What real world difference is there between engines?

[Rama]

Beacuse of the extra running cost aren't worth it! Again!! :lol:
As stated before by someone, I really do think BMW should have made the M a lot more of a difference to the rest of the Z4's!

Why so defensive? :tumbleweed:

Jeeze. I don't know why we get "defensive"....maybe looking at some of your comments from this thread would give you a hint....

I've driven both. I didn't find the M to be that much different on the road.

To be honest, the M felt the same compared to the 3.0,

The only reason I guess that may of sparked an interest was the M badge!

but looking at the figures I think the "which car you have in your garage" makes the most performance difference!!

The only ones saying it is faster are the people who own an M!

I'm glad you think so! A different front fender and an extra exhaust pipe (and less trunk space!)

Honestly, if it was worth the extra I would have bought one but the differences for me just don't add up! Maybe I should have blindly bought the M just because it was the M like some obviously have!

The last one is telling.......the bottom line is you chose whatever car for your reasons. I personally don't care what you drive or why you drive it, but if you are going to come on here and basically say that all of us who own the M versions are stupid for spending the extra money or blindly bought it because of the badge, don't be surprised if you don't get a warm and fuzzy reception. As much as you don't want to recognize it, there are big performance differences between the cars - that is a fact and not an opinion. Again if it isn't enough to justify it for you, then fine - again I don't give a rats arse what you drive. Just don't try to tell me something I know isn't true.

 

[Breaker]

You seem to be turning this into an argument. No need! PM me if you feel the need to have a go at me personally.

Look, this road testers review of the 2 cars is exactly what I mean http://motortorque.askaprice.com/reviews/auto-0607/niche-and-exclusive-the-new-bmw-z4-coupe.asp

You track yours so you can use the difference. Now stop telling me I'm expecting you to agree with me. If you like your M, fine!

:topicclosed:

 

[slackjack]

I do have to agree with Rama a little bit there, perhaps though his post is a little full-on...

I drive a 3.0L coupe and i've never driven an M (though would love to). I can take a wild guess though that as great as my 3L is, it will be of higher performance...

I also had the option of purchasing the M when I bought mine, but being a young chap of 23 I couldn't afford/justify the running costs sadly as i'm also an aspiring pilot £££.

BUT... If I had some extra ££s, there's no way I wouldn't have bought the M! Almost on the more aggressive looks alone, let along extra 80 horses.

To be honest Breaker, I think you are the same (and you have stated so)... If you had more cash to not worry about the insurance/fuel/tax/servicing, you would have bought the M.

Perhaps these guys/gals do, so thats why they've bought the better specimen... :wink:

 

[rabman5]

Breaker, What I think you're missing is the fact that the road testers review means absolutely nothing to those of us who drive the car every day. I know you drove an M once, but that does not give you a true feel to a car's character. Thus your need to rely on motortorque.com to tell you about it. Below are two quotes from your article stating what most of us have also stated.

The Z4 3.0si SE and Sport models give refined and responsive driving at all speeds. The Z4 M is more raw, has a harder edge to it and needs to be used on traffic free open roads, or better still a track days, for it to perform to its true potential. This version needs to be driven hard to appreciate its capabilities both from the handling point of view and the engine power. Both maximum power and torque are developed further up the rev range than its 3.0-litre counterparts so it needs space and freedom from legal requirements to enjoy it best.

The 3.0si versions are far more compliant and social for day in day out driving. Smooth and flexible at low speeds, responsive in the mid range and quite fast enough at the top end to bring a smile to the driver’s face.

You asked for the difference. There it is. Just don't try to tell us it's negligible until you truly experience, not read about, it. I would not be satisfied with the 3.0si which is why I spent a little more for the M. Maybe another thread entitled "Is it worth it?" would be more appropriate to discuss that question. Keep driving and enjoying your car.. I know I will.

 

[Breaker]

When buying a car you can only go on a road test. I road tested both and made my decision I never buy a car on what people tell me in a mag. I just happen to agree with the test! I actually only found that test this afternoon!

OK. I'll stay out of this post now.
Didn't want it to upset anyone, just wanted the real world differences between the cars, of which I guess you will never get typing on a forum until you do a real world back to back test.

I probably ranted on too much about this subject anyhow!

I will probably get to prove my point one day. :driving:

Racked up a few posts though!

 

[flyboyaj]

opcorn: opcorn: opcorn:
opcorn: opcorn: opcorn:

 

[Breaker]

Sorry to disappoint.

"Breakers left the building!!" :yeah:

 

[ovrkll]

^^ Thanks, (in appreaciative tone) :wink:

 

[Rama]

You seem to be turning this into an argument. No need! PM me if you feel the need to have a go at me personally.

Look, this road testers review of the 2 cars is exactly what I mean http://motortorque.askaprice.com/reviews/auto-0607/niche-and-exclusive-the-new-bmw-z4-coupe.asp

You track yours so you can use the difference. Now stop telling me I'm expecting you to agree with me. If you like your M, fine!

:topicclosed:

No mate - I'm not having a go at you, sorry if you thought that and I didn't mean it to come off that way. Here is how I see this thread to date:

1 - Breaker asks what the real world difference is.
2 - Many owners chime in with their experiences (real world experiences including with the M's) saying "Yes, there is a difference."
3 - Breaker says - well not according to the short trest drive I had and all these articles I've read (that by the way don't influence me when I buy a car).

I guess I'm more frustrated/puzzled that you don't seem to be listening to the input from people who drive these cars regularly.

I guess I don't know why you asked the question if you already know the answers? :tumbleweed:

I don't track my car - you have me confused with someone else in this thread.

Cheers, Al

 

[Rama]

^^ Thanks, (in appreaciative tone) :wink:

:rofl: :rofl:

 

[carl]

I had a TVR Cerbera before the Z4. The 3.0 was too much of a drop in performance to be considered

 

[Z4coupe]

I think the most important thing is to know what you want and how you plan to use the car. Nothing sadder than seeing the kids on some E46 boards buying a 323i/325i, then pour thousands into it trying to make it look and perform like an M3. A year later, they're grousing about how the car is unsaleable because no one will pay them for all the alterations they've done. And why are they selling? Oh, they're getting an M3...

If you're confident that the non-M will meet your needs, then paying for the extra horses is a waste. But if you "know thyself" and think you'll want more horses, it's better to buy factory thoroughbreds right from the dealer. Aftermarket ponies tend to be more expensive, don't hold their value, and void the warranty on the rest of the herd.

All hogwash, cmon be honest here. Hell if we all paid what you did for your Zed, we would all have an M in the garage,maybe 2, lol

 

[mikedav]

1 - Breaker asks what the real world difference is.
2 - Many owners chime in with their experience - "Yes, there is a difference."
3 - Breaker says - well not according to the short trest drive I had and all these articles I've read

I guess I'm more frustrated/puzzled that you don't seem to be listening to the input from people who drive these cars regularly.

If we bought them for the badge, why not buy a 3.0 and stick an M badge on it...

 

[gannet]

1 - Breaker asks what the real world difference is.
2 - Many owners chime in with their experience - "Yes, there is a difference."
3 - Breaker says - well not according to the short trest drive I had and all these articles I've read

I guess I'm more frustrated/puzzled that you don't seem to be listening to the input from people who drive these cars regularly.

If we bought them for the badge, why not buy a 3.0 and stick an M badge on it...

That would be a whole other debate

 

[1340fxd]

Lots of straight line talk here. On a twisty B road, which would you rather flick round the bends - a 2.0L or heavy snouted 3.0L? :driving:

 

[mikedav]

Lots of straight line talk here. On a twisty B road, which would you rather flick round the bends - a 2.0L or heavy snouted 3.0L? :driving:

A 3.2

 

[carl]

Lots of straight line talk here. On a twisty B road, which would you rather flick round the bends - a 2.0L or heavy snouted 3.0L? :driving:

A 3.2

Surely the bigger the displacement of the engine, the larger the cylinders (holes in the block), hence the less it weighs :lol:

 

[ElegantSpoon]

I've not read all this thread but I have a 2.2 and I must say I'm more than happy with it. Don't get me wrong my friends 3.0 is indeed quicker but then when you spend most of your time in traffic it doesn't make any difference

I've find the 2.2 overtakes without fault and I love it! I think at the end of the day its all personal and in our own eyes ours is best

 

[physprof]

this all seems a bit crazy... the 2.2 and 2.5 are nippy cars, the 3.0 is quick but

reality is 3.2M is significantly faster. nigh on 340 bhp......it has to be otherwise it is not being driven.....

some observations..... OK people argue about 0-60's but autocar mag also give data on 0-100 mph.... 3.2 coupe did it in sub 12sec IIRC, to better that you need to be checking into some serious kit - for comparison 3.2 quatro TT is 15sec... drive at 100 and count three seconds and see how far you've travelled.... a 2.5 z4 is quoted at 17.2.... five seconds plus...now a lesser car driven well can pull off some neat real world overtaking moves - matching gears/carrying speed... etc

the problem I believe and correct me if I'm wrong is that unless you have first hand experience of how some cars go from say 50 to 100+... compared to "quick" cars... then it is quite an eye opener... we've an slk 230k which to most is a nippy/quick car (0-60 in 7.1) ..step-down auto to help, but reality is it doesn't have the overtaking urge of the M far less the oh...that corner is coming too quick reaction a fast car can generate....however coupled with a quick motor is uprated brakes so you can scrub speed off quickly......

so IMHO there is a significant difference .. which we pay for at the pumps....cest la vie.

 

[alex85]

Been looking for a thread like this...

Seeing as i have been trying to decide whether the 3.0 is worth it over the 2.5?

0-60 in the 3 is 5.7, in the 2.5 it is 6.8 now thats a massive difference IMO - but real world would you really notice i.e. if you werent drag racing.