Replacement for a Z4
Discussion
plenty said:
Shifter1 said:
Z4C seems to fall in the very common slot of a car which could be "perfect", but falls just short of it and makes you ask, why? Why not go all the way?
It has a lot going for it. It does a lot which other similar cars don't. But yet, it falls just short of delivering. Really a pity, as where we're going with EVs, a car like the Z4C, if it was well rounded and closed the circle, would be such a treasured one.
Assuming you mean handling (because there's nothing wrong with the basic form factor or straight sixes), then I suspect it's because there wasn't enough time allocated to fine-tuning, or the project was rushed, or they needed the engineering resource elsewhere. Another few months in development would have yielded a very different car out of the box. A rare mistake by BMW who are usually quite thorough.It has a lot going for it. It does a lot which other similar cars don't. But yet, it falls just short of delivering. Really a pity, as where we're going with EVs, a car like the Z4C, if it was well rounded and closed the circle, would be such a treasured one.
Fortunately a decent alignment and aftermarket suspension transforms the car. Although you're still stuck with the EPAS.
Shifter1 said:
Z4C seems to fall in the very common slot of a car which could be "perfect", but falls just short of it and makes you ask, why? Why not go all the way?
It has a lot going for it. It does a lot which other similar cars don't. But yet, it falls just short of delivering. Really a pity, as where we're going with EVs, a car like the Z4C, if it was well rounded and closed the circle, would be such a treasured one.
There is quite a bit of that going on. I have the impression that even more so with cars of the modern era. Either by design/engineering needs or by oversight. Almost as if there was a gentleman's agreement between carmakers, no to give us everything. We just can't have nice things.
It's weird to say it, but I think the Z4C's strength for many is also its weakness for some.It has a lot going for it. It does a lot which other similar cars don't. But yet, it falls just short of delivering. Really a pity, as where we're going with EVs, a car like the Z4C, if it was well rounded and closed the circle, would be such a treasured one.
There is quite a bit of that going on. I have the impression that even more so with cars of the modern era. Either by design/engineering needs or by oversight. Almost as if there was a gentleman's agreement between carmakers, no to give us everything. We just can't have nice things.
It's a fabulous all-rounder. It's very easy to live with, it's easy to drive, it's easy and cheap to maintain, and it's actually pretty practical as 2-seaters go (hatch and a decent boot). If it were a Top Trump, it would score 7-8 out of 10 for pretty much everything. That's not damning with faint praise either - cars like this are VERY rare.
As a consequence of all of those things, it's not the most exciting drive and there's not much of a 'tuning scene' (as there might be for a Japanese car or more modern BMW).
It's horses for courses, I suppose. Some people like cars like this, others prefer flawed genius.
Edited by C70R on Friday 24th March 09:24
Shifter1 said:
plenty said:
Shifter1 said:
Z4C seems to fall in the very common slot of a car which could be "perfect", but falls just short of it and makes you ask, why? Why not go all the way?
It has a lot going for it. It does a lot which other similar cars don't. But yet, it falls just short of delivering. Really a pity, as where we're going with EVs, a car like the Z4C, if it was well rounded and closed the circle, would be such a treasured one.
Assuming you mean handling (because there's nothing wrong with the basic form factor or straight sixes), then I suspect it's because there wasn't enough time allocated to fine-tuning, or the project was rushed, or they needed the engineering resource elsewhere. Another few months in development would have yielded a very different car out of the box. A rare mistake by BMW who are usually quite thorough.It has a lot going for it. It does a lot which other similar cars don't. But yet, it falls just short of delivering. Really a pity, as where we're going with EVs, a car like the Z4C, if it was well rounded and closed the circle, would be such a treasured one.
Fortunately a decent alignment and aftermarket suspension transforms the car. Although you're still stuck with the EPAS.
It's a closer competitor to things like the 350Z, S2000 and Cayman/Boxster. And if you were to give a choice of having one of those to live with as my only car, I'd take the Z4C in a heartbeat.
Sure, the others might do certain things better, and others might feel more special as a 'weekend' car. But none of them is a patch on the Z4 as a total ownership prospect.
plenty said:
Shifter1 said:
Z4C seems to fall in the very common slot of a car which could be "perfect", but falls just short of it and makes you ask, why? Why not go all the way?
It has a lot going for it. It does a lot which other similar cars don't. But yet, it falls just short of delivering. Really a pity, as where we're going with EVs, a car like the Z4C, if it was well rounded and closed the circle, would be such a treasured one.
Assuming you mean handling (because there's nothing wrong with the basic form factor or straight sixes), then I suspect it's because there wasn't enough time allocated to fine-tuning, or the project was rushed, or they needed the engineering resource elsewhere. Another few months in development would have yielded a very different car out of the box. A rare mistake by BMW who are usually quite thorough.It has a lot going for it. It does a lot which other similar cars don't. But yet, it falls just short of delivering. Really a pity, as where we're going with EVs, a car like the Z4C, if it was well rounded and closed the circle, would be such a treasured one.
Fortunately a decent alignment and aftermarket suspension transforms the car. Although you're still stuck with the EPAS.
They are balanced (pretty close to 50/50 weight distribution) but fairly safe cars to drive, just like a lot of factory BMWs. They have pretty neutral handling, with a bias towards understeer, from the factory. They were designed specifically like that, because they aren't supposed to be 10/10ths sports cars (like an MX5 or S2000).
In spite of that, Evo wrote some nice things about it:
"Traction is huge. There’s no M diff, so you won’t be emerging from corners crossed-up with both rear arches filled with thick white smoke, but the 3.0si is a deeply absorbing partner down a favourite road, and the way you feel part of the car is almost Caterham-like. It has undoubtedly been engineered for people who want to drive, not just pose."
To be honest if they'd just had better suspension out of the box and cost just a smidge less to buy for a good example I might have bought one instead of the Boxster. For me I ended up with the Porsche not necessarily because it's a much better car, although it certain areas it is better (handling, ride, brakes), but simply because it was much cheaper and with the areas it did better it was impossible to ignore.
Had I been able to get a z4c with coilovers, alignment and in good condition for 8k I'd be back in the club I reckon. However I paid 7k for the Boxster, and I don't need to mess with the suspension and brakes to make it drive well whereas I was looking at minimum of 10k to get half decent Z plus another 1k+ sorting the suspension as a minimum.
I just have to pray the Boxster doesn't go BANG
Had I been able to get a z4c with coilovers, alignment and in good condition for 8k I'd be back in the club I reckon. However I paid 7k for the Boxster, and I don't need to mess with the suspension and brakes to make it drive well whereas I was looking at minimum of 10k to get half decent Z plus another 1k+ sorting the suspension as a minimum.
I just have to pray the Boxster doesn't go BANG
TameRacingDriver said:
To be honest if they'd just had better suspension out of the box and cost just a smidge less to buy for a good example I might have bought one instead of the Boxster. For me I ended up with the Porsche not necessarily because it's a much better car, although it certain areas it is better (handling, ride, brakes), but simply because it was much cheaper and with the areas it did better it was impossible to ignore.
Had I been able to get a z4c with coilovers, alignment and in good condition for 8k I'd be back in the club I reckon. However I paid 7k for the Boxster, and I don't need to mess with the suspension and brakes to make it drive well whereas I was looking at minimum of 10k to get half decent Z plus another 1k+ sorting the suspension as a minimum.
I just have to pray the Boxster doesn't go BANG
Honestly, I've passengered in a Z4 with expensive coilovers, and they were just too hard for British B-roads. The standard suspension is over-damped (classic BMW), but seems to be much more at home on smoother, sweeping A-roads.Had I been able to get a z4c with coilovers, alignment and in good condition for 8k I'd be back in the club I reckon. However I paid 7k for the Boxster, and I don't need to mess with the suspension and brakes to make it drive well whereas I was looking at minimum of 10k to get half decent Z plus another 1k+ sorting the suspension as a minimum.
I just have to pray the Boxster doesn't go BANG
C70R said:
You're missing the point of the Z4. It was never conceived as a competitor to the MX5.
It's a closer competitor to things like the 350Z, S2000 and Cayman/Boxster. And if you were to give a choice of having one of those to live with as my only car, I'd take the Z4C in a heartbeat.
Sure, the others might do certain things better, and others might feel more special as a 'weekend' car. But none of them is a patch on the Z4 as a total ownership prospect.
I'm with you on this as well. If I was to choose an only car out of all of those I'd go for the Z4C too, but I haven't driven a Cayman/Boxster though. It's a closer competitor to things like the 350Z, S2000 and Cayman/Boxster. And if you were to give a choice of having one of those to live with as my only car, I'd take the Z4C in a heartbeat.
Sure, the others might do certain things better, and others might feel more special as a 'weekend' car. But none of them is a patch on the Z4 as a total ownership prospect.
C70R said:
It wasn't a mistake at all. The Z4 was never designed or intended to be the last word in pin-sharp handling.
No, but it would be have been very simple for BMW to have delivered a car to better please the keen drivers, without compromising its ability as a cruiser. So it's entirely fair to describe it as a missed opportunity.C70R said:
Honestly, I've passengered in a Z4 with expensive coilovers, and they were just too hard for British B-roads. The standard suspension is over-damped (classic BMW), but seems to be much more at home on smoother, sweeping A-roads.
Coilovers with road-biased spring rates wouldn't have that issue.
Shifter1 said:
Sure. There is also that.
But in the case of the Z4C this doesn't fit.
I don't think it needs more power. It wouldn't have really made that much difference on the budget to have sorted the suspension and not used the dreadful steering. To me it looks like oversight/incompetence.
And what were they protecting? BMW made no AMG GT equivalent, which is about the only type of car they could want to protect. M3 and the like are totally different types of cars and don't overlap.
The Z4M. They were getting too close to it in all honesty with the Z4C, as Mr Tidy says its 80% of the car for 50% of the money. But in the case of the Z4C this doesn't fit.
I don't think it needs more power. It wouldn't have really made that much difference on the budget to have sorted the suspension and not used the dreadful steering. To me it looks like oversight/incompetence.
And what were they protecting? BMW made no AMG GT equivalent, which is about the only type of car they could want to protect. M3 and the like are totally different types of cars and don't overlap.
See the steering thing, really isn't a thing for many owners. It doesn't bother me in the slightest because of the reason I bought the car and how I use it. It isn't dreadful at all if you use the car as a GT car rather than wanting something that bumps this way and that every second. It shouldn't be judged for not providing something it wasn't made to provide. Suspension likewise, is absolutely fine in the Sport spec. The only let down was the run flats, which when swapped out made a huge difference.
Ultimately, BMW would have had research on potential customer bases. Would have marketing lined up for particular segments. They build a car to suit that, not to suit an individual who wants a perfect sports car. Its about building what you think will sell, not building the perfect car that would appeal to a smaller group.
C70R said:
Honestly, I've passengered in a Z4 with expensive coilovers, and they were just too hard for British B-roads. The standard suspension is over-damped (classic BMW), but seems to be much more at home on smoother, sweeping A-roads.
I would have hoped to get coilovers with a softer setting and hopefully achieve the better ride quality that way, is that not possible?plenty said:
C70R said:
It wasn't a mistake at all. The Z4 was never designed or intended to be the last word in pin-sharp handling.
No, but it would be have been very simple for BMW to have delivered a car to better please the keen drivers, without compromising its ability as a cruiser. So it's entirely fair to describe it as a missed opportunity.C70R said:
Honestly, I've passengered in a Z4 with expensive coilovers, and they were just too hard for British B-roads. The standard suspension is over-damped (classic BMW), but seems to be much more at home on smoother, sweeping A-roads.
Coilovers with road-biased spring rates wouldn't have that issue.On the coilovers point, you're oversimplifying it. The OEM spring-rates are softer than any aftermarket coilovers, until you get into the realms of bespoke springs - they are "road-biased" springs. The spring-rates aren't the issue, it's the damping that's the challenge. Adding coilovers with stiffer springs isn't going to solve the lack of body control on bumpy roads. If anything, it makes the issue worse.
Edited by C70R on Friday 24th March 10:10
plenty said:
C70R said:
It wasn't a mistake at all. The Z4 was never designed or intended to be the last word in pin-sharp handling.
No, but it would be have been very simple for BMW to have delivered a car to better please the keen drivers, without compromising its ability as a cruiser. So it's entirely fair to describe it as a missed opportunity.C70R said:
Honestly, I've passengered in a Z4 with expensive coilovers, and they were just too hard for British B-roads. The standard suspension is over-damped (classic BMW), but seems to be much more at home on smoother, sweeping A-roads.
Coilovers with road-biased spring rates wouldn't have that issue.AS C70R said, the suspension is nicely set up for hitting A roads hard, which is where it should predominantly live, and in terms of handling and power easily overcomes an MX5 in those circumstances.
Anyway, thread is not here to debate the pros and cons of the Z4C. If you like them you do, if you think they were badly designed, thats your prerogative.
I am now still flipping about wondering what to get after I sell mine. A 987 maybe. But was hoping for something a little bit less seen on the roads.
I am now still flipping about wondering what to get after I sell mine. A 987 maybe. But was hoping for something a little bit less seen on the roads.
coldel said:
plenty said:
C70R said:
It wasn't a mistake at all. The Z4 was never designed or intended to be the last word in pin-sharp handling.
No, but it would be have been very simple for BMW to have delivered a car to better please the keen drivers, without compromising its ability as a cruiser. So it's entirely fair to describe it as a missed opportunity.C70R said:
Honestly, I've passengered in a Z4 with expensive coilovers, and they were just too hard for British B-roads. The standard suspension is over-damped (classic BMW), but seems to be much more at home on smoother, sweeping A-roads.
Coilovers with road-biased spring rates wouldn't have that issue.AS C70R said, the suspension is nicely set up for hitting A roads hard, which is where it should predominantly live, and in terms of handling and power easily overcomes an MX5 in those circumstances.
A former-MrsC owned a Mk2 1.8iS (the alleged pinnacle of UK-spec MX5s), and I'd rather cut my left leg off than do a long drive in it again. Coincidentally, at 6ft3 I might have been more comfortable if I'd done that.
By contrast, I'm off on a Euro-tour to Switzerland and the Ring in my Z4 this summer, and I'm looking forward to a comfortable cruise down and a competent car around the fun bits.
It's too simplistic to look at a pair of two-seater convertibles and say "Why isn't A more like B?". They were just built for different purposes.
C70R said:
So much this.
A former-MrsC owned a Mk2 1.8iS (the alleged pinnacle of UK-spec MX5s), and I'd rather cut my left leg off than do a long drive in it again. Coincidentally, at 6ft3 I might have been more comfortable if I'd done that.
By contrast, I'm off on a Euro-tour to Switzerland and the Ring in my Z4 this summer, and I'm looking forward to a comfortable cruise down and a competent car around the fun bits.
It's too simplistic to look at a pair of two-seater convertibles and say "Why isn't A more like B?". They were just built for different purposes.
That's actually one of the reasons I'm trading from mx5 to the Boxster, the mx5 is great fun to take out for an hour to blast on some back roads but even in LE spec like mine, comfortable it ain't. A former-MrsC owned a Mk2 1.8iS (the alleged pinnacle of UK-spec MX5s), and I'd rather cut my left leg off than do a long drive in it again. Coincidentally, at 6ft3 I might have been more comfortable if I'd done that.
By contrast, I'm off on a Euro-tour to Switzerland and the Ring in my Z4 this summer, and I'm looking forward to a comfortable cruise down and a competent car around the fun bits.
It's too simplistic to look at a pair of two-seater convertibles and say "Why isn't A more like B?". They were just built for different purposes.
TameRacingDriver said:
C70R said:
Honestly, I've passengered in a Z4 with expensive coilovers, and they were just too hard for British B-roads. The standard suspension is over-damped (classic BMW), but seems to be much more at home on smoother, sweeping A-roads.
I would have hoped to get coilovers with a softer setting and hopefully achieve the better ride quality that way, is that not possible?And the OEM alignment specifies a massive amount of toe particularly at the rear - a more neutral geo makes for a much more responsive drive without making the car unnecessarily tail-happy or twitchy.
C70R said:
On the coilovers point, you're oversimplifying it. The OEM spring-rates are softer than any aftermarket coilovers.
On the M at least, which is the model I know most about, the OEM rear rates are too hard and fronts too soft. With coilovers you can select the exact springs you want and match the damping to suit. Softening the rear and stiffening the front massively improves turn-in and the overall cohesion of the drive. It also improves the ride and mostly eliminates the bounce at the rear caused by springs that are too hard plus poor OEM damping.coldel said:
So why didnt Mazda simply make the MX5 a decent cruiser? Because it isn't a comfortable cruiser at all. What you are asking isn't a missed opportunity, its actually a very difficult ask.
Not difficult at all. My Z4M handled quite poorly when I bought it. £1k and a couple of weekends of my time later, it drives really rather well. And it's no less good as a cruiser.coldel said:
Anyway, thread is not here to debate the pros and cons of the Z4C. If you like them you do, if you think they were badly designed, thats your prerogative.
Why can't we openly debate the pros and cons of the Z4? And I both like them and own one, and am open to how they can be improved as well as willing to share my experience having worked out how to overcome the flaws. I consider that a more useful contribution to this thread than suggesting there is no debate to be had.plenty said:
Why can't we openly debate the pros and cons of the Z4? And I both like them and own one, and am open to how they can be improved as well as willing to share my experience having worked out how to overcome the flaws. I consider that a more useful contribution to this thread than suggesting there is no debate to be had.
Because its a thread about what car to get next, not a thread about the pros and cons of the outgoing Z4. If you really feel its an important topic you must debate, then start a thread called 'the pros and cons of a Z4 and how to improve them' and crack on. The pros and cons of a Z4 have 0% relevance to what car to get next. coldel said:
Anyway, thread is not here to debate the pros and cons of the Z4C. If you like them you do, if you think they were badly designed, thats your prerogative.
I am now still flipping about wondering what to get after I sell mine. A 987 maybe. But was hoping for something a little bit less seen on the roads.
You say you're looking to trade down in value terms? If so, you're not going to get much 987 for significantly less than the Z4.I am now still flipping about wondering what to get after I sell mine. A 987 maybe. But was hoping for something a little bit less seen on the roads.
If you were on a budget of ~£7k and wanted something rare, that isn't a hot hatch but feels a bit 'special', I'd consider looking at the FWD Italians. A V6 Alfa GTV/GT or a Fiat Coupe 20V Turbo can be had for that kind of cash, and fit the bill.
If neither of those float your boat, then you're starting to dig into more obscure stuff. Off the top of my head, having just played around with a not dissimilar budget:
- 350z. You'll get one of the earlier ones, but probably a decent one. Convertible looks are 'challenging', but they are good value.
- Chrysler Crossfire V6. I've never fitted worse in a car, but they are rare and vaguely interesting.
- Alfa Brera V6. I'm no fan of the design, but they are certainly rare and different.
If it were my £7k, and I wasn't buying a Z4, I'd be in a facelifted 986 2.7 Boxster.
Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff