3.0 Z4 vs Z4M

[Fidgits]

Someone suggested the Z4 as a good potential next car for me, and giving it thought I am getting more and more tempted.

However, I cant help but wonder whether its worth to go the whole hog to get the Z4M?

Its in the region of 10k more to buy, does 10MPG worse, though is about 50bhp up and a second quicker to 60.

But is it really worth the extra? Can you tell in everyday driving? Or is it only for hooligans and track days that the 'M' comes out? I saw you lose the boot to the Battery on the M, how bad is the boot to begin with? is it really that bad in the M?

Also, should I avoid the 3.0 Z4's down at the 15k mark? Are there any common problems with them, (I guess the M has the VANOS thing) anything I should look at?

are there any alternative cars I should consider? (didnt like the S2000 engine), the car is really for 90% hammering up and down the motorway, 10% fun, maybe a track day or ring trip.

[m12_nathan]

80bhp, LSD, suspension, different steering I think (M has hydraulic, non M has electric?) and the engine is brilliant.

Get the M if you can afford it, 3.0 if you can't, simple as that.

[Kirk]

I test drove both. M, no contest (though the 3.0 is a fine car). Tyres alone make the decision an easy one.

[Andrew D]

Well fundamentally the 3.0i is a cruiser/roadster, whereas the M is a balls-to-the-wall lunatic mobile. Both can shift, but there's no real prospect that a 3.0i (such as mine) could compete with the M in performance terms. As for suitability for the road; the M will be comparable to the 3.0i in useability terms, and as far as power is concerned to fully use either you'll be thraping the speed limit. But the choice depends on what flavour of 3.0i you're talking about.

The post-facelift (current) 3.0Si is 260bhp, but I've yet to see one on the road and residuals are strong. As in silly. However a good pre-facelift 3.0i (packing 231bhp) can be had from a dealer for £18k, which makes a lot of sense versus an M at £30k. So I suppose it comes down to the funds involved. If you're above the £25k mark I'd certainly avoid the 3.0Si and go for the M, although mileage/economy will be a consideration. Below that and I'd be tempted to go for a mint, high-spec, low mileage 3.0i and pocket the change to cover a full set of Michelin Pilot Sport II's and four years insurance and servicing.

Or alternatively... if you're around £25k and can't stretch, maybe an Alpina Roadster S would fit the bill. 3.4 litre straight six, 300bhp; a nice halfway house.

[gwatson]

This wil be controversial but.........M engine requires a lot of work.... bugger all torque, drive more like the 2.5 below 4000rpm, but then things get going for sure...depends how you drive. I love low down grunt.

For me, I bought a 3.0 then supercharged it, 30bhp more and 100NM and almost 80kg less. Drives like a big turbo diesel engine low down and yet has lots of power up top. The only thing that lets the Z4 3.0 down is steering feel, quite numb. The Z4M is better, but far from sporty or perfect.

I have cheaper insurance, get 36mpg on the motorway, servicing is cheaper plus no ///M tax on parts.

Test drive both for sure.

G

[1st_petrolhead]

I have owned a Z4 3.0 and in my opinion its not a good car if you like going fast on bumpy B roads. The suspension is not good. This is down to the run flats and the springing being too hard. While recceing for a tour I used the Z4 and was very disapointed in its lack of ability to cover ground safely.

Put it this way, my caterham handles the bumps better.

The Z4M is not on run flats but still quite twitchy.

I am not a Porsche fam but did get a test drive of a cayman S and was expecting similar results as it was wearing the 19" turbo alloys but I was pleasantly supprised how easily it coped with B road bumps.

Try having a look at the Z4 forum. Lots more there to advise you