2009 vs 2014 Z4

lux said:
TitanTim said:
I was all for the 4 cyl when I first got the Zed but after 2 years all I can say is its cr*p, can't wait to get rid at the end of the month, and I hate to say that as I love the rest of the car :|

If staying with the Zed it has to be a new 35i or an older 6cyl.

Tim.
Click to expand...

It's certainly not 'crap' Tim. You seem to be talking out your arse now you've swapped yours!?
Maybe you should have driven it rather than stick it in the garage.
Click to expand...

Sorry Steve I disagree, have a trawl of the other forums :wink: I'm not knocking the Zed but I'm knocking the engines refinement which is poor, no other way to put it. Wanted to enjoy it but cringe at times sitting in traffic wandering where the diesel van is :lol: Its not an engine befitting of the car and surprising considering the technology thats supposed to be in it.

Maybe your engine is a Special Edition :)

P.S. haven't actually swapped it yet :poke:

Tim.
 
Just out of interest, is your 4 pot Z3 belt or chain driven? I know that my 90's 318 (E36) was the own belt drive BMW that I've owned.

(I had a couple of Z3s myself, a 2.8 then a 3.0. I still maintain that the 3.0 was the most fun car that I've owned! :) )
 
Maybe yours isn't run it, coz mine sounds fine from cold.
I'm not saying this is 'THE' engine to have, but I honestly prefer it to my 23i but maybe it's because it's auto and my 23i was manual. Pulling off in my 23i was as shaky as sh1tting dog when cold!?
 
TitanTim said:
lux said:
TitanTim said:
I was all for the 4 cyl when I first got the Zed but after 2 years all I can say is its cr*p, can't wait to get rid at the end of the month, and I hate to say that as I love the rest of the car :|

If staying with the Zed it has to be a new 35i or an older 6cyl.

Tim.
Click to expand...

It's certainly not 'crap' Tim. You seem to be talking out your arse now you've swapped yours!?
Maybe you should have driven it rather than stick it in the garage.
Click to expand...

Sorry Steve I disagree, have a trawl of the other forums :wink: I'm not knocking the Zed but I'm knocking the engines refinement which is poor, no other way to put it. Wanted to enjoy it but cringe at times sitting in traffic wandering where the diesel van is :lol: Its not an engine befitting of the car and surprising considering the technology thats supposed to be in it.

Maybe your engine is a Special Edition :)

P.S. haven't actually swapped it yet :poke:

Tim.
Click to expand...

Maybe you got a bad un'! The 28i that I took for a demo drive certainly didn't sound like you describe! Maybe if you actually drove your car, instead of locking it away for 1/2 the year, it would actually get better! :P
 
There is a metalized whirring noise that you can hear if crawling along in traffic but other than that nothing!
 
Zed Five said:
Just out of interest, is your 4 pot Z3 belt or chain driven? I know that my 90's 318 (E36) was the own belt drive BMW that I've owned.

(I had a couple of Z3s myself, a 2.8 then a 3.0. I still maintain that the 3.0 was the most fun car that I've owned! :) )
Click to expand...

The Z3 has the M43 which is chain driven, your 318 if earlier than April 1999 I think would have had the M44 which I thought was chain driven as well :?

Tim.
 
TitanTim said:
Zed Five said:
Just out of interest, is your 4 pot Z3 belt or chain driven? I know that my 90's 318 (E36) was the own belt drive BMW that I've owned.

(I had a couple of Z3s myself, a 2.8 then a 3.0. I still maintain that the 3.0 was the most fun car that I've owned! :) )
Click to expand...

The Z3 has the M43 which is chain driven, your 318 if earlier than April 1999 I think would have had the M44 which I thought was chain driven as well :?

Tim.
Click to expand...

It was a 93 car. def, belt (I changed it! :D )
 
InvisibleName said:
Maybe you got a bad un'! The 28i that I took for a demo drive certainly didn't sound like you describe! Maybe if you actually drove your car, instead of locking it away for 1/2 the year, it would actually get better! :P
Click to expand...

I'm wandering if the 2.8 is better than the 1.8 and 2.0 as the injectors are uprated so maybe has a bearing ? however theres loads of F30 owners running the N20 2.8 who report it sounds rubbish on cold start and at idle once warmed up so there must be something in it. I'm not having a pop but all I'm saying is it could be better regarding refinement considering its a BMW.

Tim.
 
Zed Five said:
TitanTim said:
Zed Five said:
Just out of interest, is your 4 pot Z3 belt or chain driven? I know that my 90's 318 (E36) was the own belt drive BMW that I've owned.

(I had a couple of Z3s myself, a 2.8 then a 3.0. I still maintain that the 3.0 was the most fun car that I've owned! :) )
Click to expand...

The Z3 has the M43 which is chain driven, your 318 if earlier than April 1999 I think would have had the M44 which I thought was chain driven as well :?

Tim.
Click to expand...

It was a 93 car. def, belt (I changed it! :D )
Click to expand...

You put a belt in a chain driven engine :o :poke:

Tim.
 
Why do people assume the M has no torque? It's very quick in the gears. I could post the 20mph increments of the M versus the 35i from separate Autocar road tests but I can't be bothered to go and look for the 35i figures in the loft. The M ones are on my phone, hence why I've posted them below. However I can assure that you make very, very rapid progress in an M and especially when overtaking. How about 60-80mph in 2.8s or 50-70 in 2.7s for example? Very few cars will beat that by any significant margin. You also don't have to rev the nuts off them either ( another misconception from people who often have never driven one).

EDIT: found the 35i test results as well and included them. You can see that they are very similar to the M until you get to high speed but then the M opens up a gap on in-gear and straight-line. I don't suppose the 35iS is THAT much quicker than the 35i but probably just pips the M due to much greater torque although that advantage will be blunted by the extra weight.

epy5asaz.jpg
he7unuje.jpg
 
What makes the 35i fast is the shifts rather than the power. The DCT really rinses every little bit of performance out of the engine.

I know from being on the other side of the fence that trying to keep up with any automatic is hard through the gears let alone one that shifts as fast as the DCT.
 
As others have said, I would not go from a creamy six to a rattly four pot.

IMHO that N20 engine sounds awful when it is in a normal car like an 3 series or an X3.

It has no place whatsoever in an open top sports car such as the Z4.
 
original guvnor said:
Why do people assume the M has no torque? It's very quick in the gears. I could post the 20mph increments of the M versus the 35i from separate Autocar road tests but I can't be bothered to go and look for the 35i figures in the loft. The M ones are on my phone, hence why I've posted them below. However I can assure that you make very, very rapid progress in an M and especially when overtaking. How about 60-80mph in 2.8s or 50-70 in 2.7s for example? Very few cars will beat that by any significant margin. You also don't have to rev the nuts off them either ( another misconception from people who often have never driven one).

EDIT: found the 35i test results as well and included them. You can see that they are very similar to the M until you get to high speed but then the M opens up a gap on in-gear and straight-line. Is don't suppose the 35iS is THAT much quicker than the 35i but probably just pips the M due to much greater torque although that advantage will be blunted by the extra weight.

epy5asaz.jpg
he7unuje.jpg
Click to expand...

It's more fun if you do rev the nuts off them though :P

In fairness 'down on torque' was exactly the assessment I'd given an e46 m3 before I had properly had a go too. I guess that's just the assumption people jump to with high revving engines a la v-tec.

I've wanted a ferrari 360 for a LONG time and it wasn't until I started looking at stats (and leaving one for dead in my old supra) that I realised that from a performance point of view I wouldn't be far off from the Z4m. Ferrari 360 torque: 275 lbs ft @ 4750 Z4m torque: 269 lbs ft @ 4900. Simillar torque at a similar rev range. Not bad for something that I had resigned as torqueless back in the day.
 
Incidentally this is Autocar's test of the V6 S F-Type Coupe. £60k before extras (the example tested was £74k) and it is quite a bit slower than a Z4M.

It's 1755kg as well which just seems way too lardy. Interior is a bit low rent and criticised for it too. Still think a base 991 Carrera or Cayman GTS is a better place for your money.


nyba5epu.jpg
 
OG I had a good read of the Autocar test, I do like the F Type a lot. The in gear times are quicker gear for gear in the Jag?
 
It's true Mike that it's easier to drive than an M. Less gear changes required to make rapid progress but if you want to overtake as fast as possible the M is quicker for most of those increments. It's also with saying it has 8 gears so it should be quicker due to the shorter ratios.
 
Will be intresting to try the newer four pot over the six.

Cheaper tax disc as well. Guess we will be keeping the 35i
 
Tim, I'm not sure you have driven yours enough to comment. Hasn't you car only got about 7 miles on the clock. I bet you've never had it above 3000 rpm :-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom