Z4. What kind of car is it?
06-26-2003, 11:28 PM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: South
Posts: 5,184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I saw one for the first time yesterday while I sat in a 1/2 hour queue on the A4 (Flippin circus!).
It was on the forecourt of a dealership, parked with the roof down.
Although I'm not overly keen on the front (and they HAVE to lose the orange indicators
) it looks a thousand times better than the Z3.
Its a big car, it sits well and looks chunky, the M version if there is going to be such a thing, will look very muscular.
The thing is, like Boxters, people buy these cars because of the badge, the build quality, the customer service (rightly or wrongly) and the reliability.
Enthusiastic drivers, who want a true sportscar which has classless beauty and purposeful capabilities will drive an S.
Look on the bright side, if loads of Z4's are sold it will just help our exclusivity
It was on the forecourt of a dealership, parked with the roof down.
Although I'm not overly keen on the front (and they HAVE to lose the orange indicators
) it looks a thousand times better than the Z3. Its a big car, it sits well and looks chunky, the M version if there is going to be such a thing, will look very muscular.
The thing is, like Boxters, people buy these cars because of the badge, the build quality, the customer service (rightly or wrongly) and the reliability.
Enthusiastic drivers, who want a true sportscar which has classless beauty and purposeful capabilities will drive an S.
Look on the bright side, if loads of Z4's are sold it will just help our exclusivity
06-26-2003, 11:46 PM
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Near Northampton
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I read last week in the Evening Standard that the S is the 4th most popular roadster in the UK - demand doubled last year. The article mentioned a figure of around 1200 sold - not sure if that was last year, the year before or total to date.
Wyatt
Wyatt
06-27-2003, 01:23 AM
#13
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE]Originally posted by wedgemorgan
[B]I read last week in the Evening Standard that the S is the 4th most popular roadster in the UK - demand doubled last year.
[B]I read last week in the Evening Standard that the S is the 4th most popular roadster in the UK - demand doubled last year.
06-28-2003, 06:39 AM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Falkirk
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I went to my local BMW dealer today to look at a Z4. First impressions are that it is wider than expected and a lot nicer in the flesh that in the photographs. The car was wearing optional 18inch cross bolted alloys which were the nicest I've seen in some time.
On sitting in the car, the first impression is the amout of space. The transmission tunnel is lower that the 'S' and the cabin wider. The doors are also lower, but this makes you feel like you are sitting less in the car and more on it. Footwell space is about the same, however legrom and seat width are far superior. With the seat fully back I could not depress the clutch fully and I'm 6'2". The seat bolsters are not aggressive enough for my taste, but the micro adjustment possible due to the electric seat adjustment makes for a perfect driving position. The leather was of better quality, but the seats were not very "sporty" to look at or sit in.
The facia is a little disappointing. The plastics looked rather hard and unyeilding and unlike other BMW's were not obviously better than those in the 'S'. The steering wheel was adjustable, but the qualty of the handle and its tactile nature were appalling. All the switches were the usual quality BMW items. so no complaints there.
The bootspace was better than the 'S' for width and length but not depth. The battery was where I expected the space saver to be, so I reckon this BM has a get you home kit like the M3.
Overall, would it be a step up from the 'S'? Well, from its show room presence I would say yes. In price terms, the model I saw today had
On sitting in the car, the first impression is the amout of space. The transmission tunnel is lower that the 'S' and the cabin wider. The doors are also lower, but this makes you feel like you are sitting less in the car and more on it. Footwell space is about the same, however legrom and seat width are far superior. With the seat fully back I could not depress the clutch fully and I'm 6'2". The seat bolsters are not aggressive enough for my taste, but the micro adjustment possible due to the electric seat adjustment makes for a perfect driving position. The leather was of better quality, but the seats were not very "sporty" to look at or sit in.
The facia is a little disappointing. The plastics looked rather hard and unyeilding and unlike other BMW's were not obviously better than those in the 'S'. The steering wheel was adjustable, but the qualty of the handle and its tactile nature were appalling. All the switches were the usual quality BMW items. so no complaints there.
The bootspace was better than the 'S' for width and length but not depth. The battery was where I expected the space saver to be, so I reckon this BM has a get you home kit like the M3.
Overall, would it be a step up from the 'S'? Well, from its show room presence I would say yes. In price terms, the model I saw today had
06-28-2003, 06:52 AM
#17
Good review, DR. Having read the reasons/thinking behind the S2000 it would be interesting to hear the Z4 equivalent. Looks like they have greatly improved on the Z3 (not difficult!) all round, and price/performance wise they are under the Boxster, both 2.7 and S, with their two competing 2.5 and 3.0 engines.
For me the stock S2000 is still a landmark in terms of "form from function" DDG looks and grin factor, even 4 years on. So many of its important design decisions have been followed in the Z4. I would be fascinated to know if the car is an evolution/copycat or was designed from a blank sheet of paper. The former I suspect.
For me the stock S2000 is still a landmark in terms of "form from function" DDG looks and grin factor, even 4 years on. So many of its important design decisions have been followed in the Z4. I would be fascinated to know if the car is an evolution/copycat or was designed from a blank sheet of paper. The former I suspect.
06-28-2003, 10:50 PM
#18
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: East Midlands Swamp
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Drove alongside the Z4 for about a mile yesterday in Nottingham - was Tuetonic black - impressions as follows:
1. very wide and looks like its been broken of a suspension bridge with all the pronounced box sections.
2. Rear looks a bit wierd, the lines are very curvy but don't hang together like a graceful curve was started off by one bloke and then someone else came along and finished it off in a different direction- front dominated by a less than agressive grill.
3. the side indicators are complete and utter crap - little round things with the lens around the edge of a BMZ badge
4. could be me and the fact it was new and being driven by an OAP perhaps but it didn't seem quick of the mark.
Didn't rate it - I reckon the analysts have it right - driven by people who a) want a BMW badge and b) want a fashion accessory - probably the same bunch that bought the Z3.
If was buying a BMW ( which I used to) it would be a cabrio M3 SMG not this rubbish.
1. very wide and looks like its been broken of a suspension bridge with all the pronounced box sections.
2. Rear looks a bit wierd, the lines are very curvy but don't hang together like a graceful curve was started off by one bloke and then someone else came along and finished it off in a different direction- front dominated by a less than agressive grill.
3. the side indicators are complete and utter crap - little round things with the lens around the edge of a BMZ badge
4. could be me and the fact it was new and being driven by an OAP perhaps but it didn't seem quick of the mark.
Didn't rate it - I reckon the analysts have it right - driven by people who a) want a BMW badge and b) want a fashion accessory - probably the same bunch that bought the Z3.
If was buying a BMW ( which I used to) it would be a cabrio M3 SMG not this rubbish.
06-29-2003, 10:24 AM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: london
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I test drove the z4 and found its handling v. ungainly,steering lacked communication.
I thinks its more a cruising car rather than a car to be driven...(actually scared me a bit when it lurched around corners at high speed). Felt slower than the S too. To look at, I found it doesnt seem to mix well with the flares on the side and the front...the front doesnt look at all right..hard to explain...it just sort of droops.
at 30k for the 3.0 i will stick with the S...I prefer to drive my cars!
I thinks its more a cruising car rather than a car to be driven...(actually scared me a bit when it lurched around corners at high speed). Felt slower than the S too. To look at, I found it doesnt seem to mix well with the flares on the side and the front...the front doesnt look at all right..hard to explain...it just sort of droops.
at 30k for the 3.0 i will stick with the S...I prefer to drive my cars!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post