The Best ///M/Barge/General Rant/Look at this/O/T (Vol XVII)
Discussion
Pennyroyal Tea said:
It is when there's no good reason why you're not considering an E46 M3 instead.
Problem with the Z4 is that it's cheaply built in the US, and it feels it. Trim starts rattling in the first few thousand miles; not helped by the terrible damping (which in turn is exacerbated by the RFTs on non-M models).
Good looking car (in M flavour; I personally feel the standard cars look a little anemic), but it's no Cayman rival.
£10k will get you a nice M3.
What he said.Problem with the Z4 is that it's cheaply built in the US, and it feels it. Trim starts rattling in the first few thousand miles; not helped by the terrible damping (which in turn is exacerbated by the RFTs on non-M models).
Good looking car (in M flavour; I personally feel the standard cars look a little anemic), but it's no Cayman rival.
£10k will get you a nice M3.
The following comes with the health warning that I'm a ham-fisted oaf who doesn't really know his ARBs from his LSD, but all the same...
Having owned a 3.0 and M version of the Z4C, I'd echo everything PT says above. The 3.0 kind of works as a baby GT car - it has a nice smooth engine with lots of low down grunt that revs out well enough. No fireworks, but pleasing all the same. But the ride was crap. And not a good car for flinging down your favourite B road, IMHO. It wasn't that it felt like it'd send you through a hedge backards... it felt more like it'd bounce you over it. Just no finesse or resolution to the handling.
Sometime later I bought an M version (it was a year old, the market was on its arse and there was a cracking deal on the table... and it was red and shiny). As we all know, the engine in the M is in another league. And other bits and pieces were better than the 3.0 - quicker rack, better brakes, and so on. And it looked ace and had that sense of occasion that comes from sitting [relatively] low down, back over the rear axle. But (again, IMHO) disappointingly unresolved from a ride and handling perspective. The e46 just feels so much better thought through.
And as PT says, although the interior felt a tad more modern than the e46, the build quality felt way behind.
A complete no brainer from my perspective - I'd choose an e46 M3 over the Z without question (and recently did so).
CampDavid said:
ferrisbueller said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Elise it is then.Problem with low mileage cars IMO/IME is that their value is inherently linked to the mileage.
£15k would buy a very decent S2 methinks.
ferrisbueller said:
CampDavid said:
ferrisbueller said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Elise it is then.Problem with low mileage cars IMO/IME is that their value is inherently linked to the mileage.
£15k would buy a very decent S2 methinks.
CampDavid said:
ferrisbueller said:
CampDavid said:
ferrisbueller said:
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Elise it is then.Problem with low mileage cars IMO/IME is that their value is inherently linked to the mileage.
£15k would buy a very decent S2 methinks.
I lost touch with exact market trends after I sold mine and 111Rs refused to descend to the £15k point at which I'd promised myself one.
The Toyota engined, 134bhp, S was a lovely thing and much more friendly in the wet than my S1 ever was. I think that might have been the last one I drove. I should probably address that.
Gruber said:
The following comes with the health warning that I'm a ham-fisted oaf who doesn't really know his ARBs from his LSD, but all the same...
Same health warning from me, but as you know cmoose, I've had both a 3.0si and an M as well. I'll echo some of the points from Gruber, but not all.I fully understand your requirement for a 'sports car' rather than 'sports saloon'. Some of our decision-making (actually most of my decision-making, I will unashamedly admit) is the passion for how the car looks. The Z4 has the E46 beat in this regard. That isn't to say the E46 isn't lovely.
3.0si
It's a great car, and if you never drove the M, you'd think it's a fantastic car. The handling isn't as good as the M, though I must admit I warmed to my RFTs as soon as I took them off. The mega-stiff sidewall makes for some sharp turn-in! Of course, ride quality is not as good. The engine is a peach, but compared to the M it is boring. It may sound weird to say this, but they are completely different. The 3.0si is a creamy, nice-but-relaxing-sounding engine, which will get quite frankly ridiculous MPG. Taking it easy on the motorway will see 35-ish.
M
Fantastic car! More dramatic lines, better steering, better suspension... but it's the engine that makes it. Having now owned both, there is no way I'd go back to a 3.0si. The only reason I sold mine was that I was driving so many miles, and the motorway mpg was nearer 25mpg-ish.
Personally I'd not even be bothered about Coupe now. It's the far better looking car, and a proper classic, but the Roadster was ace fun (and cheaper to buy).
By the way, since I know you're a Porsche fan, I also drove a Cayman S (07-plate) when I had my 3.0si. It was EASILY a better car, but I actually preferred my 3.0si (at the time, anyway). It felt more alive (probably due to it being so skittish!), and it was far more interesting looking.
A huge positive if you can stretch to a Z4MC is that it's very rare to see - always nice in a sea of grey Porsches.
Always happy to chat (at tedious length!) about the Z4s if useful.
king aceolly22n said:
CampDavid said:
Golf clubs?
Leins said:
LaurasOtherHalf said:
I may be about to do something a little rash again.....
On paper they tick an awful lot of boxes for me. Mr Dog is dreaming of something more "fast wagon" though I feel!
olly22n said:
CampDavid said:
Golf clubs?LaurasOtherHalf said:
Leins said:
LaurasOtherHalf said:
I may be about to do something a little rash again.....
On paper they tick an awful lot of boxes for me. Mr Dog is dreaming of something more "fast wagon" though I feel!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff