RE: BMW Z4 M40i: Driven
Discussion
Honeywell said:
Ha ha!
I’ve just been out in the wet in an MX5 D with 180bhp manual box and LSD in the rain with wet leaves everywhere for a 12 mile drive. I’ve had the back end out both ways about ten times, I’ve ragged the thing in the first four gears to the red line, I’ve covered the ground at a heck of a pace on winding B roads and the odd stretch of A road - it was brilliant. And that’s with the hood up on a dark November morning. THATS a convertible sports car.
What this 1.6 ton autobox land yacht is I don’t really know but it shouldn’t really be branded as. Sportscar under trade descriptions laws. I think Yachtcar is about right right actually. Looks good, signals money, not much practical value, opulently appointed, image orientated and mostly owned by wealthy people over 50. It’s a Yachtcar.
They largely also exist because men are idiots. Bigger is always better and a stereo that goes up to 11 must be better than one that goes up to 10. Hence we end up with rwd sportscars with 389lb/ft of torque (which is much more than most farm tractors) using 8 speed gearboxes that can do more than double the national speed limit with more lateral grip than a 1970s F1 car. It’s all just so unnecessary. And expensive.
But to make a Yachtcar like the Z4 actually ugly - for that I think you probably need a committee.
Will sell like hell. :-(
Mx5 driver jealous of z4 shocker.I’ve just been out in the wet in an MX5 D with 180bhp manual box and LSD in the rain with wet leaves everywhere for a 12 mile drive. I’ve had the back end out both ways about ten times, I’ve ragged the thing in the first four gears to the red line, I’ve covered the ground at a heck of a pace on winding B roads and the odd stretch of A road - it was brilliant. And that’s with the hood up on a dark November morning. THATS a convertible sports car.
What this 1.6 ton autobox land yacht is I don’t really know but it shouldn’t really be branded as. Sportscar under trade descriptions laws. I think Yachtcar is about right right actually. Looks good, signals money, not much practical value, opulently appointed, image orientated and mostly owned by wealthy people over 50. It’s a Yachtcar.
They largely also exist because men are idiots. Bigger is always better and a stereo that goes up to 11 must be better than one that goes up to 10. Hence we end up with rwd sportscars with 389lb/ft of torque (which is much more than most farm tractors) using 8 speed gearboxes that can do more than double the national speed limit with more lateral grip than a 1970s F1 car. It’s all just so unnecessary. And expensive.
But to make a Yachtcar like the Z4 actually ugly - for that I think you probably need a committee.
Will sell like hell. :-(
"And boy does it sound good here. In Sport Plus mode the exhaust pops and crackles on the overrun"
Am I the only one utterly tired of these OTT artificial 'enhancements'? If I lift off I want to hear the engine choking for life through the closed throttle on the overrun.
And sound through the speakers when there's a straight six to play with. Jeez.
Am I the only one utterly tired of these OTT artificial 'enhancements'? If I lift off I want to hear the engine choking for life through the closed throttle on the overrun.
And sound through the speakers when there's a straight six to play with. Jeez.
Kenny Powers said:
Love how the armchair commentators once again reckon they know a manufacturer’s market better than the manufacturer. If one prefers the ethos of a Mazda MX5 then that’s fine - buy a Mazda MX5. Meanwhile I’m reasonably sure that BMW know who they want to sell this car to, and in the main, I doubt they’re the type of buyer who will ever even know how much it weighs much less care even if some motoring anarok told them 
Yet BMW managed to sell 223,105 first gen Z4 (E85/E86) over a six years production run against 118,444 second gen (E89) spread over an 8 year production run. Incidentally, where they experienced the largest market loss is in the US, where clearly the combination of a lardy car, automatic gearbox and lukewarm performance wasn't really appreciated. So maybe yes, the armchair commentators in here know better than BMW what they (i.e. the market) would buy. For full disclosure, i've owned since new one of the first ever produced Z4M Coupe. When the E89 was launched i was invited by my dealer to test drive the 35i. Appalling experience, not a sport car and not the sport car feeling i was looking for. I was hoping for it to get the S62 to create an M version which i may have considered, but it never came. I haven't of course driven the G29 so i will reserve judgement, but from what i read it seems very similar with to an E89 in a new frock.
What makes the E85/86 still appealing (and unbearable to people like Cerb4.5lee) is it's compact size (4.10m long), the great N/A engines (i know they won't come back, yet..), the sometimes hard to manage gearbox, which makes for an engaging and demanding driving experience, and the lines which make it a modern design still to date - who would have thought that we would be regretting the departure of Chris Bangle....
J2daG1990 said:
Am I right in thinking this is the same shared engine plant that is going into the new Supra out next year?
I'm looking forward to seeing how that looks compared to this.
Z4 or Supra it would be Supra for me every time.
The Supra does look a lot better though I'm guessing it will be coupe only so not a direct alternative to the Z4I'm looking forward to seeing how that looks compared to this.
Z4 or Supra it would be Supra for me every time.
(probably intentional from BMW)
Enricogto said:
Yet BMW managed to sell 223,105 first gen Z4 (E85/E86) over a six years production run against 118,444 second gen (E89) spread over an 8 year production run. Incidentally, where they experienced the largest market loss is in the US, where clearly the combination of a lardy car, automatic gearbox and lukewarm performance wasn't really appreciated. So maybe yes, the armchair commentators in here know better than BMW what they (i.e. the market) would buy.
For full disclosure, i've owned since new one of the first ever produced Z4M Coupe. When the E89 was launched i was invited by my dealer to test drive the 35i. Appalling experience, not a sport car and not the sport car feeling i was looking for. I was hoping for it to get the S62 to create an M version which i may have considered, but it never came. I haven't of course driven the G29 so i will reserve judgement, but from what i read it seems very similar with to an E89 in a new frock.
What makes the E85/86 still appealing (and unbearable to people like Cerb4.5lee) is it's compact size (4.10m long), the great N/A engines (i know they won't come back, yet..), the sometimes hard to manage gearbox, which makes for an engaging and demanding driving experience, and the lines which make it a modern design still to date - who would have thought that we would be regretting the departure of Chris Bangle....
All good points. Personally I still don’t see the need for such concentrated vitriol just because it’s not someone’s cup of tea. Other cars are available. Some people go on about new cars as though they just threatened their first born child.For full disclosure, i've owned since new one of the first ever produced Z4M Coupe. When the E89 was launched i was invited by my dealer to test drive the 35i. Appalling experience, not a sport car and not the sport car feeling i was looking for. I was hoping for it to get the S62 to create an M version which i may have considered, but it never came. I haven't of course driven the G29 so i will reserve judgement, but from what i read it seems very similar with to an E89 in a new frock.
What makes the E85/86 still appealing (and unbearable to people like Cerb4.5lee) is it's compact size (4.10m long), the great N/A engines (i know they won't come back, yet..), the sometimes hard to manage gearbox, which makes for an engaging and demanding driving experience, and the lines which make it a modern design still to date - who would have thought that we would be regretting the departure of Chris Bangle....
But each to their own. I guess it depends on one’s outlook on life
Chap at my station has a Z3 - a car I never much cared for back when it was commonplace. Thing is, roof down at least, it's actually looking like a more and more resolved design, particularly his example, in silver.
His is the rather gutless 2.2, sadly fitted with a slushbox, yet it sounds a million dollars as soon as it turns over - the engine is a peach, and it was at least available with a manual gearbox.
This M40i is massively powerful in a lump hammer sort of a way, but it's not like to Z3 3.0 was short of puff, and there was a fair bit less mass to lug around. Given the choice, I'm struggling to make a case for the new car at all.
His is the rather gutless 2.2, sadly fitted with a slushbox, yet it sounds a million dollars as soon as it turns over - the engine is a peach, and it was at least available with a manual gearbox.
This M40i is massively powerful in a lump hammer sort of a way, but it's not like to Z3 3.0 was short of puff, and there was a fair bit less mass to lug around. Given the choice, I'm struggling to make a case for the new car at all.
cerb4.5lee said:
They've never made a good one, which is pretty baffling when you consider how very well regarded the 3 and 5 series have been over the years.
The Z4M Roadster I had was a poor drive in comparison to the 3 series I'd had, the clutch/gearbox were at odds with each other, and the ride/suspension didn't have any compliance to it.
They've ditched the metal roof on this one and managed to make it heavier and made it auto only(which I do understand because Bmw's manual gearboxes are crap).
I genuinely believe that Bmw should just give it up as a bad job, and just stick to what they're good at. Sports car and Bmw just don't go together.
I cannot help feeling that re-bodying an M2 as a Z2 would have been the way to go.The Z4M Roadster I had was a poor drive in comparison to the 3 series I'd had, the clutch/gearbox were at odds with each other, and the ride/suspension didn't have any compliance to it.
They've ditched the metal roof on this one and managed to make it heavier and made it auto only(which I do understand because Bmw's manual gearboxes are crap).
I genuinely believe that Bmw should just give it up as a bad job, and just stick to what they're good at. Sports car and Bmw just don't go together.
If you cannot beat the MX-5, er, better it...
just passing by said:
So ugly. How did that get design approval?
you'd only buy it if it were 40% cheaper than the Porsche. But £50k basic is a lot of money for a product that is clearly inferior to the current Boxster, never mind the upcoming model.
+1you'd only buy it if it were 40% cheaper than the Porsche. But £50k basic is a lot of money for a product that is clearly inferior to the current Boxster, never mind the upcoming model.
Every time BMW pitch the Z4 as a Boxster rival when it isnt. Happened last time too. It cant justify the price tag and its simply not as good. The 20i model will be big seller, but it will take subsidised finance deals to make that happen - and it usually takes BMW some considerable time to realise this.
They might even have to resort to a 18i variant if they want to get volume out there.
MikeGoodwin said:
So what 1600kg when wet with passenger ? For a f
king convertible
Design is what I expected from BMW it's in keeping with it's ugly design language of recent times started off by the 1 series.
I'd rather have an mx5. 180hp a LSD and some nice bilstein dampers in the new ones will be a riot to drive.
king convertibleDesign is what I expected from BMW it's in keeping with it's ugly design language of recent times started off by the 1 series.
I'd rather have an mx5. 180hp a LSD and some nice bilstein dampers in the new ones will be a riot to drive.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff