depends on your driving style preference

the cars are really chalk and cheese, apart from being convertibles

the S2000 is not easy to punt around very quickly

most quick bms are

 

Thanks for the replies everyone. I agree that if the costs are not wildly different, the most important consideration should not be the figures but what the car does for you, how it makes you feel and whether it suits your driving style.

Purely in the interest of academic research, I

 

Sorry, just wanted to add:

S2000 is expensive to insure because when it first came out, too many people drove it without respect and tw@tted them off the roads (as they have no TC), so the insurance companies responded in knee-jerk fashion by ramping it up to group 20 and placing it as high risk.

I love Z4s. They're handsome (they ARE!), the engines sound nice and they're way, way better than the Z3. I also prefer them to Boxsters/SLKs/TTs et al.

3.0si v S2000? Take the Honda. It's a precision tool which rewards good drivers, not just everybody, and it looks better, sounds better and is built better than the BMW. In fact, I'd actually say go for the old 3.0i instead of the 3.0si if you want the BMW, as the new magnesium alloy straight-six sounds less exciting than the old M54 lump, and it only delivers marginally more torque/quicker performance figures (0-62mph in 5.7 instead of 5.9... whoopee f***ing do, I'm impressed).

I drove a 3.0si Sport very recently and was underwhelmed by it; good, but nothing special. All this from a bloke who was going to buy a 3.0i Z4 two years ago!

I was all set for a Z4 until I drove the S2000. Pick the Honda, you really won't regret it! Plus, it'll hold its value better than the BMW.

 

Sorry, but I just have to point out that your statemnt is not quite true.

The insurance grouping of a car has little to do with loss experience. It is decided by the a panel which is part of the Association of British Insurers, with data supplied by the Motor Insurance Repair Research Centre, or Thatcham, as it's more widely known.

A car is assessed on a number of factors relating to its performance (fast cars have higher ratings), safety, security, repair costs (both labour and parts).

See here for more http://www.thatcham.org/research/index.jsp?page=33
http://www.abi.org.uk/Display/default.asp?...,0&Child_ID=144

One suspects the S2000 has such a high grouping due to its performance, the lack of security offered by a convertible, as well as the traditional Japanese disregard for double locks etc, the specialised nature of many of its parts (a Z4, for example shares many parts with other BMWs, the S2000 does not) meaning they are expensive.

Individual insurers will then weight their premium based on their loss experience.

Hope that helps.

Luke, get the car that you like the best. It may be the S2000, it may be the Z4.

 

Hmm, I stand corrected! I was sure when it first came out that it was in insurance group 17 and then moved to 20, but my brain is probably failing me.

It is still higher than it should be, though. I can get insurance cheaper for a

 

D = Does not meet the security requirement for a car of this type and the group rating has therefore been increased. (e.g. A group 9 car where the security requirement is not up to Thatcham

 

The overall reason for buying my 2nd S2000 had nothing to do with fuel bills or insurance, I just love the car. It's not if I can afford the bills, most of my money goes towards the car upkeep and mods.

I went full circle, trying more or less every type of car, hot hatch, turbo, supercharged, coupe just because I don't think you can get a feeling for a car until you've owned it. I test drove the Z4 before buying my 2nd S and it just didn't feel special even on the test drive, even though it was the first time I'd been in one. That

 

[QUOTE=matthehat17,Oct 20 2006, 02:48 PM]

Hmm, I stand corrected! I was sure when it first came out that it was in insurance group 17 and then moved to 20, but my brain is probably failing me.

It is still higher than it should be, though. I can get insurance cheaper for a

 

I'd love to know the insurance quote for a Veyron:

"Yes, I'm 24 years old with two years no claims and nine points, I'm keeping it on a street in St Ann's, Nottingham, no it doesn't have a Tracker, I intend to do 34,000 miles a year and I want to insure six of my friends to drive it too!"

 

LOL Matt and thanks for your views. They pretty much reflect the way I think I'll be heading - but I'll still give the BM a whirl for sake of good form and all that.

Thanks also guys for the info about insurance ratings - it's good to have someone try to make some sense of what I still feel is an unfairly high group for the Honda.

As for your hypothetical (I hope!) insurance proposition; I'm not sure whether you'd hear the sound of the reciever being slammed down or the sound of the insurance company director salivating at the prospect if the chance to double his annual turnover on the back of a single policy.