 L/kW)
  • 1.8 S : 6 L/hp (8.2 L/kW)
  • 2.3 TD : 6 L/hp (8.2 L/kW)
  • 2.6i : 3.5 L/hp (4.7 L/kW)

    Trunk size and maximum speed comparison

  • 3.0i 3000 V6 : 2.45 L/km-h (1.52 L/mph)
  • 3.0 3000 V6 24V : 2.35 L/km-h (1.46 L/mph)
  • 3.0 3000 CAT V6 : 2.29 L/km-h (1.42 L/mph)
  • 2.0i CAT : 3 L/km-h (1.86 L/mph)
  • 2.4i : 2.71 L/km-h (1.68 L/mph)
  • 3.0 CAT V6 : 2.34 L/km-h (1.45 L/mph)
  • 2.3 TD Interc. : 2.95 L/km-h (1.83 L/mph)
  • 2.0i : 2.84 L/km-h (1.76 L/mph)
  • 2.6 i : 2.17 L/km-h (1.35 L/mph)
  • 2.3 D : 3.48 L/km-h (2.16 L/mph)
  • 1.8i : 2.89 L/km-h (1.8 L/mph)
  • 1.8 N : 2.84 L/km-h (1.76 L/mph)
  • 1.8 : 3.18 L/km-h (1.98 L/mph)
  • 1.8 S : 3.09 L/km-h (1.92 L/mph)
  • 2.3 TD : 3.18 L/km-h (1.98 L/mph)
  • 2.6i : 2.5 L/km-h (1.55 L/mph)

    Trunk capacity to fuel consumption ratio

  • 3.0 3000 V6 24V : 55.7x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 3.0 3000 CAT V6 : 54.7x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.4i : 59.1x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 3.0 CAT V6 : 51.5x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.3 TD Interc. : 67.5x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.6 i : 53.1x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.3 D : 72x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 1.8 N : 66.7x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.6i : 53.1x (Trunk/Consumption)

    • Vehicle Trunk space Trunk to acceleration ratio Trunk space to tank size Trunk space to engine capacity Difference with world average
    3.0i 3000 V6 540 L 61 L to 1 s 7.7x 182x +62L
    3.0 3000 V6 24V 540 L 69 L to 1 s 7.7x 182x +62L
    3.0 3000 CAT V6 520 L 58 L to 1 s 7.4x 175x +42L
    2.0i CAT 540 L - 7.7x 270x +62L
    2.4i 520 L 46 L to 1 s 7.4x 216x +42L
    3.0 CAT V6 520 L 52 L to 1 s 7.4x 175x +42L
    2.3 TD Interc. 520 L 36 L to 1 s 7.4x 230x +42L
    2.0i 540 L 51 L to 1 s 7.7x 270x +62L
    2.6 i 520 L 48 L to 1 s 7.4x 200x +42L
    2.3 D 540 L 28 L to 1 s 7.7x 239x +62L
    1.8i 540 L 44 L to 1 s 7.7x 301x +62L
    1.8 N 520 L 39 L to 1 s 7.4x 290x +42L
    1.8 540 L 38 L to 1 s 7.7x 301x +62L
    1.8 S 540 L 38 L to 1 s 7.7x 301x +62L
    2.3 TD 540 L 37 L to 1 s 7.7x 239x +62L
    2.6i 520 L 52 L to 1 s 7.4x 200x +42L
    Vehicle 3.0i 3000 V6
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 61 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.7x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 182x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 3.0 3000 V6 24V
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 69 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.7x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 182x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 3.0 3000 CAT V6
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 58 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.4x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 175x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 2.0i CAT
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio -
    Trunk space to tank size 7.7x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 270x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.4i
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 46 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.4x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 216x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 3.0 CAT V6
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 52 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.4x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 175x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 2.3 TD Interc.
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 36 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.4x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 230x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 2.0i
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 51 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.7x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 270x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.6 i
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 48 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.4x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 200x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 2.3 D
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 28 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.7x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 239x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 1.8i
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 44 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.7x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 301x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 1.8 N
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 39 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.4x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 290x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 1.8
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 38 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.7x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 301x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 1.8 S
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 38 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.7x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 301x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.3 TD
    Trunk space 540 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 37 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.7x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 239x
    Difference with world average +62L
    Vehicle 2.6i
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 52 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.4x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 200x
    Difference with world average +42L

    Quick notes on Opel Omega trunk space

      • Trunk capacity for generation: 520 L
      • Amount of carry-on suitcases: 11.6 pcs
      • Amount of average suitcases: 5.2 pcs
      • Trunk space per 1 passenger: 104 L
      • Max trunk load: 81 kg
      • Interior transformation: limited
      • Horsepower to trunk space: 3.7 L to 1 hp
      • Torque to trunk capacity: 2.4 to 1 Nm
      • Trunkley rating: 8 / 10

    Trunk space to engine power ratio

  • 1.8 : 5.9 L/hp (8 L/kW)
  • 2.4i : 4.2 L/hp (5.7 L/kW)
  • 1.8i : 4.5 L/hp (6.1 L/kW)
  • 2.6i : 3.5 L/hp (4.7 L/kW)
  • 2.0i : 4.5 L/hp (6.1 L/kW)
  • 3.0 V6 24V 3000 : 2.5 L/hp (3.5 L/kW)
  • 3.0 3000 : 2.9 L/hp (4 L/kW)
  • 2.3 TD Interc. : 5.2 L/hp (7 L/kW)
  • 1.8 S : 5.8 L/hp (7.9 L/kW)
  • 1.8i N : 6.3 L/hp (8.7 L/kW)
  • 2.0i CAT : 5.3 L/hp (7.1 L/kW)
  • 2.0 : 5.2 L/hp (7 L/kW)
  • 2.3 D : 7.1 L/hp (9.6 L/kW)
  • 2.3 TD : 5.8 L/hp (7.9 L/kW)
  • 3.0 3000 V6 CAT : 3.3 L/hp (4.5 L/kW)
  • 3.0 V6 24V Evolution 500 : 2.3 L/hp (3.1 L/kW)
  • 3.6 24V Lotus : 1.4 L/hp (1.9 L/kW)

    Trunk size and maximum speed comparison

  • 1.8 : 2.84 L/km-h (1.76 L/mph)
  • 2.4i : 2.6 L/km-h (1.62 L/mph)
  • 1.8i : 2.78 L/km-h (1.73 L/mph)
  • 2.6i : 2.42 L/km-h (1.5 L/mph)
  • 2.0i : 2.67 L/km-h (1.66 L/mph)
  • 3.0 V6 24V 3000 : 2.17 L/km-h (1.35 L/mph)
  • 3.0 3000 : 2.29 L/km-h (1.42 L/mph)
  • 2.3 TD Interc. : 2.83 L/km-h (1.76 L/mph)
  • 1.8 S : 2.84 L/km-h (1.76 L/mph)
  • 1.8i N : 2.84 L/km-h (1.76 L/mph)
  • 2.0i CAT : 2.74 L/km-h (1.7 L/mph)
  • 2.3 D : 3.19 L/km-h (1.98 L/mph)
  • 2.3 TD : 2.95 L/km-h (1.83 L/mph)
  • 3.0 3000 V6 CAT : 2.48 L/km-h (1.54 L/mph)
  • 3.0 V6 24V Evolution 500 : 2.09 L/km-h (1.3 L/mph)
  • 3.6 24V Lotus : 1.84 L/km-h (1.14 L/mph)

    Trunk capacity to fuel consumption ratio

  • 1.8 : 73.2x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.4i : 62.7x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 1.8i : 67.5x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.6i : 53.1x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.0i : 64.2x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 3.0 V6 24V 3000 : 56.5x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 3.0 3000 : 54.2x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.3 TD Interc. : 67.5x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 1.8 S : 66.7x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 1.8i N : 66.7x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 2.3 D : 74.3x (Trunk/Consumption)
  • 3.6 24V Lotus : 50.5x (Trunk/Consumption)

    • Vehicle Trunk space Trunk to acceleration ratio Trunk space to tank size Trunk space to engine capacity Difference with world average
    1.8 520 L 39 L to 1 s 6.9x 290x +42L
    2.4i 520 L 50 L to 1 s 6.9x 216x +42L
    1.8i 520 L 42 L to 1 s 6.9x 290x +42L
    2.6i 520 L 56 L to 1 s 6.9x 200x +42L
    2.0i 520 L 48 L to 1 s 6.9x 260x +42L
    3.0 V6 24V 3000 520 L 72 L to 1 s 6.9x 175x +42L
    3.0 3000 520 L 62 L to 1 s 6.9x 175x +42L
    2.3 TD Interc. 520 L 39 L to 1 s 6.9x 230x +42L
    1.8 S 520 L 39 L to 1 s 6.9x 290x +42L
    1.8i N 520 L 39 L to 1 s 7.4x 290x +42L
    2.0i CAT 520 L - 6.9x 260x +42L
    2.0 520 L - 6.9x 260x +42L
    2.3 D 520 L 27 L to 1 s 7.4x 230x +42L
    2.3 TD 520 L 38 L to 1 s 6.9x 230x +42L
    3.0 3000 V6 CAT 520 L 50 L to 1 s 6.9x 175x +42L
    3.0 V6 24V Evolution 500 520 L 73 L to 1 s 6.9x 175x +42L
    3.6 24V Lotus 520 L 102 L to 1 s 6.9x 144x +42L
    Vehicle 1.8
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 39 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 6.9x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 290x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 2.4i
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 50 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 6.9x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 216x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 1.8i
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 42 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 6.9x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 290x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 2.6i
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 56 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 6.9x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 200x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 2.0i
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 48 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 6.9x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 260x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 3.0 V6 24V 3000
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 72 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 6.9x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 175x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 3.0 3000
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 62 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 6.9x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 175x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 2.3 TD Interc.
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 39 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 6.9x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 230x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 1.8 S
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 39 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 6.9x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 290x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 1.8i N
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 39 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.4x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 290x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 2.0i CAT
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio -
    Trunk space to tank size 6.9x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 260x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 2.0
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio -
    Trunk space to tank size 6.9x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 260x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 2.3 D
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 27 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 7.4x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 230x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 2.3 TD
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 38 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 6.9x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 230x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 3.0 3000 V6 CAT
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 50 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 6.9x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 175x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 3.0 V6 24V Evolution 500
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 73 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 6.9x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 175x
    Difference with world average +42L
    Vehicle 3.6 24V Lotus
    Trunk space 520 L
    Trunk to acceleration ratio 102 L to 1 s
    Trunk space to tank size 6.9x
    Trunk space to engine capacity 144x
    Difference with world average +42L