Z4M with 120k miles for $16.75k or 3.0si with 65k miles for $13k

[Mainzer05]

Having a bit of a dilemma.

I've been in the market for a clean manual e85 3.0si for the past several weeks and managed to find a super clean one with 65k miles in black (but sadly without sport seats) about 15 hours from me for $13k. However, I also managed to stumble upon an imola red Z4M roadster with a stellar service history with 120k miles. It's about 8 hours from me and near my gf's parents so it would be easy to get. The road bearings haven't been done yet, so I was able to get him to go down to $16.75k.

Now I'm torn on which is the better choice. Obviously ignoring price and mileage, the M is the obvious choice as the better car and can still be driven at 8/10ths relatively legally, but then everyone describes the 3.0si as an absolute sweetheart with just the right amount of power to drive 10/10ths and the N52 as a bit more bulletproof than the S54. I have more than enough money to buy both and to do the rod bearings if I go with the M or upgrade the seats if I go with the 3.0si, but is an M with twice as many miles and for $4k more a better choice than the 3.0si? I guess the ultimate difference is the market for each, since I can afford both. Basically, if I own the M for 3 years and then sell it with 150k miles (hoping I'll love it so much I won't sell it that soon), would the resale value be better than the 3.0si's in 3 years and at that point 105k miles? Basically the real cost to own calculation. If it seems like I would lose less on an M with 150k miles than a 3.0si with 105k miles (again, not necessarily planning to sell but a cost of ownership), then I would probably go with the M, but I can't tell if the $16.75k price tag positions me well or not. Is 120k miles a lot for an S54 after the rod bearings are done that nobody would wanna touch if in several years for resale? I don't think I'd be upset with the experience of the 3.0si at all, but then an M would be all the better. The red is also much prettier than the black imo.

Thanks! Need to decide soon before either get bought up so appreciate your thoughts. I guess at the end of the day for me it doesn't come down to experience, I'd love both, but rather better value for money and/or longevity of the engine at their respective mileages.

 

[tomscott]

Ive had 2 Z4Ms and love them.

You are correct the 3.0SI is 80% at about 50% the cost to run.

Reason why there is so much convo here in the UK is the tax is so much higher it's £695 per year and the 3.0 is half the price, also the M needs a lot more service attention that costs more. That being said I have an imola Z4M and ive spent 5k in the last 4 years on it in maintenance mine has 80k on it. They are spendy cars and that's why the 3.0 is saught after.

Servicing and parts is expensive, inspection 1+2 on the Z4m is expensive then there are other things to consider they are old so there will be wear items that need sorting obvious ones are - bearings, suspension, engine and gearbox mounts, vanos. Those together will probably be £3k+ to sort and at 125k will probably all need doing. Mines an 06 and the dampers are well past their best you can feel the mounts are past their best too as there is a touch of drive train movement under acceleration.

Other service items like disk and pads are £500 an axel.

Its really important to find one that is one the good side of the service pattern to reduce the amount of money you need to spend or like me you could end up spending a lot quite quickly. 16.5k could be well over 20 before you know it, as long as your prepared then it will be fine.

That being said the 3.0 needs all the same things but the difference is the cost is literally 50%. another notable things for the 3.0 is the water pump worth getting that done.

Regardless of cost you should try and test drive both with more local cars. Those distances are massive to go and see to then be disappointed. The M is also quite a marmite car you love them or don't. There are quite a few quirks with the M like the gearbox is a little notchy and takes a bit of getting used to, its quite skittish over uneven surfaces (easily solved with a better suspension kit), its also a bit of a handful which is the reason so many people like them but also equally dislike them, its like an axe murderer just wants to put you through a hedge backwards. It's so unlike a lot of 2 seaters on the market today, for example the Boxster is very compliant everywhere that the Z feels quite unwieldy but again that's why they are so good imo. I bought a Boxster in-between my 2 Z4Ms and was a bit disappointed with it.

Its worth trying one out first.

Once you get past the cost perspective in my opinion there is little comparison that 20% is huge. You get so much more in the M all the nice visual differences like the body kit, quad exhausts, seats and obviously the S54 is just a masterpiece the induction in the roadster is just addictive. Its just a great engine and one everyone should experience.

 

[Mr Tidy]

I've had two 3.0Si Coupes and have had my Z4MC since 2019, and would agree with what Tom has said about the Si being 80% of the car for 50% of the money.

Running costs are always going to be significantly higher for the M given the additional service items like valve clearances at every other service, and M specific parts always attract the M tax. 120K miles on an M would be a real issue here in the UK but doesn't seem to be so much of one in most other markets - I'm guessing you are in the USA where it seems quite normal for a car that age.

Your total cost to own is always going to be higher with the M because of that.

The M was an itch I just had to scratch while I could but I went into it with my eyes open and still love it. The higher running costs are a price I'm prepared to pay for that M experience - only you know if it's a price you would be willing to pay!

 

[MarshMA10]

I had a brilliant condition 3.0si e85 for about 10 months in Scotland, and loved it as a cruiser bit of fun. But as an out and out sports car for fast road or track days it’s not the one. It’s not particularly fast really—the gear change is a little bit woolly, the handling is OK rather than excellent, the steering is very electronic… the noise is great though.

I’ve driven an M coupe a few times and it’s a much sharper car if you want sharpness, the steering being the biggest difference for me I felt. I wanted something cheaper, that I wouldn’t worry anboht GF driving, and that would be less hassle, so the e85 was bang on for me. I think the use cases for each car are quite different!

Good luck in your search and definitely drive both options.