Pics of my new Z4M Coupe
Discussion
I really had quite modest expectations for this car, but I'm enjoying it much more than I expected. After being involved from a journalistic perspective in a few Z4M articles this year (EVO and Total BMW) I knew where the weaknesses were but decided to take the risk anyway.
BMW should be shot for not providing the car in this format as standard, it makes such a difference to the way it looks and drives. I'm a great believer in running a car in hard, and after owning 4 E46 M3s/CSLs I've a pretty good idea how to treat it. I must say the engine is so much better in this Z4M Coupe than any M3 I've ever driven, it's a great swansong for the S54 powerplant and both seriously torquey and powerful. It sounds pretty great too.
Handling with these Michelin PS2 tyres would now warrant comparison with the Cayman - most of the criticisms of the Z4MCoupe in the press are due to the appalling Contisport Contacts that come as standard. It's now genuinely fun to take to the edge of its handling envelope, where before it required more bravery.
BMW should be shot for not providing the car in this format as standard, it makes such a difference to the way it looks and drives. I'm a great believer in running a car in hard, and after owning 4 E46 M3s/CSLs I've a pretty good idea how to treat it. I must say the engine is so much better in this Z4M Coupe than any M3 I've ever driven, it's a great swansong for the S54 powerplant and both seriously torquey and powerful. It sounds pretty great too.
Handling with these Michelin PS2 tyres would now warrant comparison with the Cayman - most of the criticisms of the Z4MCoupe in the press are due to the appalling Contisport Contacts that come as standard. It's now genuinely fun to take to the edge of its handling envelope, where before it required more bravery.
Rev Dogbolter said:
Congratulations my dear Doctor. It really looks great. Better than the verger in a cassock.
You said it handles better than the test car. Is this because of the cross brace, the 19" low profiles, the fact they are PS2's or have you done something else as well??
(btw I followed your recommendation and fitted a cross brace to my Z4M Roadster. It has improved on bumpy roads. Thanks)
Bless you.
The Reverend
You said it handles better than the test car. Is this because of the cross brace, the 19" low profiles, the fact they are PS2's or have you done something else as well??
(btw I followed your recommendation and fitted a cross brace to my Z4M Roadster. It has improved on bumpy roads. Thanks)
Bless you.
The Reverend
Dear Reverend, the cross brace certainly helps but I feel the biggest liability are the tyres. Michelin PS2s are so much more responsive and predictable than the Contis. Also I suppose I now have a wider profile of rubber on the front axle which considerably reduces understeer and increases confidence.
BRoCceRs said:
DoctorD said:
I really had quite modest expectations for this car, but I'm enjoying it much more than I expected.
Seriously question - why buy one ?
After performing all these magazine reviews and providing my opinons on both Z4M Roadster and Coupe, I could see its potential and was sufficiently tempted by the look of the Coupe to buy one 'subject' to making a few changes. If it hadn't been as good then I would most probably have sold it, but now I'm looking forward to many more miles of smiles..
Edited by DoctorD on Friday 22 September 14:22
I gave them both some exercise this afternoon to investigate their differences and was surprised by what I found.
First thing, the CSL accelerates more quickly. OK, my Z4MC is still green but it felt pretty quick in isolation. The Z4MC feels like it has a 3.4 litre engine compared to the CSL's 3.2, but the CSL pulls so much harder above 4000 rpm. Noise wise, again in isolation the Z4MC sounds pretty nice but compared to my CSL, it whispers. My kids tell me that the Z4MC has about 1/4 of the voice of our CSL.
Handling is interesting. The CSL moves around much more and feels like there's much more lateral movement in the suspension arms. The Z4MC by comparison feels rock-solid, not uncomfortable but stiffer in bodyshell and more tightly controlled in its damping. Surprisingly though it's the CSL that is easier to just throw into a corner and it then absorbs and fires out, whereas the Z4MC is a little less fluid but still a whole ton of fun.
The CSL feels the more forgiving if braking late into a tightening corner, but I'm not sure that should be held against the Z4MC. By any normal standards the Z4MC is as quick, agile and secure as pretty much any car out there. It just needs to be wearing the right shoes and perhaps also the strut brace that is fitted to mine.
The DSC system on the Z4MC is too conservative, it needs an M-track mode as in the CSL. At least with the CSL you can still play within M-track, whereas on the Z4MC there's no alternative but to switch off DSC completely.
Each car has a very different personality, the Z4MC feels like a very sporting GT car, ideal of daily driving and touring. Whereas the CSL just wants to go fast everywhere and needs a track environment to truly feel at home.
First thing, the CSL accelerates more quickly. OK, my Z4MC is still green but it felt pretty quick in isolation. The Z4MC feels like it has a 3.4 litre engine compared to the CSL's 3.2, but the CSL pulls so much harder above 4000 rpm. Noise wise, again in isolation the Z4MC sounds pretty nice but compared to my CSL, it whispers. My kids tell me that the Z4MC has about 1/4 of the voice of our CSL.
Handling is interesting. The CSL moves around much more and feels like there's much more lateral movement in the suspension arms. The Z4MC by comparison feels rock-solid, not uncomfortable but stiffer in bodyshell and more tightly controlled in its damping. Surprisingly though it's the CSL that is easier to just throw into a corner and it then absorbs and fires out, whereas the Z4MC is a little less fluid but still a whole ton of fun.
The CSL feels the more forgiving if braking late into a tightening corner, but I'm not sure that should be held against the Z4MC. By any normal standards the Z4MC is as quick, agile and secure as pretty much any car out there. It just needs to be wearing the right shoes and perhaps also the strut brace that is fitted to mine.
The DSC system on the Z4MC is too conservative, it needs an M-track mode as in the CSL. At least with the CSL you can still play within M-track, whereas on the Z4MC there's no alternative but to switch off DSC completely.
Each car has a very different personality, the Z4MC feels like a very sporting GT car, ideal of daily driving and touring. Whereas the CSL just wants to go fast everywhere and needs a track environment to truly feel at home.
gunner said:
gorgeous car.may I ask how you got those wheels fitted?When I enquired I was told that the car only came with one type of wheels which looks like it may be wrong.Can you please explain how you did it?Cheers.
As Nathan says, I already had the wheels (they were my spare set from my CSL), but BMW really should have made a 19" option available. Any wheel that fits an M3 will also fit the Z4M Coupe, so either CSL ones (or perhaps the slightly narrower ones from the M3 CS) or something tastefully aftermarket would suit.
craigAMV8 said:
Hi mate it looks amazing. I had one on order an cancelled it and i bought a AMV8 instead, you pics are making me think, WRONG. The wheels make it, did you have side skirts fitted ?
Yes, I had the BMW aerokit side skirts fitted, they're only £115 each so can't figure why BMW didn't fit them as standard to the M model.
Rev Dogbolter said:
Dearest Doctor,
In an earlier posting, you eluded to the Roadster's oversteer would be improved by the CSL wheel / tyre combo having a wider track. Is this due to the wheel offset above (is this different from the standard wheels?) and / or are the tyre widths different from the standard 225 / 255 width?
I have asked my local dealer (Ocean Paignton) twice for the aerokit skirt and CSL wheel information. Their incompetance is such that they say theydon't know and will find out and get back to me, which they never do. The Lord truly works in mysterious ways. At least I now know from your posting that the skirts cost £115....now all I have to do is convince them that they really exist and can sell them to me!!!!!
Bless you for continuing enlightenment.
The Reverend Dogbolter
In an earlier posting, you eluded to the Roadster's oversteer would be improved by the CSL wheel / tyre combo having a wider track. Is this due to the wheel offset above (is this different from the standard wheels?) and / or are the tyre widths different from the standard 225 / 255 width?
I have asked my local dealer (Ocean Paignton) twice for the aerokit skirt and CSL wheel information. Their incompetance is such that they say theydon't know and will find out and get back to me, which they never do. The Lord truly works in mysterious ways. At least I now know from your posting that the skirts cost £115....now all I have to do is convince them that they really exist and can sell them to me!!!!!
Bless you for continuing enlightenment.
The Reverend Dogbolter
Dealers, bless them.
The side skirts are part of the 'Aerodynamic Package' kit that is part number 51 19 0 413 069, but it will have its own part number since each element of the kit can be purchased seperately. So the parts assistant merely needs to enter the above part number, click on the 'extended side skirts' sub-item and then order it!!
The CSL wheels will be a problem to get hold of since BMW try to prevent people buying them who don't already own an M3 CSL. It may be easier to get hold of the M3 CS wheels which look the same, but are slightly narrower at the front (8J rather than 8.5J). The wheel offset makes little difference but the footprint is increased by the wider rims (8.5J and 9.5J) and increased tyre width (235/265). My car is therefore 9mm wider at the rear and 4mm wider at the front, with an increased footprint also.
Grip, shall we say is 'not' a problem..
Strangely it doesn't understeer much at all, in fact the front end is really planted (much more so than the CSL with -2 degrees camber). But when you really carry a lot of speed through a fast corner the ride height feels a tadge too high, as if it is slightly on tippy-toes. An inch or so lower and it would be nigh on perfect (as you noted at Sandown Park the other day).
Rev Dogbolter said:
I must say I feel the aesthetics of the front of the car would be even more improved if the front spoiler protruded further forward than the grill similar to, but not as extreme as, the racing series Coupe. Any thoughts?
Yours etc etc
Reverend Dogbolter
Yours etc etc
Reverend Dogbolter
Dear Rev, fit the side-skirts first and then see what you think. Personally I feel it looks quite balanced as it is. Remember the full Aerokit included front and rear spoilers which the Z4M already has, so the side-skirts just complete the look. Strange, why BMW did not fit them in the first place..
vr6-er said:
This car may be great as a drivers car, but in my opinion is pig ugly as standard without the CSL wheels and will depreciate very hard. Its new at the moment but give it a year or so and you'll pick one up very cheap. Its alright if your minted.
I got a lease quote on a Z4 M conv and from the residual offered BMW finance have no confidence in that car! In years to come the conv will be marginally more desirable.
Just a word of warning.
I got a lease quote on a Z4 M conv and from the residual offered BMW finance have no confidence in that car! In years to come the conv will be marginally more desirable.
Just a word of warning.
Edited by vr6-er on Wednesday 18th October 22:42
I disagree with you. I doubt that the Convertible will be the more desirable, they both look quite different and without wishing to upset the Convertible owners out there, the Coupe would appear to be the better looking and more desirable car. Having owned an Alpina Z4 'Convertible' for almost a year and now the Z4M Coupe I can compare the comments and admiring glances from other drivers. And the driving experience is even more different than the aesthetic ones.
Even the depreciation on my Alpina Z4 was no worse than I would expect from something in Porsche's stable, in fact I did better than the Boxster S that I owned before that.
Edited by DoctorD on Saturday 21st October 15:06
p.s. did I mention the other reason why the Coupe might hold it's value better?
Firstly BMW are only bringing in 200 cars in the first year, so there will be a lot less around than the Convertible and finally...
...it drives brilliantly (provided you change the tyres and fit a strut brace). It's such a sweet car to drive hard, so nimble and agile and 'solid' (i.e. well planted). There's a lovely feeling that I only ever experience in BMW's (and never experienced with the Cayman S), you perhaps lift slightly as you turn into a corner, and can feel the weight transfer to the front-end, then you apply the throttle and the torque is so immediate that you can feel the front tuck towards the apex of the corner and guide you to the exit. It's so detailed the feedback you get through the chassis and the amount of influence that the throttle has over you trajectory that I find myself smiling and looking forward to the next corner. It's such a tactile driving experience and the engine is so strong and gutsy that I can't help taking the long way home just to prolong the journey.
It's just a shame that some owners will not get to experience this, since you need to change those lousy continentals and fit the PS2s before you'll notice the chassis talking to you this way.
Firstly BMW are only bringing in 200 cars in the first year, so there will be a lot less around than the Convertible and finally...
...it drives brilliantly (provided you change the tyres and fit a strut brace). It's such a sweet car to drive hard, so nimble and agile and 'solid' (i.e. well planted). There's a lovely feeling that I only ever experience in BMW's (and never experienced with the Cayman S), you perhaps lift slightly as you turn into a corner, and can feel the weight transfer to the front-end, then you apply the throttle and the torque is so immediate that you can feel the front tuck towards the apex of the corner and guide you to the exit. It's so detailed the feedback you get through the chassis and the amount of influence that the throttle has over you trajectory that I find myself smiling and looking forward to the next corner. It's such a tactile driving experience and the engine is so strong and gutsy that I can't help taking the long way home just to prolong the journey.
It's just a shame that some owners will not get to experience this, since you need to change those lousy continentals and fit the PS2s before you'll notice the chassis talking to you this way.
EdwardLovett said:
Dr
Where did the strut brace come from? or is it standard?
Have you just put the Cup Alloys Straight on with out making any adjustments?
Edward
Where did the strut brace come from? or is it standard?
Have you just put the Cup Alloys Straight on with out making any adjustments?
Edward
Hi Edward, the strut brace is just the standard BMW strut brace from the Z4 accessories catalogue. I believe it only became available earlier this year.
The CSL alloys just fitted straight on without need for any spacers. The clearances between strut and wheel and between tyre and inner fender are exactly the same as in my CSL, so it's a 'factory type' fit and entirely within normal BMW specifications.
There really is no excuse for BMW not fitting these as standard or making them available in the order configurator.
gunner said:
I must admit to being very tempted by one of these.Can you provide some sort of benchmark for how it drives vs Cayman/911/GT3...anything like that?Also I would need to do some commuting in it around town,would it be ok in that respect?Thanks a lot.
I've owned a GT3, 996C2 and tested several Caymans so I can draw a reasonably comparison. The Z4M Coupe is less compliant than a Cayman (on standard suspension or in the softer PASM setting), the Cayman tends to 'float' across the road surface whereas the Z4MC is a little bit firmer on the rebound. It's not a problem per se, but is noticeable. Part of the problem is that the standard tyre pressures are too high, rather than 31/32 psi it's much more compliant on 28/29 psi. The Z4 has always been very sensitive to tyre pressures. The 3.2l engine on the Z4MC feels bigger and more torquey than the 3.4litre Cayman, exactly the opposite to what you would expect and is clearly more accelerative. There's no doubt in my mind which engine I would choose. Agility would again go with the Z4MC which turns in more quickly and feels like the smaller car to hustle. The Cayman by comparison feels the larger car to drive and manoeuvre. In standard guise the Cayman feels the more homogenous in the corners, but change the tyres on the Z4MC and fit a strut brace and then you can lean on the Z4MC's chassis in total confidence.
A GT3 rides a lot firmer than the Z4MC and is nowhere near the everyday car. Even by comparison my M3 CSL doesn't settle into a GT mode anywhere near as well as the Z4MC, which is a perfect every day car. My problem is that it's all too easy to rack up the miles in the Z4MC, and I've already covered 3500 miles in little over a month, so I'm letting it rest in my garage whilst I drive one of my other cars, but given the choice I would just keep on driving it.
I guess overall the Z4MC reminds me of a 911, very similar in being totally usable, comfortable on long journeys and fun when you plant your right foot. It feels a performance level above the Cayman, in the same way that the 911 does, although clealry it doesn't have the same cachet as driving either Porsche. But then neither does it cost as much..
Gassing Station | M Power | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff