BMW Z2 ?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

07-14-2006, 12:40 PM

#11

Mr.E.G.

Join Date: Aug 2005

Posts: 6,262

Likes: 172

Received 105 Likes on 63 Posts

if they make the car weigh 2700 ish lbs (which they wont) i would want it. it could have 120 hp for all i care. i just want a light tossable rear wheel drive car.

Reply Like

07-15-2006, 01:14 AM

#12

VTEC_Junkie

Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2002

Location: Berkeley

Posts: 4,709

Likes: 0

Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Quote:

Originally Posted by ITR #203,Jul 14 2006, 06:33 AM

Sure, if straight line speed is all your talking about, yes, the M roadster is more than a match for the Boxster S, while costing a significant $5000 less.

The new Shelby Cobra Mustang is also better than the Aston Martin V8 Vantage as well, under that reasoning.

Also, you ignore the fact that the Z4 line starts at 35k with 215 hp (not the 255hp that you speak of) vs. 49k at 240 hp for the Boxster. The SLK starts at around 40k but goes up to 70k if you get the SLK AMG55, which in terms of straightline performance, spanks both the Boxster and the M roadster. The sheer price difference, when BMW cars are NOT values 99% of the time, should shed some light on the situation.

Sorry but the Z4's are simply behind when it comes to handling in terms of performance (except yes, the M version is better than the SLK's but I'd argue the all of the non-M's even with the sport pack are worse than the SLK's). The interior is not nearly as nice as the SLK in terms of materials and now with the 987 Boxsters, is behind in terms of giving you that feeling that you are in a special car.

Dont get me wrong, I kinda like the Z4's and I'd love to have a M roadster or even a 3.0si, but the exterior is only above average with the top down (with the top up, its hideous) and the interior doesn't do much for me after 5 years have passed (I liked it when it was released). Also, the 3.0si has the electronic steering which has been one of the main criticisms against it; thankfully, the M version does not have this but it would be one of my reasons for not buying a 3.0si.

you do realize the entry level slk is the slk280 with a 3.0L v6 producing 228hp and has the base price of $43K?? sure, it's still got more power than the entry level z4 and costs thousands more, but it's also a heavier car with a hardtop convertible which offsets the price and power difference. as for the z4 styling, i don't think it's really fair to say that its styling is behind the times to the benz and porsche. sure the benz and porsche styling is better inside and out, but the z4's styling is just in line with the styling direction that bmw is going with all the models in its lineup. the interior/exterior designs of the c and e classes are certainly nicer than those of the 3 and 5 series, respectively, imo, but i don't think anyone would go so far as to say that the bmw counterparts as complete vehicles are behind the times and inferior to the benzs. mercedes may offer more pleasing and "higher quality" styling (and generally more power), but bmw offers better driving dynamics in their vehicles, which, imo, is also reflected in the z4 vs. slk. the slk may have better quality styling and more power, but i find the z4 more fun and rewarding to drive. yes, i agree that the electronic steering in the z4 is the weakest link in the car's chassis, but keep in mind that the s2000 also uses an electronic steering system, which i've always felt has kept the s2k from being an even better car than it is. nonetheless, when it comes to the z4, slk, and boxster, i think all three cars are very comparable in terms of performance, handling, and amenities. sure one car excels more in one area than the other, but overall, i don't feel any one car overshadows the other, and at the end of the day, it's just a matter of preference as to which car will suit you best.

Reply Like

07-15-2006, 01:18 AM

#13

VTEC_Junkie

Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2002

Location: Berkeley

Posts: 4,709

Likes: 0

Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.E.G.,Jul 14 2006, 12:40 PM

if they make the car weigh 2700 ish lbs (which they wont) i would want it. it could have 120 hp for all i care. i just want a light tossable rear wheel drive car.

go buy yourself a miata...

Reply Like

07-15-2006, 01:20 AM

#14

VTEC_Junkie

Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2002

Location: Berkeley

Posts: 4,709

Likes: 0

Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Quote:

Originally Posted by climacus,Jul 14 2006, 08:45 AM

In Europe you can get a Z4 2.0 with the four banger. Makes no sense here though since gas is so much cheaper.

premium gas is averaging $3.50/gallon in the states these days. sure it's probably still cheaper than what people pay in europe, but $3.50 is rediculously high to us americans and a lot of people are beginning to be fuel economy conscious, unlike 5 years ago.

Reply Like

07-15-2006, 08:04 AM

#15

Slamnasty

Registered User

Join Date: Jan 2004

Location: Phoenix

Posts: 4,536

Likes: 0

Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by VTEC_Junkie,Jul 15 2006, 01:18 AM

go buy yourself a miata...

No kidding. They've been selling such a car here for well over a decade now.

Reply Like

07-15-2006, 09:24 AM

#16

PedalFaster

Registered User

Join Date: Mar 2002

Location: Seattle, WA

Posts: 6,014

Likes: 0

Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Quote:

Originally Posted by VTEC_Junkie,Jul 14 2006, 01:20 AM

if bmw wants to offer a more "affordable" roadster than the current z4 lineup, all they really need to do is throw in a 4 banger, manual top, manual climate control, 16" wheels, and maybe manual windows, and remove some of the stability control nannies from the current z4 and price it $6-$8K less than the current z4 3.0.

The problem with that is that the Z4 is too heavy to be credible with a four cylinder motor. It's a 3000 lb. car -- the changes you describe might drop it to 2900 lb., but it really needs to be lighter to be competitive with the 2500 lb. MX-5 and the 2800 lb. Solstice.