Z4M in Autocar Magazine

[Angelus666]

Sorry, my bad.... :|

 

[buzyg]

Looked last week didn't spot it. Will take another look this week.

 

[Angelus666]

35 cars....you'd guess they think that's not a lot, but then the haggling point at the end kind of suggests you can haggle because of the surplus available?

For reference a quick search on autotrader shows there are 73 porsche boxsters and caymans available within 5 miles of my location.

 

[Wondermike]

Sorry, my bad.... :|

No problem

Does make you wonder though, most Z4 articles seem to have errors and misquotes, which we pick up on, but are all reviews the same?

 

[Fishy Dave]

No, I don't think they copy each others articles on the whole, they all contain different errors

I have decided that it is the last one I will contribute to unless I am shown a proof so I can see what I'm putting my name to, as it's personally embarrassing. Last months BMW Car magazine has been the most accurate so far IMO.

 

[Beedub]

I got my copy today, it's a two page article with a few mistakes and misquotes, but generally it's positive at least.
The author of the piece has done some research himself and has added bits like recommending toughened bearing shells? I'd described to him how the rear centre brake lights can crack but still work, but the guide suggests checking the unit works. He also mentions my Z4 book (which I haven't finished yet) and that I'm an ARDS instructor which I was but didn't tell him about. I talked about the roof motor relocation and to contact the individuals on here that do it but somehow this got lost in translation and he recommended 'the clever people at the BMW Car Club'
He seems obsessed with the 35 currently for sale as if this is a lot when I told him it was nothing compared to the number of Boxster or Cayman for sale.
I told him the standard brakes are over servoed and more than strong enough for road use but are worth upgrading for track, I didn't say they 'can feel dead'. I could go on......

Sorry for the mistakes, but I'm happy that the M keeps getting press exposure anyway.

i don't know why but I'm really annoyed lol..... he seems to have just added BS for the sake of it, i know you would have given this guy the real facts , especially as you've used yours in anger so much, the standard brakes have never, ever felt dead they are bloody fantastic, i only changed mine due to the extra power and sprint usage i do.... The roof relocation thing is imo something id never do, they look messy again imo , keep the stock location and just be really proactive with the drain clearance. The ///M being a more niche car they seem to be garaged and overall its generally less of an issue on this model, the same problems still arise but generally the cars are kept dryer due to their "weekend Toy" type credentials.

Lots of press for this car recently and tbh its a tiny , relatively light 2 seater sports car, with a genuinely class s6 , manual box, excellent driving position and steering feel, a proper hydraulic rack.... whats not to love.... its ALREADY a classic in todays world for me and every chance i get i talk this car up, its absolutely deserved! I really get bothered by the fact that every article i read on the z4m is FULL of mistakes , literally all of them....

 

[nickw6666]

Hmmm - I read it and thought there were a number of inaccurate or shall we say slightly misleading comments.

I agree with the comments on this topic that focusing on 35 cars for sale in relation to it being positioned as a classic is a bit silly. There are hundreds of Boxsters / Caymans for sale as said, so 35 is a low number and funnily enough is more than I've seen for quite some time. There are quite a few Porsche 993/964 air-cooled cars for sale but does that affect their status, not at all as the overall numbers are still low same as the Z4M.

The Z4M Roadster and Coupe have their place and both have their benefits, and both are hard core driving cars. That said, by adding a permanent hard roof, the Coupe is twice as stiff as the Roadster (32000 Nm/degree v 14500 Nm/degree), so there can be no way that a Roadster can feel nearly as stiff as a Coupe when really pushing on such as on track, even though the Roadster is more than stiff enough. In standard form, the Coupe will be slightly faster around the Ring than a Roadster simply due to the rigidity and slightly stiffer suspension set up.

I say this not to create a Roadster v Coupe debate, which is pointless as one has clear obvious differences over the other and both are great, but to question the writer of this article for the way he has written some points. It's as if he is trying to create a case for the Roadster over the Coupe, which is nonsense of course as if you want open top experience you go for the Roadster, and if you want the permanent roof and coupe form and stiffer set up you go with the Coupe.

We are talking fine margins obviously here, but I think the writer has picked up on a comment and made a thing of it rather than spending word space covering more areas in relation to the car and market.

For a car magazine, I would have expected better and the contrast with the review on Pistonheads some time ago is quite stark.

It also worries me a little when they mention the changing of big end shells at 75K miles as a precaution. It's way to early to be putting that out into the mainstream. There are many M3's with S54 engines that have gone beyond 100K mileage with no issues at all. The S54 has proven very reliable and is not a Porsche M96/M97 with inbuilt design issues.

There are some good points but overall I would have thought the article could have been better written.

Fishy Dave - it's certainly no fault of yours!

 

[Fishy Dave]

The Z4M Roadster and Coupe have their place and both have their benefits, and both are hard core driving cars. That said, by adding a permanent hard roof, the Coupe is twice as stiff as the Roadster (32000 Nm/degree v 14500 Nm/degree), so there can be no way that a Roadster can feel nearly as stiff as a Coupe when really pushing on such as on track, even though the Roadster is more than stiff enough. In standard form, the Coupe will be slightly faster around the Ring than a Roadster simply due to the rigidity and slightly stiffer suspension set up.

I take responsibility for those comments. Not disputing the torsional figures, but I do stand by my feelings that I can't really tell the difference in chassis stiffness when driving on track. I can feel plenty of other differences when hopping from one to another but stiffness (oo-er) isn't one of them. It could be that the Roadster chassis is so stiff that to tell the difference between this and the Coupe requires a pro driver, stopwatch and a 12.9 mile circuit? When Tom and I have stopped cars (at four or five circuits now) our performance is comparable in both cars but the spec and geometry keeps changing so it is difficult to make exact chassis comparisons. I've owned other convertibles where chassis flex can be felt, but the Z4 isn't one of them. I did say 'it feels almost as stiff as the Coupe' in the article.
I would like to get a few of us together at a trackday next year and providing the driver takes responsibility for the well being of my car I'm happy for a Coupe driver to compare for themselves.

It's as if he is trying to create a case for the Roadster over the Coupe, which is nonsense of course as if you want open top experience you go for the Roadster, and if you want the permanent roof and coupe form and stiffer set up you go with the Coupe.

I think I probably was making a case for the Roadster, that it is as good as the Coupe, not better, not worse. Too often I have read how the M Coupe is the one to go for as an investment/track car/hardcore driving machine with the M Roadster being largely forgotten or considered the 'soft' option. This writer actually phoned me back after nearly an hours telephone call to clarify if the M Roadster was sort of like a standard Boxster whilst the M Coupe was a Cayman S equivalent?
It wound me up a bit and led me to mention the lower current purchase price of the Roadster, slightly less weight etc. As you say they are both hardcore driving machines, but Joe Public doesn't seem to know that.

You are right that it is very different from the Pistonheads guide. They had far more space and spoke to more owners in that one, with research covering many weeks. The Autocar writer does one of these articles every week and is limited to a couple of pages to list the things he thinks the average armchair reader/pub expert will want to read. I did politely offer to proof read the article but he declined.

It's difficult to know how to approach the rod bearing issue in an article like this. Very few people seem to have experienced the problem, but it is known and can strike at almost any mileage. How would you (I don't just mean you Nick) suggest it is mentioned without it seeming like a ticking time bomb?

Dave

 

[original guvnor]

It's interesting how we all have different views on the rigidity. I've driven Darren's Z4MR a few times and it is a lot less stiff than my Z4MC. I would say immediately noticeably so. That's not to its detriment - if anything I think the Z4MR is the nicer road car. The coupe is more fidgety and less comfortable. Both cars are pretty much stock too.

The Coupe is worth more simply because of three factors - First, it's rarer because there aren't thousands of E86's in non-M guise on the roads so it is nowhere near as ubiquitous as the roadster. Second, it's sort of seen as the M Coupe's younger brother and that is dragging values higher and 3) it is just prettier to look at to most people's eyes. When I say that I'm not saying the roadster is ugly (I owned one for many years) it's just not as attractive as the coupe is to look at. The fact that the coupe was also used as the BMW GT3 car of that era (albeit with a V8 engine in) won't have done it any harm either. Competition heritage can lead to higher values for the road cars they are based on.

Dave - I would write a letter to the Editor and see if they print it listing something of things you've mentioned in this thread.

 

[Fishy Dave]

The Coupe is worth more simply because of three factors - First, it's rarer because there aren't thousands of E86's in non-M guise on the roads so it is nowhere near as ubiquitous as the roadster. Second, it's sort of seen as the M Coupe's younger brother and that is dragging values higher and 3) it is just prettier to look at to most people's eyes. When I say that I'm not saying the roadster is ugly (I owned one for many years) it's just not as attractive as the coupe is to look at. The fact that the coupe was also used as the BMW GT3 car of that era (albeit with a V8 engine in) won't have done it any harm either. Competition heritage can lead to higher values for the road cars they are based on.

I completely agree.

As for writing a letter, I will try but I've been misquoted in magazines before and I don't think I've ever had a retraction or correction.

 

[bmwaddict]

I've driven Darren's Z4MR a few times and it is a lot less stiff than my Z4MC. I would say immediately noticeably so. That's not to its detriment - if anything I think the Z4MR is the nicer road car. The coupe is more fidgety and less comfortable.

Definitely agree with this after having been in both.

 

[Beedub]

if I'm honest i think the stiffness is the only point we cling onto as a difference because their is so little to distinguish these two... i had the choice to buy a new coupe or a new roadster ( both were sub 700 miles ) i drove both a length, really at length and not once was my choice of the roadster determined or not determined by its stiffness i just liked the roof off experience , just why id probably have an s2000 over the a coupe if their was one, ..... the z4m roadster has a higher rigidity figure than the e46 m3 coupe and lotus exige for gods sake, lol!!! its not even an argument... No one seems to mention either on most of the track test in the media the roadster was actually quicker as it was lighter !! honestly the choice is simply based on which floats your boat more imo.

Having spent ALOT of time on track with my car, and tracking my mates 3.,0si coupe, i really cant feel flex in the chassis, and i think alot of people are commenting on the slightly softer factory dampers and not the flex of the chassis but cant distinguish the difference of the two.... i have a solid track car setup suspension and the car is rock solid i have proven sprint track times, beating gt3s and high power evo's etc and the like, on a timed lap by quite a margin, time and time again.... All on cheapo nankang semi slicks.

Both are wonderful in my eyes and i don't get involved in the coupe is this or the roadster is this or doesnt have this or doesnt have that , its sooooooo insignificant, we all own fantastic sports cars.

i think we all forget the z4m roadster or coupe these cars were NEVER celebrated to be what we all feel they are, they were often named the runts of the litter..... The best reviews i read or watched of the z4m were always of the roadster, Top gear richard hammond piece, Fifth gear with jason plato and the fantastic article from evo where they placed it top against the boxster S , tuscan red rose and alpina RS.... I never once read a review where the coupe came out on-top in a test like this against its equivalent, the caymans S :wink:

even a recent back to back with the cayman gt4 which id guess is probably much stiffer again than the z4 coupe, a whole generation forward didn't outline a lack of stiffness in my z4 R, this isn't about being a biased owner its just not something thats an issue otherwise i wouldn't have brought the car.

i remember the marketing for the z4 at the time , they had a picture of the bare z4 chassis upside and quoted how the frame could manage twice its weight again .... very impressive!

 

[Beedub]

The Z4M Roadster and Coupe have their place and both have their benefits, and both are hard core driving cars. That said, by adding a permanent hard roof, the Coupe is twice as stiff as the Roadster (32000 Nm/degree v 14500 Nm/degree), so there can be no way that a Roadster can feel nearly as stiff as a Coupe when really pushing on such as on track, even though the Roadster is more than stiff enough. In standard form, the Coupe will be slightly faster around the Ring than a Roadster simply due to the rigidity and slightly stiffer suspension set up.

I take responsibility for those comments. Not disputing the torsional figures, but I do stand by my feelings that I can't really tell the difference in chassis stiffness when driving on track. I can feel plenty of other differences when hopping from one to another but stiffness (oo-er) isn't one of them. It could be that the Roadster chassis is so stiff that to tell the difference between this and the Coupe requires a pro driver, stopwatch and a 12.9 mile circuit? When Tom and I have stopped cars (at four or five circuits now) our performance is comparable in both cars but the spec and geometry keeps changing so it is difficult to make exact chassis comparisons. I've owned other convertibles where chassis flex can be felt, but the Z4 isn't one of them. I did say 'it feels almost as stiff as the Coupe' in the article.
I would like to get a few of us together at a trackday next year and providing the driver takes responsibility for the well being of my car I'm happy for a Coupe driver to compare for themselves.

It's as if he is trying to create a case for the Roadster over the Coupe, which is nonsense of course as if you want open top experience you go for the Roadster, and if you want the permanent roof and coupe form and stiffer set up you go with the Coupe.

I think I probably was making a case for the Roadster, that it is as good as the Coupe, not better, not worse. Too often I have read how the M Coupe is the one to go for as an investment/track car/hardcore driving machine with the M Roadster being largely forgotten or considered the 'soft' option. This writer actually phoned me back after nearly an hours telephone call to clarify if the M Roadster was sort of like a standard Boxster whilst the M Coupe was a Cayman S equivalent?
It wound me up a bit and led me to mention the lower current purchase price of the Roadster, slightly less weight etc. As you say they are both hardcore driving machines, but Joe Public doesn't seem to know that.

You are right that it is very different from the Pistonheads guide. They had far more space and spoke to more owners in that one, with research covering many weeks. The Autocar writer does one of these articles every week and is limited to a couple of pages to list the things he thinks the average armchair reader/pub expert will want to read. I did politely offer to proof read the article but he declined.

It's difficult to know how to approach the rod bearing issue in an article like this. Very few people seem to have experienced the problem, but it is known and can strike at almost any mileage. How would you (I don't just mean you Nick) suggest it is mentioned without it seeming like a ticking time bomb?

Dave

Even the rod bearing issue..... i mean have you seen the issues porsche have with their engines.... lol!!! this is nothing, s2000s.... they also have their hidden issues too, engine related!!! he s54 is a master piece for a mass production engine, with some really cool race tech still be used by the like of the Gt3 and f12 TDF to name a few! The solid valve train is a PITA to service and very expensive but we wont be seeing this type of stuff on your sub 50k cars anymore them days are GONE!

if i need to change my RBs for a grand at higher miles, no problem, if i need to address my vanos or head gasket , No problem, its a minor for such an engine, ill open mine up way before anything goes wrong and do some preventative work, these cars need looking after.

 

[TomK]

I've driven Darren's Z4MR a few times and it is a lot less stiff than my Z4MC. I would say immediately noticeably so. That's not to its detriment - if anything I think the Z4MR is the nicer road car. The coupe is more fidgety and less comfortable.

Definitely agree with this after having been in both.

The only times I've driven dave's wendy house and likewise him in my proper car has been on track. Perhaps on the road with potholes etc the differences are more noticeable, but on a smooth(ish) track at 9/10ths (not my car ) the roadster showed no signs of lacking stiffness relative to mine.

eta I'm pretty sure the Z4M roadster is considerably stiffer than the E46M3 and no one ever seems to complain about that thing flexing. This stiffness thing is a bit of a red herring imo.

 

[Beedub]

I've driven Darren's Z4MR a few times and it is a lot less stiff than my Z4MC. I would say immediately noticeably so. That's not to its detriment - if anything I think the Z4MR is the nicer road car. The coupe is more fidgety and less comfortable.

Definitely agree with this after having been in both.

The only times I've driven dave's wendy house and likewise him in my proper car has been on track. Perhaps on the road with potholes etc the differences are more noticeable, but on a smooth(ish) track at 9/10ths (not my car ) the roadster showed no signs of lacking stiffness relative to mine.

eta I'm pretty sure the Z4M roadster is considerably stiffer than the E46M3 and no one ever seems to complain about that thing flexing. This stiffness thing is a bit of a red herring imo.

it does..... so when i read constantly about the "flex" i usually know its because their is nothing else to say, lol..... imagine that, one of bmws most complete track models the e46 CSL, and the z4mR has a stiffer chassis, come on get outa here lol!!!! Pick which one looks best and enjoy the platform, but which ever you choose will need some suspension changes to realise what the car can truly do....

 

[Gazc]

I think the stiffness thing goes back to the Z3M which was very wobbly until the coupe came along. People who don't know any different think wrongly that the Z4M is the same.

 

[Woots]

I want one (again)

 

[Beedub]

I want one (again)

save up your beer tokens and buy mine! :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: everything is for sale at the right price , i think

 

[Woots]

I want one (again)

save up your beer tokens and buy mine! :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: everything is for sale at the right price , i think

Sadly I have the money but trying to save up a huge house deposit....boooooringgggg

Glad yours is doing well??

 

[Beedub]

I want one (again)

save up your beer tokens and buy mine! :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: everything is for sale at the right price , i think

Sadly I have the money but trying to save up a huge house deposit....boooooringgggg

Glad yours is doing well??

everything is well