Bridging the gap-Z4 Coupe vs Cayman

[vachss]

Originally Posted by epbrown

To answer your original post - I don't think you can get there from here.... The better steering feel is partly the result of the hydraulic steering, but largely due to the mid-engine layout taking a lot of weight off the front tires. Again, nothing you can do about that.

I just wanted to amplify a bit of what epbrown said about handling. The Z4 has excellent balance - almost exactly 50/50 on the F/R - but there's more to weight distribution than the location of the center of mass. Mid-engined cars have significantly lower moment of inertia (a measure of how far the weight is separated from the center of mass). As a result it just takes less effort to get them turning and to stop the rotation when desired. You can put sticky rubber on a Z4 and make it corner really well - and indeed I can corner at higher speed in my Z4 than I could in my old MR2 - but it just fells like it's "working harder" to do it.

The Cayman had this same kind of effortless feel in initiation and stopping of rotation that the MR2 did (as well as gobs more power - comparable to the Z4). As much as I love the Z4 I have to admit that I can't see it ever outhandling the Cayman.

[apexstrafer]

I'm not sure what we're even discussing at this point. Sounds like the guy just bought the wrong car for his needs, due to a lack of research on his part beforehand. Nothing at all wrong with the 3.0 coupe, but if you want that Porsche steering feel...get a Porsche.

[UncleScottie]

Originally Posted by apexstrafer

I'm not sure what we're even discussing at this point.

Correct, discussing the M's or Cayman's hydraulically assisted steering vs the Z4C3.0si's electrically assisted unit doesn't much sense. I wouldn't undertake such a swap. I would however, and still am, considering dumping the run-flats. Grappiness of the brakes is another area that could be addresses for reasonable effort and costs.

Forget the P-car comparison for the monent. BMW could have easily made the Z4C3.0si a better car with the tools in their own arsenal with little if any additional cost overall. Conventional tires, hydraulically assisted steering from the M coupe, and the brakes from the 135i, but BMW chose not to do so. For this I do considered the Z4C3.0si flawed. It is by no means a bad car, it just could have been better. Matter of fact, I think BMW's planning/marketing is flawed for pulling the plug on this car. If they had addressed the things I'm talking about, sales would have never been as slow as they were.

[pbdm4k]

The brakes from the 135i aren't that great... They look good, that's about it.

In regards to the Z4C being flawed, go compare the SLK market to other "luxury" roadsters...

You got the TT, the Z4, the 370Z, a few others... and the SLK... SLK dominates the market. BMW is going where the business is. Not where the ultimate driving machine is. They've lost their way. End of that.

At the end of the day. It's what puts money in their pockets. There just wasn't a sufficient market to justify keeping the model in the lineup the way it was.

As most of you can attest to, lots of you picked up your Z4M's at heavily discounted prices. It just wasn't a volume car they were going to make money on.

[Matty C]

Originally Posted by rc'Z

The M might be a better driving machine, but still looses it to the Porsche in the looks department.

You are right, the feminine looks of the Porsche are very appealing.

[CalRick]

What issues do you have with the 3.0si braking? Fade resistance? Initial bite? Torque output? Dusting? Cold bite? Noise? As others have mentioned, there is nothing inherently wonderful about the 135i brakes except that BMW added some marketing bling with "6 piston" and "Brembo" in their literature; they aren't markedly better (or worse) than most of the other BMW brakes.

A good resource to tap for your braking concerns is Dave Zeckhausen at http://store.zeckhausen.com/catalog/. Drop him a line and he can probably address your concerns better than any general online forum, whether the answer is a change of pad compound or a swap to a BBK. And you can get a modified CDV there, too, while you're at it.

Any manufacturer can make their cars better; indeed, one of the big criticisms of the Boxster/Caymen is that they are overly compromised so that they don't step on 911 sales.

There is no end to discussions about BMW (and BMWNA in particular) marketing and engineering decisions - runflat tires, electric steering, missing dipsticks, no hatchbacks in the US (ignoring the new 5 series GT - that's a GT, not a hatchback!) "lifetime" fluid fills, etc. etc. etc. Half or more of the letters in Roundel each month center around these issues. Bottom line is that they make their decisions based upon what they feel is best for them, and they will sink or swim based upon them. As with many things, they are slowly diluting their brand by moving more mass market. Also worth considering is that BMW is traditionally a maker of sports sedans, and sportscars are a sideline for them, while Porsche is first and foremost a sportscar company that has been branching out into other market segments.

[epbrown]

Originally Posted by UncleScottie

Forget the P-car comparison for the monent. BMW could have easily made the Z4C3.0si a better car with the tools in their own arsenal with little if any additional cost overall. Conventional tires, hydraulically assisted steering from the M coupe, and the brakes from the 135i, but BMW chose not to do so. For this I do considered the Z4C3.0si flawed.

I disagree, ironically. It's ironic because that's how I feel about the Z4M - the mods I've made to mine are how I feel the car should have come from the factory, and everything used has an OEM part number: the aerodynamic sideskirts to help further differentiate the M from the standard car, the 3.91 diff to add some pep while still preserving the precious 0-60 time spec, and CSL/ZCP wheels because they look nice and because the car is based on so much other E46 M3 Competiton Package/CSL hardware.

However, the 3.0si coupe was not meant to extend the performance of the range - it's supposed to be the exact same spec as the roadsters, and it is. Someone looking for more go, more edge, was supposed to go with the M, which was actually pretty easy for a while there - my M was only two grand more than a 3.0si for sale here.

The 3.0si is fine as-is - in fact, the press almost unanimously liked it more than the Z4MC.

[UncleScottie]

Originally Posted by epbrown

...However, the 3.0si coupe was not meant to extend the performance of the range - it's supposed to be the exact same spec as the roadsters, and it is. Someone looking for more go, more edge, was supposed to go with the M, which was actually pretty easy for a while there - my M was only two grand more than a 3.0si for sale here.

The 3.0si is fine as-is - in fact, the press almost unanimously liked it more than the Z4MC.

Which press are you talking about? Yes, the European press did seem to unanimously favor the base Z4C3.0si. Stating a less choppy ride with little, if any, compromise in handling. Unfortunately BMWNA and it's dealers saw fit to go with mostly Sport Package equipped cars here. Meaning they thought more buyers would want more "edge". IMHO that hurt sales by turning away buyers that would have otherwise bought the car if they had test driven the base car.

According to that European press, the combination of "sports suspension", 18" wheels, and run-flat tires gave the SP equipped Z4 coupe more edge, rough edge that is, than the M coupe, which they felt had a less choppy ride with it's conventional tires.

I can only assume the press you are referring to meant the base coupe.

[UncleScottie]

I glad this thread got such a decent response, however I was hoping for a few more possibilities for tweaking the Z4 besides the obvious switch to non-RFTs. Figured I'd compile a list of possible tweaks, cost them out, and then weigh against just buying something different like the Cayman.

Are there any reflashes for the steering assist mapping and/or hacks to have the "Sport" button change the steering assist mapping without changing throttle sensitivity?

[vachss]

Originally Posted by UncleScottie

Are there any reflashes for the steering assist mapping and/or hacks to have the "Sport" button change the steering assist mapping without changing throttle sensitivity?

I don't know anything that explicitly does what you ask, but I know how it could be done with a bit of tinkering. The throttle response can be adjusted independently of the steering by messing around with the voltages coming out of the accelerator pedal module. An aftermarket device called the Sprint Booster that plugs into the pedal module does exactly that and creates a steeper throttle vs. pedal position response function - much as actuation of Sport Mode does. I would imagine one could modify a Sprint Booster or hack one's own circuit to flatten rather than steepen the throttle vs. pedal response and thus cancel out the throttle steepening of Sport Mode. Flip on Sport Mode and switch on your hacked Sprint Booster at the same time and you get the steering effect of Sport Mode without the throttle steepening. If you want to be fancy about it you could figure some way to trigger the "inverse Sprint Booster" from the Sport Button so that you get only steering effect at a single touch.

But I would think several days of experimenting would be needed to get this right. On the upside, if you figured out a circuit diagram for a home brew Sprint Booster with a user adjustable throttle vs. pedal gain lots of folks here would be your friend...

[jragan]

2009 Cayman S + LSD + PCB >= E86 ///M > 2008 Cayman S

but then it's also safe to say

2009 Cayman S + LSD + PCB > 997-1 C2S

but yet it's also safe to say

Track-prepped E86 ///M ~ 997-1 GT3 > 2009 Cayman S + LSD + PCB

[jragan]

Originally Posted by shift@red

^^Im sorry, but I dont agree with nearly any of that. 997.1 GT3 is FAR, FAR superior to any street car BMW has ever made. In order to match the 997.1 GT3 with a Z4M youre going to need a serious diet of 300+ lbs, nearly another 100 hp, tons more tq and a lot of suspension work to come close to the perfectly balanced chasis the GT3 has, not to mention the grip.

Maybe on paper. But in reality they're much closer than you'd expect with just suspension, brakes and tires on the E86 ///M. I track regularly with the P-cars and I know how things fall out.

[AWM3]

Originally Posted by jragan

Maybe on paper. But in reality they're much closer than you'd expect with just suspension, brakes and tires on the E86 ///M. I track regularly with the P-cars and I know how things fall out.

You're just a much better driver.

Seriously though, aren't there a ton of websites that discuss the lap speeds around the Nurburgring of various cars, both stock and modified? By polling those it should be possible to establish which is the faster car on the track.

[jragan]

Originally Posted by shift@red

Well, there are more factors than that, such as driver skill, and from the post below above mine, that is the case. Its much easier for a novice or any skill level to get into a 50-50 BMW and be quick. It takes more time to learn to drive a 911, but when you do, it is far more rewarding than anything BMW can offer. The Cayman S is also another car any skill level can get into and be fast, because its inherent balance and neutral handling is beyond amazing.
The Z4M still isnt even a sub 8 second 'ring' car. If you took the best driver in a 911 GT3 and the best driver in a Z4M, the Z4M wouldnt win a single contest.
Here a comparo of the two:

http://www.fastestlaps.com/index.php...=46c81a841feb7

And its not even close! Hockenheim short, GT3 is 5.5 seconds faster. No suspension, brakes and tires are going to make up that much time on a short course. On Bedford Autodome, the GT3 is 4.5 seconds faster, on the 'ring', GT3 is 31 seconds faster, and the list goes on. They are two cars that are clearly in two different ballgames, let alone leagues.
Like I said the Cayman S is its competitior as they are neck and neck, but the Cayman S has the edge.

You have your assertions completely backwards when it comes to the E85 and E86 ///Ms. Do your research. This particular model of BMW is absolutely not a car any dumb ass can just jump in and drive. It takes a lot of skill and seat-time to properly handle one of these on the track. It is for this very reason that the auto magazines editors could never get much out of the car. Look at the professional race circuits and you'll see that the few E86 ///Ms competing are almost always at the top mixed in with the GT3s, granted these are specially-prepared race cars but it does tell you that, as a platform the E86 carries itself well. And I do beg to differ with you that a good driver with a well set up E86 can approximate 997-1 GT3 territory (which is what I said in the first place -- I used an "~" to mean "approximate", not "equal to" in my original comparison).

This is turning into a MAC vs PC debate, especially since you have no first hand experience with this particular platform and only make wild-hare assertions and comparisons. The E85/E86 is probably one of the raw-est setups BMW's created and if you were to drive one, you would see. It's raw, viceral, and you feel everything. There's a reason this car has been compared to Super 7s by people who actually know how to drive.

[Beedub]

i have to say guys, this is brilliant to read and imo what these forums are all about, constuctive arguements!! sorry to go off topic.

[chickdr]

Originally Posted by shift@red

I just bought a 2007 Z4M coupe and a leftover (brand new, 114 miles on it) 2006 Z4 M roadster. So yes, i have a good amount of hands on experience.

Out of curiosity, why would you buy BOTH an 07 Z4M coupe and an 06 Z4MR in such a short period of time? Collector?

[UncleScottie]

As the original poster, this thread took a wrong turn somewhere.

The context was meant to be as "Driver's car" not as "Track car". Z4 Coupe 3.0si vs Cayman, not Z4M Coupe vs Cayman S (or from somewhere out in left field, the GT3). A spirited Sunday drive through the countryside, not hot laps in a track prepped car that had to be trailered to the event.

Ignoring the Z4MC for the moment. BMW and its dealers really screwed up with the Z4 Coupe 3.0si in North America.

First off, greed got the better of most dealers, as they stocked mainly "Sport Package" equipped cars. A decision they paid for in the end with cars they could sell without huge discounts. By many accounts in the automotive media, and my own test drives, the base 3.0si is the better car. The Sport Package adds little in the way of handling improvements, yet significantly decreases ride comfort.

All BMW had to do is put in a hydraulic rack with decent steering feel and a set of conventional tires and they would have had the "pocket GT" that their marketing was claiming they had. It would have also given them a car that would have sold a bit better. Instead we got a useless "sport mode" button and some of the worse riding tires ever produced.

[EenyBear]

I have had the great good fortune of driving a 2009 Lamborghini Gallardo and a new Ferrari 458 Italia.... and a 2007 Z4M and a 2010 Cayman S. The Gallardo and the Z4M both have the kick-in-the-pants torque and raw driving excitement I crave while the Ferrari and the Cayman S have the refined handling and high-RPM acceleration I deeply appreciate but don't desire.

Actually, I found the Ferrari somewhat less satisfying compared to the AWD Gallardo and similarly found the Cayman S less thrilling compared to the Z4M. In fact, the Cayman S felt like a fine sedan to me at low speeds and low RPMs. Not everyone will agree but that what makes cars and car ownership interesting.

So, as it has now come to the time to pick a car for the next few years, I have picked a Z4M. Why? The performance characteristics and benchmarks are close enough to the Gallardo (witness the Top Gear Leader Board) for a fraction of the cost. All the performance of the Gallardo with little of the vulnerability parking downtown and not so in-your-face as the Gallardo tends to be when I drop my kid at school. Truth be told, the Cayman S is a prettier car to my eye than the Z4M but the driving experience of the Z4M wins me over every time.

Yes, the Cayman S was intuitive to drive and there were no surprises. It practically drove itself. Not for me.... When I take delivery of the new-to-me Z4M in a week or two, I'll post a picture or two.
Cheers.

[antennahead]

Originally Posted by EenyBear

I have had the great good fortune of driving a 2009 Lamborghini Gallardo and a new Ferrari 458 Italia.... and a 2007 Z4M and a 2010 Cayman S. The Gallardo and the Z4M both have the kick-in-the-pants torque and raw driving excitement I crave while the Ferrari and the Cayman S have the refined handling and high-RPM acceleration I deeply appreciate but don't desire.

Actually, I found the Ferrari somewhat less satisfying compared to the AWD Gallardo and similarly found the Cayman S less thrilling compared to the Z4M. In fact, the Cayman S felt like a fine sedan to me at low speeds and low RPMs. Not everyone will agree but that what makes cars and car ownership interesting.

So, as it has now come to the time to pick a car for the next few years, I have picked a Z4M. Why? The performance characteristics and benchmarks are close enough to the Gallardo (witness the Top Gear Leader Board) for a fraction of the cost. All the performance of the Gallardo with little of the vulnerability parking downtown and not so in-your-face as the Gallardo tends to be when I drop my kid at school. Truth be told, the Cayman S is a prettier car to my eye than the Z4M but the driving experience of the Z4M wins me over every time.

Yes, the Cayman S was intuitive to drive and there were no surprises. It practically drove itself. Not for me.... When I take delivery of the new-to-me Z4M in a week or two, I'll post a picture or two.
Cheers.

I watched that the other day (Top Gear/Stig Z4M run)................. was impressed the Z4M was only 2 tenths of a second slower than the Gallardo ................ talk about a sleeper

[Finnegan]

Easybear, congratulations on your purchase! Having owned both (Gen I CS) and now the Z4M I'll second your observations on the CS. Enjoy!

[pal]

I don't understand why people are beating on the Z4C 3.0si so much - its a ~3100 lb car with 255 hp with perfect weight distribution and a modern suspension layout. Change out some components and it will be a great all rounder. If I had a 3.0si, I would do the below to make it a fun track car and a comfortable daily driver -

(1) Lighter wheels with real max/extreme performance tires
(2) SS brake lines and hi-po pads
(3) KW V3s for suspension if you need an all rounder or TCKLine/KW Clubsport for a more track oriented machine
(4) M Sport seats if your Z4C did not come with them
(5) A limited slip rear differential
(5) Sign up for HPDEs

[Finnegan]

I'm not sure anyone's really "beating" that much on the 3.0 here, aside perhaps from the OP to some degree. The OP hasn't posted here since early Dec 2010, and actually has (or had) a 3.0. He was the one with the most to say and harshest comments about perceived deficiencies: electric steering rather than hydraulic; the "sport package" rather than smoother non-sport suspension; runflats, and so on.

I don't read that as beating though. It's pretty much the same thing IMO that M owners do when talking about brakes on the ///M, plastics, nav system, stereo, hanging balls exhaust, excess weight. We look all kind of look at "what could have been" compared to "what is" and some like to find where things come up short.

Your post is right on the money with what can be done to take the 3.0 up quite a few notches--in fact, several of those items (coils, HPDEs, wheels/tires, pads/lines) could easily apply to the ///M as well. HPDEs are a must for getting the most out of any machine!

In terms of 3.0/M, I think both are great cars, and if there's anything to beat on it's BMW's lack of focus on maximizing the potential of both. On the other hand, when I look at what's available now the 3.0 and ///M are head and shoulders above some of the current bloated mass-appeal based offerings. Don't even get me started on the triple turbo "M" SAV that was posted in another area of Bimmerpost today.