E89 Handling?

A

Atom1

Member
 Leeds
Every review I watch or write up I read always puts a downer on the steering and handling of the e89?

EVO Mag - 'clumsy and ultimately disappointing'

From folk who have lived with this model i am intrigued, what are your thaughts and conclusions on the handling of the e89? I refuse to belive this is the case!

Are these reviwers judging it on a driving level, skill and experience that I will never achieve or equal!?

I'v baught this car as I belive the handling is its defining quality....

Interesting!....
 
They are, imo comparing the e89 to the likes of the boxster/cayman and the Audi TT, 370Z etc, i think they are correct as far as the steering is concerned, the handling/ride not so much.Even so it`s not the best in it`s class, understeer, crashy ride on runflats are it`s worst traits. But all that can be bettered, but at a cost. I have fitted KW v3 coilover suspension, slightly wider but lighter wheels and best of all got rid of the runflats for Vred vorti tyres, the transformation is amazing, my car is now so much more controlable, better ride, handling, steering has at last some feel to it, down to the tyres more than anything else i think. But as i said at a cost, nearly £4k for that little lot. :D
 
It's a compromised car for sure without spending a bomb on it. I still love it but it isn't the best handling or riding car. It's trying to be comfortable and sporty at the same time. Something few can pull off (Porsche can).
 
Well, looks like I will have to keep saving for that Porche. I fancy the new Boxter or Cayman.
 
You buy it for what it is a 2 seater cruiser, I don't see the point making it into something it aint :) I would still have the Zed over a Porsche.

Tim.
 
And your not going to get a new Cayman or Boxster for 34k or I would have , anyway I think the Z4 looks great far better than a TT or SLK and goes just as well if not better than these two. 8) :thumbsup:
 
rayz4 said:
They are, imo comparing the e89 to the likes of the boxster/cayman and the Audi TT, 370Z etc, i think they are correct as far as the steering is concerned, the handling/ride not so much.Even so it`s not the best in it`s class, understeer, crashy ride on runflats are it`s worst traits. But all that can be bettered, but at a cost. I have fitted KW v3 coilover suspension, slightly wider but lighter wheels and best of all got rid of the runflats for Vred vorti tyres, the transformation is amazing, my car is now so much more controlable, better ride, handling, steering has at last some feel to it, down to the tyres more than anything else i think. But as i said at a cost, nearly £4k for that little lot. :D
Click to expand...

More or less the reason why i recently sold mine. I just wasn't prepared to throw a bucket load of money to address an area of a car that i paid quite a lot for in the first place.
Which was a shame, as i thought everything else about the car was great.
 
Atom1 said:
Are these reviwers judging it on a driving level, skill and experience that I will never achieve or equal!?
Click to expand...

I think the question is are they really judging the car based on the *real* customer's needs and requirements.

In reality they are often not reviewing the car the customer will buy. Typically the manufacturers provde them with a high end optioned up version together with a press pack that contains a whole load of stuff for them to rewrite to show how knowledgable they are about the car.

The E89 is a bit of a compromise. It looks pretty. It's a bit heavy. But then BMW figured customers actually want the folding metal roof. They stick the electric steering and the runflats on because that's company policy these days.

So the result is a car that doesn't handle as perfectly as the journos and their peers would like. So what? It handles way better than most cars on the road - it's RWD and quite tractable. If people want something 'better' then options are actually quite limited - particularly if the metal folding roof is important (and for many customers it is).
 
Anyone who drives the Zed and makes revues on the handling of the Zed hasn't had the time to learn to drive it properly. A slightly different driving style needs to be employed and ditch the run flats. Anyone who disagrees should meet me at the track and I'll show them what it is capable of without understeer or oversteer. I admit I changed the rear diff but the suspension is standard. Even the Cayman which is the best handling standard Porsche isn't quite as balanced in corners as the Zed and will bite if you get it wrong.
 
The Cayman does bite, I tried one,the 35is z4 is a much better option for me allround cheaper, better looking, coupe or roadster and less to insure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
 
Having returned from a trip to the 'ring in July I had the chance to do a few laps around it :D . And I have to say I was genuinely impressed with the handling of the car on track (with a completely stock Z4). I have been before in a 350z, but the handling in the Z4 gave me a lot more confidence I was able to maintain speed round the corners. This is even though the 350z has a bigger engine vs. the 2l turbo Z4 I drive now. I also think almost all reviews are based on the inline 6 engine - I have found the 4 pot sharper and more responsive to steering input and this stood out on track especially.

Even so, my Z4 is not a track car and it was just as enjoyable cruising across Europe in comfort and the top down. As a car I drive almost everyday it is a cracking package 8)

I think some reviews need to be updated!
 
I was pleased with the handling of my E89. It was a lot better planted going into corners than my Z4 3.0si Coupe. The suspension was more compliant, especially on bumpy B roads near me that makes up most of my journeys! Not as sharp as the MINi's I've owned but it was a good compromise.
 
I've always thought of a boxster or cayman a "poor man's" 911..when it comes to a porsche go big or go home.

I don't think the z4 is ever considered a poor mans 6 series but even looks wise the boxster and cayman have nothing on the 911 whereas a z4 still looks great.

Granted the boxster and cayman are great to drive, but I think you will always wish you spent a bit more and got a 911.
 
I couldnt disagree more, I love the new cayman, drove it at the Porsche center begining of June, cant wait to own one....one day,lol ;)

Delve into the reviews from Car, Evo and Top Gear Magazines, listen to Henry Catchpole and Chris Harris on You tube.

Seriously capable car and an absolute treat to drive :)
 
I came from an e86 (z4mc) to the e89 and would be the first to admit its not quite as sharp as that but the e86 was sharp all the time and when you have had a crappy day at work and your head hurts it was sort of annoying.
for 90% of the time the e89 is fine and for the other 10% I guess you need a Porsche
 
Yea i'm not saying it isnt a bad car to drive, im sure its great, I always just think save that little bit (alot :D ) more and get a 911.

Nothing wrong with having a boxster or cayman..just not a 911 lol.

As for the z4, there seems to be many things which arent as good as the old z4 but to be fair I dont exactly race around in it...it does the job fine for me.
 
Yep the E85 used to snap back if I got it wrong way more than the E89 seems a bit flatter, but saying that the 28i is getting fun compared to the 30i auto.

There has always been boxter loving press, slating anything else especially the z4 for many years. I have looked and had one for a few days in 2008 and to be honest not a lot in it when normal driving.

Manual roof then, poor boot space, noisy engine behind you, 12K on top of ours (year and specification) with similar depreciation, massive servicing/ running costs.

Few of my work mates have old 911's around £20K but neither of them use them a lot and kept in the garage. Give me a new z4 or boxter any day.

My TT before the zds was quite sterile, so not a lot of choice in our price range for a roadster.
 
Mazda MX5 is a great compromise between usable power and handling. Out of all these 300BHP + cars, on most of the drives we go on, I wonder how much horsepower we actually waste (as in not used) and how much we are actually using? Would be a very interesting read I think.

Now I am quite a quick driver, I like driving fast where conditions allow me too (if I really want a blast I take the motorbike), but since selling my Z4 I am finding I am not getting from A to B any slower in the Evoque on a few runs over 40min drive away I do every week.

So, at what point, on the road, does all this trick suspension/ big horsepower actually aid us in our normal driving with rubbish crowded roads and speed cameras? I think if we all started out in any type of sports car we choose at the same time on an A to B road drive, the one that got there first would be the driver who took more chances rather than the the one with the best handling/biggest horsepower car. We buy these cars for the looks and the feelgood feeling of driving them and because of what they CAN achieve rather that how we use them. :P
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom