E85 or E89..?

A

Anmarube

Active member
 Atherstone, Warwickshire.
Hi all,

Was looking for a 3.0 Si with 10k to spend. Some lovely low mileage examples out their.
Whilst looking have also come across Highish mileage E89s. 3.0 liter but with 90 plus K om them. I'm talking Auto's by the way.

Love the older shape Z4 and the fact that there isn't much electronic wise whereas the newer one's seem to have lots of gizmos going on..


Which would you guys go for?
Low miles old shape (Talking around 30k miles)
High miles new shape (90 K plus miles)
 
Hmm it really depends on individual. I prefer the exterior styling of the E85 plus it is a roadster so to me, has to be a soft top. But I do prefer the interior styling of the E89.

Since I am a hands-on type of owner, I prefer a car that has less electronics which is easier to DIY on.

Hence, my personal vote will be a low miles old shape E85 :) Which is what I ended up with, a 2003 3.0i AT :D
 
Maniac said:
:popcorn:
Click to expand...

....and posted in the E85 section it's open season.

OP you're going to get some E89 mud slinging replies mostly by people that have never driven one, make of them what you will.

Purely IMO both have their good points and bad, the hard top is expensive to put right on the E89 should it cause problems. The E85 can sometimes suffer from sticky steering, which really spoils the car, mine had it, there are various reasons for it's cause and cures. Also the E85 needs non run flats more that the E89 as the latter seems to ride better with them.

But tbh, at the money you're talking, personally i can't see that much difference between them. Servicing should be pretty similar if you farm that out. Each can have mechanical faults like any car, broken springs, worn bushes etc etc, but roof apart i don't see the E89 being any more electrically problematic than the E85. Should the later car have I drive then that could cause problems I guess but so too the nav on the other. Both have good 6 speed auto boxes with the same pull thumb push paddles. You get adaptive suspension on the E89 mind, that's very nice to have.

As usual it comes down to what you want, interior looks and function with the exterior looks, and how easy you think each would be to move on should you require. I tend to think a car over 100k is going to be hard to move on and still get fair money for it, it's silly as there's nothing wrong with a post 100k car if it's been cared for, but there seems to be a barrier at 100k. Having said that you could ignore the re-sale issue and just get what you want, enjoy it and deal with selling it when the time comes.

To me they are both excellent cars, I love the 3.0si E85, if I have to sell my E89 35is I would be delighted to plonk myself back in a 3.0 si. If I had to choose I'd probably go E85, mainly for the low miles.
 
Thanks guys,

I am leaning towards 3.0 Si E85 mainly because that's what I was looking for in the first place.. Just that they are close together in terms of money Low miles E85 High miles E89.

I think my money will be on the E85 for the reason it's a ragtop plain and simple. I know things go wrong on them but seems far easier to fix as a hands on guy rather than an E89.

Thanks for your imput guys, Really appreciated. Just about to put another post up now about a low miles one owner car to see if anyone here has owned it..

Once again......Cheers all..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom