Discussion
Considering a Z4, though I have not driven one yet. Currently have a 1-series coupe.
- Do the new "s-drive" Z4s not come in coupe form?
- Is there much of a difference between the older 3.0si and the newer sdrive 3.0 cars?
- What's the ride like? I've heard it's horribly crashy and awful, but then you hear a lot of things about cars and often they are complete arse
From a cash point of view i could probably do a money-neutral swap into an older style 2007 Z4 3.0si with some trimmings. Obviously the NA I6 is going to be nice, but do they feel quick? and is the 30ish mpg realistic?
Thanks in advance.
- Do the new "s-drive" Z4s not come in coupe form?
- Is there much of a difference between the older 3.0si and the newer sdrive 3.0 cars?
- What's the ride like? I've heard it's horribly crashy and awful, but then you hear a lot of things about cars and often they are complete arse
From a cash point of view i could probably do a money-neutral swap into an older style 2007 Z4 3.0si with some trimmings. Obviously the NA I6 is going to be nice, but do they feel quick? and is the 30ish mpg realistic?
Thanks in advance.
Richard-G said:
ride is all down to the runflats , f##king runflats. On normal boots the ride is ok, the way the later all aluminium 3.0si drives is better aswell, more balanced, 50:50 weight dist. Great car
yes forgot to complete what I was saying. The ride. I got out of the car after running down a well known route and said to the dealer that it was the most dangerous ride I had ever experienced. The ride was simply horrible, the wheels seemed to go in generally the direction of the steering wheel. I'm sure as has been said with replacing runflats to normals that things would improve but the steering was extremely vauge and the car tram lined and tracked horribly.Does that make them bad? No, I suspect it was just the run flats. Worth having a chat with pulse as to his ownership experience though
Ditching the runflats for normal tyres and a can of tyreweld (or whatever) is the most common "modification" to the Z4. I know the RFTs on my 130i were the primary reason I got rid of the car after two years.
Having said that, the missus's 2.0 seems pretty comfortable on RFT's. But I'd still put normal tyres on - it transforms the car.
Having said that, the missus's 2.0 seems pretty comfortable on RFT's. But I'd still put normal tyres on - it transforms the car.
pilchardthecat said:
Thanks.
I'd like to know more about the differences between the older/newer cars.
Would you say the ride on non-runflats is better/worse/the same as the 1 series (on non-runflats)
do you mean the different gen cars or the mk1.1 and mk1.2 cars? They had a midlife facelift and the 3.0 had a power upgrade you see.....I'd like to know more about the differences between the older/newer cars.
Would you say the ride on non-runflats is better/worse/the same as the 1 series (on non-runflats)
Daniel1 said:
pilchardthecat said:
Thanks.
I'd like to know more about the differences between the older/newer cars.
Would you say the ride on non-runflats is better/worse/the same as the 1 series (on non-runflats)
do you mean the different gen cars or the mk1.1 and mk1.2 cars? They had a midlife facelift and the 3.0 had a power upgrade you see.....I'd like to know more about the differences between the older/newer cars.
Would you say the ride on non-runflats is better/worse/the same as the 1 series (on non-runflats)
I'm guessing the 1.1 and 1.2 differences include the newer piezo direct injection engine vs the older one (265 vs 250-something)? Were there any changes to the ride etc?
I suppose the ride is something of a concern as i do a lot of A/B road driving and don't want a bad back!
Hi. Can I offer some comments having purchased a 4 year old manual 3.0 coupe about 6 weeks ago.
1. My car is a not a M coupe, hence the ride is ok. M ride is too harsh for me, as is the fuel consumption penalty.
2. The sports seats are very comfortable
3. The car is on runflats, it does tramline, ride is firm. All in all though it is an acceptable ride but perhaps when 2 of the tyres need replacing I may consider changing all four for 'normal' tyres as it will be virtually cost neutral (2 run flats v 4 normal tyres)
5. On my daily commmuter run from North London to South West london, the car returns 28-29 mpg. Did a motorway run to Southampton over the weekend & it returned 35 mpg. With more spirited driving I would expect both figuers to drop by 4-5 mpg. Given the amount of speed cameras & traffic, spirited driving will only ever make up a small amount of my day to day driving.
6. Acceptable performance is a subjective thing, but I find the 3.0 to be fine & sufficiently entertaining for day to day driving
7. I beleive the new s-drive is heavier & hence feels less lively. Having said that the folding tin top does offer the best of both worlds if you don't mind a less edgy driving experience.
Hope these personal, real world observations help.
1. My car is a not a M coupe, hence the ride is ok. M ride is too harsh for me, as is the fuel consumption penalty.
2. The sports seats are very comfortable
3. The car is on runflats, it does tramline, ride is firm. All in all though it is an acceptable ride but perhaps when 2 of the tyres need replacing I may consider changing all four for 'normal' tyres as it will be virtually cost neutral (2 run flats v 4 normal tyres)
5. On my daily commmuter run from North London to South West london, the car returns 28-29 mpg. Did a motorway run to Southampton over the weekend & it returned 35 mpg. With more spirited driving I would expect both figuers to drop by 4-5 mpg. Given the amount of speed cameras & traffic, spirited driving will only ever make up a small amount of my day to day driving.
6. Acceptable performance is a subjective thing, but I find the 3.0 to be fine & sufficiently entertaining for day to day driving
7. I beleive the new s-drive is heavier & hence feels less lively. Having said that the folding tin top does offer the best of both worlds if you don't mind a less edgy driving experience.
Hope these personal, real world observations help.
The new folding hard-top Z4's are a softer proposition all round than the previous fabric topped Z4. The ride is far more compliant and composed.
The 'Sport' button on the 3.0 s drive I had stiffened the suspension, steering and sharpened the throttle response, and it then becomes more like the old car.
The 'Sport' button on the 3.0 s drive I had stiffened the suspension, steering and sharpened the throttle response, and it then becomes more like the old car.
pilchardthecat said:
It seems the v1.1 has a 231bhp 3.0 engine, and the v1.2 had 265, same as the very new ones.
Does anyone know exacly when the change was made
2007 '07' plates onwardDoes anyone know exacly when the change was made
you can tell by the lack of orange indicators in the front lamps and the 'straight' rather then 'curvy' rear lamps. Had different wheel designs and front and rear bumpers iirc
also introduction of the 2.0
This is only from general observation rather then any direct source.
As regards to the difference between the 1st and 2nd generations:
The mk1 was aimed as a boxster rival and was thus designed as a traditional roadster. It suffered from overly stiff suspension and tramlined a lot. They are good when pushing on but are figidity and annoying when driving normally. There is a lot of debate that a lot of it can be fixed by ditching the runflats. The 3.0 is quite tail happy. My 2.0 was broken nearly the whole time i had it.
The mk2 weighed somewhere in the region of 150kg more and you really felt it. Designed to be more of a GT roadster in respect to being aimed at the Mercedes SLK rather then boxster and apparantly is very good at it. Struggles when being pushed though and no where near as pure as the 1st incarnation. I would say that although it might not be as good at going quickly, it might be more then adequate for how you drive. A racing driver would prefer the mk1, you may find the mk2 is perfectly acceptable.
hope my totally non researched opinions help
Edited by Daniel1 on Tuesday 4th May 18:58
spud989 said:
Do you want the car to throw round the B roads or to cruise/pose in?
The earlier cars are much better at the former than the newer ones.
Mostly the former, but i'll be doing 50 miles/1-2 hours a day commuting in it, so i don't want any back injuries and a really crashy ride. The earlier cars are much better at the former than the newer ones.
I'd love to hear from someone who's driven a facelift 1 series and can compare the two. I found the 1er with runflats a bit crashy, but it's fine on Falkens.
If i were getting a new one it would be the 35 i suspect, but i'm not convinced it's remotely worth the extra cash by the sound of it.
http://www.z4-forum.com/forum/
Pop over for a chat. I've only had mine a week, but I love love love it
Pop over for a chat. I've only had mine a week, but I love love love it
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff