E89 model/engine not all they seem ?

[Angie4m]

Ok , so this one appears to have Msport seats but isn't advertised as Msport :? What are the ext visual differences from the 2nd one which has Se seats ? http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201502161004320/sort/default/price-from/12000/postcode/bb120hr/radius/1501/maximum-age/up_to_6_years_old/onesearchad/used%2Cnearlynew%2Cnew/make/bmw/page/1/model/z4/usedcars?logcode=p

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201503111613390/sort/default/onesearchad/used%2Cnearlynew%2Cnew/price-from/12000/usedcars/model/z4/radius/1501/make/bmw/page/1/maximum-age/up_to_6_years_old/postcode/bb120hr?logcode=p

Neither are M Sport. Sports seats could be had as a £490 option. As with all M Sports, they have different front and rear bumpers with the rear bumper having a different valance/rear splitter usually in grey or colour coded in the 35is.

Lux has a M Sport, see his pic in his sig.

 

[mr wilks]

They look very plain on 17" wheels with the "SE" suspension...

Yea but that's a mornings work to change :wink:
Think it would have to be the straight 3.0 for me if i went 89

 

[aquazi]

the old E90/ E92 was similar.. the 325 was actually a 3.0... and i am pretty sure something similar was there for the E36.... where the badge doesnt designate the engine cc. :?

 

[mr wilks]

the old E90/ E92 was similar.. the 325 was actually a 3.0... and i am pretty sure something similar was there for the E36.... where the badge doesnt designate the engine cc. :?

Yeah i get that i just think badging it as 28i says to 99% of folks who have owned BMWs that its a 6 cyl engine ?
Maybe its just the way i'm reading it & its not intended that way at all :?

 

[aquazi]

the old E90/ E92 was similar.. the 325 was actually a 3.0... and i am pretty sure something similar was there for the E36.... where the badge doesnt designate the engine cc. :?

Yeah i get that i just think badging it as 28i says to 99% of folks who have owned BMWs that its a 6 cyl engine ?
Maybe its just the way i'm reading it & its not intended that way at all :?

No i think you are right it is confusing... not sure many non car people would care so much about the 6cl thing.... but the fact the 20i and the 28i are so far apart - when infact they are near identical engines... not sure if its only a detune which separates them even :?

 

[john-e89]

the old E90/ E92 was similar.. the 325 was actually a 3.0... and i am pretty sure something similar was there for the E36.... where the badge doesnt designate the engine cc. :?

Yeah i get that i just think badging it as 28i says to 99% of folks who have owned BMWs that its a 6 cyl engine ?
Maybe its just the way i'm reading it & its not intended that way at all :?

Nope you're reading it right Mr Wilks, it's just very confusing, when I looked for 35is I assumed it'd be a 3.5 litre normally aspirated, nope, 3 litre twin turbo. Well that's what I think I've ordered, don't think i'll really know until it pitches up and I lift the bonnet..... :roll:

 

[lux]

I don't hink you should be driving anyway if you can't understand what really is a quite simple model range

 

[A1GSS]

Yes, agreed with all of this. The so-called "2.8" 4 pot engines with big turbos have plenty power but don't feel right. I wanted a non turbo straight 6, not a 4, so the so-called 2.3i is the right answer (but it's a 2.5 litre). Lovely smooth creamy thing, adequate power, smoooooooooooth and very revvy. Good stuff. I hated the turbo 4s. Others might love them but for me a complete non starter.

 

[Mobeer]

BMW have had different engine sizes to model numbers for at least a decade - the original 1-series from 2004 had a 2.0 118i and 118d.


Looking at my really old catalog the 3 Z4 trims are:
sDrive23i
sDrive30i
sDrive35i

Very few differences in spec exist:
sDrive23i has heated seats as an option, others have this as standard
exhaust differs
interior trim differs
17" alloy wheel style differs
and various engine differences

but I suspect this catalog is very old indeed.

 

[A1GSS]

23i straight 6 is gone and replaced by the 4 pots.

 

[Maniac]

Yes, agreed with all of this. The so-called "2.8" 4 pot engines with big turbos have plenty power but don't feel right. I wanted a non turbo straight 6, not a 4, so the so-called 2.3i is the right answer (but it's a 2.5 litre). Lovely smooth creamy thing, adequate power, smoooooooooooth and very revvy. Good stuff. I hated the turbo 4s. Others might love them but for me a complete non starter.

But they're not so-called are they? People, not BMW, shove a dot in-between the figures. They're actually so-called 23i, 18i, 20i, 28i etc. Its a BMW nomenclature to hint at the power they deliver akin to old cc measurements, but its people that put the dot in there and call them a 2.8, there's never been a 2.8 e89.

 

[Stark]

One of the only really good things about my SLK 350, V6 no turbo, 3.5 litres

Yes probably just the one thing but nevertheless

 

[ekimj10]

An amazing topic, I like many others assumed the figures somehow related to engine capacity, despite our DD being a Series 1 - 118i with a 2.0L motor.
Amazing why its taken so long to be brought into discussion.

 

[Nictrix]

Yes, agreed with all of this. The so-called "2.8" 4 pot engines with big turbos have plenty power but don't feel right. I wanted a non turbo straight 6, not a 4, so the so-called 2.3i is the right answer (but it's a 2.5 litre). Lovely smooth creamy thing, adequate power, smoooooooooooth and very revvy. Good stuff. I hated the turbo 4s. Others might love them but for me a complete non starter.

But they're not so-called are they? People, not BMW, shove a dot in-between the figures. They're actually so-called 23i, 18i, 20i, 28i etc. Its a BMW nomenclature to hint at the power they deliver akin to old cc measurements, but its people that put the dot in there and call them a 2.8, there's never been a 2.8 e89.

Exactly, people add the dot where there isnt one.
It is easy to think that a 28i is a 2.8 engine though.
It must be even more difficult if you remove the badges from the 4 cylinder models and then only have the V5 to tell you what it actually is.
When we first started looking for our Z it was a bit confusing until you understand the strange numbers, like ours why not just call it the sdrive25i it is a 2.5L after all.
It is not just the Z range though, when browsing autotrader for other BMWs its sometimes not clear exactly what engine size is in some models, like a 318 is a 2.0 and a 325 is a 3.0.
Why not just call them 320s and 330s and possibly add something after this to show what stage tuning they have.
As far as I am aware the SDrive stands for standard drive and the XDrive is 4 wheel drive

 

[AndyJ]

BMW just cater for the market. For many years there were model designations that reflected engine sizes and buyers became accustomed to this.

Now (due to legislation BMW have no control over) engines have had to change and it's no longer viable to make so many engines in many varying sizes, turbos are now also used everywhere, yet the customer still expects to see a model designation that reflects the position in the range. So instead of completely changing the range, BMW stuck with well known models that people could relate to. They may not reflect the engine size directly anymore, but they do still show how the model fits within the range.

The most confusing models to me initially were the 35i / 35is, especailly as sDrive is then tagged on the end. So you get a 35i sdrive and a 35is sDrive. However it doesn't take too long before you have adverts in AutoTrader that confuse the two, "35isDrive"… I know they didn't want to call it an M, but they could have made the designation difference clearer.

 

[mr wilks]

Yes, agreed with all of this. The so-called "2.8" 4 pot engines with big turbos have plenty power but don't feel right. I wanted a non turbo straight 6, not a 4, so the so-called 2.3i is the right answer (but it's a 2.5 litre). Lovely smooth creamy thing, adequate power, smoooooooooooth and very revvy. Good stuff. I hated the turbo 4s. Others might love them but for me a complete non starter.

But they're not so-called are they? People, not BMW, shove a dot in-between the figures. They're actually so-called 23i, 18i, 20i, 28i etc. Its a BMW nomenclature to hint at the power they deliver akin to old cc measurements, but its people that put the dot in there and call them a 2.8, there's never been a 2.8 e89.

I'm guilty of the dot mr M , but for all bar the anoraks who glance at a car for sale that reads " Bmw Z4 E89 sDRIVE 28i " they won't be expecting a 2.0 turbo4 cyl petrol engine :wink:

My thought for today on the E89 is why no turbo diesel is offered when the 2 rival companies offer them & every other model in BMW range also has TD engines available :?

 

[Maniac]

Diesel? .... Heathen.

 

[mr wilks]

Diesel? .... Heathen.

i wouldn't buy one i just wondered if they'd dropped a clanger or not really interested in selling larger volume where the Z is concerned ? I'm sure TT & SLK diesel's will be big shifters in sales numbers

 

[Maniac]

Personally, I'm glad the e89 isn't sold massively... makes them a rarer sight.

 

[Angie4m]

Considering when the E89 was launched BMW promised that it would only be the 6 cylinder versions that would be avalible. Fast forward 4 years and they remove 1 6 cylinder engine and replace it with 3 2.0l 4 cylinder versions. To then add diesel to it would make them a right laughing stock.

Good to keep in mind that BMW built the E89 around it being a 'sports car' and diessl doesn't quite fit in with that look. Also the competition sell more diesel versions to company car drivers and even then both petrol and diesel variants aren't that popular these days. People want practical cars, however I find mines most practical for my needs.