Looks like an E89 Z4M is on the cards after all

[Stuart Truman]

There's no doubt they "could" do a proper M and make a success of it. The new M5 engine would fit, suspension can be fettled and they could keep the roof but make it carbon fibre as well as any other panels they felt needed slimming down. It might not be an out and out sports car, but neither are the M5 or M6 but nobody's saying they don't deserve their places in the M stable.

Question is, is there enough of a market for one if they did. Their bean counters obviously don't think so

 

[The Admiral]

I'm completely the opposite - much prefer the delivery of a well integrated turbo engine and a bit more comfort

I would like to have seen a proper E89 Z4M with the E92 M3 drivetrain available from the start, even if I personally wouldn't have chosen this over the 35i.

Cheers

Rog

 

[original guvnor]

I'm completely the opposite - much prefer the delivery of a well integrated turbo engine and a bit more comfort

I would like to have seen a proper E89 Z4M with the E92 M3 drivetrain available from the start, even if I personally wouldn't have chosen this over the 35i.

Cheers

Rog

That's fine Rog but there is no choice now. It's a turbo or nothing. That is wrong and to claim, as BMW do, it's because of emissions is bullshit when the 5.5 litre NA V8 powered SLK AMG engine emits 195g/km CO2compared to 219g/km for the 35i and 35iS. The 991 Carrera has a 350BHP 3.4 litre engine with 213g/km, the Boxster S (with PDK) has 315hp and 188g/km of CO2.

 

[The Admiral]

I'm sure Merc & Porsche will catch up soon :lol:

Yeah, I think the M series models should have stayed NA and the M Performance ones gone the turbo route, but it's difficult to please all the people all of the time I guess...

Rog

 

[Mitch89]

Hope that picture isnt representative of the car they will launch

I highly doubt that particular car has anything to do with the styling of a M-badged version of the E89.

 

[Sandygate128]

As it says just a renamed 35iS.

BMW have screwed the Z4 up big time with the E89.

I moved up from the old z4 3.0
12 months ago to 35i deep sea blue with white design package,navigation ,adaptive sports suspension,DCT gearbox,DAB radio,
Electric folding mirrors ect ect.
And in my opinion saying that BMW have screwed up the z4 is way off mark.
The e89 is superior in every way build is far better as is ride and steering feel.
The interior of the old z4 was thrown together and while I had my e85 for five years it never felt as special as the e89 does and is still doing 12 months later and at three years old.
While it is immaculate part down to me part down to how it's been screwed together.
The only way I think BMW have screwed up is by moving away from what they wanted to do
With the e89 and move it up market so a more simple roadster like the original z3 would fill the gap.
Churning out base spec z4s in white with red leather(only other e89s I see) and renting them out for £299 a month
Has done far more harm to the z4s image in my humble opinion.
The people at BMW responsible for the z4 must have been hanging their heads low while they draped their
Red dot design award with a black cloth.
When they dropped the first 4 pot engine into their amazing car.
Maybe they haven't sold out totally unless they bring out a
Z4 sdrive 18d m sport with cloth seats and windy windows maybe that'll have the fur coat and no knicker brigade wetting themselves.

 

[original guvnor]

Sandygate,

I actually agree with a lot of what you say. When I say "screwed up" I mean it's market positioning and it's engine line-up as some of my other comments on here illustrate. You say you don't agree with me and then towards the end of your post criticise them for the exact same things I did.

 

[aquazi]

Maybe the purpose of the E89 is to move more upmarket, like the original Z4 was to the Z3... to compete with the SLK's.

This would leave a nice segment open in the market beneath to compete against the likes of the MX-5 which is still the best selling roadster... in steps in the Z2

 

[Sandygate128]

Sandygate,

I actually agree with a lot of what you say. When I say "screwed up" I mean it's market positioning and it's engine line-up as some of my other comments on here illustrate. You say you don't agree with me and then towards the end of your post criticise them for the exact same things I did.

Point taken I took the screwed up part more as a reflection on the car and totally agree with you on how BMW are now positioning the z4.

 

[original guvnor]

This would leave a nice segment open in the market beneath to compete against the likes of the MX-5 which is still the best selling roadster... in steps in the Z2

Rumour has it VW/Porsche have canned any idea of a baby Boxster or it's VW equivalent.

If a Z2 did appear it would no doubt have sub 2-litre turbos. Wouldn't appeal to me but I guess they'll be watching what happens with the BRZ/GT86.

 

[micz4]

The marketing worked on me,as much as i liked the original Z4,i wouldn't have bought one and was between buying a Boxster or SLK when i discovered the E89. We all have different things that we look for when parting with a substantial amount of money for a car and the manufacturers have to do their best to tick as many boxes as they can.I've had mine for nearly two years now and still love it but wouldn't buy another one because the 4 cylinder turbo format doesn't appeal to me.If the boxster came with a folding metal roof i'd buy one tomorrow.

 

[Carol M]

Sandygate,

I actually agree with a lot of what you say. When I say "screwed up" I mean it's market positioning and it's engine line-up as some of my other comments on here illustrate. You say you don't agree with me and then towards the end of your post criticise them for the exact same things I did.

Point taken I took the screwed up part more as a reflection on the car and totally agree with you on how BMW are now positioning the z4.

I took it that way too. Assuming you meant marketing etc then yes, I have to agree with a lot of what you say.
The e89 is in a different league to the older Zeds. Sorry but it is.
I didn't own an earlier zed but have driven one so I had a comparison. I really like the older zeds but the styling and quality for me just didn't do it. I much preferred my Z3. The E89 on the other hand, I fell in love with.

We all have lovely cars on here, be they tin tops, rag tops or transformers. It comes down to personally choice in the end. (and finances, always those to consider!)

 

[Anonymous]

We all have lovely cars on here, be they tin tops, rag tops or transformers. It comes down to personally choice in the end. (and finances, always those to consider!)

Each of us purchased our cars for our requirements (and budgets) and each will have it's pros and cons, but as long we are enjoying owning and driving our cars, then that's all that really matters.

 

[ranski]

+1

Z4-35i and Carol for forum president and vice president!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sandygate128]

We all have lovely cars on here, be they tin tops, rag tops or transformers. It comes down to personally choice in the end. (and finances, always those to consider!)

Each of us purchased our cars for our requirements (and budgets) and each will have it's pros and cons, but as long we are enjoying owning and driving our cars, then that's all that really matters.

I agree but this is a forum and it's all about getting different views out into the world so hope some people haven't been
Offended in any way.
it's just that I would never want a sports car that could be burned off by a oil burning golf.
If budget was an issue then I'd stick to car within it.
It's always lower model cars that end up not been looked after properly 4 or 5 years down the line.
And it's these that reduce image / residuals in the long run.

 

[original guvnor]

I wouldn't want people to think I don't like the E89. I do, in fact it's gorgeous looking inside and out. I just feel BMW have done half a job. They could've made the range much more appealing than they have with greater flexibility in engine type, a proper "halo" model etc etc. If they had I might have one on my drive right now but doesn't look like I ever will.

 

[whitez4]

I wouldn't want people to think I don't like the E89. I do, in fact it's gorgeous looking inside and out. I just feel BMW have done half a job. They could've made the range much more appealing than they have with greater flexibility in engine type, a proper "halo" model etc etc. If they had I might have one on my drive right now but doesn't look like I ever will.

but if you look at the performance times (both on paper and round a track) the outgoing Z4M and the sdrive35is are basically the same

http://www.fastestlaps.com/comparisons/bmw_z4_m_roadster-vs-bmw_z4_sdrive_35is.html

I dont see how branding the 35is sepcifically as an M car would have made any difference? The new model offers just as much performance as yours does? Therefore if anyone wants an alternative to the Z4M, thye have one. Perhaps the only difference is the way they have marketed it, rather than how they have produced it.

 

[TitanTim]

For me as much as anything its the retractable hardtop thats the clincher its just so much more convenient than the old Z4 which I skipped on when looking at a possible Z3 replacement. I still have the Z3 a love it but whichever way you look at it ragtops for me are a PITA to keep looking good and maintain, hence why I'm looking to get a hardtop for the Z3. There are all the other benefits extra security, refinement etc, yes theyre a little heavier but it doesn't bother me and the E89 just looks beautiful top up or top down whereas with ragtops I always feel the looks are slightly compromised with the hood up :|

Tim.

 

[Sandygate128]

I wouldn't want people to think I don't like the E89. I do, in fact it's gorgeous looking inside and out. I just feel BMW have done half a job. They could've made the range much more appealing than they have with greater flexibility in engine type, a proper "halo" model etc etc. If they had I might have one on my drive right now but doesn't look like I ever will.

but if you look at the performance times (both on paper and round a track) the outgoing Z4M and the sdrive35is are basically the same

http://www.fastestlaps.com/comparisons/bmw_z4_m_roadster-vs-bmw_z4_sdrive_35is.html

I dont see how branding the 35is sepcifically as an M car would have made any difference? The new model offers just as much performance as yours does? Therefore if anyone wants an alternative to the Z4M, thye have one. Perhaps the only difference is the way they have marketed it, rather than how they have produced it.

True but I always think there is a bit of "the emperors new clothes" about M models and people dare not speak Ill of them.
Some people will alway want a M model purely for the badge.
I find my 35i more than quick enough and I don't feel I'm driving a lesser car because it has no M badge.
The e89 is after all more GT than out and out sports car maybe that's why BMW said they'd be no M model.
it might be a good idea if the opportunity arises that the "M people "could have go in a 35i to see what they think
In terms of the performance difference between the two.

 

[original guvnor]

I've driven a 35i on two occasions - once at length on an official launch day at Bedford Autodrome and once on a dealer test drive, one was manual, the other DCT. Nice cars, both of them. I'd turn that question round and say have you driven an M (Roadster or Coupe)?

It's not about performance per se. I think the 35is is probably a bit quicker, despite the extra weight, because it has a lot more torque. I'd be pretty disappointed if it wasn't as quick because it was conceived 4 years later than the M and costs more than the M did.

For me the M is about sharper steering, the LSD, a high-revving bespoke M NA engine and the noise that accompanies it. That's why on the other thread I was bemoaning BMW's decision to go the turbo route, no longer creating bespoke engines when their competitors are going in the opposite direction and creating high-revving NA engines with a lower CO2 output than BMW's turbos.

I can understand people wanting a hardtop, you generally fall in one camp or the other, but in 5 years of having a Z4 Roadster, stored outside, it never leaked, failed, required next to no maintenance compared to a fixed roof or hard top. Nobody ever tampered with it, roof up it was perfectly refined and noise levels were low when you wanted them to be.