BMW Z3 - Next Car

[bromlio]

Hello!

So I am considering buying a BMW Z3 as my next car. (Im currently driving a crappy Seat Ibiza 1.2)So this is a nice step up for me, anyone got a any info about the car on the performance, basicalyl is it a fun car to drive?

[Actus Reus]

Suspension design is from an 80's 3-series whilst the rest of the underpinnings are from the E36 3 series (sold from early 90s onwards) - so far as I recall most magazines panned the way it drives, but there were some good engines to be had. IMHO there are probably better choices - is a convertible a must have?

[U T]

They weren't well liked in general but they are well built, reliable and good fun, even in not very quick 1.9 guise. And widely available at less money than they deserve to be.

Not as good as an MX-5, but better value now, the Z3 is not a bad car, despite what most people think.

[boobles]

I owned a Z3M & if I am honest, it didn't do anything for me & wasn't very nice to drive.

[bromlio]

Actus Reus said:

Suspension design is from an 80's 3-series whilst the rest of the underpinnings are from the E36 3 series (sold from early 90s onwards) - so far as I recall most magazines panned the way it drives, but there were some good engines to be had. IMHO there are probably better choices - is a convertible a must have?

I'm looking to spend around £3k. So any kind of fun car really, I just noticed that the prices for the Z3's are pretty low. If you could recommend anything else that would be appreciated.

[kambites]

Not very - the chassis is frankly a bit rubbish.

The MX5 is a better car, and the mk3 MR2 is a much better car, IMO. The Z3 was available with some nice engines, though, and was generally pretty reliable and well screwed together. Not a bad car overall, but not the great car it could have been if they'd got the handling right.

Edited by kambites on Monday 24th October 13:33

[Four Litre]

I had a 2.8 for a couple of years, my first 2 seater. Loved it to start with, was very reliable and had a great engine. Whatever you do, get a 6 cylinder, otherwise you'll end up with a sh!tty 4, which really is not up to the job and sounds wheezy. The 2.8 and upwards comes with wider bodywork which makes it look a lot nicer. A friend had the 1.9 which really was cr*p compaired. Make sure you test drive a few, mine was great to start with but by the time I traded it in it was like riding in ben hur's chariot!! It felt like something in the chassis had broken and it really felt quite out of control. Watch out for the plastic rear windows as they crack in the cold and rub when put down. You can get these replaced but its a bit of a job and not for the feint hearted!

If you come from a seat to a 6 cylinder Z3 you wont be dissapointed. Petrol was also not a problem so dont be concerned about that.

Good luck.

[Actus Reus]

If it's going to be a 2-seat cabrio then it's got to be an MX-5 (http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/3258496.htm)

Also reliable and, in their day, voted best handling car. A superb car to learn how to drive RWD, and quick enough with it. I'd have one over a Z3 all day long. If you like the idea of fun, but practical too, how about a Focus ST170? A bit underwhelming in terms of performance, but handling is superb and as a package, for the money, I reckon tough to beat (http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/sales/3051622.htm)...

IMHO there's lots of better stuff for 3 grand than a Z3.

[alfa pint]

Same points as above. I thought about one, couldn't quite stretch to a 6 cylinder version, drove the 4 pot and was completely underwhelmed. The driving position was ok, but that was about it. The looks never did it for me either.

Mk3 MR2 is a great handling car, but you really only have 2 gloveboxes behind each seat for storage. For me, the whole point of a convertible is for you and a bint to disappear for a dirty weekend somewhere and there's no way you'll get a weekend's worth of shoes, clothes and makeup into an MR2. The old ones yes, but not the Mk3. Can't help but think Toyota missed a trick there, especially when you see how much space there is in a boxster.

MX5 is the obvious choice for a reason. I just find them too ubiquitous. The MG TF has a rock hard ride and I didn't like the high up driving position. Bought an Alfa Spider instead - as quick as a Z3, better handling, different, pretty, comfortable, take out the space saver and there's room for the bint's shoes and makeup.

[U T]

alfa pint said:

Bought an Alfa Spider instead - as quick as a Z3, better handling, different, pretty, comfortable, take out the space saver and there's room for the bint's shoes and makeup.

The down side of the Alfa is that you may never actually reach your destination, unless on the back of a recovery truck.

[Jasandjules]

For a couple of ks I'd say an Mr2 T-Bar is about the best punt.

[Mr Dave]

Actus Reus said:

Suspension design is from an 80's 3-series whilst the rest of the underpinnings are from the E36 3 series (sold from early 90s onwards) - so far as I recall most magazines panned the way it drives, but there were some good engines to be had. IMHO there are probably better choices - is a convertible a must have?

Yes because using suspension from the E30 is a bad thing, probably one of the best handling saloons of all time and they still have a massive following because of how they drive.

With a few simple mods a Z3 will outhandle an MX5 any day and the 1.9 is a great engine. If you can get the 2.5 or 2.8 its in another league from an MX5.


Out of the box the MX5 is probably better, but if you are looking to upgrade then the Z3 is the way to go.

Nicer to sit in as well.

So in my opinion get a mark three MR2. Love them.

[kambites]

So how are you going to increase the end-to-end rigidity of a Z3 significantly without fitting a full roll cage? Strut braces will help the front and rear ends stay square, but will do nothing to keep them parallel to each other which is the real problem with that chassis.

The fact that the Z3 coupe is a decent car to drive, sums up what's wrong with the roadster - it just doesn't have enough strength in the passenger cell area. Unfortunately that's rather a difficult problem to solve without adding something solid at roof level. It's a shame really, because as you say the suspension setup is fundamentally pretty good, it's just not allowed to do its job because the chassis is so poor.

Edited by kambites on Monday 24th October 14:43

[U T]

If you read the OP, he's upgrading from a 1.2 Ibiza. A 1.9 Z3 in standard form will seem like a rocket ship.

[Actus Reus]

Mr Dave said:

Yes because using suspension from the E30 is a bad thing, probably one of the best handling saloons of all time and they still have a massive following because of how they drive.

With a few simple mods a Z3 will outhandle an MX5 any day and the 1.9 is a great engine. If you can get the 2.5 or 2.8 its in another league from an MX5.


Out of the box the MX5 is probably better, but if you are looking to upgrade then the Z3 is the way to go.

Nicer to sit in as well.

So in my opinion get a mark three MR2. Love them.

Perhaps I should clarify - good handling car though the E30 was, the unsophisticated design does not work well in the Z3 which, to be more accurate I think, shares an awful lot with the 3-Series compact. Which was st.

I agree about the MR2 though - assuming you can live with never taking more than a packet of fags with you when you use it, it's a great car. I'd still get the MX-5 though.

[Riknos]

OP, I originally wanted a Z3 in your price range, but after not being impressed I test drove a mk1 MX5 and was hooked, and ended up buying one instead.

I'd also consider a mk3 MR2.

[alfa pint]

U T said:

The down side of the Alfa is that you may never actually reach your destination, unless on the back of a recovery truck.

If you get a ste one yes. Touching wood (oo er missus), I've had mine for 4 years and I've only had to replace wear and tear items (cambelt, tensioners, 2 x wheel bearings, tyres, rear disks and pads, front disks and pads, front foglight, power steering pump, exhaust, lambda sensor) - all the sort of things you expect to go wrong on any car with 100k on it when you've done the last 30 odd k in it yourself.

[stuckmojo]

OP, for what'it's worth, I've had the "stty" 1.9 Z3 for about 4 years, and most posters above are right on its flaws.

But, it'd be very good on fuel, absolutely bomb proof mechanically (150,000 miles on mine) and nice to sit in. Also, it's not that slow compared to most things on the road.

I've grown to like mine for what it is; a well-screwed together BMW convertible.

I am not sure about the Mazda, but the BMW has also some ok storage in the boot and a spare wheel.

If I had to go back and make the choice again, I'd still go for the BMW (perhaps the 2.8 though)

[5lab]

alfa pint said:

If you get a ste one yes. Touching wood (oo er missus), I've had mine for 4 years and I've only had to replace wear and tear items (cambelt, tensioners, 2 x wheel bearings, tyres, rear disks and pads, front disks and pads, front foglight, power steering pump, exhaust, lambda sensor) - all the sort of things you expect to go wrong on any car with 100k on it when you've done the last 30 odd k in it yourself.

I'd disagree. on my 183,000 mile mondeo, of which I've done the last 60,000 miles, I've had to replace disks and pads, tyres and, err, nothing else. I would count a cambelt as a service item but I'd not expect to replace things like lamba sensors, exhausts and power steering pumps. Not saying that level of expendature is a horror story, just that its still worse than an 'average' car

[Dalto123]

Had a little look on Autotrader, and I must say the MX5 looks like a better value car. This one I found is a '52' reg, 1.8 litre car with 22,000 miles from new, and they're asking £2850!

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2011...