Alpina or M?

Poll Poll Alpina or M

  • Alpina

    Votes: 24 30.4%

  • M

    Votes: 55 69.6%
  • Total voters
    79
RS = Roadster S, Taz. The Alpina Roadster is the Z8 version, the Alpina Roadster S is the Z4 version.
 
currently on autotrade there are only 2, 1 says S and 1 doesn't

what the obvious differences?
 
toledo said:
Taz said:
markeg said:
RS = Roadster S, Taz. The Alpina Roadster is the Z8 version, the Alpina Roadster S is the Z4 version.
Click to expand...

but it still as a 3.4 ltr engine?
Click to expand...

yep Roadster S has 3.4l straight six, Roadster v8 has a 4.8l v8
Click to expand...

ah right so the 1 too get is the V8, i assume this is a lot more expensive and rarer
 
IMO they'll both hold their value well, but neither is an investment car. M3 (E30) are fetching 40k upwards for the low (40k-ish) mileage and I expect that an immaculate ///M coupe would fetch similar in about 20 years time. Alpinas are rarer and do fetch good values, but it's a smaller market. Again, you need to keep an immaculate, low mileage, stock version.

Personally, I'll enjoy the car today as in 20 years time I'll be too senile to enjoy any potential resale value :)
 
Some Z8s are worth north of £125k now in standard form, no idea how much the Alpina versions are now... But they are not Z4s :poke:
 
There are two versions of the Z4 - the Roadster S Lux and the Roadster S. Both have the 3.4 ltr engine. Difference is in the level of add-ones (Xenon, SatNav, etc).

The V8 is the Z8 version ( called the Alpina Roadster ), which is the 4.8 ltr.
 
Taz said:
toledo said:
Taz said:
but it still as a 3.4 ltr engine?
Click to expand...

yep Roadster S has 3.4l straight six, Roadster v8 has a 4.8l v8
Click to expand...

ah right so the 1 too get is the V8, i assume this is a lot more expensive and rarer
Click to expand...

If money is no object then yes. But they are completely different beasts. Alpina Roadster v8 is based on a BMW Z8 whereas Alpina Roadster S is based on a BMW e85 Z4

If you want an Alpina Roadster v8 you better have deep pockets..... http://www.dupontregistry.com/autos/listing/2003/bmw/z8/1164309 :tumbleweed:
 
To be complete....

If it looks like a Z1 it's an Alpina RLE (Roadster Limited Edition) - Production run of 66
If it looks like a Z8 it's an Alpina Roadster V8 - Production run of 555
If it looks like a Z4 it's an Alpina Roadster S - Production run of 370 (or 373)
 
If I ever got rid of my car. It would have to be for the alpina or M not worth changing unless into one of these cars. I love the look of the alpina but love the power of the M. Can't decide
 
rossonr said:
If I ever got rid of my car. It would have to be for the alpina or M not worth changing unless into one of these cars. I love the look of the alpina but love the power of the M. Can't decide
Click to expand...

As I've previously said, owning an Alpina is like being a member of White's whereas ownership of an ///M is akin to being a regular at Stringfellows... :P
 
Taz are you looking for a good reason to add to the collection, sure the "it's an investment" should work a treat, but like others have said not sure if there's that much money in them, well not for another 20-30 years until they stop selling combustion engines and steering wheels...
 
if you look at the prices of the Alpina, considering they are older than the M's they are fetching more money
 
PerryGunn said:
rossonr said:
If I ever got rid of my car. It would have to be for the alpina or M not worth changing unless into one of these cars. I love the look of the alpina but love the power of the M. Can't decide
Click to expand...

As I've previously said, owning an Alpina is like being a member of White's whereas ownership of an ///M is akin to being a regular at Stringfellows... :P
Click to expand...

Tarts before toffs any day of the week :P
 
tertius said:
stevo///m3 said:
Havard said:
///M for me but I would say that. Alpinas are rare but the performance of the M makes it desirable.

Just been looking at the spec of the M compared to a Cayman GTS and just the brakes alone are miles apart in specification. What a car and for relatively little money considering the performance and noise, ooh the noise...!!

H.
Click to expand...

What's the deal with the brakes then? I'd expect a brand new Porker to have significantly better stoppers than my nearly-9-year old car. I wonder if you're referring to the wet use safety feature or the off-the-throttle feature or something else, which I either don't know about or have forgotten? I thought Porsche were renowned on brakes? Just curious I suppose...
And, back on topic, the answer probably depends on what you wanted when you were buying - for me, the inner lunatic of the M engine and driving feel. Never driven an Alpina so I can't really compare in any event.
Stevo
Click to expand...

I agree, the M might have larger discs, but in actual performance I would expect the Cayman GTS to lead by miles.

Certainly my 993 had some of the best brakes I've ever experienced, and they were Porsche standard bar fluid and pads. I get instruction from time to time from a chap who races pretty much everything from Caterhams to Moslers and he still talks about how good the brakes were in that car.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the thread hijack. I am shopping for a Cayman or Boxster GTS and was shocked at how small the brakes were in comparison to the M. With the M having 345's up front and 328's on the back, I thought the Porker would have had similar, if not slightly smaller.

The Cayman has 330 on the front and just 299 on the back. I have never driven a Cayman or Boxster but I am really impressed with the way the M stops. Maybe I need to have a test drive and see how the Porker stops with smaller discs.

Would really appreciate if anyone in the know can teach me a bit about brakes and the specification. I just assumed that the bigger the brakes, the better they stop and dissipate heat.

H.
 
Havard said:
tertius said:
stevo///m3 said:
What's the deal with the brakes then? I'd expect a brand new Porker to have significantly better stoppers than my nearly-9-year old car. I wonder if you're referring to the wet use safety feature or the off-the-throttle feature or something else, which I either don't know about or have forgotten? I thought Porsche were renowned on brakes? Just curious I suppose...
And, back on topic, the answer probably depends on what you wanted when you were buying - for me, the inner lunatic of the M engine and driving feel. Never driven an Alpina so I can't really compare in any event.
Stevo
Click to expand...

I agree, the M might have larger discs, but in actual performance I would expect the Cayman GTS to lead by miles.

Certainly my 993 had some of the best brakes I've ever experienced, and they were Porsche standard bar fluid and pads. I get instruction from time to time from a chap who races pretty much everything from Caterhams to Moslers and he still talks about how good the brakes were in that car.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the thread hijack. I am shopping for a Cayman or Boxster GTS and was shocked at how small the brakes were in comparison to the M. With the M having 345's up front and 328's on the back, I thought the Porker would have had similar, if not slightly smaller.

The Cayman has 330 on the front and just 299 on the back. I have never driven a Cayman or Boxster but I am really impressed with the way the M stops. Maybe I need to have a test drive and see how the Porker stops with smaller discs.

Would really appreciate if anyone in the know can teach me a bit about brakes and the specification. I just assumed that the bigger the brakes, the better they stop and dissipate heat.

H.
Click to expand...

There are all sorts of aspects to braking performance, e.g.:

1. disc diameter - larger generally better
2. disc thickness - thicker generally better
3. disc design - e.g. ventilated, drilled, grooved, etc. -
- pretty much any performance car will have ventilated discs (that is to say the disc is formed like a sandwich of two plates with vanes holding them apart - this allows air to be drawn through the middle of the disc for cooling
- cross-drilling - I'm not really a fan of cross drilling, it reduces surface area, they get clogged up with pad material, and provides a weak point for cracking to start
- grooves - usually an alternative to cross drilling, fewer problems and help maintain a good pad surface
4. disc material - different steels plus super expensive carbon ceramic of course; more expensive discs tend to be better steel, harder wearing, longer lasting and more resistant to heat
5. caliper spec. - number of pistons, size of pistons, and position of pistons - this is where the Porsche brakes outscore the BMW ones, they have more pistons (four vs one from memory) - allowing the pressure to be distributed more evenly across the pad, and for the centre of pressure to be further out from the axis
6. pad size - bigger generally better
7. pad material - easily changed of course and many options out there for all cars
8. brake fluid - again easily changed and many options; most track drivers will be looking for a high "dry" boiling point - i.e. the temperature at which the brake fluid will boil as once it boils you are sh1t out of luck, as our cousins would say; most of the best performing brake fluids, in this regard tend to be DOT. 4 spec fluids
9. cooling - how well are the brakes cooled, brakes are basically a heat exchange engine - converting kinetic energy to heat - and so getting heat away from the system is crucial - well cooled small brakes will out perform poorly cooled large ones - particularly noticeable in extended sessions (long track sessions, steep mountain passes!; endurance racing) - see also the fluid point - if you can't get the heat away the fluid will eventually boil
10. weight distribution - as already mentioned the way the weight of the car is distributed affects the loading through the tyres under braking and thus the ultimate grip between the tyres and the road - if the tyres aren't gripping the brakes won't do a whole lot - the Porsche with its rear or mid-engine layout has an advantage here - it has weight over the rear wheels for traction under acceleration, but braking moves the weight forward, loading up the front tyres for very effective braking; whilst it still has the engine weight over the rear meaning the rears can still be very effective
11. tyres and grip - see 10 - better tyres = more grip = better braking. Ultimate braking occurs at the threshold of grip, just at the point when the tyres are about to lock, the "higher" this point is the harder you can brake

I'm sure I have missed many things but a few things to consider.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom