|
|
SUPPORT ZPOST BY DOING YOUR TIRERACK SHOPPING FROM THIS BANNER, THANKS! |
Post Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
05-19-2010, 10:40 PM | #1 |
Captain
28
Rep 615
Posts |
Z4 3.0si coupe review
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.
__________________
2013 Audi TT RS (Tech Pkg, Sport Exhaust, Heated Seats, Sirius)
Retired--2007 Z4 M Coupe (Imola Red/Black, Premium Pkg, Heated Seats, XM, Bimmian stubby antenna, CDV delete, Apex EC-7--Anthracite, Goodyear F1 Asymetric 2. |
05-19-2010, 11:21 PM | #2 |
Major
77
Rep 1,143
Posts |
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. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 06:32 AM | #3 |
Brigadier General
868
Rep 4,080
Posts |
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!
__________________
Huz-Z
BMW Z4 3.0si Roadster. Montego Blue Metallic. Premium and Sport Package. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 09:02 AM | #4 |
Lieutenant Colonel
128
Rep 1,771
Posts
Drives: 2007 Z4M Coupe
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: NJ
|
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)
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 09:21 AM | #5 |
Captain
28
Rep 615
Posts |
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.
__________________
2013 Audi TT RS (Tech Pkg, Sport Exhaust, Heated Seats, Sirius)
Retired--2007 Z4 M Coupe (Imola Red/Black, Premium Pkg, Heated Seats, XM, Bimmian stubby antenna, CDV delete, Apex EC-7--Anthracite, Goodyear F1 Asymetric 2. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 09:26 AM | #6 |
Lieutenant General
2387
Rep 12,635
Posts
Drives: Z4 M, X5, GX460
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: CT
iTrader: (100)
Garage List E86 Z4 M [10.00]
F15 X5 xDrive35i [9.17] F10 550i (Retired) [9.17] F25 X3 xDrive35i (R ... [9.43] E82 135is (Retired) [9.53] E85 Z4 M (Retired) [9.41] E90 328i xDrive (Re ... [9.25] E86 Z4 3.0si (Retired) [8.93] |
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.
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 09:43 AM | #7 |
Brigadier General
2063
Rep 4,365
Posts
Drives: '07 Z4 Coupe, '21 X3, '16 GMC
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Iowa
|
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.
__________________
2007 Z4 3.0si Coupe • 6 MT • Black Saphire Metallic • PP • SP
2016 GMC Sierra SLT Z71 Premium Plus 4x4 2017 Harley StreetGlide • Denim Black • V&H Tune 2021 BMW x30i • Phytonic Blue Metallic • Fully loaded |
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 12:18 PM | #8 | |
Captain
56
Rep 815
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 12:22 PM | #9 |
Major
77
Rep 1,143
Posts |
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. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 02:51 PM | #10 |
Colonel
142
Rep 2,002
Posts |
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
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 03:08 PM | #11 | |
Colonel
87
Rep 2,464
Posts |
Quote:
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? |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 03:27 PM | #12 | |
Major
58
Rep 1,224
Posts |
Quote:
3.0si Roadster M = 3.23:1 A = 3.64:1 3.0si Coupe M = 3.46:1 A = 3.64:1
__________________
If you can't take the time to teach a kid something good, someone will take the time to teach them something bad.
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 03:38 PM | #13 | |
Colonel
142
Rep 2,002
Posts |
Quote:
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. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 03:43 PM | #14 | |
Major
99
Rep 1,269
Posts |
Quote:
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
__________________
2019 Porsche 911 4 GTS
2016 BMW M3 2008 BMW Z4M coupe |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 04:11 PM | #15 |
Captain
56
Rep 815
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 04:14 PM | #16 |
Colonel
87
Rep 2,464
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 04:56 PM | #17 |
Captain
56
Rep 815
Posts |
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. Last edited by vachss; 05-20-2010 at 05:01 PM.. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 05:10 PM | #18 | |
Captain
28
Rep 615
Posts |
Quote:
Something tells me that wasn't what GP was thinking of.
__________________
2013 Audi TT RS (Tech Pkg, Sport Exhaust, Heated Seats, Sirius)
Retired--2007 Z4 M Coupe (Imola Red/Black, Premium Pkg, Heated Seats, XM, Bimmian stubby antenna, CDV delete, Apex EC-7--Anthracite, Goodyear F1 Asymetric 2. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 09:57 PM | #19 | |
Colonel
142
Rep 2,002
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 10:56 PM | #20 |
Free Thinker
18624
Rep 7,512
Posts |
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.
__________________
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 11:19 PM | #21 |
Car Geek
4131
Rep 3,829
Posts |
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. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-20-2010, 11:52 PM | #22 |
Captain
56
Rep 815
Posts |
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. |
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|