Thoughts on 2.0 i
- Thread starter Simeon33
- Start date
Hi, most of the guys that have them (2litre) say they're good cars but its not going to sound like the six cylinder versions
What's making you change your mind? the bigger cars don't cost much more to run and they generally have less issues than the 4 pot.
Rob
What's making you change your mind? the bigger cars don't cost much more to run and they generally have less issues than the 4 pot.
Rob
Have you checked that the 3.0l litre will be (much) more to insure than the 2.5? I ask because insurance quotes move in mysterious ways and I'm sure that I've read on here that there's often little or no difference.
I cannot speak from personal experience as I pay about £200 fully comp with protected no claims on my ///M. But that's the (only) benefit of being an old fart!
Good luck in your search.
I cannot speak from personal experience as I pay about £200 fully comp with protected no claims on my ///M. But that's the (only) benefit of being an old fart!
Good luck in your search.
I've had my 2.0i Sport for a year now and love it. Admittedly it's not the quickest thing on 4 wheels, but it all depends on what you want from the car. I'm happy driving a car that is no slouch, but not rip-snorting, and looks the mutts nuts, as all zeds do. If out and out power is your priority then the 2.0i is not for you as it is probably out-paced by most modern larger-engine standard cars - except that as it's so low it feels a lot faster than it actually is. Horses for courses I'd say.
louie12 said:
+1 :thumbs
Mine suited/suits me down to the ground. I have a 15 mile round trip to work - the majority of it in a 30/40 mph zones
I also live on the doorstep to the Lake District so the extra power is not much use on the roads there either
So with low insurance and good fuel economy the 2.0l is fine for me
I would have liked a 2.5/3.0l but it was hard to justify really
I have read that the 2.0l is better balanced due to the reduced weight up front
Not having driven the others I couldn't possibly comment
Like other have said = horses for courses
Even my 3.0 feels slow to me so the 2.0 must feel really slow surely? Thing with the Z4 is that it isn't exactly a handling masterclass so you need power to make up for it
A
Anonymous
Guest
Some people want a car for power, some want it for looks. It's purely subjective.
If you're not looking for power then the 2.0 looks just as great as the rest. It's a perfectly good engine.
That said, my 2.2 is woefully underpowered so don't expect more than the performance of a modern 1.6
If you're not looking for power then the 2.0 looks just as great as the rest. It's a perfectly good engine.
That said, my 2.2 is woefully underpowered so don't expect more than the performance of a modern 1.6
I found my 2.0i Sport brilliant for blasting around the back roads of Northumberland. Free revving and fun - able to use all revs in a licence friendly way. On the road the 2 litre surprises quite a few with its capabilities. 0-60 figures aren't everything.
However. . .
The 3.0si and 6 cylinder engine is amazing - on the recommendation of Swiftly and others I tried one and decided to upgrade within 200 yards and two roundabout! Running costs not a great deal higher.
However. . .
The 3.0si and 6 cylinder engine is amazing - on the recommendation of Swiftly and others I tried one and decided to upgrade within 200 yards and two roundabout! Running costs not a great deal higher.
stevengude
Member
I test drove a 2 and a 2.5 before i bought my 3.0. The 3 litre is the best for me hence why i bought it. But to be honest the 2.0l was also a good car, its just a different car - they all have their own strengths. The 2l has issues with the manifold cracking whichicam be very expensive, which is one of the big issues with them.
If your anywhere near chesrerfield feel free to come and sit in a 3l!
If your anywhere near chesrerfield feel free to come and sit in a 3l!
The noise of the six is ADDICTIVE, if you are only used to a four, then you'll probably be happy, as by all accounts they are nippy enough.. But the sixes, and in particular the 3.0, are in a different league...
The sixes also seem to be a bit more robust, I know they all have their "weaknesses" but the 2.0 does suffer from the mentioned manifild cracking, and also likes to munch the occasional timing chain...
Mike
The sixes also seem to be a bit more robust, I know they all have their "weaknesses" but the 2.0 does suffer from the mentioned manifild cracking, and also likes to munch the occasional timing chain...
Mike
There's definitely benefits to using a 6 cylinder powered car when you're blasting accross Europe or travelling any great motorway distance imo.
My 2.5L E36 coupe was utterly capable of cruising accross the German Autobahns, sometimes sitting at its' top end of 145mph for 100's of miles at a time with supreme composure and seemingly little effort whatsoever.
OK, my carbon footprint was far larger than if I was sitting on a flight from Amsterdam to Warsaw lets say, but it's the trip and the car that made it so much more enjoyable and nice to know I could choose at my own leisure whether to fly or drive.
I wouldn't have felt this way with a four-pot petrol car however as any four-banger at its' top end sounds strained and you end up with the perception that it will go pop at any moment.
Maybe not with a diesel tho.
Just my twopenneth.
My 2.5L E36 coupe was utterly capable of cruising accross the German Autobahns, sometimes sitting at its' top end of 145mph for 100's of miles at a time with supreme composure and seemingly little effort whatsoever.
OK, my carbon footprint was far larger than if I was sitting on a flight from Amsterdam to Warsaw lets say, but it's the trip and the car that made it so much more enjoyable and nice to know I could choose at my own leisure whether to fly or drive.
I wouldn't have felt this way with a four-pot petrol car however as any four-banger at its' top end sounds strained and you end up with the perception that it will go pop at any moment.
Maybe not with a diesel tho.
Just my twopenneth.