z4 coupe 3l si sport and 3.2m costs

A

alkypete

Member
Hi

Im looking at getting either the 3l sport or the 3.2m coupe but am trying to look at the various costs so i can make the right choice on which car to get. I test drove the 3l at the weekend and thought it was great but would prefer the faster sportier M. My only worry is that as ill be driving it everyday the costs of servicing and fuel etc might end up spiraling high.

Can anyone out lay a few costs for me? I've looked at the service pack thing on the BMW site and saw its about 500 a year for servicing on the 3l and 1000 for the 3.2? is that right? Can anyone give me a rough yearly servicing cost on both cars. I can see the MPG of the 2 cars but how much does it cost to fill the tank on both cars and how many miles would you get from them? I saw its about a 55l tank so Im guessing thats about 60 pounds to fill my friends newish m3 takes 70 to fill and he reckons it will do max 300 miles to that if he takes it easy. Im not tight on budget just thinking if there would be a massive difference at the end of the year.

My main concern is if i buy the 3l I might sit at home thinking i wish id bought the 3.2 doh! Insurance isn't alot more per year and i will be doing a 60-80mile round drive per day sometimes travelling over to germany. Im guessing Ill end up doing 15-20k per year.

Thanks for any help pete
 
I looked at an M but couldn't justify the difference in price for the difference in performance. More expensive than an equivalent 3.0l. Only .7 sec quicker to 62 (same top speed) and the M has to be revved more. The M is also in the highest road tax bracket, the 3.0si is in the next one down (at the moment!!). Fuel costs would make a difference also depending on what you are using it for! The M engine is the older of the 2 also (not that that matters! I just like checking my oil without leaving the driving seat!! :P ). The interior of the si Msport version is the same as the M also (difference being the gear knob!).

I am biased though as I bought the 3.0si Coupe. Haven't regretted it since, and yes, I have driven the M version (it didn't sound as good from inside to me?) :D

At the end of the day, if you are going to sit thinking "I wish I had that M badge on my car" then get the M. :wink:
 
As said above, check out this thread, its discussed at length. I tried both and the 3.0 is a great car, and easier to drive - its smoother and more restrained whereas the M is heavier and more demanding. However like you I would have regretted it as the M offers lots more IMO. Namely

- Better styling - front bumper, quad exhausts, M detailing
- Nicer interior - carbon leather instead of alu, M seats
- Much faster (0-60 does not paint the whole picture)
- Nicer steering feel (hydraulic not electric)
- LSD
- No run flats

Cost wise though, its

15k Oil Service - £200ish (just an oil change!)
30k Inspection 1 - £500ish
45k Oil Service - £200ish
60k Inspection 2 - £900ish

Tyres : Same / Less than the 3.0 (run flats are so expensive), though they may go quicker? I am on 12k, about 1500 miles left
MPG : 2-3MPG worse
Finance : Cheaper per month than a 3.0, as the residuals are stronger apparently

...so if you buy a very low miler the bills won't be too bad for a while. What I would say as you will be using it daily is find one with cruise if you need it, as it cannot be retrofitted on the M (more common on the 3.0)...I don't have it and miss it on long runs. Apart from that I have done 12k in 7 months and its been fantastic, though a 3.0 would probably be more relaxing when I just want to get home!
 
Thanks for all the info so far. From what I can tell you can get 350 miles from a tank on the 3.0 and just under 200 on the 3.2 is that right? Service costs from above don't seem too bad compared with the TVR I was looking at that would probably bankrupt me ha ha! hmmm 200 a year more on tax and 200 on insurance and about 300% more ear wear from the nagging gf for driving to fast.
 
Not a lot in residuals really. 3.0si comes out a bit better actually.

M: http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/used-prices/Valuation.aspx?deriv=33896&plate=84&issue=0

3.0si: http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/used-prices/Valuation.aspx?deriv=33049&plate=85&issue=0

Both based on an '07 car.

3.0l si has the M seats by the way. :wink:

Don't forget though. MPG, running costs, and general day to day do not figure in the process for M cars!! You buy an M car with your heart, not your head!!! :P I bought a John Cooper Works MINI Cooper S as my last car.
Very quick car on the road (actually I don't think a Z4 would leave one of of those very easily, if not at all!) but running costs, MPG, insurance, road tax, were almost the same as the Z4 I have now!! I bought it because I wanted the top performance version of the MINI. :D
 
alkypete said:
Thanks for all the info so far. From what I can tell you can get 350 miles from a tank on the 3.0 and just under 200 on the 3.2 is that right?
Click to expand...

I get about 290-320 from a tank on a good trip. Less when thrashing about.

Breaker said:
Not a lot in residuals really. 3.0si comes out a bit better actually.
Click to expand...

I was looking at a 56 3.0Si and a 56 M, which was £4k more. The quotes I got gave a final balloon on the 3.0 that was just over half that on the M, making it £22 more expensive per month. I won't keep it more than two years anyway so its academic! I seriously had to consider the 3.0 because its much smoother in 'normal' driving, but the above combined with everything I listed made me think balls to it, just get the M...you are right, if economy is vital buy a 335D

:)
 
For what it's worth, I've been driving VERY carefully for the last two weeks (since I reset the computer) in my 3.0 and with lots of short journeys, very gentle acceleration and no speeding I'm currently averaging 35MPG. No fun, I can assure you!
 
Hi Pete - I was in exactly the same situation as you until a few weeks ago, when I bought myself an M Coupe (the 3.2). In my case, the 2 big desirabilities of the 3.0si were the mpg and lower tax band. The trouble was that I found the 3.0 to be nowhere near as involving as the RX-8 PZ that I had previously - the electric steering is much more numb, and the ride felt a bit floaty. Having said that, the PZ version of the RX-8 had Prodrive-tuned suspension fitted that was (according to my passengers) mega-hard but felt fine to me. The new suspension would have also added a bit more weight and feel to the steering too, so I guess it was a very 'extreme' car to come from. I'm sure in the grand scheme of things (and had I been coming from a more 'balanced' car) that the steering's fine, but it felt like a big step backwards from what I wanted. The M on the other hand matches the RX-8 for feel, yet had lovely added weight and the chunky wheel that make it feel truly like a sports car (the 3.0si Sport also has the chunky wheel). Brilliantly, the car's noticably much more comfy than the RX-8 (no runflats, like the RX-8), yet I've not seen any more body roll from it. See mikedav's first post for pretty much everything that sold the M to me over the 3.0. The other thing I noticed with other cars is that i'd become used to the RX-8's engine, or more specifically, the 9000rpm redline. Cars like the new TT and the 3.0 Z4 seemed to run out of revs far too quickly at 7k, whereas the M's 8200rpm redline is near enough to make no difference, given the bucketload of extra performance it gives over the RX. It's amazing just how useful a large rev band is - you use your available power to get you going during an overtake, but it also often means that you don't need to snag another gear half-way past. As with all cars, a lot of it depends on you and your take on the trim levels. You could view the 3.0 as a sports car that has the same underpinnings as the M yet with the advantages of lower CO2, tax and buying price, or you could see it as a fairly big step down from the M what with it's missing LSD, less attractive front/rear bumpers, etc that feels like it was originally the M but then 'chopped down' to meet a price point. To me, it felt like the latter - that I'd be missing out on the M's kit, rather than feeling like I had much of it for less cost.

Either way, they're both brilliant cars, and you've definately chosen the right model to be looking at. I was amazed at how quickly my choices narrowed to the Z4 once I started looking.
 
As someone who faced the same choice I can tell you: If you preferred the M Coupe, that's the car you should buy. Personally I thought the M was a bit much for daily driving - harsh on the bumps but brutally quick. Fun, but I preferred the somewhat easier to get along with 3.0si. Even so I've occasionally wished I'd jumped on the M (though when I fill up after 400 miles on each tank I more frequently thank myself for not doing so).

I think though, that if I'd really wanted the M and convinced myself to buy the 3.0 anyway I'd have spent the ensuing year regretting my choice. Life's too short. If the M is really what you want then it's the car you should get.
 
vachss has just summed-up what I was trying to say in far fewer words :? :wink:

If you want the M, but think there might be a 'way out' where you can get better mpg and CO2 for little sacrifice, don't do it: you'll spend the rest of time wishing you had those missing features.
If, on the other hand, you see the 3.0si as a fantastic sports car that does without things you barely care about, with good mpg and CO2 that's perhaps more suited to everyday driving (even because it has a bit less power to keep under control), then that's the scenario in which it becomes a proper contender.
 
I had went through the same comparisons on this side of the Atlantic, and just couldn't afford the M. Ended up purchasing a saphire black 3.0si coupe with premium package, sport package, and M sport heated seats. Paid about $40,000 out the door vs $52,000 for an M. Plus with gasoline approaching $4.00 per gallon, my 23mpg is much appreciated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom