2.5 v 3.0

C

chrispearson

Member
Im in the market for a z4 but im unsure whether or not to hold out for a 3.0

Is there that much difference in the real world and is it worth an extra £200 on insurance.
 
Real world difference, depends where you drive... on the twisty stop / start stuff, not a lot. Traffic light GP between the two, or something else, you will lose out. Overtaking, is good but obviously "there's no replacement for displacement." The 2.5 is a great engine and does pull well in all gears, if not the same as the 3.0. Mechanically the other benefits of the 3.0 are bigger brakes, 6 speed box and sports suspension (-15mm). I went out looking for a 3.0 (well Boxster or S2K) but bought the 2.5 on age and condition. Part of me still wishes I had the 3.0, but really enjoy my car! In the scheme of things £200 for insurance shouldn't be a deterring factor, if it's that close then cost of consumables (brakes / tyres) may also be a consideration, in which case 2.5.

If you fancy a 2.5 that has been loved and never seen rain... err, no, never seen snow, err, no... never seen -30 arctic conditions, then drop me a line :wink:
(I want / need an M)

It isn't a night and day difference between the two IMO, although I'm sure others would disagree. I would say drive both, if you're not massively in need of a 3.0 then go on spec, condition and history. With spec just keep an eye on the bits that you want but can retro-fit in case your ideal car doesn't have said item.

Just to add... from what I've seen reported there isn't any great difference in fuel economy.

Good luck :thumbsup:
 
This doesn't really answer your question, but I'm sure I remember reading on the forums years ago that the difference between the 2.2i and 2.5i is much more noticeable than the difference between the 2.5i and 3.0i... Reading this back, I'm not sure if that sounds right though.... :?
 
Z4 Beemer said:
This doesn't really answer your question, but I'm sure I remember reading on the forums years ago that the difference between the 2.2i and 2.5i is much more noticeable than the difference between the 2.5i and 3.0i... Reading this back, I'm not sure if that sounds right though.... :?
Click to expand...

That's what I've been told too.

PawnSacrifice has a 2.5 and on a driveout with him surrounded by 3.0s and a M or two, he didn't exactly lag behind....
 
Another thing springs to mind... are the smaller 6 cylinder units not slightly "smoother" than the larger units? :?
 
i think the only bad point about my 2.5 is the fact it doesnt have 6 gears and at motorway speeds the revs are at around 2500 IIRC.

apart from that its good for little twisty roads, motorways (pulls well) and its still good for cruising nice and slow with the roof down 8)
 
Apart from the £200 on insurance you probably won't spend much more on fuel/running costs generally.

I'd drive each one to see if you can. 3.0 tend to have more spec and stuff to justify the extra cost.

Dave
 
Just to add, the 2006 on 2.5si gets 218 bhp, 6 speed box, sports suspension and top speed of 149mph, just shy of the 3.0i (231 bhp).
The 3.0si gets 265bhp all the above and 155mph, so its model year dependent also

The 2.5si is also group 18 insurance which I think maybe the same as the 3.0i / si
 
Cheers for the advice i think ill be going for the 2.5

Just had a look on autotrader etc found this but its been sold

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/200953349341198/sort/priceasc/usedcars/make/bmw/model/z4/price-to/11000/price-from/8000/radius/1501/page/1/postcode/wa42as?previous=%2Fsearch%2Fresults%2Fusedcars%2Fpostcode%2Fwa42as%2Fra

Theres another one for £9800 similar spec with only 51k does that sound good?
 
You may want to delete that link... as CJ pointed out the other day about AutoTrader posts, it's got your post code on there!

£9,800 sounds reasonable.
 
Rudd_2002 said:
i think the only bad point about my 2.5 is the fact it doesnt have 6 gears and at motorway speeds the revs are at around 2500 IIRC.

apart from that its good for little twisty roads, motorways (pulls well) and its still good for cruising nice and slow with the roof down 8)
Click to expand...

My facelift 2.5i has 6-speed manual box.
 
The first Z4 i drove was a 56reg 2.5i (i think that was a 174 bhp one) and it seemed ok, but not brilliant (coming from a toyota celica) pretty sure it had a 6-speed box though.

Then drove a 2.5si (214bhp) and decided thats what i wanted (i prefer the black lights to the 3.0 chrome ones) And performance wise it was a massive bump from the 2.5i, much torquier and felt more responsive.

However after coming on here and reading lots of people saying go for the 3.0 over the 2.5 i though i'd go for a sneaky drive on a car and have to say the 3.0si vs the 2.5si is def noticable.. and the brakes felt much better.. and i quite like the standard electric seats too, so much so i bought that and settled with the chrome headlights!

Insurance for me was less then £50 difference between the two.
 
aquazi said:
The first Z4 i drove was a 56reg 2.5i (i think that was a 174 bhp one) and it seemed ok, but not brilliant (coming from a toyota celica) pretty sure it had a 6-speed box though.

Then drove a 2.5si (214bhp) and decided thats what i wanted (i prefer the black lights to the 3.0 chrome ones) And performance wise it was a massive bump from the 2.5i, much torquier and felt more responsive.

However after coming on here and reading lots of people saying go for the 3.0 over the 2.5 i though i'd go for a sneaky drive on a car and have to say the 3.0si vs the 2.5si is def noticable.. and the brakes felt much better.. and i quite like the standard electric seats too, so much so i bought that and settled with the chrome headlights!

Insurance for me was less then £50 difference between the two.
Click to expand...

To be fair you are mixing chalk and cheese, which most people on here do.

Most members who have a pre facelift model think of 2.5 (177bhp) and 3.0 (231bhp) and this is what they talk about when comparing 2.5 and 3.0

Post facelift there is the 2.5 (177bhp I think), 2.5si (218bhp) and 3.0si (258bhp). The 3.0si is the only 3.0 post facelift but I dont believe it can be compared in the same was as the post facelift 3.0.

But hey that's just my opinion :)
 
srhutch said:
aquazi said:
The first Z4 i drove was a 56reg 2.5i (i think that was a 174 bhp one) and it seemed ok, but not brilliant (coming from a toyota celica) pretty sure it had a 6-speed box though.

Then drove a 2.5si (214bhp) and decided thats what i wanted (i prefer the black lights to the 3.0 chrome ones) And performance wise it was a massive bump from the 2.5i, much torquier and felt more responsive.

However after coming on here and reading lots of people saying go for the 3.0 over the 2.5 i though i'd go for a sneaky drive on a car and have to say the 3.0si vs the 2.5si is def noticable.. and the brakes felt much better.. and i quite like the standard electric seats too, so much so i bought that and settled with the chrome headlights!

Insurance for me was less then £50 difference between the two.
Click to expand...

To be fair you are mixing chalk and cheese, which most people on here do.

Most members who have a pre facelift model think of 2.5 (177bhp) and 3.0 (231bhp) and this is what they talk about when comparing 2.5 and 3.0

Post facelift there is the 2.5 (177bhp I think), 2.5si (218bhp) and 3.0si (258bhp). The 3.0si is the only 3.0 post facelift but I dont believe it can be compared in the same was as the post facelift 3.0.

But hey that's just my opinion :)
Click to expand...





Pre face lift 2.5i is 192bhp not 177bhp! :poke:


Here you go chrispearson...............http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/specs/summary.aspx?model=74
 
Pre and post facelift discussion are very different. My research is pre-facelift, i.e. when I bought my previous 3.0.

I had a 2.5 SE for a weekend and a 3.0 SE for a weekend. The 2.5 was driving like a dish cloth and very sluggish (both were auto boxes I must add). Once I had the 3.0 for the weekend, there was no comparison. It was so, so much more lively and such a pleasure to be in.

The 3.0 also used less fuel as it did not need to work as hard I suppose.

Again - my opinion when having both for a weekend, pre-facelift. Never driven any facelift versions to compare.
 
If you're considering both, for the sake of £200 insurance id definitely go for the 3.0i. I was in the same deliberation as you, but thought that i'd probably regret it later if i bought the 2.5.

In addition to stated above, the 3.0 also usually benefits from higher trim levels (wheels etc) and the sound generator. With regards to fuel consumption, theres barely anything in it between the two.
 
I never even considered anything other than a 3.0 or 3.0Si - unless there is a really good reason, then the additional cost is pretty negligable, I mean, if you can afford a Z4 i the first place, then the difference between a 2.5 and 3.0 shouldn't really matter.
 
Its also a case of what is available when your ready to buy, I really wanted the 3.0l but when a mint 2.5ise (with every thing I wanted on it) turned up for an exceptional price It made my mind up.
 
LazioMaster said:
Its also a case of what is available when your ready to buy, I really wanted the 3.0l but when a mint 2.5ise (with every thing I wanted on it) turned up for an exceptional price It made my mind up.
Click to expand...

That's a good point! Depends on how long you can / are willing to wait for! I think there are less 3.0's about - usually the case when I looked on the BMW site.
 
JUST taken delivery of a 2008 3.0si Sport Manual (261bhp) to replace my 2003 2.5 SE Auto (192bhp) with 17" wheels, which I'd had for almost 4 years.

First impressions WOW!

Smashing engine sound, loads of power and torque, delightful gearbox, better ride - although firmer, it's more stable, more comfortable seats, seems more economical - but I've only driven 40 miles so far.

Insurance is only £50 more - but I'm an old fart living in the country.

Sam4a

I'll update the photo soon!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom