BMW Z3 - good cars?
Discussion
Just come across this in the my eBay wandering and can't help but think it does look cool!
What are these cars like? Incredibly dated or a hairy chested handling and performance bargain from the 2000s? I think it's the closest thing to a Austin Healey 3000.
The car in the picture is a lowered 2.8 and not an M. Is the Z3 a waste of time unless you buy an M?
Love to hear some more user experiences. They strike me as good, retro top down fun? What's the gearbox like?
What are these cars like? Incredibly dated or a hairy chested handling and performance bargain from the 2000s? I think it's the closest thing to a Austin Healey 3000.
The car in the picture is a lowered 2.8 and not an M. Is the Z3 a waste of time unless you buy an M?
Love to hear some more user experiences. They strike me as good, retro top down fun? What's the gearbox like?
The pictured one has been chavved up to the max. The 1.9 is ok but very loud on the engine front. The 2.8 is fun and can go sideways lots. The M versions need suspension work as they feel like the front end is lifting up a lot at high speed.
If you are large you won’t fit. I’m 6’4 and don’t really fit, unless I removed my legs. Which may hurt.
If you are large you won’t fit. I’m 6’4 and don’t really fit, unless I removed my legs. Which may hurt.
I'd go for a Z4 if you're over 5ft 6in, otherwise you'll look a bit odd in it with the roof down.
Also the Z4 is arguably one example where the evolution between generations saw almost universal improvements across the board.
Ie, bigger, but lighter and stiffer. Better engines/efficiency, but still very reliable. Superior braking, CofG, acceleration, handling, but actually riding about the same.
Also the Z4 is arguably one example where the evolution between generations saw almost universal improvements across the board.
Ie, bigger, but lighter and stiffer. Better engines/efficiency, but still very reliable. Superior braking, CofG, acceleration, handling, but actually riding about the same.
The one in the OP's post looks bl@@dy awful. As previously stated it looks as though it is owned by a chav.
I owned one (a six cylinder 2.0) as a daily driver for two years and covered over 22,000 miles each year without fault. Just needed tyres and consummables. Brilliant little car. I left the hard top on mine virtually permanently as through the course of my work it was often parked in some less than savoury areas and felt safer and more secure.
I owned one (a six cylinder 2.0) as a daily driver for two years and covered over 22,000 miles each year without fault. Just needed tyres and consummables. Brilliant little car. I left the hard top on mine virtually permanently as through the course of my work it was often parked in some less than savoury areas and felt safer and more secure.
Depending on your vehicle history/expectations they're either a quirky, fun roadster or an archaic, scuttle-shaking liability.
The 1.9 4 banger is the sweetest handling but is woefully slow. The best all-rounder is the 2.8 (or rare later 3.0 coupe version) which has sufficient power and economy balance to remain a long-term prospect.
They have their place, but I'd personally look at a Z4.
The 1.9 4 banger is the sweetest handling but is woefully slow. The best all-rounder is the 2.8 (or rare later 3.0 coupe version) which has sufficient power and economy balance to remain a long-term prospect.
They have their place, but I'd personally look at a Z4.
I bought a 3.0 from eBay after a good Sunday pub session didn't actually want one by hey ho. I only use it occasionally as it is to be fair a bit small with the roof up so I only ever drive it with the roof down. I wouldn't use it as a daily though too small and noisy for that.
Mine has a sports exhaust so sounds pretty good with some pops and bangs on over run, which is nice.
Mine has a sports exhaust so sounds pretty good with some pops and bangs on over run, which is nice.
I had a 2.2 (I think) & apart from the engine, which was lovely, it was hand on heart, the worst car I've owned. Didn't break down, was reliable for the most part & looked pretty good for what it was.
However, arcane rear suspension & terrible scuttle shake killed it as a driving experience for me plus the feeling that at six foot,you sat on it rather than in it. Also, lousy sound system but hey ho. They're improved vastly by fitting a strut brace, but all in all, it wasn't one for me & I'm no BMW hater. My advice, take a good long test drive before parting with your hard earned.
However, arcane rear suspension & terrible scuttle shake killed it as a driving experience for me plus the feeling that at six foot,you sat on it rather than in it. Also, lousy sound system but hey ho. They're improved vastly by fitting a strut brace, but all in all, it wasn't one for me & I'm no BMW hater. My advice, take a good long test drive before parting with your hard earned.
. You shouldn't hopefully have rust to contend with either.They are cheap to run as based on big standard 3 series running gear etc....
They are what they are ie a retro roadster but with 90s reliability and safety before everything went electronic. I much preferred them to the Z4 which bmw shifted to a boring consumer market. The z4 just looks dated now whereas the Z3 always looked classic styled.
Ps I've owned both including a rather special schnitzer S54 Z3m Imola.
If your after an easy relatively boring option get a Z4 nothing wrong with them but if you want a bit more old school character get the Z3. Ps 2.8 or 3 litre but I prefer the pre facelift 2.8s rear end. The 2.2 facelift was a great sounding middle ground though. The ///M are just a hoot but you have to be prepared to drive them hard and revise the suspension setup. Safe place for your money though and in terms of total cost of ownership with little / no depreciation cheap sports cars. I made a good margin on my last ///M (it was the highest price I'm aware of for any Z3 and sold privately to a collector).
They are what they are ie a retro roadster but with 90s reliability and safety before everything went electronic. I much preferred them to the Z4 which bmw shifted to a boring consumer market. The z4 just looks dated now whereas the Z3 always looked classic styled.
Ps I've owned both including a rather special schnitzer S54 Z3m Imola.
If your after an easy relatively boring option get a Z4 nothing wrong with them but if you want a bit more old school character get the Z3. Ps 2.8 or 3 litre but I prefer the pre facelift 2.8s rear end. The 2.2 facelift was a great sounding middle ground though. The ///M are just a hoot but you have to be prepared to drive them hard and revise the suspension setup. Safe place for your money though and in terms of total cost of ownership with little / no depreciation cheap sports cars. I made a good margin on my last ///M (it was the highest price I'm aware of for any Z3 and sold privately to a collector).
Excuse the thread bump but have been offered a pristine Z3 at shed money and am sorely tempted. I just wondered if there might be options for getting the seating any lower as I'm 6'+ and would prefer to sit in rather than on.
As an aside, I love the look of the example in the OP (apart from the bra thing) but I was born in Chatham.
Also the car I'm considering is only a 1.9 twin cam but I love the M44 engine and BDS can liberate some healthy power and performance at reasonable cost, although I'm not looking for a super fast weekend car. Just something for weekends and occasional summer commuting here in Cornwall.
As an aside, I love the look of the example in the OP (apart from the bra thing) but I was born in Chatham.
Also the car I'm considering is only a 1.9 twin cam but I love the M44 engine and BDS can liberate some healthy power and performance at reasonable cost, although I'm not looking for a super fast weekend car. Just something for weekends and occasional summer commuting here in Cornwall.
Gassing Station | BMW General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff