Is there Z life after a ///M ?
- Thread starter mr wilks
- Start date
MACK said:
Time will tell , , i bought the 35i with specific long distance euro roadtrips in mind that i didn't fancy with my M roadster , not that it couldn't cope but after many long weekends touring Uk with Mrs W just wanted a little more cabin comfort & cruiser capabilities + id had the ZMR almost a year & didn't want to add potentially 7-8000miles in 7 months to its 80k .
I always have one eye on the exit as soon as i buy any weekender & this time its next summer so only at that point will i know whether to twist or stick & what the next move will be :wink:
MACK said:Looks great, the "Lardy E89" point of view is an interesting one. Depending where you look there seems to be about about 80-90Kgs between an 35i manual and an E85M. However there's about 120kg's between an E85M and a E85 3.0i but no one calls the M lardy!
I don't think the gulf in handling between the E89 and the M is that great either. BMW seem to miss the mark from the factory on both for different reasons and a quick search on here shows you how much better they both can be with some choice aftermarket suspension and decent tyres (E89).
Its a real shame the M Division didn't get let loose on the E89. The 35i manual as a base would have been great. Right engine and box, well it was good enough for the BMW 1M and we all know how well thought of that car is. If they coupled that to a LSD, Remap, Nice Exhaust, Non Runflats and some well thought out springs/shocks it could have been right up there. Certainly would have enhanced the models perception.
With the above it wouldn't have been enough to push an M car out, which is probably why they didnt. The 35IS is a fast car and is well up there with any of the M cars of the time.
Although they did soften the parts that could make the car quicker... like the DCT has a more sluggish map.
Apart from the 1M every M car up to that point had a bespoke M engine and BMW had already put that in the 35IS. The only other available was the S65.
On paper the Z4 is around the same weight as an M3 so you can do some quick maths and in numbers alone there wouldn't be any real difference. (in manual form) Possibly with a DCT it would be a few 10s quicker. Of course the experience would be completely different but the effort and expectation probably wouldn't have lived up and especially after the "failure" of the E85/86M in sales figures.
In classic BMW M style it would have been nice to get a bespoke M body kit, M interior, quads, LSD some bespoke M wheels. Essentially the 35IS is exactly the same in looks as any other m sport apart from the rear diffuser.
The Z Ms were always special M projects, essentially making a 'classic' sports car from the parts bin. Many of the complaints about the E85/86M like the crashy ride etc are all characteristics of a great drivers car, full feel from every part of the car. Its just not great to live with everyday which most reviewers jumped on. The weight of the E85/86 was also a positive with it being a good saving on the M3. On paper the M3 had 4 seats was about the same price so looked like better value to most buyers, it was a victim of a poor economic climate. The opinion on announcement also wasnt great reviews even commented on that it wasnt an appealing package even with the looks...
I think its probably one of the best looking modern BMWs without doubt. Anyway it has aged incredibly well and its about as close to a true driving experience as you will get in the modern car world.
You also have to remember that the economy wasnt really a great place when the E89 was released also and neither with the facelift with the E89 not really hitting the point with upgrading owners again it seemed to miss with sales figures. The platform wasnt really set for a classic M car, what would have been interesting is if BMW had gone down the AMG root and just made a stupid fast muscle car like the AMG variants. The AMG cars arent really amazing in the twisties but the sheer power makes up for it in most reviewers minds.
Saying that, what BMW did with the E89 is a strange one, it was meant to take on the Merc/Audi segment of luxury GTs yet both the comp offered rocket cars with an AMG or RS version but also a fully fledged diesel segment. Most TTs or SLK cars I see are diesels so they probably missed out there too as BMW made the best diesel engines at the time... a 35D would have been an interesting car for sure.
Will be interesting to see what the Z5 brings but I doubt it will be the car that the forum is calling out for. Will probably be more like an i8 drivetrain than a Z4M.
At the end of the day its all about perception and people get arsy about purist opinions. Myself included.
If you accept what the car is then it is a really great bit of kit. In a world where more and more cars share parts, engines and platforms the purist days of old are over.
mr wilks said:
I think the E89 would make a great tourer which is the reason I fancy one. On the eurotrips time is usually spent 70% of the time on the motorway getting to where you need to be and 30% on the great driving roads.
My only reservation was the boot, with the roof down its a tiny space, possibly one decent suitcase? With mine and SWIMBOs gear my photography gear and the essential trip gear... I dont think it would all fit with the roof down. As there isnt any other space in the car apart from the footwell?
This years eurotrip the 911 was moderately full we traveled fairly lightly with two grip bags and two rucksacks and my photography gear. The trips I have done have been more 10 days to 2 weeks.
The nice thing about the 911 is that you can put the rear seats down and have a huge amount of space, the cayman the same with the hatchback style and the boxster has 2 boots which fits a surprising amount of gear.
How did you get on with it in comparison to the farily big boot in the M?
MACK said:Looks great, the "Lardy E89" point of view is an interesting one. Depending where you look there seems to be about about 80-90Kgs between an 35i manual and an E85M. However there's about 120kg's between an E85M and a E85 3.0i but no one calls the M lardy!
I don't understand this either, especially with the amount of E85 owners jumping ship into E89s. I wonder how many of these used to slate the E89?
This is the difference between the two.
The E89 is:
6 inches longer
half an inch wider
half an inch lower
Just a shame its heavier.
And as has been seen in pictures, the E89 doesn't jump out as being huge.
Nictrix said:MACK said:Looks great, the "Lardy E89" point of view is an interesting one. Depending where you look there seems to be about about 80-90Kgs between an 35i manual and an E85M. However there's about 120kg's between an E85M and a E85 3.0i but no one calls the M lardy!
I don't understand this either, especially with the amount of E85 owners jumping ship into E89s. I wonder how many of these used to slate the E89?
This is the difference between the two.
The E89 is:
6 inches longer
half an inch wider
half an inch lower
Just a shame its heavier.
And as has been seen in pictures, the E89 doesn't jump out as being huge.
Lardy to my mind describes something slightly heavier than it should be & to a certain extent sum's up the oversized rear flanks of the 89 ( obviously part of the design to incorporate the folding roof within ) which can at certain angles add visual weight to the cars looks ?
You just have to look at your pics of the group of Z4s and the E89 doesn't just jump out at you for being completely different.mr wilks said:Nictrix said:MACK said:Looks great, the "Lardy E89" point of view is an interesting one. Depending where you look there seems to be about about 80-90Kgs between an 35i manual and an E85M. However there's about 120kg's between an E85M and a E85 3.0i but no one calls the M lardy!
I don't understand this either, especially with the amount of E85 owners jumping ship into E89s. I wonder how many of these used to slate the E89?
This is the difference between the two.
The E89 is:
6 inches longer
half an inch wider
half an inch lower
Just a shame its heavier.
And as has been seen in pictures, the E89 doesn't jump out as being huge.
Lardy to my mind describes something slightly heavier than it should be & to a certain extent sum's up the oversized rear flanks of the 89 ( obviously part of the design to incorporate the folding roof within ) which can at certain angles add visual weight to the cars looks ?
I prefer the looks of the E89(rear end not so much) and the interior and a 35i Manual would be my ideal Z4, I didn't like the ride/gearbox in my Z4M(presume the Manual is a little better in the E89) and I hated the way it looked with the fabric roof up, so a folding hard top is my preference for sure. I'm a E89 fan certainly.
Yorkie Z said:For me the lack of a LSD is the biggest problem on the E89. It's a 2k aftermarket mod if you do want one.
Second issue is with the roof down you have limited boot space. So a weekend away with luggage means the roof stays up.
[/quote
Drop your cases off at the hotel & the roofs down again! Or pack a bit lighter & there’s no problem at all :wink:
Don’t forget there’s bespoke luggage available for the e89 which still allows for roof operation
Rob