RE: BMW Z4 M40i: Driven

[rayyan171]

As I predicted, the M40i engine works wonders on a well-sorted chassis such as this. Very good to hear that this isn't a compromised ride and handles as well as a coupé, simply due to the way they have stiffened up this new chassis they have developed. The instability of convertibles seems to be a thing for the past, for BMW at least. Adaptive drive is what should be thanked for however, this has always made night and day difference in many BMW's, from the 3 series to the X5.

[robinandcamera]

nightflight said:

Is it just me, or does that look like a Mercedes?

I was here to post the same. Remove the badges and front grill and I would swear blind it was a new SL55.

[TWPC]

Marbella in March... sunny day... 21 degrees... being paid to test drive a convertible... I want that job!

This Z4 has a great engine but otherwise this car doesn't really appeal. For an even better job spec I'd want to be testing an MX-5...

[Car 54 where are you]

With Porsche 718 sales already in the doldrums internationally, this car will give Porsche sleepless nights.

[Oily76]

Frimley111R said:

All BMWs are heavy (which no-one ever seems to mention)

Maybe compared to cars 20 years ago, but nowadays they are usually a good 100kg lighter than the Audi/Merc equivalent. 320d = c. 1500 kg, Merc 220d c. 1700 kg, Audi A4 2.0 TDi c. 1600kg.

That is a substantial difference, and is the same throughout the range - apart from the 1 series which is a RWD car with all the attendant additional weight and complexity that entails.

[thiscocks]

Ugly

[limpsfield]

I like the look of this. I have an M240 which is a great car, and a 12 year old Boxster S.

This could replace both potentially - there is a look of the Jag F Type in some of those pictures.

[Luke.]

limpsfield said:

I like the look of this. I have an M240 which is a great car, and a 12 year old Boxster S.

This could replace both potentially - there is a look of the Jag F Type in some of those pictures.

What are your thoughts on the M240i convertible?

[daveco]

Oily76 said:

Frimley111R said:

All BMWs are heavy (which no-one ever seems to mention)

Maybe compared to cars 20 years ago, but nowadays they are usually a good 100kg lighter than the Audi/Merc equivalent. 320d = c. 1500 kg, Merc 220d c. 1700 kg, Audi A4 2.0 TDi c. 1600kg.

That is a substantial difference, and is the same throughout the range - apart from the 1 series which is a RWD car with all the attendant additional weight and complexity that entails.

I think there is close to a 300kg difference in weight between the newest 520d and its Mercedes E-class equivalent. And the new, front wheel drive Audi A6 2.0 diesel is close to 150kg heavier...than a rwd car.

Edited by daveco on Thursday 21st March 14:30

[limpsfield]

Luke. said:

limpsfield said:

I like the look of this. I have an M240 which is a great car, and a 12 year old Boxster S.

This could replace both potentially - there is a look of the Jag F Type in some of those pictures.

What are your thoughts on the M240i convertible?

I never really liked the look of it personally, and when I bought the coupe I already had the boxster so wasn't looking for another soft top.

I am sure it drives great though. The M240 appealed to me initially because it reminded of the 90s BMW 3 series before cars all got massive. I would definitely have another.


How does your Abarth compare to your previous Boxster?

Edited by limpsfield on Thursday 21st March 14:18

[Luke.]

limpsfield said:

I never really liked the look of it personally, and when I bought the coupe I already had the boxster so wasn't looking for another soft top.

I am sure it drives great though. The M240 appealed to me initially because it reminded of the 90s BMW 3 series before cars all got massive. I would definitely have another.

I'm not sold on the looks either. Think I actually prefer the no nonsense M140i. And I've got two kids, so makes much more sense. Though was toying with the 240i convertible for a little while. Well that and an oldish 911 of some sort.

[limpsfield]

Luke. said:

I'm not sold on the looks either. Think I actually prefer the no nonsense M140i. And I've got two kids, so makes much more sense. Though was toying with the 240i convertible for a little while. Well that and an oldish 911 of some sort.

I think the M140 makes much more sense from a practicality point of view - I don't think you can go wrong with that.

[otolith]

neil1jnr said:

modern cars seem to do a pretty good job in disguising their mass anyway.

Not so much that as most people having no experience of anything that isn't heavy.

[Ares]

dandare said:

Starting to look like a Mercedes. Not pretty. I like the rear the most.
Interior is pretty ugly, to my eyes.
At least the weight is reasonable for a new car. Still too heavy, though, but not bad for cruising, if you can get over the looks. I can't.

I saw it a week ahead of the launch, and the first thing that grabbed me was how good the interior is in the flesh - leaped forward two or three generations IMO.

Second thing was how good the M40i sounded

[Luke.]

limpsfield said:

How does your Abarth compare to your previous Boxster?

Edited by limpsfield on Thursday 21st March 14:18

Love it. Love the noise, the lightness, it's brilliant fun car. I'd take it over the Boxster for day to day stuff no problem at all. And at the moment, they're a steal. Leasing ours for £148 a month. Honestly, it's a joyous little car.

[scenario8]

Luke. said:

Love it. Love the noise, the lightness, it's brilliant fun car. I'd take it over the Boxster for day to day stuff no problem at all. And at the moment, they're a steal. Leasing ours for £148 a month. Honestly, it's a joyous little car.

I know very little indeed about car finance but that sounds like very cheap, fun motoring. The cost to me for the “pleasure” of driving my company diesel econobox is far higher than that.

Edited to add;

I’m sure the BMW is a lovely (but surely far costlier) proposition for other people, too.

[900T-R]

Oily76 said:

Maybe compared to cars 20 years ago, but nowadays they are usually a good 100kg lighter than the Audi/Merc equivalent. 320d = c. 1500 kg, Merc 220d c. 1700 kg, Audi A4 2.0 TDi c. 1600kg.

Don't know where that 1,700 kg for the C 220 d comes from - Merc quotes 1,450-1,505 kg (it's a 50/50 aluminium/steel construction after all). 1,700 is in 4-cylinder E-Class territory - maybe someone looked up an E 220 d instead?

[Brian Fallon]

This car is grossly overpriced at £50k+ with options. A low mileage second hand Boxter S or a new Audi TTS would make more sense and would certainly be a better drive (at least the Boxter).

[Ares]

Brian Fallon said:

This car is grossly overpriced at £50k+ with options. A low mileage second hand Boxter S or a new Audi TTS would make more sense and would certainly be a better drive (at least the Boxter).

Really? A second hand car would be cheaper than a new car?? Bloody hell..... Someone tell the car magazines. That could revolutionise the car industry. What a scoop.

Next you'll be telling us that a lower model is cheaper than a top model???

[Ares]

....and of course, this is the 4-pot Boxster S that starts above £50k, before you start adding options like, wheels.