2.2,2.5 or 3.0l Z4?

Just a bit more information

Forget the 2.0 and 2.2

the 3.0 is similar across the years so 03 to 09

Now the 2.5 there has been a bit of a change

pre facelift 06 2.5 was 2.5 192 BHP SE this was a 0-62 around 6.7

Post facelift the one you need is SI not i. the i was a de rated 2.5 to market as old 2.2 as this was dropped and runs at 177 BHP and 7.7 secs. the SI was a uprated 2.5 and was 218 BHP 0-62 in 6.5 This is a massive difference for what appears to be a 2.5 same powerbox. so the S infromt of the i makes 1.2 seconds difference. The Si is as suggested above only 0.7 secs slower than the 3.0.

so if your looking at a 2.5 then
03 to 06 2.5 SE
06 to 09 2.5 SI or better SI sport (has more trinkets as base model like Msport susspention, seats, etc

Now between the 2.5si or 3.0 then its a few K or a year older or so. I could never justify the extra K or year older car for 0.7secs. Saying that i am now in a new shape 3.0 and yes its a few mpg less than the old 2.5 but imreally enying the 0.7 sec difference. (yes the 0 to 62 for the new 3.0 is the same as the old one even with the extra weight of the tin top.
 
guys, update,

Would you consider age to be a big factor? I have found two that I may buy, one is 2003 the other 2004, i thought since it is purely a weekend car there was not much point in spending an extra 3-4 k for it to sit in the garage during the week.
However, both appear to be great examples, both 2.5, only differences between the specs is the 2003 has 18" ellip wheels and the 2004 model has 17" spoke wheels.
Both have done similar mileage, I prefer the 2003 model because I love those elliptical wheels.
Should I consider the older model, or would you say stick to the newer car.
How well do these cars age?

rich
 
Age shouldnt be an issue if maintained well. Condition is important.

If both are similar, go for the one with the spec you prefer, which by the sounds of things is the 03 with ellipsoid wheels? :thumbsup:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
rwilki said:
guys, update,

Would you consider age to be a big factor? I have found two that I may buy, one is 2003 the other 2004, i thought since it is purely a weekend car there was not much point in spending an extra 3-4 k for it to sit in the garage during the week.
However, both appear to be great examples, both 2.5, only differences between the specs is the 2003 has 18" ellip wheels and the 2004 model has 17" spoke wheels.
Both have done similar mileage, I prefer the 2003 model because I love those elliptical wheels.
Should I consider the older model, or would you say stick to the newer car.
How well do these cars age?

rich
Click to expand...


'elliptical' wheels - I tend to get them fixed if that happens.

Seriously on Zeds the age doesn't really matter. They are all out of production now and imho condition of any given model is the key factor. A poorly maintained 2007 or 8 is less attractive than a well loved older model and all you do is pay more for the later registration. Remember these are mainly now enthusiasts cars having mainly finished any leases and moved to a specialist market.

Mine is a 2003 and one of the oldest around and although has had a lot of customising is amongst the best in the country and doesn't look more than a couple of years old. I can't see why I'd want to pay £5-£8k more for a later model unless I was changing to an ///M or a coupe.
 
ellipsoid, ha, didnt even register when I wrote that.

Thanks guys, you have given me much to consider, will be going to look at th two models concerned this weekend and hopefully come away with one of them.

Best Regards

Richard
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom