E85 Z4 3.0si ride/handling?
Discussion
Hi all,
I'm toying with the idea of buying myself an E85, Z4 3.0si as a "fun car" for the weekends, not as a track car.
However I hear mixed things about the ride/handling balance on them and wondered about the following.
1.) What's the ride like on UK roads as stock?
2.) Are they a bit "spikey/unpredicatable" at the back end as I've seen a few comments made by reviewers?
3.) Does anyone have any experience of having one and "sorting" the suspension for road use and what results did you get?
I just can't help but think that a relatively light sportscar with a lovely N/A straight 6, manual box and really stiff chassis should be able to be really fun?
I'm toying with the idea of buying myself an E85, Z4 3.0si as a "fun car" for the weekends, not as a track car.
However I hear mixed things about the ride/handling balance on them and wondered about the following.
1.) What's the ride like on UK roads as stock?
2.) Are they a bit "spikey/unpredicatable" at the back end as I've seen a few comments made by reviewers?
3.) Does anyone have any experience of having one and "sorting" the suspension for road use and what results did you get?
I just can't help but think that a relatively light sportscar with a lovely N/A straight 6, manual box and really stiff chassis should be able to be really fun?
Had one for over four years as an occasional weekend toy. It's used by my retired brother more regularly than by me. I hadn't driven it for about a month but took it out this morning to go 'shopping'. It never ceases to surprise me as to how good it is as an all round sports car for every day use.
It's exactly as it left the factory with individual interior, memory seats and xenons. The only problems that we have had were failure of the roof motor and also the ABS pump. Both were DIY fixes costing about £200 each.
The ride is on the firm side but perfectly acceptable, certainly softer than my old Landie!
It's exactly as it left the factory with individual interior, memory seats and xenons. The only problems that we have had were failure of the roof motor and also the ABS pump. Both were DIY fixes costing about £200 each.
The ride is on the firm side but perfectly acceptable, certainly softer than my old Landie!
Ditch the runflats if it still has them, I replaced the shocks springs and a lot of the bushes on mine (including M bushes to increase the castor) at 100k miles and it made a noticeable improvement to the handling. Although getting rid of the runflats made the biggest improvement. They are picky about the wheel alignment so take it somewhere proper not your average garage for that. I use it every day on mixed roads and I can't think of anything better for the price to be honest.
Hi Rico, I had an E86 3.0si for almost 2 years, then another for nearly 4 years so pretty much the same car other than being the Coupe.
First off there are 2 models, SE and Sport. The Sport has the very desirable (like £750 or so for a used pair) M-Sport seats as standard, plus M-Sport steering wheel and M-Sport suspension which is 15mm lower and therefore stiffer. But all those features were options on the SE, so some may have one or more.
All E85/86 models came with Bridgestone run-flat tyres as standard, and to be fair a Sport model (both mine were) on those tyres the ride is pretty crashy when you find a pot-hole - to the extent that even on a dry road if you are "giving it some" over a pothole the traction control light will come on sometimes!
I never made any modifications to mine, but many owners recommend ditching the run-flat tyres and quite a few go for a Bilstein suspension kit that comes with Eibach springs. Swapping the tyres and replacing any worn suspension bushes also reduces their tendency to tramline.
The standard spec was a bit miserly, with cruise control and rear parking sensors being options although all the 3 litre ones had electric seats with driver's memory. For an E85 heated seats are very desirable so you can get the top down when the sun is shining even if it isn't that warm. Bi-Xenon headlights are also very popular.
BMW located the roof motors beneath the roof drains so they often get drowned, and I think they want about £800 for a new motor. Luckily there are a few people on z4forum.com who can usually revive dead ones and relocate them into the boot where they stay dry for around £200. That forum is well worth a visit for some research.
From data someone on there put together it looks like less than 1,000 3.0Si Roadsters came to the UK, so you may need to be prepared to travel. I had to for both of my Coupes!
But the 3.0Si engine is fantastic, pulling strongly from low revs right up to it's 7,000 rpm red-line. I was so impressed with it that last year I bought an E90 330i with the same engine as my daily!
They do have a couple of foibles though. The first is just something to get used to - there is no dipstick, you check oil level by pressing a button on the dash. But they have an electric water pump which will die at some point, and when it does it only takes a mile or so to overheat, and if you don't stop it will go into "limp" mode pretty quickly. But when it happens varies. The pump on my 1st one died after just 60K miles and 9 years, but my 2nd was still on it's original pump after 90K miles and 14 years. The OE pumps are made by Pierburg and BMW will rob you of over £500 for one, but you can get the same thing elsewhere for more like £250.
Oil leaks from the cam-cover aren't unknown and rear brake pipes can corrode just in front of the passenger side rear wheel.
Hopefully that doesn't sound like too much doom and gloom, after all these cars are well over a decade old now so will need some maintenance, but it may help if you can find one that has already had some of these problems addressed.
Overall I think they are great cars, and I would still have mine if I hadn't got carried away in December and bought an M Coupe.
First off there are 2 models, SE and Sport. The Sport has the very desirable (like £750 or so for a used pair) M-Sport seats as standard, plus M-Sport steering wheel and M-Sport suspension which is 15mm lower and therefore stiffer. But all those features were options on the SE, so some may have one or more.
All E85/86 models came with Bridgestone run-flat tyres as standard, and to be fair a Sport model (both mine were) on those tyres the ride is pretty crashy when you find a pot-hole - to the extent that even on a dry road if you are "giving it some" over a pothole the traction control light will come on sometimes!
I never made any modifications to mine, but many owners recommend ditching the run-flat tyres and quite a few go for a Bilstein suspension kit that comes with Eibach springs. Swapping the tyres and replacing any worn suspension bushes also reduces their tendency to tramline.
The standard spec was a bit miserly, with cruise control and rear parking sensors being options although all the 3 litre ones had electric seats with driver's memory. For an E85 heated seats are very desirable so you can get the top down when the sun is shining even if it isn't that warm. Bi-Xenon headlights are also very popular.
BMW located the roof motors beneath the roof drains so they often get drowned, and I think they want about £800 for a new motor. Luckily there are a few people on z4forum.com who can usually revive dead ones and relocate them into the boot where they stay dry for around £200. That forum is well worth a visit for some research.
From data someone on there put together it looks like less than 1,000 3.0Si Roadsters came to the UK, so you may need to be prepared to travel. I had to for both of my Coupes!
But the 3.0Si engine is fantastic, pulling strongly from low revs right up to it's 7,000 rpm red-line. I was so impressed with it that last year I bought an E90 330i with the same engine as my daily!
They do have a couple of foibles though. The first is just something to get used to - there is no dipstick, you check oil level by pressing a button on the dash. But they have an electric water pump which will die at some point, and when it does it only takes a mile or so to overheat, and if you don't stop it will go into "limp" mode pretty quickly. But when it happens varies. The pump on my 1st one died after just 60K miles and 9 years, but my 2nd was still on it's original pump after 90K miles and 14 years. The OE pumps are made by Pierburg and BMW will rob you of over £500 for one, but you can get the same thing elsewhere for more like £250.
Oil leaks from the cam-cover aren't unknown and rear brake pipes can corrode just in front of the passenger side rear wheel.
Hopefully that doesn't sound like too much doom and gloom, after all these cars are well over a decade old now so will need some maintenance, but it may help if you can find one that has already had some of these problems addressed.
Overall I think they are great cars, and I would still have mine if I hadn't got carried away in December and bought an M Coupe.
RicoOS said:
1.) What's the ride like on UK roads as stock?
The ride - without coilovers or runflats - is alright. My RenaultSport Megane was no worse.Mine came with what would later be called "Sport" suspension (all the early 3.0s did). If your worried, you can get SE spec instead.
With runflats it's pretty unpleasant on motorways due to tramlining.
RicoOS said:
2.) Are they a bit "spikey/unpredicatable" at the back end as I've seen a few comments made by reviewers?
Not really - mine came with a premium runflat on one rear, and a regular ditchfinder on the other side - and it's been fine.You can get it sideways if you drive like a knob in the wet, but you aren't going to be doing big smokey drifts without an LSD, especially as it's not that powerful (or at least mine isn't - early 3.0 with 234HP).
Full disclosure - I spun mine on a trackday. On the sighting lap.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpevFZe3HYk
RicoOS said:
3.) Does anyone have any experience of having one and "sorting" the suspension for road use and what results did you get?
Yes.I've got on with some decent tyres, KW coilovers, polybushed, big brakes and decent seats.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
I bought it as a cheap convertible that doesn't rust.
It makes a lovely noise and I love convertible driving, but it isn't really a sports car - it's based on the E46 chassis, just a bit lighter, has an electric rack, run flats and terrible seats (if none-sport) - none of which help.
It's still fun though - but for SI money a (cheap) Boxster would be a better sports car - but very different running costs!
The E46 underpinnings, IMO, are a very good thing - reading owners diaries of cheap Porsches makes me wince. Everything is very reasonably priced and well-supported.
In hindsight I should've gone for the SI (more for the economy than the extra power) but at the time I had no idea if I'd get on with it or not so went cheap.
Well actually, in hindsight I should've got an M roadster - a much better ownership proposition than an E46 M3, just a shame they've held their value really well.
Wow thanks people, some really good info and views there, methinks that I may have to go find one and have a drive to see what I think, whilst I love the idea of the M version, glad to hear the N52 is as highly rated as I'd heard and although I love the idea of an Z4M in many ways, I suspect I would prefer the slightly softer version, maybe it's just my age, but I've always been more of an M5 than an M3 man, and I love Alpina's more than M cars. Pity the Alpina Roadsters are similar money to the M cars, otherwise I suspect that would be right up my street..
I have a 3.0Si Sport on Bridgestone runflats.
Ride is harsh tbh. Seems to be very sensitive to tyre pressures. Does like to tramline but since making sure the pressures were to the exact spec on the door, it's notably better. Electric steering is not especially communicative.
Looks great though. Engine is very nice but does need to be revved to the red line to extract the true performance.
Ride is harsh tbh. Seems to be very sensitive to tyre pressures. Does like to tramline but since making sure the pressures were to the exact spec on the door, it's notably better. Electric steering is not especially communicative.
Looks great though. Engine is very nice but does need to be revved to the red line to extract the true performance.
RicoOS said:
Wow thanks people, some really good info and views there, methinks that I may have to go find one and have a drive to see what I think, whilst I love the idea of the M version, glad to hear the N52 is as highly rated as I'd heard and although I love the idea of an Z4M in many ways, I suspect I would prefer the slightly softer version, maybe it's just my age, but I've always been more of an M5 than an M3 man, and I love Alpina's more than M cars. Pity the Alpina Roadsters are similar money to the M cars, otherwise I suspect that would be right up my street..
I think if you really want the best driving experience, you need to go for the Boxster.Edited by g3org3y on Monday 6th April 17:28
You didn't mention the "M" option in your original post OP.
Based on my (so far) limited experience of my M I'd say the 3.0Si is 75% of the car for 50% of the money, whereas when new they were also 75% of the money!
The N52 engine is fantastic - very smooth and loves to rev. But the S54 in the M is just a different beast - beast being probably the best way to describe it, and it is even happier to rev.
Other M bonus features are Hydraulic power steering, an LSD as standard, they all have Bi-Xenons and no run-flat tyres. Certainly I found a standard M had a better ride than a standard 3.0Si on run-flats.
3.0Si represents much better value for money, but after years of 3.0si ownership and finding myself with the funds an M was an itch that just had to be scratched!
If there is a downside there is the obvious M tax on parts, etc. and the boot is a fair bit smaller as the battery sits in it because it can't go under the boot floor because of the 2nd back-box.
While Ms and Alpinas do look pricey compared to 3.0Sis, due to rarity I would hope they'll hold their value.
So just to put temptation in your path I'll add a photo.
Based on my (so far) limited experience of my M I'd say the 3.0Si is 75% of the car for 50% of the money, whereas when new they were also 75% of the money!
The N52 engine is fantastic - very smooth and loves to rev. But the S54 in the M is just a different beast - beast being probably the best way to describe it, and it is even happier to rev.
Other M bonus features are Hydraulic power steering, an LSD as standard, they all have Bi-Xenons and no run-flat tyres. Certainly I found a standard M had a better ride than a standard 3.0Si on run-flats.
3.0Si represents much better value for money, but after years of 3.0si ownership and finding myself with the funds an M was an itch that just had to be scratched!
If there is a downside there is the obvious M tax on parts, etc. and the boot is a fair bit smaller as the battery sits in it because it can't go under the boot floor because of the 2nd back-box.
While Ms and Alpinas do look pricey compared to 3.0Sis, due to rarity I would hope they'll hold their value.
So just to put temptation in your path I'll add a photo.
RicoOS said:
Hi all,
I'm toying with the idea of buying myself an E85, Z4 3.0si as a "fun car" for the weekends, not as a track car.
However I hear mixed things about the ride/handling balance on them and wondered about the following.
1.) What's the ride like on UK roads as stock?
2.) Are they a bit "spikey/unpredicatable" at the back end as I've seen a few comments made by reviewers?
3.) Does anyone have any experience of having one and "sorting" the suspension for road use and what results did you get?
I just can't help but think that a relatively light sportscar with a lovely N/A straight 6, manual box and really stiff chassis should be able to be really fun?
I currently own a v.low mileage one, although the car is pleasant to drive it's not really a fun car to drive - I blame that notion from the sale of my TVR.I'm toying with the idea of buying myself an E85, Z4 3.0si as a "fun car" for the weekends, not as a track car.
However I hear mixed things about the ride/handling balance on them and wondered about the following.
1.) What's the ride like on UK roads as stock?
2.) Are they a bit "spikey/unpredicatable" at the back end as I've seen a few comments made by reviewers?
3.) Does anyone have any experience of having one and "sorting" the suspension for road use and what results did you get?
I just can't help but think that a relatively light sportscar with a lovely N/A straight 6, manual box and really stiff chassis should be able to be really fun?
The ride of the car was transformed by swapping from run flats to Goodyear F1,s,
The suspension could benefit with a more compliant type, but the car was never designed for Britain's craggy pot -holed roads.
The Silk Smooth is a gem, good low down torque but does need to be revved. Hence I wish that BMW fitted it with a V8 as per some of the BMW's saloons, after all there is the space under the bonnet!
It's no Boxster, but the running costs are not as high.
To sum up, it's a great car for a drive out with the roof down or up what ever the weather.
Non-runflats, replacing the bushes on the front 'lollipop' wishbones and dropping the pressure in the tyres a couple of psi from the recommended amount (I think I'm running 32psi) made a huge difference to the wandering/tramlining.
When I got the car at 8 years old with only 28k on it it was borderline dangerous on the motorway, as others have said.
When I got the car at 8 years old with only 28k on it it was borderline dangerous on the motorway, as others have said.
Mr Tidy said:
You didn't mention the "M" option in your original post OP.
Based on my (so far) limited experience of my M I'd say the 3.0Si is 75% of the car for 50% of the money, whereas when new they were also 75% of the money!
The N52 engine is fantastic - very smooth and loves to rev. But the S54 in the M is just a different beast - beast being probably the best way to describe it, and it is even happier to rev.
Other M bonus features are Hydraulic power steering, an LSD as standard, they all have Bi-Xenons and no run-flat tyres. Certainly I found a standard M had a better ride than a standard 3.0Si on run-flats.
3.0Si represents much better value for money, but after years of 3.0si ownership and finding myself with the funds an M was an itch that just had to be scratched!
If there is a downside there is the obvious M tax on parts, etc. and the boot is a fair bit smaller as the battery sits in it because it can't go under the boot floor because of the 2nd back-box.
While Ms and Alpinas do look pricey compared to 3.0Sis, due to rarity I would hope they'll hold their value.
So just to put temptation in your path I'll add a photo.
I can see the attraction of the M, however maybe it's just because of getting older, but the Alpina Roadster appeals far more.Based on my (so far) limited experience of my M I'd say the 3.0Si is 75% of the car for 50% of the money, whereas when new they were also 75% of the money!
The N52 engine is fantastic - very smooth and loves to rev. But the S54 in the M is just a different beast - beast being probably the best way to describe it, and it is even happier to rev.
Other M bonus features are Hydraulic power steering, an LSD as standard, they all have Bi-Xenons and no run-flat tyres. Certainly I found a standard M had a better ride than a standard 3.0Si on run-flats.
3.0Si represents much better value for money, but after years of 3.0si ownership and finding myself with the funds an M was an itch that just had to be scratched!
If there is a downside there is the obvious M tax on parts, etc. and the boot is a fair bit smaller as the battery sits in it because it can't go under the boot floor because of the 2nd back-box.
While Ms and Alpinas do look pricey compared to 3.0Sis, due to rarity I would hope they'll hold their value.
So just to put temptation in your path I'll add a photo.
I'm just trying to make up my mind, all I know is that it's got to have a straight 6, preferably normally aspirated, it needs to be quick, but I'm far more into having a car that talks to me, that doesn't keep trying to tell me what to do (not into all these assistance systems), plus there is no chance in the next few years I can have £15kish tied up in a weekend car that also costs more to run.
Part of me thinks I should just get a manual 330CI convertible, as I know I love my mint 330CD daily driver
citizen smith said:
I currently own a v.low mileage one, although the car is pleasant to drive it's not really a fun car to drive - I blame that notion from the sale of my TVR.
The ride of the car was transformed by swapping from run flats to Goodyear F1,s,
The suspension could benefit with a more compliant type, but the car was never designed for Britain's craggy pot -holed roads.
The Silk Smooth is a gem, good low down torque but does need to be revved. Hence I wish that BMW fitted it with a V8 as per some of the BMW's saloons, after all there is the space under the bonnet!
It's no Boxster, but the running costs are not as high.
To sum up, it's a great car for a drive out with the roof down or up what ever the weather.
That's what I was hoping to hear The ride of the car was transformed by swapping from run flats to Goodyear F1,s,
The suspension could benefit with a more compliant type, but the car was never designed for Britain's craggy pot -holed roads.
The Silk Smooth is a gem, good low down torque but does need to be revved. Hence I wish that BMW fitted it with a V8 as per some of the BMW's saloons, after all there is the space under the bonnet!
It's no Boxster, but the running costs are not as high.
To sum up, it's a great car for a drive out with the roof down or up what ever the weather.
Although there is a part of me that thinks I would give one to a good suspension tuning/set up company to get it riding and handling as well as it can Set up, can make such a difference 
RicoOS said:
citizen smith said:
I currently own a v.low mileage one, although the car is pleasant to drive it's not really a fun car to drive - I blame that notion from the sale of my TVR.
The ride of the car was transformed by swapping from run flats to Goodyear F1,s,
The suspension could benefit with a more compliant type, but the car was never designed for Britain's craggy pot -holed roads.
The Silk Smooth is a gem, good low down torque but does need to be revved. Hence I wish that BMW fitted it with a V8 as per some of the BMW's saloons, after all there is the space under the bonnet!
It's no Boxster, but the running costs are not as high.
To sum up, it's a great car for a drive out with the roof down or up what ever the weather.
That's what I was hoping to hear The ride of the car was transformed by swapping from run flats to Goodyear F1,s,
The suspension could benefit with a more compliant type, but the car was never designed for Britain's craggy pot -holed roads.
The Silk Smooth is a gem, good low down torque but does need to be revved. Hence I wish that BMW fitted it with a V8 as per some of the BMW's saloons, after all there is the space under the bonnet!
It's no Boxster, but the running costs are not as high.
To sum up, it's a great car for a drive out with the roof down or up what ever the weather.
Although there is a part of me that thinks I would give one to a good suspension tuning/set up company to get it riding and handling as well as it can Set up, can make such a difference The hardest problem that you are going to have, is finding a suitable car that you would like to buy! A lot of people skip on Maintenance and their cars have minimal service history.
The search to find the right car could take quite a while. Took me a few months to find mine amongst the private classifieds.
citizen smith said:
I currently own a v.low mileage one, although the car is pleasant to drive it's not really a fun car to drive - I blame that notion from the sale of my TVR.
The ride of the car was transformed by swapping from run flats to Goodyear F1,s,
The suspension could benefit with a more compliant type, but the car was never designed for Britain's craggy pot -holed roads.
The Silk Smooth is a gem, good low down torque but does need to be revved. Hence I wish that BMW fitted it with a V8 as per some of the BMW's saloons, after all there is the space under the bonnet!
It's no Boxster, but the running costs are not as high.
To sum up, it's a great car for a drive out with the roof down or up what ever the weather.
To be fair after a TVR I can see why it wouldn't feel as much fun - as in scary - to drive with it's silky smooth engine. You'd probably have felt more at home in an M as the engine is more of a beast just tempting you to go for it! And as they have non-runflat tyres the standard ride is actually better than an Si Sport on run-flats.The ride of the car was transformed by swapping from run flats to Goodyear F1,s,
The suspension could benefit with a more compliant type, but the car was never designed for Britain's craggy pot -holed roads.
The Silk Smooth is a gem, good low down torque but does need to be revved. Hence I wish that BMW fitted it with a V8 as per some of the BMW's saloons, after all there is the space under the bonnet!
It's no Boxster, but the running costs are not as high.
To sum up, it's a great car for a drive out with the roof down or up what ever the weather.
I'm guessing your car is a Sport model - there was an SE that doesn't have M-Sport suspension and sits 15mm higher on softer suspension. But sadly they didn't have the fantastic M-Sport seats as standard.
A V8 might have been good, but why not go the whole hog? Someone managed to fit a BMW V10 into one!
We bought one over a Boxster, based on the price of fixing various standard problem and consumable parts on both. A good decision as it's been a very dependable mile muncher.
Mine is just an i.... but with the SI seats, roll bars, shocks as options, etc etc etc etc, an option SI in all but the label (They even stuck an SI badge on for irony)
So the si (sport) has 19mm rear anti roll bar vs 18mm in the I , 25mm vs 24 at the front standard I, and slightly different valving on the struts. (I checked the numbers on the strut labels and measured the ARBs with a vernier)
I wouldn't say it sets your hair on fire in any department, and i find it quite easy to stroke along at a reasonable pace. But it doesn't beg to be leathered or put into situations by the scruff of the neck. Or provoked in the dry. Handling wise, I agree with everything above and you can get them sideways if you drive like a knob (in the wet).
We've swapped the fronts to decent non run-flats and you can definitely notice the reduction in crashyness, noise and harshness through the steering The rears are still run-flat shod, have loads on them, and are wearing evenly, but they'll get swapped too eventually.
Many also complain about the electric PAS, but I really don't feel it's a problem, the steering is fine. However it just has this vague spot between turn in, and when the suspension settles into the corner, then it also seems to respond vaguely to small inputs mid corner.
As a result before drawing a conclusion on it's handling, I am going through the process of changing some of the known weak point bushes on the rear to see if the vagueness can be reduced.
My inital thought was rear drop links, but it seems the rear trailing arm bushes have loads of lateral toe movement in them when worn, like the old sandwich bushes on a 205 but without the widow maker lift off oversteer results. Again the RTABS can also have shims inserted to limit the toe movement, which i am also doing. The upper and lower outer bushes also seem quite fubar. I would imagine any car of a similar milage that hasn't been rebushed would need similar attention. (100k) So if you drive one, bear that in mind, some enthusiast owned poly bush everything, which has its own drawbacks. you can get a complete set of rear bushes for very reasonable money. The tools to change them are a bit more of an issue, but not beyond a decent independent mechanic, or enthusiast.
The standard geometry is also worth fiddling with, it's got a lot of rear camber, and not much up front, a shade more front end camber would definitely help the front end feel after the initial turn in, and a touch less rear might help the rears wear more evenly.
There's quite a few posts on the z4 forum about the improvement in front end when using CSL geometry, and another fair few with people complaining about tram lining, wondering why changing the geometry on worn tyres leads to a love of car hedge insertion. It increases front camber, reduces rear, and changes the toe on both.
I shall give the CSL geometry a go after changing the bushes.
Hope this helps
cheers
J
Mine is just an i.... but with the SI seats, roll bars, shocks as options, etc etc etc etc, an option SI in all but the label (They even stuck an SI badge on for irony)
So the si (sport) has 19mm rear anti roll bar vs 18mm in the I , 25mm vs 24 at the front standard I, and slightly different valving on the struts. (I checked the numbers on the strut labels and measured the ARBs with a vernier)
I wouldn't say it sets your hair on fire in any department, and i find it quite easy to stroke along at a reasonable pace. But it doesn't beg to be leathered or put into situations by the scruff of the neck. Or provoked in the dry. Handling wise, I agree with everything above and you can get them sideways if you drive like a knob (in the wet).
We've swapped the fronts to decent non run-flats and you can definitely notice the reduction in crashyness, noise and harshness through the steering The rears are still run-flat shod, have loads on them, and are wearing evenly, but they'll get swapped too eventually.
Many also complain about the electric PAS, but I really don't feel it's a problem, the steering is fine. However it just has this vague spot between turn in, and when the suspension settles into the corner, then it also seems to respond vaguely to small inputs mid corner.
As a result before drawing a conclusion on it's handling, I am going through the process of changing some of the known weak point bushes on the rear to see if the vagueness can be reduced.
My inital thought was rear drop links, but it seems the rear trailing arm bushes have loads of lateral toe movement in them when worn, like the old sandwich bushes on a 205 but without the widow maker lift off oversteer results. Again the RTABS can also have shims inserted to limit the toe movement, which i am also doing. The upper and lower outer bushes also seem quite fubar. I would imagine any car of a similar milage that hasn't been rebushed would need similar attention. (100k) So if you drive one, bear that in mind, some enthusiast owned poly bush everything, which has its own drawbacks. you can get a complete set of rear bushes for very reasonable money. The tools to change them are a bit more of an issue, but not beyond a decent independent mechanic, or enthusiast.
The standard geometry is also worth fiddling with, it's got a lot of rear camber, and not much up front, a shade more front end camber would definitely help the front end feel after the initial turn in, and a touch less rear might help the rears wear more evenly.
There's quite a few posts on the z4 forum about the improvement in front end when using CSL geometry, and another fair few with people complaining about tram lining, wondering why changing the geometry on worn tyres leads to a love of car hedge insertion. It increases front camber, reduces rear, and changes the toe on both.
I shall give the CSL geometry a go after changing the bushes.
Hope this helps
cheers
J
Edited by kyepan on Wednesday 8th April 22:44
Mr Tidy said:
To be fair after a TVR I can see why it wouldn't feel as much fun - as in scary - to drive with it's silky smooth engine. You'd probably have felt more at home in an M as the engine is more of a beast just tempting you to go for it! And as they have non-runflat tyres the standard ride is actually better than an Si Sport on run-flats.
I'm guessing your car is a Sport model - there was an SE that doesn't have M-Sport suspension and sits 15mm higher on softer suspension. But sadly they didn't have the fantastic M-Sport seats as standard.
A V8 might have been good, but why not go the whole hog? Someone managed to fit a BMW V10 into one!
Yes, your right it's the Si.I'm guessing your car is a Sport model - there was an SE that doesn't have M-Sport suspension and sits 15mm higher on softer suspension. But sadly they didn't have the fantastic M-Sport seats as standard.
A V8 might have been good, but why not go the whole hog? Someone managed to fit a BMW V10 into one!
Mr Tidy said:
To be fair after a TVR I can see why it wouldn't feel as much fun - as in scary - to drive with it's silky smooth engine. You'd probably have felt more at home in an M as the engine is more of a beast just tempting you to go for it! And as they have non-runflat tyres the standard ride is actually better than an Si Sport on run-flats.
I'm guessing your car is a Sport model - there was an SE that doesn't have M-Sport suspension and sits 15mm higher on softer suspension. But sadly they didn't have the fantastic M-Sport seats as standard.
A V8 might have been good, but why not go the whole hog? Someone managed to fit a BMW V10 into one!
Yes, your right it's the Si. I do like the look of the V10 though, but is it reliable or does it have a few foibles.I'm guessing your car is a Sport model - there was an SE that doesn't have M-Sport suspension and sits 15mm higher on softer suspension. But sadly they didn't have the fantastic M-Sport seats as standard.
A V8 might have been good, but why not go the whole hog? Someone managed to fit a BMW V10 into one!
Way back in 2002 I purchased an "M" Roadster after reading the reviews and liking the idea of a Powered Roof, but only kept it for 6 months and went back to a TVR Griffith 500 - more luxurious and a better ride with more grunt and a glorious soundtrack.
Old age has made me buy the Z4, but the Z4M does have it's advantages bar the running costs.
citizen smith said:
Yes, your right it's the Si. I do like the look of the V10 though, but is it reliable or does it have a few foibles.
Way back in 2002 I purchased an "M" Roadster after reading the reviews and liking the idea of a Powered Roof, but only kept it for 6 months and went back to a TVR Griffith 500 - more luxurious and a better ride with more grunt and a glorious soundtrack.
Old age has made me buy the Z4, but the Z4M does have it's advantages bar the running costs.
Now I'm confused - all facelift 3 litres were Sis. But some were to SE spec and others were to Sport spec. Way back in 2002 I purchased an "M" Roadster after reading the reviews and liking the idea of a Powered Roof, but only kept it for 6 months and went back to a TVR Griffith 500 - more luxurious and a better ride with more grunt and a glorious soundtrack.
Old age has made me buy the Z4, but the Z4M does have it's advantages bar the running costs.
The Z4 didn't go on sale until 2003 and the M model didn't go on sale until the facelift in early 2006 so I'm not sure what M you bought in 2002, unless it was a Z3M!
But I can understand the appeal of a TVR - I do have RAC Recovery with Home Start after all.
Gassing Station | BMW General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff