Z4M / E46 M3 - Are they just not that fast?
Discussion
Performance is relative too though. All cars get faster over time, so your average repmobile in the e46 M3's time was slower to 60 than the present 320d for instance. I don't think you can compare car performance aggressively across era's like that, I know my tuned Mk2 Focus ST (c270bhp)is neck and neck with an e46 M3 downhill (and would probably out pace him uphill), as I suspect it would a lamborghini Muria.
I prefer the blue collar rep of the Ford badge to BMW, but I still would get more from Z4M ownership than the Ford by a big margin - but not the M3 though, I'd actually rather have the tuned ST.
I prefer the blue collar rep of the Ford badge to BMW, but I still would get more from Z4M ownership than the Ford by a big margin - but not the M3 though, I'd actually rather have the tuned ST.
having had both, a remapped e9x 335d, will in 99% of cases on the road see off an E46 M3. after 5 minutes driving the M3, who cares if it can't quite beat the diesel at the traffic light grand prix!
I think that considering the massive power and capability some standard cars are producing nowadays (M5, GTR etc etc) outright performance and power should be considered in the same way a Bugatti's top speed is, i.e nice to talk about in the pub (or Champagne bar!?), but totally irrelevant on public roads.
As Porsche appears to be realising with the resurgence of a manual gearbox on a top end model, the market is starting to appreciate the driving experience over outright performance figures.
I think that considering the massive power and capability some standard cars are producing nowadays (M5, GTR etc etc) outright performance and power should be considered in the same way a Bugatti's top speed is, i.e nice to talk about in the pub (or Champagne bar!?), but totally irrelevant on public roads.
As Porsche appears to be realising with the resurgence of a manual gearbox on a top end model, the market is starting to appreciate the driving experience over outright performance figures.
stuart-b said:
My 35iS is ~370 bhp at the moment and recently kept a V10 M5 in check,
In reality it's all about the power delivery and torque/power curves. The 7 speed DCT helps.
Agreed - I have a remapped 120d, and I sit on a mountain of torque throughout the revs, as such I can beat a modded RX8 over a 1/4 mile by a second, despite a slower start. Both cars within 50kg and 10hp of each other. In reality it's all about the power delivery and torque/power curves. The 7 speed DCT helps.
3rd and 4th gear let the RX down as it dropped the revs out of its power band, but on the track, the chassis and handling would leave me for dead. And on a rolling start, speed and acceleration are similar.
BlueEyedBoy said:
I've had the Z4 for around 2 years now and had the odd tussle with other machinery. The other day, I could not lose an Astra Mk IV!!
Now the car was obviously highly tuned given it had a bloody big intercooler on show low down, but given the Z4 is meant to have 350bhp, in order to get that out of an Astra it would have probably being the quickest one in the UK! It was literally glued to my bumper all the way up into significant numbers on a pretty straight road.
Now are those ponies only available in the 6 - 8k band and therefore most the time its not putting out that much until you get there?
Now I love driving the car and the noise it makes as you accelerate is great, but I struggle to lose traction in the dry in anything other than first, which is a bind to use anyway as you either nail it or have to use it timidly as its so jerky, which implies to me that the power really is all at the top end. My Cerebra 4.5 would lose traction in 3rd, now I know a much lighter car and mine had around 380bhp verified, but when a VW T5 tries to accelerate in the inside of the slip road to beat you and you don't make much distance on him, is the car just old hat now in the power stakes to turbo'd revo cars?
I know from experience that Astras can be fast. A guy pulled up next to me at the lights one late evening and asked to have a little TLGP as he said he'd had a remap but he said wait until I get into 2nd gear as they when it hits it peak power (Or something like that) he just wanted to see how it compared to my car. It was fast in 2nd gear but then I left him and then we slowed down. So they can be fast with a remap but I wouldn't say anything like as refined as a BMW. Now the car was obviously highly tuned given it had a bloody big intercooler on show low down, but given the Z4 is meant to have 350bhp, in order to get that out of an Astra it would have probably being the quickest one in the UK! It was literally glued to my bumper all the way up into significant numbers on a pretty straight road.
Now are those ponies only available in the 6 - 8k band and therefore most the time its not putting out that much until you get there?
Now I love driving the car and the noise it makes as you accelerate is great, but I struggle to lose traction in the dry in anything other than first, which is a bind to use anyway as you either nail it or have to use it timidly as its so jerky, which implies to me that the power really is all at the top end. My Cerebra 4.5 would lose traction in 3rd, now I know a much lighter car and mine had around 380bhp verified, but when a VW T5 tries to accelerate in the inside of the slip road to beat you and you don't make much distance on him, is the car just old hat now in the power stakes to turbo'd revo cars?
Funnily enough I used to be able to dust people in my Twingo most of the time but just the other day a prat in a black Polo GTI (new 1.8 model) was all over my backside and I couldn't shake him. Thankfully he was driving like a mobile chicane in the bends, almost losing control, so I got away in the end.
For exactly this reason I picked up a 60k mile 05 R53 Mini Cooper S for £3.5K and spent £1k putting on second hand performance intake, exhaust, intercooler, injectors, & R56 MCS brakes before getting it remapped with a 17% pulley to 230BHP.
Nothing this side of an Impreza/Lancer would shake it on road but it's a different story on track above 80mph where the gearing runs out. Mrs hates it and all the attention it draws what with the popping, banging and supercharger whine, hence I've also got a daily.
Z4M was neither a road or track car, it was caught inbetween, but I'd still swap you for the Mini.
Nothing this side of an Impreza/Lancer would shake it on road but it's a different story on track above 80mph where the gearing runs out. Mrs hates it and all the attention it draws what with the popping, banging and supercharger whine, hence I've also got a daily.
Z4M was neither a road or track car, it was caught inbetween, but I'd still swap you for the Mini.
andysgriff said:
Stock vs modified, not a fair comparison.
For me this is the bottom line.Z4M/M3 or a tuned up Astra, I know what I'd rather have. Anybody can throw money at a car and make it faster, spend the same on the Z4M/M3 and it'll remain faster. What's that prove? Nothing. Okay the Z4M/M3 cost more overall, but that's because it's BMW v's Vauxhall and the luxuries that entails.
I like my Impreza RB5 WRSport standard, 5secs to 60 (pretty good), just under 14secs to 100 (pretty average)... but it's more than fast enough on today's roads. Sure today's hot hatches will piss all over it around Bedford in the hands of the Stig, but that's not where it spends it's life and certainly not who's driving them... so unless you're balls out on the edge of an accident they are all comparable. Mine cost 10% the price of a Focus RS, less than 10% of an S3, C45AMG but then they get lappings of modern toys and luxuries... I like the raw pure driving theatre of mine.
Horses for courses...
Wolands Advocate said:
Yes, my point is though that I am fairly sure the Z4M gives you that and the Maserati does too. Still doesn't mean you might not get "owned" at some point by a man with a point to prove in a gussied-up Civic.
this +1I have a Golf R and the model down from a Z4M (3.0si which is only 265bhp and sprints in 5.7secs on paper so not as 'fast'). I have more fun driving the Z: feel, high revs, sound of the straight 6 - i'd love an M (i'm looking or i might stick in an ESS single screw for the N52)... The Golf is a great bit of kit and it is faster in every single way, but i'll never get that attached to it.
Although the question was is the Z4M still fast: the answer is yes, it's just not as fast as cars built 6 or 7 years after they stopped making them.. Advancement is great, it's a shame BMW decided not to produce an E89 M or you might have had something current to compare directly against modern hatches. I live in hope for whatever replaces it.
Siiiigh, that time again is it???? 10 year old standard car shown up by a newer tuned car????? Try sticking a supercharger onto the Z4 and then see how you get on otherwise this is not a comparison.
Put them side by side stock and see what happens.
Did you not enjoy just having a play with the astra????? You don't have to win all the time and it doesn't matter what car you are driving there will ALWAYS be something faster or someone, as lets not forget that although we like to think we are all driving gods most of us are probably distinctly average.
Put them side by side stock and see what happens.
Did you not enjoy just having a play with the astra????? You don't have to win all the time and it doesn't matter what car you are driving there will ALWAYS be something faster or someone, as lets not forget that although we like to think we are all driving gods most of us are probably distinctly average.
Of course it's a fair comparison, it's the same comparison we all make every time we buy a car!
Do we get a brand new car unsullied by others & packed with the latest tech, or do we get something a bit older that's probably a bit quicker instead? Do we spend our money on a car that's quick but with no tuning potential, or something cheaper that we can spend a few grand on making into a sleeping monster?
It's always a fair comparison, as long as the budget involved is the same. It's just down to preference.
Do we get a brand new car unsullied by others & packed with the latest tech, or do we get something a bit older that's probably a bit quicker instead? Do we spend our money on a car that's quick but with no tuning potential, or something cheaper that we can spend a few grand on making into a sleeping monster?
It's always a fair comparison, as long as the budget involved is the same. It's just down to preference.
If we ignore 'fast' being top speed. Then in the realm of comparable car speeds most will likely push to, say 0-100mph, the turbos now seem to be more resolved, easy power lower down, in gear acceleration etc. Your NA engines have to be ready at high revs to compete. Assuming they are then a 2ltr now pushing out 300-400bhp with easy power will be real world faster.
Mainstream has now resolved turbo issues, the performance knowledge is there to easily match NA figures in the 0-100mph range.
M3 is still fast when compared to width / length of road etc, which is why in isolation a sportscar feels fast. S2000 is always my default example, ragged about on it's own the car feels fast, and it is for the roads that rarely get wider, longer, less busy. But in a race with a 'fast' car now, left for dead.
A fast car will still feel fast in isolation, but over time loses it's 'fast' tag as newer cars match and surpass it. You could tell a young PHer that an M3 for example is a fast car, but when comparing, it used to be a fast car. In isolation, it still is. Unless you drive it on a massive road.
A bit like how a 2-stroke kart at Buckmore is fast, put the same kart at Silverstone and it'll feel slow. As long as the roads stay as they are, old fast cars will still feel fast.
Mainstream has now resolved turbo issues, the performance knowledge is there to easily match NA figures in the 0-100mph range.
M3 is still fast when compared to width / length of road etc, which is why in isolation a sportscar feels fast. S2000 is always my default example, ragged about on it's own the car feels fast, and it is for the roads that rarely get wider, longer, less busy. But in a race with a 'fast' car now, left for dead.
A fast car will still feel fast in isolation, but over time loses it's 'fast' tag as newer cars match and surpass it. You could tell a young PHer that an M3 for example is a fast car, but when comparing, it used to be a fast car. In isolation, it still is. Unless you drive it on a massive road.
A bit like how a 2-stroke kart at Buckmore is fast, put the same kart at Silverstone and it'll feel slow. As long as the roads stay as they are, old fast cars will still feel fast.
Thankfully were I live in South Scotland I don't find myself in all these race scenarios- so my M3 is still as fast as it ever was.
Apparently there are now lots of other fast cars available, which is great. Hopefully people will buy them so I can try them when they are 10 years old too. With all the 1.0 Eco engines, and 1.6 diesels there are plenty of sedate machines out there for us performance car owners to negotiate around, regardless of the era of the car.
When I get out of my Hilux or girlfriends 1.5 Almera to pick the M3 up out of the garage, it certainly feels fast!
Oh, and on a technical geekery note, the S54 develops 80% of it's torque at 2000rpm. It has a very high torque output for a N/A engine, and more wheel torque available that an E46 330d, or even 335d's if you calculate out the gearing :-)
Apparently there are now lots of other fast cars available, which is great. Hopefully people will buy them so I can try them when they are 10 years old too. With all the 1.0 Eco engines, and 1.6 diesels there are plenty of sedate machines out there for us performance car owners to negotiate around, regardless of the era of the car.
When I get out of my Hilux or girlfriends 1.5 Almera to pick the M3 up out of the garage, it certainly feels fast!
Oh, and on a technical geekery note, the S54 develops 80% of it's torque at 2000rpm. It has a very high torque output for a N/A engine, and more wheel torque available that an E46 330d, or even 335d's if you calculate out the gearing :-)
S54 engine is very fuel fussy. V-power or Tesco 99 or expect it to retard and never really "want" to go to 8,000 rpm which it should do if running right.
Plus with solid tappets you need to adjust/replace the shims which is part of the inspection service but is rarely done. You know if it was done properly if they keep your car overnight so the clearances can be measured with a completely cold engine, they find some issues and then you wait another day for delivery of the new shims and the morning for them to be replaced. It rarely, if ever, is done without you specifically challenging the dealership.
All in all that adds up to lost BHP.
My E46 M3 and my Z4M both were "relatively" quick up to 100mph, but where they are better, when comparing to other cars, is when you top 3rd, hold it through 4th and do not lift to 8,000 (140 mph) and go for 5th. That is their better comparative area as they hold well to the speed limiter in 5th.
RW
Plus with solid tappets you need to adjust/replace the shims which is part of the inspection service but is rarely done. You know if it was done properly if they keep your car overnight so the clearances can be measured with a completely cold engine, they find some issues and then you wait another day for delivery of the new shims and the morning for them to be replaced. It rarely, if ever, is done without you specifically challenging the dealership.
All in all that adds up to lost BHP.
My E46 M3 and my Z4M both were "relatively" quick up to 100mph, but where they are better, when comparing to other cars, is when you top 3rd, hold it through 4th and do not lift to 8,000 (140 mph) and go for 5th. That is their better comparative area as they hold well to the speed limiter in 5th.
RW
To add fuel to the fire my 2016 335d Touring "daddy special" easily matches my V8 E92 M3 up to 3 figure speeds. This is despite being 110bhp short of the M3. I does have an additional 170lbft of torque though.
Large capacity turbo diesels have change the game dramatically
The 335d is debadged and has given many a 'performance' car, a 135i included a surprise.
Large capacity turbo diesels have change the game dramatically
The 335d is debadged and has given many a 'performance' car, a 135i included a surprise.
Ekona said:
Of course it's a fair comparison, it's the same comparison we all make every time we buy a car!
Do we get a brand new car unsullied by others & packed with the latest tech, or do we get something a bit older that's probably a bit quicker instead? Do we spend our money on a car that's quick but with no tuning potential, or something cheaper that we can spend a few grand on making into a sleeping monster?
It's always a fair comparison, as long as the budget involved is the same. It's just down to preference.
What the car on finance against the one that's bought outright......budget is less of a factor here than you may think. Christ we're not battering each other with wallets we are talking about pace and to compare a standard old car to a new tuned one isn't a fair comparison. I fear you have missed the point of my comment and indeed the thread y quite some distance if not entirely. Go back to sleep. Do we get a brand new car unsullied by others & packed with the latest tech, or do we get something a bit older that's probably a bit quicker instead? Do we spend our money on a car that's quick but with no tuning potential, or something cheaper that we can spend a few grand on making into a sleeping monster?
It's always a fair comparison, as long as the budget involved is the same. It's just down to preference.
We should all remember the main reason why Most car makers are using turbos on their new cars 'Emissions and efficiency' Do we really think if they could still make a N/A str8six or V8/V10 with performance to match but still make the Euro garbage emissions rules they would, course they would, car makers know what a good engine looks/sounds like, and it's not a 4cyl turbo is it? Lexus are never going to make another LFA with a screamer V10, as VW are never going to drop a V6 in a golf, and Renault a v6 in the back of a Clio, but mainly because of emissions, and it's a very sad time where the market and most buyers all look at mpg, road tax before much else.
The whole petrol bmw range used to be largely based on a N/A st8six as did Porsche, and now the New boxter and Caymans are fitted with 4cyl turbo motors, bmw are either diesel or a 1.6/2.0 turbo petrol, and sadly the M3/4 needs the turbo to be as quick as the older engines, and conform to emissions rules.
I'm not so sure adding a turbo onto everything is what I'd class advancement, as one poster said the S54 was (still is) a marvel of a engine, with design and power outputs (at its time) for a N/A engine above most others comparible. Bmw no longer hand build engines, they just grab a standard 'production engine N'x' something or other, up the boost and tweak emissions to suit. The M3/M4 1M, M2 are all largely based on similar tech, and base engines, to me that's not exactly advancement.
Only today I had a conversation about the new Porsche Cayman vs the old, and salesman said 'shouldn't say this' but 'We still prefer the 6cyl motor' says it all really.
Andy
The whole petrol bmw range used to be largely based on a N/A st8six as did Porsche, and now the New boxter and Caymans are fitted with 4cyl turbo motors, bmw are either diesel or a 1.6/2.0 turbo petrol, and sadly the M3/4 needs the turbo to be as quick as the older engines, and conform to emissions rules.
I'm not so sure adding a turbo onto everything is what I'd class advancement, as one poster said the S54 was (still is) a marvel of a engine, with design and power outputs (at its time) for a N/A engine above most others comparible. Bmw no longer hand build engines, they just grab a standard 'production engine N'x' something or other, up the boost and tweak emissions to suit. The M3/M4 1M, M2 are all largely based on similar tech, and base engines, to me that's not exactly advancement.
Only today I had a conversation about the new Porsche Cayman vs the old, and salesman said 'shouldn't say this' but 'We still prefer the 6cyl motor' says it all really.
Andy
0836whimper said:
Creating a 50 metre gap with an M3 before three figures were reached seems far fetched. And the torque thing is not really relevant if both are redlining each gear.
They are roughly the same in a straight line, with the 135i on a track getting out of shape round corners, esp on track,(with a duller power delivery being subjective).
100 mph is very nearly 50 metres per second, so seems about right to me given high tens vs high elevens claimed 0-100 times?They are roughly the same in a straight line, with the 135i on a track getting out of shape round corners, esp on track,(with a duller power delivery being subjective).
Agreed you need a very quick thing to make a quick thing seem slow. My Elise SC is quick enough to keep a Nissan GTR looking fairly honest at vaguely road legal speeds, but it's a much slower car in a straight line on paper.
Edited by herebebeasties on Tuesday 7th June 13:19
Gassing Station | M Power | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff