z4M to E93 m3
- Thread starter afennell
- Start date
The S65 and the S54 produce 80% of their torque from 1800-2000rpm when you consider the Z4MR is 1450kg and the coupe 1465kg vs 1580kg for the E92.
The S65 has 400nm vs 365nm on the S54.
The E46 M3 on the other hand is 1570kg so in the comparison the E92 is quicker quicker than the E46 and without the math the Z might just take it but real world... probably not a huge difference.
There’s a lot of phycology in it too, the Z4M feels tiny to me, same way the E46 felt quick gokart, the E92 just felt big and the driving position is higher, it was also quieter inside and your quite removed so the speed doesn’t feel quite like it does in the other two which to me is probably the difference. The e92 also feels quite linear until you hit 6k and you get that top end pep. But similarly you get a similar feeling with the S54 higher up but the E46 and E85/6 felt more connected.
I think the takeaway is that it’s a real shame the E9X was the only car to get that engine. I never really liked the E92 much apart from the V8 noise and it drank heavily over 20k it averaged 19mpg, the Z4Mc over the same sort of driving got 27mpg over 20k.
Not that it really matters but putting £80 in and getting under 250 miles was a bit of a pain.
Another thing to throw into the mix is the DCT, I haven’t driven one but they will make the car feel quicker, they change so quick that it makes the car feel like it has more torque as it’s always in the right rev band. My dads 991 PDK is incredible although not as involving but makes that car feel far quicker than it is.
The S65 has 400nm vs 365nm on the S54.
The E46 M3 on the other hand is 1570kg so in the comparison the E92 is quicker quicker than the E46 and without the math the Z might just take it but real world... probably not a huge difference.
There’s a lot of phycology in it too, the Z4M feels tiny to me, same way the E46 felt quick gokart, the E92 just felt big and the driving position is higher, it was also quieter inside and your quite removed so the speed doesn’t feel quite like it does in the other two which to me is probably the difference. The e92 also feels quite linear until you hit 6k and you get that top end pep. But similarly you get a similar feeling with the S54 higher up but the E46 and E85/6 felt more connected.
I think the takeaway is that it’s a real shame the E9X was the only car to get that engine. I never really liked the E92 much apart from the V8 noise and it drank heavily over 20k it averaged 19mpg, the Z4Mc over the same sort of driving got 27mpg over 20k.
Not that it really matters but putting £80 in and getting under 250 miles was a bit of a pain.
Another thing to throw into the mix is the DCT, I haven’t driven one but they will make the car feel quicker, they change so quick that it makes the car feel like it has more torque as it’s always in the right rev band. My dads 991 PDK is incredible although not as involving but makes that car feel far quicker than it is.
I enjoyed reading your post.tomscott said:
You are spot on with this bit too. I never considered the DCT in mine because I prefer 3 pedals but for me the S65 engine really suits the DCT. I think that the DCT gets the best from the engine and as you say it makes it feel that bit more torquey...you can also flick down the gears much quicker too.
Z4M-2006 said:R60BBA said:Z4M-2006 said:
1. £25,000 for an M4 isn’t expensive, considering it was a £60,000 car brand new.
2. It’s more financially viable to pay for an extended warranty than to chance it and end up with big bills for the aforementioned failures.
3. Taking out a warranty doesn’t make one a ‘brainwashed fanboy’ it’s a way of protecting oneself from financial detriment.
4. It’s a repmobile that is faster than your Z4M on the Nurburgring
5. ‘High failure’ is a hyperbolic claim based on what evidence exactly? Cross reference production numbers with failures and I’m sure you’ll find the ‘failure’ rate is reasonably low.
6. I’m pretty sure a low mileage M4 would cost a lot less to run than a 10 year old E9X M3 which will need rod bearings, throttle actuators, subframe rust, bushes and brakes attended to. Oh and cheaper than any Ferrari or Porsche for that matter either.
How many of your cars have extended warranty?
You say £25,000 isn’t expensive for an M4, when it’s a £60k new . Yea it’s £60-£70k for a 3 series coupe .. are you insane ???
The reason they lose half there value in 3 years is because they are grossly overpriced and the market corrects there value .
Paying £100-£200 a month to ensure your £60-£70k 3 yr old car doesn’t break is good financial sense??
Yea.... ok... if you say so... I think that’s absolute robbery and unjustifiable.
High failure rate ... this shouldn’t be happening at all in cars with low miles.. it’s an engineering disaster. I can accept failure rates when an engine is 100k into its life.. but not 10 or 20k.. it’s poor engineering at BMW’s end and penny pinching, pure and simple.
A newer car should be a lot cheaper to run shouldnt it than an older car ... What’s your point? Neither are great cars and I would suspect that over the years and miles they would cost similar..
The E9x M car at least has some longevity in its engine repairs.. ie, you know you should get the rod bearings and throttle actuators done at xxxxxx miles ....with the F series the engine, turbos etc can crap out at any time with no prior warning due to poor design. Age or mileage has no bearing on when a colossal bill is heading your way.
I have owned Porsche’s in warranty ... fortunately they never went wrong and extended warranty was £650 a year ,costs buttons to run as a daily, service every 2 years and sold for more than I bought it for
Let that just sink in
Nothing to sink in.
Other than what a load of rubbish that isn’t worth my time sending a proper reply to.
I was considering an E93 M for the missus but decided on the the E93 335i M Sport DCT.
The N54 engine does have its well known problems of which we have one, turbo actuator, could be solenoid or vac pipe, solved by turn it off and turn it on.
It has enough low end torque to be fun around town and the M Sport exhaust has a lovely tone, especially in Sport mode.
We’ve had the car for about three years and it hasn’t cost a penny in repairs, the only thing we did was to ditch the runflats
It doesn’t have the kudos of the ///M or the feel but I’m happy with the decision.
The N54 engine does have its well known problems of which we have one, turbo actuator, could be solenoid or vac pipe, solved by turn it off and turn it on.
It has enough low end torque to be fun around town and the M Sport exhaust has a lovely tone, especially in Sport mode.
We’ve had the car for about three years and it hasn’t cost a penny in repairs, the only thing we did was to ditch the runflats
It doesn’t have the kudos of the ///M or the feel but I’m happy with the decision.
Z4M-2006 said:
People always seem to say that about the v8 - but when you stack it up
e9x m3: 295 lbs/ft
RS4: 317 lbs/ft
The audi weighs 200kg more.
When you compare it to a C63 there's a much bigger gap of course.
Plus the s65 is possibly the only way to get a 8,500rpm redline in a v8 this side of a ferrari
I'm a convert though as before proper seat time and some comparable roads, I never liked the idea of an e92. But the sharper turn-in and better body control, combined with bounding the v8 through the DCT on a nice technical road made me fall in love with the thing. With the competition pack thrown into the mix it was a treat. The Z4M felt like a middle point between the Boxster and the E92 which is no bad thing, best of both worlds
But that said, the e93 did feel notably more wobbly so I'm not sure I'd enjoy it quite as much
^ this was so much fun.