RE: BMW Z4 M Coupe | Spotted

[Jonstar]

I've just bought one of these, having owned 3.0's this is on another planet entirely, the engine is worth the entry fee alone!

[cerb4.5lee]

Jonstar said:

I've just bought one of these, having owned 3.0's this is on another planet entirely, the engine is worth the entry fee alone!

While I ultimately didn't get on with my Z4M I do remember falling in love with the engine on the test drive for sure. It just seemed to dominate the whole car in a very positive way.

I'm also a very big fan of the N52 engine too because it is so silky smooth and free revving.

[MikeM6]

cerb4.5lee said:

While I ultimately didn't get on with my Z4M I do remember falling in love with the engine on the test drive for sure. It just seemed to dominate the whole car in a very positive way.

I'm also a very big fan of the N52 engine too because it is so silky smooth and free revving.

I really liked the N52 in the 3.0si too, I just found it so responsive compared to my N54 and sweeter than the N55 M235i. Wasn't too bothered that it lacked the punch of the turbo units, it just felt nicer.

[rapidude]

Drove both E46M3 and Z4MC back to back yesterday on the same deserted road. Z4MC is miles more special than an E46M3.
E46M3 was a benchmark car. anything slower was meh and anything faster was eye watering. It's 20 years old now and its still as great a car as it was then. Not a turbo in sight.

For sure both are sliding into Future classic's DM's

[Skc100]

milu said:

Yep Sepang over champagne. No sat nav.
Wonder who has it?

Hi Milu,

Just browsing on a slow Sunday and saw your post. I have your old car, I bought it in 2016 and love it. If you are interested my insta page with lots of pictures of the car is aYorkshireChap.

Shaun

[rotaryjam]

I was looking at getting either a Z4C or Z4MC and remember looking at the Dyno for each car.

Te curves are identical until you get right up to around 6000 rpm I think it was, then the Z4MC takes off. So unless your thrashing it there really is no difference.

[Str6mik]

Billy_Whizzzz said:

Never learned to love mine - hated the handling and despite experimenting with various set ups was never anything like as good as any of the other BMWs I have had or nearly as confidence inspiring. Terrifying at times due to unpredictability of steering/handling/ride and always felt BMW never resolved it. Sold it after 4 years and never missed it for a second.

Seconded. I had an absolutely gorgeous 24k mile concours car that cost me £24k 3 years ago. I only kept it for a year and was terrified I wouldn’t get back what I bought it for, but I sold it for the same price

As much as I loved the styling (esp back) I just didn’t enjoy driving it. It felt like it had the minimum time spent on refining the handling.

The steering lacked feel, and you never knew what was happening with grip - which was extremely problematic given the snappy handling. Felt like when pushing on the car would understeer - but then pushing further on the car would snap violently, and not in a smooth tight arc but a wild, wide arc

The suspension also felt like it had the worst of traits - hard and unforgiving over pot holes, but floaty over dips. Generally felt that the body control was terrible.

I also didn’t particularly understand the praise the straight six got - I probably should have got the csl induction as that is what I always promised it, but the handling meant I could never justify the cost

A disappointing ownership experience

[Skc100]

rotaryjam said:

I was looking at getting either a Z4C or Z4MC and remember looking at the Dyno for each car.

Te curves are identical until you get right up to around 6000 rpm I think it was, then the Z4MC takes off. So unless your thrashing it there really is no difference.

I have had both Z4C and Z4MC (and a 2.5), the way the M delivers the power is totally different. I found that the Z4C is easy to live with and drive normally around town, where as the M takes off throughout the rev range and is really not happy with slow and steady, so I’m somewhat surprised that you found no difference. I wonder if yours had an issue of some sort.

[PH User]

Skc100 said:

rotaryjam said:

I was looking at getting either a Z4C or Z4MC and remember looking at the Dyno for each car.

Te curves are identical until you get right up to around 6000 rpm I think it was, then the Z4MC takes off. So unless your thrashing it there really is no difference.

I have had both Z4C and Z4MC (and a 2.5), the way the M delivers the power is totally different. I found that the Z4C is easy to live with and drive normally around town, where as the M takes off throughout the rev range and is really not happy with slow and steady, so I’m somewhat surprised that you found no difference. I wonder if yours had an issue of some sort.

It sounds like it was yours that had the issues.

[Skc100]

PH User said:

Skc100 said:

rotaryjam said:

I was looking at getting either a Z4C or Z4MC and remember looking at the Dyno for each car.

Te curves are identical until you get right up to around 6000 rpm I think it was, then the Z4MC takes off. So unless your thrashing it there really is no difference.

I have had both Z4C and Z4MC (and a 2.5), the way the M delivers the power is totally different. I found that the Z4C is easy to live with and drive normally around town, where as the M takes off throughout the rev range and is really not happy with slow and steady, so I’m somewhat surprised that you found no difference. I wonder if yours had an issue of some sort.

It sounds like it was yours that had the issues.

Ha ha, maybe, but it doesn’t feel like it, I still have it and it’s a blast to drive😀

[Pookie123]

I owned a 3.0Si, followed by an E46 M3 SMG vert and then an E46 M3 manual coupe.

I’m ashamed to say that the most fun I had in all 3 cars was the Z4, it was so much more useable and fun. I felt more comfortable pushing it too as I always felt I was sat on the rear wheels. If I had the choice again and I had to buy one of the three, it would be the Z4.

[mmm-five]

rotaryjam said:

I was looking at getting either a Z4C or Z4MC and remember looking at the Dyno for each car.

Te curves are identical until you get right up to around 6000 rpm I think it was, then the Z4MC takes off. So unless your thrashing it there really is no difference.

Who looks at dyno charts when they're buying a car? Are you sure you didn't end up going for the extra rare Z4D with it's Z4MC-beating torque of 295lbft - after all, why would you need any more!

I do agree that the coupe handling is not as forgiving as the roadster - BMW seem to have not bothered recalibrating everything for the doubly-stiffened chassis. Mine is perfect now, but it's on Bilstein B16/PSS10...although I only replaced the OE suspension once it was shot at well past 100,000 miles.

Just do what I do, and have both a Z4MC and a 320d, so the best of both worlds

You can think of the Z4M/Z4 comparison in the same optimise/pessimist way:

• get the Z4 and tell yourself you get 80% of the car for 50% of the money...but will never have access to the 100%
• get the Z4M, pay the premium, and have access to the 100% when you want/need it

BTW, mine was £26k when I bought it in 2008 on 9,000 miles. It's probably worth peanuts now, but I've had 150,000 glorious miles in it so far.

Edited by mmm-five on Monday 15th March 20:33

[GroundEffect]

I had a Z4C and a Z4M Roadster for 4 years.

The Z4C was crap. Steering, ride, RFTs just meant it wasn't fun to drive. And the hard roof was very claustrophobic.

The Z4M was much better but still, you could not push the boundaries of the handling. It was snappy and aloof. Despite being very fast.

By comparison, my E92 M3 was an over-sized and over-powered MX5. Could drive it sideways everywhere if you wanted.

Amazing that they came out at the same time.

[cerb4.5lee]

GroundEffect said:

I had a Z4C and a Z4M Roadster for 4 years.

The Z4C was crap. Steering, ride, RFTs just meant it wasn't fun to drive. And the hard roof was very claustrophobic.

The Z4M was much better but still, you could not push the boundaries of the handling. It was snappy and aloof. Despite being very fast.

By comparison, my E92 M3 was an over-sized and over-powered MX5. Could drive it sideways everywhere if you wanted.

Amazing that they came out at the same time.

I'm another one who couldn't believe how much better the E92 M3 was(chassis/ride/handling wise) in comparison to the Z4M. I found the M3 really easy to slide and I always knew where I stood with it. I just couldn't trust the Z4M and I found it very unpredictable in comparison.

[carl_w]

mmm-five said:

Just do what I do, and have both a Z4MC and a 320d, so the best of both worlds ;

Or do what I do, and have a Z4MC and a 330d

[Planman]

I'd be interested to know how many of those who complain about the handling and ride on the Z4MC are running 19 inch wheels and/or after market suspension.

Personally I find the steering very direct and the ride no worse than the 330d MSport F81 I had. Its a sportscar, so I expect the ride to be firm.

However, each to his own etc. The Z4MC is truly a marmite car it would seem!

[Mr Tidy]

I had a couple of 3.0Si Coupes for 5+ years, then in December 2019 I saw an MC up for sale at a price that was too good to ignore.

As much as I loved the 3.0Sis the M just feels so much more special every time I drive it, so I love it even more!

I'd agree that the Si is 80% of the car for about 50% of the price, but that extra 20% made it worth the exta cost for me.

carl_w said:

mmm-five said:

Just do what I do, and have both a Z4MC and a 320d, so the best of both worlds ;

Or do what I do, and have a Z4MC and a 330d

Or do what I do and have an MC and a 330i with the same N52 engineas the Si!

[Jonstar]

People have got the wrong idea when comparing these to M3's, yes they have the same engine, they're both made by bmw, yes the M3 has a better chassis as standard BUT the Z4M is an event to drive in a way no M3 ever can be!

Sat low with a tiny steering wheel and that long rising bonnet in front of you housing one of the greatest engines of all time is an awesome experience, at which point, like in a tvr you don't care about the flaws.

You buy these cars for how special they feel, this in my opinion is one of the most important aspects of a sports car and that's where the Z4m excels.

[J4CKO]

cerb4.5lee said:

GroundEffect said:

I had a Z4C and a Z4M Roadster for 4 years.

The Z4C was crap. Steering, ride, RFTs just meant it wasn't fun to drive. And the hard roof was very claustrophobic.

The Z4M was much better but still, you could not push the boundaries of the handling. It was snappy and aloof. Despite being very fast.

By comparison, my E92 M3 was an over-sized and over-powered MX5. Could drive it sideways everywhere if you wanted.

Amazing that they came out at the same time.

I'm another one who couldn't believe how much better the E92 M3 was(chassis/ride/handling wise) in comparison to the Z4M. I found the M3 really easy to slide and I always knew where I stood with it. I just couldn't trust the Z4M and I found it very unpredictable in comparison.

I always got the idea you were never all that keen on your M3 ?

[cerb4.5lee]

Jonstar said:

People have got the wrong idea when comparing these to M3's, yes they have the same engine, they're both made by bmw, yes the M3 has a better chassis as standard BUT the Z4M is an event to drive in a way no M3 ever can be!

Sat low with a tiny steering wheel and that long rising bonnet in front of you housing one of the greatest engines of all time is an awesome experience, at which point, like in a tvr you don't care about the flaws.

You buy these cars for how special they feel, this in my opinion is one of the most important aspects of a sports car and that's where the Z4m excels.

I do love the driving position in the Z4M(especially being almost sat over the rear wheels). I'm also a big fan of cars with only 2 seats, and that adds to the sense of occasion as well I reckon. Some don't like the fat steering wheel rim in the Z4M but I didn't mind it to be fair.

It is strange that I was happy to turn a blind eye regarding the flaws that my TVR had(it had a lot of them!), whereas in the Z4M the flaws(gearbox/ride/suspension) really got to me in comparison for some reason.