z4m , whats the actual weight??
- Thread starter Beedub
- Start date
Roughly I think the savings go something like...mr wilks said:
20 kg for my carbon bucket, maybe a bit more. Only 1 mind.
20kg for the wheels
10kg for the brakes
20kg on the back boxes
7-10 on the battery
Maybe 5 on the airbox
5 on the rear control arms
Perhaps 2 or 3 on some of the rear trim removed.
The 1380 figure I got was without some of those mods, when I next get the chance I want to weigh it on the same scales that dave did for his unusually it seems lardy cab.
The z4m roadster trunk panel is insanely heavy, that panel alone re-created in carbon would save hugely..... i removed mine to get some broken clip that was rattling in the lid and honestly, we are talking 40-50kg with the complete lid with the lock as it sits on the car.... Bmw really should have made it from a lighter material like the hood.
On a side note this thing felt absolutely wicked on the road again, so involving had a real blast.
On a side note this thing felt absolutely wicked on the road again, so involving had a real blast.
john-e89 said:
Most stats that I can find quote it at 1405kg so I'm surprised you can 'really feel' the 30/40 kg difference.
No doubt you can feel that you're almost 80 hp down though I'm sure, boxster 2.7 is the same power and weight as a 3.0si basically.
www.carmagazine.co.uk/amp/car-reviews/porsche/porsche-boxster-27-manual-2015-review/
www.ultimatespecs.com/car-specs/Porsche/69014/Porsche-Boxster-(981)-27.html/amp
Beedub said:
It does!
2.7 manual comes in at 1,330kg - 1,396kg kerb weight depending on equipment.
TomK is correct @ 1405kg But that’s with a 75kg driver and baggage share.
Car feels so light, 265bhp is just right imho, I didn’t want any more, I wanted to drive this car, feel and use the chassis rather than outright grunt. It’s so nimble and precise. And yes I will try and get it weighed.
Anyway my honest opinion is the M roady is too crashy and skittish with hopeless seats for such a performance car, especially when the same era E46 had adjustable bolsters and lumbar as options. No matter, you can swap seats. But having had an old 986 for a year I knew the Boxsters handling and yearned to return to it. Even with aftermarket suspension can you really replicate the Boxsters chassis? The 981 is perfect imho, and power has nothing to do with it, if I wanted grunt I would have bought an S, but I wanted a pure sports car that i could use lots of the power with the brilliant chassis and still have a modern comfortable car you can use every day. Even on 20” wheels it’s utterly sublime, soaks up the rough and handles like nothing else this side of a stripped out track or track inspired road car. The 2.7 has plenty of shove, get it past 4K, which is very easy! and it flies in sport mode and sounds awesome.
Bottom line for me is the 981 is a better car in every respect than the M, I can’t think of anything I like more about the BM, HOWEVER, the rub is the the Porkster has cost twice what I paid for the M, so to me the Z4M remains a performance car bargain, it’s brilliant, and I’m sure can be fettled to be so much better than standard for a hell of a lot less than a 981 costs. You pays your money and takes your choice.
Bottom line for me is the 981 is a better car in every respect than the M, I can’t think of anything I like more about the BM, HOWEVER, the rub is the the Porkster has cost twice what I paid for the M, so to me the Z4M remains a performance car bargain, it’s brilliant, and I’m sure can be fettled to be so much better than standard for a hell of a lot less than a 981 costs. You pays your money and takes your choice.
I have thanks, actually only the s not your one.john-e89 said:
I don't think it was me making it into a contest about which car is better, that mantle seems to have been taken on by you in your last post...
I was mearly commenting on how I was surprised you could feel the weight difference, I've taken over 80kg out of mine and really don't think I would be able to notice back to back, I just know it goes faster round a track.john-e89 said:
TomK said:
I don’t track my cars, also I don’t care one jot about which car is faster, as I’ve said I bought the 981 for its handling prowess and weight feel, which to me is far lighter than an E85, be that a 3.0si or an M, all cars I’ve owned. Strange how you’ve just highlighted my quote that the 981 is a better car than the M and not the reason why or price difference or that I think the M is a performance bargain.
Again, bottom line is I think the 981 has a much better chassis than an M, feels lighter, and that’s the reason for my comment. I commented on it not being a contest to diffuse anything potentially that might arise.
Just my opinion.
john-e89 said:
Glad your enjoying it man!!! id LOVE a GTS to run as a daily, i think they really hit the spot with those. I also agree on the stock z4m seats which LOOK fantastic but really dont hold you at all luckily this can be easily changed out... Main thing is youve ditched a car you were happy with but got one your now Over the moon with, does it get any better ??? Also for some of things your clearly enjoying about your Porka you really should get a drive in the new alpine it may steal you away , i think its perfect for so many of us z4m owners.
john-e89 said:
We seem to be going round in circles here! I don't think anyone in their right mind would say a Z4M chassis is as well balanced as a boxster/cayman, I certainly didn't. I was commenting on your point that you could 'feel' the weight difference, imho you are confusing weight with balance, a mid engined car is always going to 'feel' lighter on turn in at least due to not having the donkey at the front.
I didn't highlight your justified opinion about the relative bargain in performance stakes the Z4M is because it doesn't really have anything to do with the discussion topic, there is no 'contest' going on here as far as I am concerned, both great cars for different reasons.