M vs. 3.0si Sport - Running Costs

O

One Team

Member
Hi all

I know running costs probably shouldn't be at the forefront of ones mind when thinking about a Z4 but I was wondering what the views were on running costs.

Obviously for a sports car the Z4 3.0 Si Sport is rather amazing both in terms of servicing, economy and tax.

Is the M variant really that much more expensive? Obviously fuel economy isn't great and the tax twice the price but how do other things compare? Are my perceptions even valid?

Any thoughts would be welcome. At the moment I am thinking 3.0si but I wondered if its worth stretching to an M.

Thanks

One Team
 
Had my 3.0i (so slightly older engine) for 4 weeks and on average 5 mile runs driving 'enthusiastically' but not full chat the whole time I@m getting 27.5mpg so you should better that.

Insurance I was pleasantly surprised to get just below £400 but of course that depends on so many factors - I'm 40, clean licence, full NCD, limited to 6000 miles pa but car is not garaged.

Servicing - don't know yet.

Biggest expenditure so far (after purchase and insurance!)- steering wheel audio retrofit kit plus a few smaller mods.

The only car I ever got rid of due to running costs was an RX8 - loved it but if I'm going to be doing 15mpg I want to be sitting in an Aston! And £600 for an alternator was a bit much (covered by warranty thankfully).

Ultimately if you're that worried about running costs either don't buy a sports car or run it as a weekend car!

Edited to add: if you like the M and can buy it / run it then go for it...quickest way to fall out of love with a car is to sit in it and keep seeing the one you 'should have bought'! (Happened to me when I bought my dream car - a 911 - but got the tiptronic and constantly wished I'd gone for a manual).
 
I've been quite surprised by the running costs so far, having just got the Z4MR enthusatic driving is still the order of the day :driving:, servicing I'm kind of got a M tax saving account ready for the inspection 2 so that will be £800 - £1100 depending where you go, Tyres again you're looking at the thick end of £450 (just had to replace the rears)

Insurance if you shop around you can get good deals but it's a group 20 car so it's going to be a "premium"

However, I personally have a grin that sticks with me all day long after a drive. The S54 is one of the worlds great powerplants, it's intoxicating.

I'm glad I went for the M it has a bizarre "Q" factor to, as most people think it's a regular Z4. But it has enough performance to see off a Boxster S (my other choice).

Bad things about the M, not the last word in economical, hard work (If we're honest :fuelfire: )

But I wouldn't change it for all Super Unleaded at BP :D
 
It depends on how many miles you will do in a year, and on what roads that will be on.

I usually get just under 20mpg (based on brimming the tank and then doing the calcs manually). Servicing and brakes will cost you dearly. Tyres are cheaper than the run-flats fitted to the 3.0Si so that is one good thing.
 
The problem with justifying the /M is that the 3.0si is such a great car and such a great all rounder.

It's comfier, very nearly as quick but significantly more economical, and you can get it with a great auto if that's your bag.

The /M is a very differently behaved beast - and you pay for that in terms of keeping it tame.

Big dealer inspections are the issue, roughly double the si based on Insp 1 £650ish & Insp 2 £900ish
 
'M' is a heart over head decision. But I wouldn't swap it for a 3 litre even after four years. It's been a priivlege to own something so fast, well equipped, reliable and fun to drive. :)
 
Beedub said:
imo i think the ///M is an expensive car to run/own.....
Click to expand...

It is when you slap superchargers on it :)
I don't find it too bad to be honest. MPG is worse than the 3.0Si but not massively so, 2-3mpg in my hands doing the type of driving I do.
Servicing, yes, that is expensive. Brakes probably also but they last a long time under normal driving conditions.
Oh and road tax, yes it's *2
I find the M runs better than the Si did on NON-Super Unleaded though so arguably it's cheaper on fuel in that respect :). However, most of us (me included) user Super most of the time.
 
One Team said:
All

Thank you all for the honest feedback which has helped me make a decision!

3.0si Sport it is! :-)

One Team
Click to expand...

Rather late, but my feedback on 3.0si;

Economy - your choice, I've done sensible 100mile+ trips at 40 mpg, but if you want to push on expect 28-32mpg. My average is very rarely below 30.

Servicing, tyres, brakes - a fortune at the dealers but if you're wise & use Independents it's not ott.

Very quick, sounds great & I'm sure you'll enjoy. If, unlike me tjough money isnt so much an issue it has to be the M..!
 
Can't see the point in not getting an ///M if you can afford it, if you don't you'll just see them about and think you should have got it. Life's too short to be sensible, the z is hardly a family car anyway so get the one that really makes you smile.

Servicing cost is double a boggo Z, but considering it's only an inspection every other service it's really not as bad as people make out and if you low miles it's big gaps between each visit to the dealer. Tax £460 and I guess will rise next budget.

MPG is 29ish for me, but that includes 2x 200mile runs each week, well it used to. So really not bad, as long as you're not a town driver.

Just try it before you decide, engines like the s54 won't be around much longer, it defines the M and you may never get a chance to own an engine like it...
 
Regrettably have always thought the M badge was a license for BMW to print M for Money. The M3 is a serious bit of kit over it's siblings... though the stock 3.0 Z4 is such a cracking motor the performance difference of the Z4M is quite noticeable but not massively better.

If you want a Z for it's unique looks, cruising appeal, reliability & uncanny ability for total strangers to pay you complements, then I find the standard 3.0 exceeds expectations.

As a quick & simple comparison, look at the cost of new brake discs between the two...

No right or wrong answer, just depends how important it is for you to personally have an 'M'
 
Have you driven both?

If not try not to. I drove them back to back and after that all your calculations go out of the window.
 
Oh yeah, on driving them.
I would say the 3.0Si is the closet BMW non-M model to an M model you can find, it's a very good car. I would recommend driving both as already mentioned. The M does feel different to drive. In some ways the 3.0Si feels more racy, the M feels more GT.The Si is boomy at lower revs but quiet higher up the rev range until the engine matures nicely then it sounds better(in my experience anyway). The M is quiet at low revs and sound fantastic as the revs rise. The M does ride a little better (non runflats), and also won't try so hard to point you towards hedges as the tramlining does not exist :thumbsup:
 
Darren M said:
Beedub said:
imo i think the ///M is an expensive car to run/own.....
Click to expand...

It is when you slap superchargers on it :)
I don't find it too bad to be honest. MPG is worse than the 3.0Si but not massively so, 2-3mpg in my hands doing the type of driving I do.
Servicing, yes, that is expensive. Brakes probably also but they last a long time under normal driving conditions.
Oh and road tax, yes it's *2
I find the M runs better than the Si did on NON-Super Unleaded though so arguably it's cheaper on fuel in that respect :). However, most of us (me included) user Super most of the time.
Click to expand...

the supercharger adds no extra maintance to the vehicle at all, ;-) apart from the s/c oil needing to be changed every 10k miles..... this takes around 10 mins to do :-) since the s/c off boost mpg has definatly improved, i.e motorway crusing showing like 0.5 psi.......

in general i think this is an expensive vehicle to own/run......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom