Z4 advice

[Daneo22]

Hello!

Thinking about purchasing a 2003 z4 but can't decide on what engine size to get, 3 Litre or 2.5?

Is the 3 Litre worth losing a few MPG for? and are there any common problems I should be wary of when buying one?

Many thanks!

[TimboZ4]

http://www.z4-forum.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=2

[steve_bmw]

the 3.0 is not that much more uneconomical than the 2.5 maybe 2 3 mpg worse at best so i wouldnt worry about that.
But check your insurance it may be more for a 3.0 so factor that in when buying as this and the extra fuel cost may start to add up over time.
And the resale value may be a problem when you decide to sell, everyone is looking for economy now so the bigger the engine the harder to sell.
A few years ago the cheapest listed always had the smallest engine, now look at the adverts all the bigger engines are slowly creeping into the cheaper price bracket and the smaller 2.2 are desirabe, not everyone wants a big engine.
Service costs are the same, you do tend to get more toys on the 3.0 but my 2.5 has lots of the stuff you find on the 3.0 like heated memory seats, hid lights, cruise ect.
Drive them both, see what you think, i did drive the 3.0 and 2.2 when looking to buy mine, the 2.2 is not slow but the 2.5 or 3.0 are the ones to go for.
You will enjoy driving the Z4 they are great cars

[Daneo22]

Thanks for the reply Steve! yea i did have a look at insurance differences, there was only £60 difference between the two. Hadn't considered resale value.. bit of a rookie mistake! :S thanks for pointing that out, I do see what you mean about people wanting better MPG cars, especially with the current price of fuel, which is probably only going to increase unfortunately

I think im going to take your advice and test drive them both this Saturday, see which one I enjoy more.

Are their any common faults I should look out for when buying one, that you know of?

Many thanks!

[steve_bmw]

There's not alot to go wrong, pretty much the same as a 3 series just make sure that the hood works and the drain holes for the roof motor are not full of leaves ect as water can build up and soak the motor = expensive repair.
This has been well documented on the net and you will find plenty of info about it with a quick google seach.

[a11y_m]

Daneo22 said:

Thanks for the reply Steve! yea i did have a look at insurance differences, there was only £60 difference between the two. Hadn't considered resale value.. bit of a rookie mistake! :S thanks for pointing that out, I do see what you mean about people wanting better MPG cars, especially with the current price of fuel, which is probably only going to increase unfortunately

I think im going to take your advice and test drive them both this Saturday, see which one I enjoy more.

Are their any common faults I should look out for when buying one, that you know of?

Many thanks!

What age of car are you looking at? Pre-facelift (pre-2006) there's marginal difference between 2.5 and 3.0 economy in the real world. The newer ones have the N52 engines (rather than M54) and are slightly better on fuel. I'm still averaging 30mpg in my M54 3.0i which IMO is outstanding given the performance and type of car.

There's a good buying guide here:http://www.z4-forum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=21281

but basically rear springs snap, 108-style (split-rim 5-spoke) alloys corrode, and roof motors can fail if the roof drains aren't kept clear.

Good luck

[mbtech01]

I've got a 2003 Z4 3.0 SE & i've been really impressed with fuel economy. I went to Goodwood revival last month & averaged 36 mpg going & 34 mpg coming home & that was using the M27,M3 & A34 roads plus some twisting country roads on the last part of the journey. I wasn't driving it at constant speeds either - i just went with the flow of traffic. I can't believe sometimes that it is a 3.0.

[Shurv]

3.0l cars will be cheaper because there are many for sale,especially with the early ones ( 2003) I think it was only available in 3.0 form when launched so all the early cars are the bigger engine.3.0 also tend to be of a higher spec. There's naff all difference in mpg or servicing costs so most go for the 3.0.

[Sortie 10]

Not sure about Shury's comment about 2003 cars being 3.0. My 2.5 was registered on 18/06/2003; I'm not the original owner but I have a feeling the car may have been a showroom launch car given the massive amount of factory options and dealer-fit accessories fitted. It is possible that the majority were 3.0 - I'm quite happy with my 2.5 but given the comments here would not turn down a 3.0 (so long as it had Carver sounds, heated leather, SMG (yep I'm a rare fan!), leccy folding mirrors, white side indicators & high level brake light)

Whilst talking options, I would happily sacrifice the corroded 5 spoke split rims and lowered suspension, wouldn't miss cruise control (doesn't suit my driving style in UK or abroad), don't miss factory navigation. Would like sports seats (drove a courtesy car with them and they make a big difference), storage pack & cup holders for longer journeys.

[Daneo22]

Thanks for all the replies guys. Iv finally decided to go with the 3 Litre, and have a few hopeful viewings tomorrow.

Can anyone please tell me where the drains are located for the roof motor? having trouble finding it on google :S

[anonymous-user]

Daneo22 said:

Thanks for all the replies guys. Iv finally decided to go with the 3 Litre, and have a few hopeful viewings tomorrow.

Can anyone please tell me where the drains are located for the roof motor? having trouble finding it on google :S

To check if they're blocked just pour a load of water (use a kettle, etc) on the hood just behind the windows. You can clearly see the water flowing out the drain holes at the bottom, if it doesn't then it's blocked.

[Sticks.]

With the roof down, look down the gap behind the n/s of the cabin, or up via the wheel-arch (not sure if you'll see much though). Worth asking if it's been thought about if nothing else.

I did a search and all I found was this, from which the pics are missing. http://www.zpost.com/forums/showthread.php?t=63033...

[anonymous-user]

Sortie 10 said:

Not sure about Shury's comment about 2003 cars being 3.0. My 2.5 was registered on 18/06/2003; I'm not the original owner but I have a feeling the car may have been a showroom launch car given the massive amount of factory options and dealer-fit accessories fitted. It is possible that the majority were 3.0 - I'm quite happy with my 2.5 but given the comments here would not turn down a 3.0 (so long as it had Carver sounds, heated leather, SMG (yep I'm a rare fan!), leccy folding mirrors, white side indicators & high level brake light)

Whilst talking options, I would happily sacrifice the corroded 5 spoke split rims and lowered suspension, wouldn't miss cruise control (doesn't suit my driving style in UK or abroad), don't miss factory navigation. Would like sports seats (drove a courtesy car with them and they make a big difference), storage pack & cup holders for longer journeys.

Seconded, mine had the sports seats and they are a must in my opinion!!

[R_T]

Hope you went for the 3.0, as you would certainly regret buying the 2.5.

[Daneo22]

Bought a 3 litre! Chuffed to bits with it, Cheers for all the responses.

[anonymous-user]

Daneo22 said:

Bought a 3 litre! Chuffed to bits with it, Cheers for all the responses.

Good choice! The biggest surprise you'll get is how good on petrol they are