EXTRAS TO LOOK OUT FOR

[rob davey]

I have a 2.0 and it is great on twisty roads; my age location etc sounds about the same as peddy but i'd guess i do a lot more miles as i use it as a work car. my insurance however is £500 and again lower tax.

it all depends what you want it for, but they can be cheap cars to run or expensive.

Also I retro fitted heated leather seats in an afternoon, cup holders in 10 mins and aux input in about the same. They all make the car a nicer place to be.

M seats can be uncomfortable if you are broad but are very nice. Also I wish i had xenons as standard lights are pretty poor.

 

[peddy]

I have a 2.0 and it is great on twisty roads; my age location etc sounds about the same as peddy but i'd guess i do a lot more miles as i use it as a work car. my insurance however is £500 and again lower tax.

it all depends what you want it for, but they can be cheap cars to run or expensive.

Also I retro fitted heated leather seats in an afternoon, cup holders in 10 mins and aux input in about the same. They all make the car a nicer place to be.

M seats can be uncomfortable if you are broad but are very nice. Also I wish i had xenons as standard lights are pretty poor.

£500. that's quiet good. how many NCB's do you have? who are you with?

 

[peddy]

each to their own, but like that sadsack Clarkson, I don't see the point in having a ragtop with a large engine....anyone who says doing 120mph+ with the roof down is an enjoyable experience is either an idiot or a dead person. Coupe I accept is another story.....

And its the old story, its not what ya drive its how ya drive it....I've embarrassed some big cars in the past with rides as mediocre as a 1.0 16v MIcra, so its not the size of your thingy thats the issue.

If you want ragtop enjoyment, still with plenty of spirit, cheap insurance, average 36-38 mpg even when pressing on, and easy resale, then the 2.0 is more than adequate TBH.

as for leather, well also personal, but I wouldn't dream of having a chavvy leather suite in my house, so why would I have it in my car? its slippery, sweaty and not very pleasant, plus it looks like a hookers saggy arse after its been sat on a few times...

just because we have the 3.0 doesn't mean it's because we want to go 120mph with the roof down!

your thoughts on leathers are shocking... but then that's coming from someone who has a sterling grey car, but a silver hardtop. :lol:

 

[Bradders75]

each to their own, but like that sadsack Clarkson, I don't see the point in having a ragtop with a large engine....anyone who says doing 120mph+ with the roof down is an enjoyable experience is either an idiot or a dead person. Coupe I accept is another story.....

And its the old story, its not what ya drive its how ya drive it....I've embarrassed some big cars in the past with rides as mediocre as a 1.0 16v MIcra, so its not the size of your thingy thats the issue.

If you want ragtop enjoyment, still with plenty of spirit, cheap insurance, average 36-38 mpg even when pressing on, and easy resale, then the 2.0 is more than adequate TBH.

as for leather, well also personal, but I wouldn't dream of having a chavvy leather suite in my house, so why would I have it in my car? its slippery, sweaty and not very pleasant, plus it looks like a hookers saggy arse after its been sat on a few times...

An amusing rant sir! However, looks like a classic case of small-engined-under-specced-car syndrome to me. :wink:

Right, I'm off out in the sunshine to enjoy some idiotic speeds with the hood down. Hope it doesn't ruffle my hair too much.

 

[Aebous]

Don't forget the automatic garage door opener...
[youtube]1C-Bxifv2Pk[/youtube]

 

[IK.]

each to their own, but like that sadsack Clarkson, I don't see the point in having a ragtop with a large engine....anyone who says doing 120mph+ with the roof down is an enjoyable experience is either an idiot or a dead person. Coupe I accept is another story.....

And its the old story, its not what ya drive its how ya drive it....I've embarrassed some big cars in the past with rides as mediocre as a 1.0 16v MIcra, so its not the size of your thingy thats the issue.

If you want ragtop enjoyment, still with plenty of spirit, cheap insurance, average 36-38 mpg even when pressing on, and easy resale, then the 2.0 is more than adequate TBH.

as for leather, well also personal, but I wouldn't dream of having a chavvy leather suite in my house, so why would I have it in my car? its slippery, sweaty and not very pleasant, plus it looks like a hookers saggy arse after its been sat on a few times...

An amusing rant sir! However, looks like a classic case of small-engined-under-specced-car syndrome to me. :wink:

Right, I'm off out in the sunshine to enjoy some idiotic speeds with the hood down. Hope it doesn't ruffle my hair too much.

I have to agree with Bradders here. It certainly seems that you're trying to justify your choice of the poverty-spec Z4; especially as you've started talking about 'embarassing' other cars - I thought you said speed wasn't important? That said, I'd like to provide my response to your comments, if I may.

Engine - I wouldn't say everyone gets it for speed. It's good to have that, of course; but I just personally couldn't have a BMW with a 4-cyl engine. The sound of the Straight-6 is beautiful. The 4-cyl sounds like all other 4-cyls on the road - boring.

Leather - Personal preference, of course; but the only time I've heard someone make the case for no leather is when they're too poor/cheap to pay for having leather in the car. I'd never buy a premium brand car without leather, and I'm sure more than 50% of others wouldn't, too.

Resale - I actually completely disagree with you here, as there is no way the 2.0 will ever be as desirable as the 3.0; and the amount of 3.0s show that.