Ok spending a bit of time thinking about this well probably too much time thinking and looking (on the internet)
So this is the story so far I bought a 2.0 Z4 m sport 8 months ago and like it a lot but it lacks the out and out kick that I have had in the past, and i am not sure I would go back to the raw road legal race car that my Westfield was, 255bhp and 510kgs fuelled with a full cage.
So looking at the prices of a Z4MR and they are falling into the price I am prepared/have to spend (pockets are not a deep as some peoples) but I spend a lot of my money on cycling I have a fleet of Pinarello bikes. To this end I am torn between just keeping the 2.0 and enjoying the drive and spend some money on it, like doing the jobs that may need to be done before they actually need to be done i.e. it looks like it is on original shocks at 93,000 miles had a strut fail at around 98,000 on my 1 series coupe (daily drive)
The questions are is the M worth the money over say a 3.0 or even the 2.0 in the driving experience, ignoring some of the the lack of kick/speed, there comes a point on the public highway that the extra power is not appropriate and I would not want to track day a Z4
What are the extra cost in maintenance I know that some or most of the M parts carry an extra cost but is there anything that is high cost that a competent maintenance technician/fitter cannot do at home, I built my Westfield from a space frame chassis and built two engines the first a Zetec and the second a Duratec that was the 255 bhp one also fitted a sequential dog box.
Is there a big difference in tyre wear and cost, depends on how it is driven, but in general use.
Fuel and running cost differences is there a big difference, I would like to be able to drive it rather that thinking best take the 120d because the fuel will be half the cost as I like to drive the Z4 as much as I can in the summer, it is SORNed for the winter so in a way the costs are halved.
Maybe the thoughts in my head will just pass or I will end up with something else.......
So this is the story so far I bought a 2.0 Z4 m sport 8 months ago and like it a lot but it lacks the out and out kick that I have had in the past, and i am not sure I would go back to the raw road legal race car that my Westfield was, 255bhp and 510kgs fuelled with a full cage.
So looking at the prices of a Z4MR and they are falling into the price I am prepared/have to spend (pockets are not a deep as some peoples) but I spend a lot of my money on cycling I have a fleet of Pinarello bikes. To this end I am torn between just keeping the 2.0 and enjoying the drive and spend some money on it, like doing the jobs that may need to be done before they actually need to be done i.e. it looks like it is on original shocks at 93,000 miles had a strut fail at around 98,000 on my 1 series coupe (daily drive)
The questions are is the M worth the money over say a 3.0 or even the 2.0 in the driving experience, ignoring some of the the lack of kick/speed, there comes a point on the public highway that the extra power is not appropriate and I would not want to track day a Z4
What are the extra cost in maintenance I know that some or most of the M parts carry an extra cost but is there anything that is high cost that a competent maintenance technician/fitter cannot do at home, I built my Westfield from a space frame chassis and built two engines the first a Zetec and the second a Duratec that was the 255 bhp one also fitted a sequential dog box.
Is there a big difference in tyre wear and cost, depends on how it is driven, but in general use.
Fuel and running cost differences is there a big difference, I would like to be able to drive it rather that thinking best take the 120d because the fuel will be half the cost as I like to drive the Z4 as much as I can in the summer, it is SORNed for the winter so in a way the costs are halved.
Maybe the thoughts in my head will just pass or I will end up with something else.......



