RE: BMW Z4 M40i: Driven
Discussion
I guess the negative responce regarding the looks is quite predictable, I think as modern cars go it looks alright. Yes the overall shape is quite bloated looking and the surface details, vents, wheel design are all very fussy, but that's par for the course these days isn't it, that's what constitutes "visual drama" I guess.
It sounds like despite the product designer Michael Wimbeck claims that the previous generation was too Mercedes-ish, the new one isn't all that different.
Interesting comments about the price, it seems to be positioned okay to me. I would have thought the F Type is a direct competitor and that costs more for the 3.0 V6.
It sounds like despite the product designer Michael Wimbeck claims that the previous generation was too Mercedes-ish, the new one isn't all that different.
Interesting comments about the price, it seems to be positioned okay to me. I would have thought the F Type is a direct competitor and that costs more for the 3.0 V6.
MX6 said:
I guess the negative responce regarding the looks is quite predictable, I think as modern cars go it looks alright. Yes the overall shape is quite bloated looking and the surface details, vents, wheel design are all very fussy, but that's par for the course these days isn't it, that's what constitutes "visual drama" I guess.
It sounds like despite the product designer Michael Wimbeck claims that the previous generation was too Mercedes-ish, the new one isn't all that different.
Interesting comments about the price, it seems to be positioned okay to me. I would have thought the F Type is a direct competitor and that costs more for the 3.0 V6.
I think an F Type is in a different league entirely. It sounds like despite the product designer Michael Wimbeck claims that the previous generation was too Mercedes-ish, the new one isn't all that different.
Interesting comments about the price, it seems to be positioned okay to me. I would have thought the F Type is a direct competitor and that costs more for the 3.0 V6.
Deep Thought said:
I think an F Type is in a different league entirely.
In what way would you say? Yes I think the F Type subjectively looks better, and it has the R and SVR halo models that lift the image. But now it has the 2.0 four pot in the range it's on a par with this Z4 in terms of hardware and spec.I've got one on order arriving early next year, pretty excited as it should be one of the first in the country! Went for the M40i as reviewed here.
It's replacing my 2015 TT and I had a 2013 M135i before that. Hoping it will offer the best of both worlds, i.e. sports car looks and a strong 6-cylinder engine with good handling. Can't wait
It's replacing my 2015 TT and I had a 2013 M135i before that. Hoping it will offer the best of both worlds, i.e. sports car looks and a strong 6-cylinder engine with good handling. Can't wait
MX6 said:
Deep Thought said:
I think an F Type is in a different league entirely.
In what way would you say? Yes I think the F Type subjectively looks better, and it has the R and SVR halo models that lift the image. But now it has the 2.0 four pot in the range it's on a par with this Z4 in terms of hardware and spec.E65Ross said:
MX6 said:
Deep Thought said:
I think an F Type is in a different league entirely.
In what way would you say? Yes I think the F Type subjectively looks better, and it has the R and SVR halo models that lift the image. But now it has the 2.0 four pot in the range it's on a par with this Z4 in terms of hardware and spec.Enricogto said:
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.
Did you mean:S65?MX6 said:
In what way would you say? Yes I think the F Type subjectively looks better, and it has the R and SVR halo models that lift the image. But now it has the 2.0 four pot in the range it's on a par with this Z4 in terms of hardware and spec.
Whilst I appreciate that looks are subjective, the new Z4 is just a boring design. The F-Type is probably the best looking car in production at present, just fabulous looking. Shame that it's also a complete lard-arse.Enricogto said:
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....
I don't mind the compact size but you're correct that I don't have much love for the old N/A engines(or the manual gearbox in the M cars). You make a very valid point regards Chris Bangle for sure, this one looks like it was designed by Stevie Wonder! Blimey that article rather damned it with faint praise. Telegraph thought it was a dud as well. I think it's hideous inside and out. Mazda and Jag are doing both ends of the spectrum better IMO.
Back when I were a lad, I used to see BMW as an aspirational brand and owned quite a few. Increasing I see them as more of a budget brand these days with the streets seemingly infested with 1 series and MPVs. I guess that's the perils of chasing volume above all else.
Back when I were a lad, I used to see BMW as an aspirational brand and owned quite a few. Increasing I see them as more of a budget brand these days with the streets seemingly infested with 1 series and MPVs. I guess that's the perils of chasing volume above all else.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff