M worth the extra over 3.0si???

[greddyl30pjg]

Money not an issue? = M
Want 'normal' running costs with a good chunk of performance? = 3.0Si

Si is a great compromise, but if your flush enough not to have to compromise go M, if not Si.

One thing i would say, if you do 5k or 15k - use it! You pay insurance & tax- enjoy it! I couldnt be doing with driving a shitter when i had a nice Z4 sat gathering dust (exception- if you have a company car).

Alot of time its false economy running 2 cars- 2 lots of insurance/ tax/ service/ tyres etc when ultimatley if you use one car its just extra juice you pay for & service it a little more frequently due to doing more milage. Consolidate, have 1 money pit rather than 2!

 

[Dangerous-Dave]

I use my ///m every day in all weathers and the only thing that has troubled me was the slip ring behind the steering wheel which was a common yet cheap easy fix.

As per earlier posts, you pay the money for it regardless if you use it of stick it in the garage. Get it on the black stuff where it belongs the grin is worth every penny it will ever cost me. I don't regret it for a minute.

 

[teamemmenracing]

If for no other reason ..... They dont make ///M's anymore .... And they are fast becoming collectable ... Thats my choice.

But then its not my every day drive anymore .....

 

[Zeld4]

LOL at some of the economy figures in this thread. High 30s and low 40s in a 3.0!? Give me a break. Maybe if you reset the MPG counter while cruising at 65mph and hold your speed there, but in the real world where you have to brake, stop and pull away every couple of minutes, even averaging 30 is bloody difficult. I'm happy as long as mine stays over 25.

I've got over 400 miles from a tank, that's 37 mpg no matter what the trip computer says.

 

[edd_jedi]

LOL at some of the economy figures in this thread. High 30s and low 40s in a 3.0!? Give me a break. Maybe if you reset the MPG counter while cruising at 65mph and hold your speed there, but in the real world where you have to brake, stop and pull away every couple of minutes, even averaging 30 is bloody difficult. I'm happy as long as mine stays over 25.

I've got over 400 miles from a tank, that's 37 mpg no matter what the trip computer says.

I agree it's possible, I can also do over 300 miles from a tank with 100 range remaining (I never let it get anywhere near empty, not good for the car) but that's during motorway driving. To suggest that's the normal everyday combined figure to somebody deciding between an M or 3.0 is just lying. 26-28 is a more honest and realistic combined figure.

 

[StevenH72]

LOL at some of the economy figures in this thread. High 30s and low 40s in a 3.0!? Give me a break. Maybe if you reset the MPG counter while cruising at 65mph and hold your speed there, but in the real world where you have to brake, stop and pull away every couple of minutes, even averaging 30 is bloody difficult. I'm happy as long as mine stays over 25.

I've got over 400 miles from a tank, that's 37 mpg no matter what the trip computer says.

I agree it's possible, I can also do over 300 miles from a tank with 100 range remaining (I never let it get anywhere near empty, not good for the car) but that's during motorway driving. To suggest that's the normal everyday combined figure to somebody deciding between an M or 3.0 is just lying. 26-28 is a more honest and realistic combined figure.

Aren't you London based though?

I average 26.1 mpg in the ///M and the weeks I've driven to work (on my normal commute) isn't much different. The key is how much city driving you need to do (me not a lot, I mainly have NSL A-roads to work).

Either way, it seems that an 8 mpg difference between the two variants seems to be the norm.

 

[edd_jedi]

Aren't you London based though?

I average 26.1 mpg in the ///M and the weeks I've driven to work (on my normal commute) isn't much different. The key is how much city driving you need to do (me not a lot, I mainly have NSL A-roads to work).

Either way, it seems that an 8 mpg difference between the two variants seems to be the norm.

I am so yes I do a lot of start-stop driving, but surely we're taking about 'normal' or 'average' driving conditions? The majority of people never go on a motorway and spend most of their time driving 5 minutes down the road to work or Tesco :lol: I reckon anything over 30mpg is not possible unless at least 50% of the driving is on national speed limit roads (either motorways or A/B roads.) I'd like to see anybody prove otherwise.

 

[Zeld4]

Aren't you London based though?

I average 26.1 mpg in the ///M and the weeks I've driven to work (on my normal commute) isn't much different. The key is how much city driving you need to do (me not a lot, I mainly have NSL A-roads to work).

Either way, it seems that an 8 mpg difference between the two variants seems to be the norm.

I am so yes I do a lot of start-stop driving, but surely we're taking about 'normal' or 'average' driving conditions? The majority of people never go on a motorway and spend most of their time driving 5 minutes down the road to work or Tesco :lol: I reckon anything over 30mpg is not possible unless at least 50% of the driving is on national speed limit roads (either motorways or A/B roads.) I'd like to see anybody prove otherwise.

What are normal driving conditions? I think motor way driving is pretty normal and the 3 litre si gets amazing mpg on motor ways. When I got my Z a year and 17k miles ago I thought I'd be lucky to see 30 mpg on long journeys and I thought I'd have to drive like a granny. But even at 80 I see 35 mpg. And if you are going 5 minutes down the road it doesn't matter about fuel economy because you are doing hardly any miles

 

[tomscott]

Most I got out of a tank was 420 driving to London from Penrith and back obvs had to fill up half way back.

I was pretty impressed.

 

[Hadies]

I only get 25mpg from my 3.0si. Should've picked an M judging by the mpg others get...
If money allows then go for the M. I think you'll be happy either way

 

[ZermattV]

Just checked the OP hasn't visited since last night.... has he got some reading 69 posts so far, some great exchange of opinions so far and the evening is yet young .

PS - Stephen what happens when you plug an 8 mpg difference in your spreadsheet and perhaps take out the non listed consumables - do you get to 40 percent - which is i guess my gut feel on how much more expensive an M costs to run .

 

[original guvnor]

If I drive like a grandma on the motorway, i.e. on or just below 70mph on cruise control, I can get about 30 mpg out of the M. Doing a more normal 80 I reckon I'd get about 27-28. Oh and before some smart alec reminds me that the speed limit is 70mph, I know. I think the best I've ever got was about 31.5 mpg and that was because of some heavy traffic, resulting in the cruising speed falling to around mid-50's mph.

 

[Woots]

On a run doing motorway ish speeds with my intake I'm getting about 27.5 with my intake

 

[Z4M-2006]

Having had 2 x Z4M's amd a 3.0si coupe i think you should go for the M..

The 3.0si is a great car....IMHO it just isnt fast enough,its no slouch but next to the S54 engined car its like chalk and cheese..

The M has about 50 bhp per ton more in PWR....That equates to the M beating the 3.0 by 5 seconds or so to 120mph.. A lifetime in sportscar world.

Edit.... Can get 34mpg out of the M on a run.....40mpg out of the 3.0si when i drove it back from Edinburgh.

 

[Bing]

We aaaaaaalways get hung up on MPG on here, makes me laugh... However, in the spirit of joining in -

For the first year and a half of ownership I drove my 3.0Si every day as a typical commuter - into London, part motorway and then slow traffic, or M25 commuting from Kent to Guildford or Hatfield. I've not done the sums, but my OBC fluctuated between about 24 and 28 MPG. Much better than my previous car - Focus ST - which stubbornly sat between 18 and 22 MPG. So quids-in from my perspective... But then perhaps not, as actually I put about 26k miles on the car so it has been serviced twice in less than two years, had all four tyres replaced (rears needing done again), had new brake pads all round and new front discs. Affordable though, especially with a car allowance and business mileage reimbursed.

On the few long distance runs I've done to Scotland and back I have managed about 33 MPG. I am sure I could have gotten higher, but I don't bimble along at 70mph when on a quiet motorway and the average speed showing on the OBC was higher. Still quite chuffed to get that kind of return from a 3.0 sports car. Even accounting for the 300 mile hoons whilst in Scotland, the MPG was still at about 29/30 by the time we got back to Kent.

However, in the last seven months I've not been working and whilst I still drive the car every day it's only had a few long motorway journeys of over 150/200 miles - most of the time it gets driven 10/15 miles a day max with longer journeys at weekends. 90% short journeys into town and back, or Local A roads. The MPG has stayed stubbornly around 19 MPG, which is terrible. I have really noticed the amount & cost of fuel I'm putting in nowadays, though that's offset by not putting nearly as many miles on it, meaning less wear and tear overall, and the service indicator is moving at a snail's pace.

The point of that totally unscientific essay is that no matter how my current car is used, I can still afford it. If you can afford it, and you love driving it, then why not ? mmmm-five is an inspiration for me in this respect, closing in on 100k miles in his and with a whole heap of plans to transform it once past that milestone. Could I afford to run an M as a daily driver like he does though ? Notwithstanding the need to buy one first, if things work out then yes. Would I want to put 15-20k miles on it in a year doing so ? Not sure, but probably. I think in my head I'd be more concerned about losing the magic of driving it more than the mileage. I do get a bit blasé about driving my 3.0 occasionally... But I have also come to understand that a spirited roof-down hoon of any length restores the joy very quickly - my familiarity with the car from driving it all the time may even make it better. So if I could afford it, based on maths provided by all of you fine folks, then I would be having one. If I couldn't then I'd run my 3.0 until it dies of natural causes.

Worth saying that I couldn't afford a third car at the same time as buying an M though, not sure a huge proportion of people could. And Mrs B's car needs changed soon anyway. I think I'd plan on driving it daily for a year or two then try to tuck it away more in the future to 'restore' and preserve it as a holidays and weekend toy once a third car is affordable. Pretty sure I could never bring myself to SORN it though :wink:

 

[JaEdBa]

Some serious rubbish posted by 3.0 owners...

20%

OK, let's put some science to it.

For my figures I've assumed 6000 miles PA, @ 26mpg for the ///M and 31pg for the 3.0si using shell nitro+ @ 137.9p/litre

Servicing costs are assuming an Insp II within the next 2 years (to get the highest cost difference for comparison, and most expensive yearly costs)

Insurance costs are based on quotes I received just prior to purchasing my ///M.

Tyres will cost very similar amounts, I've assumed £1000 (for a whole set) every 4 years.
Brakes, £500 for the ///M and £250 for the 3.0...every 5 years (for arguments sake)
I've then allowed for misc. costs of £500 for the 3.0 and £650 for the ///M each year, although in reality these cars are very reliable so is more of a contingency.



So, on the most expensive of 2 year cycles (to follow servicing) the difference is approximately 30%. In oil service cycles this drops to 25%.

I've owned an e46 M3 and now a 3.0si Z4. I can tell you now that as these cars age to state there's a 20% difference in running costs is a little ambitious. valve clearances at 2 out of 3 services will blow that one out of the water. the figures quoted for brakes are a little inaccurate to say the least.

truth be told, i'd happily part ex my 3.0 for a m in similar nick if I could find someone who'd do it, but I've a decent contingency sitting around and don't do many miles in my z. unfortunately, as I found early on, the driving experience of the 3.0si is not really comparable to the m, hence i'd swap. However to publish a spreadsheet tweaked to that degree and suggest there's only 20% in it is nonsense. They wouldn't have sold any 3.0's if that was the case, and, in reality, it's in later life that the running costs will really start to diverge as bits start to go.

 

[Bing]

Sorry about that, my last post took on a bit of a life of it's own

 

[jamiez]

///M like many others have said, the M is a different beast. My prior car was a 3.0si which I ran for 70k miles and I love it, very easy daily driver. M is a daily but per other posts it's that much special - well the coupe is anyway!

 

[Adam D]

Drive both and pick the one which meets your requirements.

The M will cost more to run all round, particularly if you pick one needing inspection 2, an air con recharge and a set of brakes. That said if you buy wisely the running costs are fair. The warrantee on the M is overpriced however so I no longer both with that. For the same money I could carry out a lot of bushing renewals and preventative maintenance at a specialist or hold back as a war chest.

Things the M does better.

Proper power steering, the electric steering lacks feedback.
A limited slip differential to maximise mechanical traction
No run flat tyres to ruin the ride quality/tramline.
Decent brakes (for road use)
Noise
Performance

Things the M fares worse.

Fuel economy (I normally get 23-26 mpg)
Reduced boot space as the battery is within the cargo area.
(subjective) controls such as the gearbox and clutch are a bit more beefy, if your used to the whisper light vagueness of say a modern fiesta then you may not like manhandling the controls.

 

[JonnyB]

WOW!!!!! Is all i can say. I thought i would get shot down for bringing this up and asked to use the search function so i can only thank everyone for all the advice and insight so far. It has taken me 45 minutes to read through the posts but i think i definitely have a better understanding now!

I am still not sure what i am swaying towards at the moment but i think trying them both out is probably the best option and deciding from there!

I know lots of people use the ZM as a weekend car only but as greddyl30pjg has put, i don't think i could have it sitting on the drive and have to get in something else. It would probably be a waste commuting however because this will contribute very few miles i don't think this will be an issue, unless only a few miles a day will cause undue stress on the engine but by the sounds of it, it is pretty robust and can take it.

Can't wait until after xmas when i get back off holiday and can really look into getting a Zed. Definitely going to be the right car for me whatever i choose, and i think having a Forum where i can get this sort of feedback and hopefully offer some advice/feedback to others in the future will be invaluable!