Z4 3.0si coupe review

[mhughett]

I ran across this tonight. It was done a couple of months ago and it appears that the car has been sold. It is the same color and year as mine so I found it very interesting. I know that most of the attention is paid to the "M" cars on this board but this reviewer actually had a lot of positive things to say when comparing this car to the M version. M owners--please don't dis the video just because the guy is trying to sell his car. I thought he made a lot of very valid points about the car that sometimes get lost in a of the "M-thusiasm for the other version.

[dekaliber]

I don't miss the 3.0si, but it definitely holds its own compared to the M. I found it definitely more suitable as a daily driver, especially since I do lots of in-town driving. The torque from the N52 engine is usable very early on in the RPM range, and to a point, does feel a bit quicker if the the RPMs are kept low. The M really doesn't like to be driven slowly, and the transmission and engine protest accordingly. As a result, it's all too easy to find myself 20+ over the speed limit almost regardless of where I am. When I do get to hustle it around a little though, there's a much wider grin on my face.

Maybe it's because I got used to it, but I actually found the exhaust note a bit more pleasant on the 3.0si -- the M has a certain brashness about it that is also nice, albeit in a very different way.

Performance aside, the subtle styling details that separate the M is one of the things that really make the car. It just looks so perfect.

[Huz-Z]

My 3.0si roadster is happy as a pig in poop cruising the highway at 80 or 90 mph. 60 seems rediculously slow in it actually. There is no doubt that the M provides the most extreme experience in these cars, but the si hits a sweet spot for me.

Its no slouch as this article will confirm:

http://www.auto123.com/en/bmw/z4/200...00&artid=90628

When an experienced reviewer says a car's passing power "is frankly startling", well I get the idea that he was impressed.

The Z4M is a truly great car. And its sister, the Z4 3.0si bears a strong family resemblance!

[SCHMOUPE]

better question is how much does lets say an 07 SI coupe go for at this point? (I know the M's go for low 30's)

[mhughett]

I think the range for the 3.0si is $24k-$28k while the range for the M is $28-$34k. You will always find people asking more for both types of cars and for CPO's with very low mileage, they may be worth a little more.

The thing about the 3.0si is that I think more people use them for daily drivers than the M and you will find that many of them have higher mileage. I just ran into a friend at my golf club last night that just bought a 2007 3.0si coupe in January and it now has 64k miles on it.

[3002 tii]

Originally Posted by shakib

better question is how much does lets say an 07 SI coupe go for at this point? (I know the M's go for low 30's)

the buyback price on my then leased 07 si coupe with full options with 27k miles was 27.9k. i talked them down to 25.9 and bought it back. supposedly they were barely making anything at that point, this was not certified btw.

[Hawkeye]

I was offered 17-19K trade in on my 07 si Coupe with 44K miles. Needless to say I didn't even go in to see the M Coupe I was looking at.

[vachss]

Originally Posted by mhughett

The thing about the 3.0si is that I think more people use them for daily drivers than the M and you will find that many of them have higher mileage. I just ran into a friend at my golf club last night that just bought a 2007 3.0si coupe in January and it now has 64k miles on it.

Completely agree. Knowing I was going to commute the car and put on a bunch of miles was one of the reasons I didn't go for the M. 2.5 years after buying it new I'm at 49,880 - should go out of warrantee this weekend...

[dekaliber]

I got $24K as a trade for my 3.0si coupe with 15K miles. Identical specs to Hawkeye's car otherwise without the aftermarket parts. This was fully $2-3K more than I was quoted by two BMW dealers and Carmax, and since I only pay tax on the portion over the trade in IL, I considered it a pretty good deal.

Some semi-recent Manheim data for your benefit:

2007 Z4 3.0si
Date Auction Sale Type Price Odometer Cond Color Eng Trans In Sample
3/25/10 RIVRSIDE Lease $22,750 28,891 Avg SLVRGRY 6G A Yes
3/25/10 RIVRSIDE Lease $23,250 32,978 Avg JET BLAC 6G A Yes
3/31/10 ATLANTA Lease $25,000 14,398 Above BLACK 6G A Yes
3/31/10 BAY CITI Lease $25,500 18,747 Above BLACK SA 6G A Yes
3/31/10 ALOHA Lease $21,000 25,249 Below WHITE 6G A Yes
3/31/10 BAY CITI Lease $22,000 26,817 Avg BLACK SA 6G A Yes
3/31/10 BAY CITI Lease $22,000 34,011 Avg BLACK SA 6G 6 Yes
3/31/10 BAY CITI Lease $20,750 37,830 Below MONACO B 6G 6 Yes
3/31/10 ATLANTA Regular $19,750 63,193 Below BLACK 6G 6 Yes
4/6/10 OHIO Lease $24,250 27,844 Avg JET BLAC 6G 6 Yes
4/6/10 OHIO Lease $23,750 35,349 Avg JETBLK 6G 6 Yes
4/7/10 W PALM Lease $23,200 26,770 Avg TITANIUM 6G A Yes
4/7/10 W PALM Lease $21,800 37,994 Avg STRATUS 6G A Yes
4/8/10 W PALM Regular $22,300 36,230 Avg SILVER 6G A Yes
4/8/10 RIVRSIDE Lease $23,000 49,129 Avg ALPINE W 6G A No
4/16/10 MANHEIM Regular $26,900 25,988 Above Black 6G A No
4/20/10 FAAO Lease $26,600 6,394 Above JET BLAC 6G 6 Yes
4/22/10 RIVRSIDE Lease $21,750 34,784 Avg BLACK SA 6G 6 Yes
4/22/10 DARLNTON Regular $23,000 36,287 Avg SILVER 6G A Yes
4/28/10 BAY CITI Lease $27,250 4,718 Above TITANIUM 6G A Yes
4/28/10 BAY CITI Lease $23,250 30,737 AVG ALPINE W 6G A Yes
4/29/10 W PALM Regular $20,400 44,961 Below SILVER 6G A Yes


2007 Z4 M
Date Auction Sale Type Price Odometer Cond Color Eng Trans In Sample
3/26/10 MANHEIM Regular $28,250 17140 Avg >LACK 6G 6 Yes
3/31/10 MINNEAP Regular $29,500 18215 Above GRAY 6G 6 Yes
3/31/10 BAY CITI Lease $27,500 19940 Avg IMOLA RE 6G 6 Yes
3/31/10 ATLANTA Lease $25,800 23136 Avg BLK SAPH 6G 6 Yes
4/16/10 NEVADA Lease $26,250 31970 Avg BLACK SA 6G 6 Yes
4/15/10 MANHEIM Lease $25,250 33664 Avg BLKSAPPH 6G 6 Yes
4/21/10 MILWAUKE Lease $29,250 37418 Above BLACK SA 6G 6 No
4/15/10 MANHEIM Lease $24,000 52516 Below BLKSAPPH 6G 6 Yes
4/8/10 RIVRSIDE Lease $24,000 55536 Below BLACK SA 6G 6 Yes

Most of the Ms selling at dealers below $30K either had high mileage, an accident record, spotty service, or cosmetic issues. You can occasionally find a good deal from a private seller here. I was able to talk to a private sale in Chicago down to $28K for a car with 20K miles, and I think the car was later relisted by a dealer for $30K (he ended up trading it in). If you weren't too picky about the options (no nav, no extended leather), it would have been a pretty good deal.

Most BMW dealers I dealt with weren't willing to go below $31-32K for a 07 M with around or under 20K miles. With CPO I was looking at between $33 and $35K.

[chickdr]

Does anyone have a graph showing the hp/torque curves of the 3.0si and M motors overlaid? I see these kind of discussions all the time and it would be nice to see some facts about the matter. The 3.0si is of course about 200lbs lighter which should make for a quicker launch, but the 3.2 has 262ft-lbs at 4900rpm which should equate to more than the 220 ft-lb at 2750rpm where the si peaks. I have actually seen this guys you tube ads previously and he sticks to this idea of the si being quicker than the M around town(i.e. non track use). The numbers don't seem to support it though. I would certainly say however, the 3.0si automatic I test drove before deciding on the M was amazingly flexible driving around town and could not be caught off guard. It is interesting how often this topic comes up

[Erhan]

Originally Posted by chickdr

but the 3.2 has 262ft-lbs at 4900rpm which should equate to more than the 220 ft-lb at 2750rpm where the si peaks.

Well, as far as I remember, the S54 gives 80% of its peak torque starting from 2000rpm. So 262*0.8=210. Which is almost equal to 3.0si 's peak torque. (= at 2000rpm, the 3.0si will most likely have less torque than M)

Since they use the same transmission, I'd assume gear ratios are same too. What about the diff? Are the ratios same between 3.0si and M?

[Incompatible]

Originally Posted by erhanh

.... What about the diff? Are the ratios same between 3.0si and M?

I don't have info on the M diffs. The following was posted by Ron Stygar in response to another question. I don't know why BMW used two different ratios between the manual roadster and coupe while the same for the auto.

3.0si Roadster
M = 3.23:1
A = 3.64:1

3.0si Coupe
M = 3.46:1
A = 3.64:1

[chickdr]

Originally Posted by erhanh

Well, as far as I remember, the S54 gives 80% of its peak torque starting from 2000rpm. So 262*0.8=210. Which is almost equal to 3.0si 's peak torque. (= at 2000rpm, the 3.0si will most likely have less torque than M)

This is what I thought I had read before, but could not find the data today. These discussions remind me of Miata.net where they are always comparing the S2000 and Miata - saying the S2K is down on torque at low rpms(as if the MX-5 is such a torque monster....) I guess the grass is always greener and people want to justify their decisions on a choice of car(or trim level). It would certainly be neat to see an overlay of the hp/torque curves of the 2 engines

As to the gear ratios. For the M they are as follows: 4.35 (1), 2.50 (2), 1.66 (3), 1.23 (4), 1.00 (5), 0.85 (6). This is mated to a 3.62:1 final drive with M Variable Differential Lock.

[GP20]

Originally Posted by erhanh

Well, as far as I remember, the S54 gives 80% of its peak torque starting from 2000rpm. So 262*0.8=210. Which is almost equal to 3.0si 's peak torque. (= at 2000rpm, the 3.0si will most likely have less torque than M)

Since they use the same transmission, I'd assume gear ratios are same too. What about the diff? Are the ratios same between 3.0si and M?

Gear ratios are different. The M's have 3.62 versus the 3.46 on the 3.0Si coupe. So that's another rouhgly 4.6% of advantage for the Z4M. But of course the Z4M is also ~120lbs heavier and have taller tires.

Having owned 2 Z4's and 2 Z4M's, even if they had the exact same power and gearing, I'd buy the Z4M just for the hydraulic steering alone (the M's much sexier styling doesn't hurt either). The regular Z4's steering feels too numb. Anyone who thinks the 3.0Si has sharp steering needs to go test-drive a Porsche; the Z4M's steering is still nowhere near as good but is pretty much as close as it gets to a Porsche's.

The 3.0Si has adequate straight-line power. But the M is more about just straight-line power. Besides, at the end of the day we all know that there's only 1 reason anyone buys a 3.0Si coupe as opposed to an M-coupe

[vachss]

Originally Posted by GP20

Besides, at the end of the day we all know that there's only 1 reason anyone buys a 3.0Si coupe as opposed to an M-coupe

Do tell. I've always wanted to know what my one reason might have been...

[Erhan]

Originally Posted by chickdr

This is what I thought I had read before, but could not find the data today.

Found this for an M3 (same engine, S54B32):



The torque at 2000rpm is 80% the peak...

[vachss]

Well, if you don't mind different units and uncorrected wheel hp, here's one of mine on a 3.0si from last week...

Way flatter torque curve than the M with a peak way lower.




and here's a link to some Z4M dynos from Bimmerfest
http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/sho...highlight=dyno
- different dyno, different day so not directly comparable, but a good indicator of the relative shape of the power curves.

[mhughett]

Originally Posted by GP20

Besides, at the end of the day we all know that there's only 1 reason anyone buys a 3.0Si coupe as opposed to an M-coupe

For me, it was primarily because the lack of trunk space on the M wouldn't allow both my golf clubs and my electric push cart (due to the battery/mobility kit being in the way) to fit together in the back.

Something tells me that wasn't what GP was thinking of.

[chickdr]

Originally Posted by vachss

Well, if you don't mind different units and uncorrected wheel hp, here's one of mine on a 3.0si from last week...
Way flatter torque curve than the M with a peak way lower.
- different dyno, different day so not directly comparable, but a good indicator of the relative shape of the power curves.

I don't know. The 3.2 is lower at 2000rpms, but by 2500 it is the same as the si and then it gets stronger from there. The M motor isn't exactly "peaky".

[M_Six]

I'm still amazed at the power of my 3.0si. Especially after trudging along in my 3.0 X5 for a few days. I just wish it had the ///M steering wheel. If the weather permits, I may test drive an '07 ///MR tomorrow when my si goes in for service. With the really shitty roads here, I'm not sure the ///M will suit as a DD. Concrete roads and expansion joints suck.

[aerobod]

Originally Posted by vachss

Way flatter torque curve than the M with a peak way lower.

With the extra grip capabilities of the ///M diff, it is significantly quicker off the line than the Z4 3.0Si. Even with 275 wide rear tyres, you can still break traction with the Z4M in first gear. At low speeds in first and second gear, traction as opposed to torque is more the issue with the ///M.

Below 2000RPM in 3rd or higher gear may be one place where the 3.0Si may be very slightly faster, but flooring the Z4M at those engine speeds would be abusive to the big-end bearings (due to it being an over-square cylinder design), so it shouldn't be in that rev range in a higher gear anyway.

[vachss]

Just to be clear: I'm not saying the 3.0si is faster than the M (or even close). Just that the torque is much more constant over a broad rpm range. In practice this means that it's not as necessary to shift the si all the time to keep it in its power band - which makes the car a bit less of a chore in day to day driving around town - and perhaps correspondingly somewhat less thrilling when there's room to open it up.

The peakier torque curve of the M is actually much more like a traditional sports car's power delivery. The "set it and forget it" nearly constant torque from 2K - 6K of the si actually felt pretty alien to me when I first drove it, but is often welcome in a daily driver.