should i buy 1

mando · Post by **mando** » Thu 01 Apr, 2010 17:34

I have never owned or even sat in a soft top...I have seen a z3 for sale 2.0 litre 1999 v reg facelift edition £4795 I quite fancy it, a mechanic at work was quite detrimental of my choice and said that he had heard they go wrong frequently and that it would cost me a lot of money..may I ask for opinions? Should I purchase?

Midsomer Mikey · Post by **Midsomer Mikey** » Thu 01 Apr, 2010 17:43

Of course you should but dont just buy the first one you see
go give it a look over and test drive to see what they are like
once youve done that that will remove the (should i buy 1) question
to I want one,compare what the car comes with to others of the same price e-bay or autotrader should help, Good luck

billz · Post by **billz** » Thu 01 Apr, 2010 19:16

We were looking for an Audi TT 225 model, my missus then saw a blue zed 1.9 in the same garage and after just sitting in it she went straight off the tt

. I would though say drive as many dif versions as you can as there is quite a bit of difference power wise. We ended up going for the 3.0 as it was just awsome. http://img546.imageshack.us/g/27032010059w.jpg/ and my missus hates silver cars

trigg35 · Post by **trigg35** » Thu 01 Apr, 2010 20:31

hi
im not sure where your friend heard that they go wrong often.i did a lot of research when i set out to buy a soft top and when looking at all the rivals the z3 seemed the least risky.i went to http://www.carsurvey.org/ and some of the cars i considered had lots of unhappy owners.the z3 seemed like a fairly content bunch.i considered everything from the merc slk,audi a4/tt, honda s2000,z4 ,to a pug 307cc and the z3 seemed fairly tried and tested.i did end up with the electric roof which can fail but it has not yet and if it did i could use it manually unlike the merc/pug etc which ends up half folded like a sail when it fails(which they do it seems).have had mine for 6 months.nothing has gone wrong and the big main dealer service i had in october was £220 - no more than my previous mondeo.remember a few years ago i thought running a bmw was out of my league and bought a renault.what a mistake! it may not have the status but they sure know how to charge.after that im not so afraid of the germans.its the french that are scary!!!

smartypants · Post by **smartypants** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 07:05

I owned a 2.2 (similar to the straight six 2.0 you are looking at) for 5 years, and did 80k miles in that time as my daily drive, it was the most reliable and actually cheapest car I have ever run - I don't know where that mechanic got his information from, certainly in my experience reliability is not even an issue.

Sit in the Zed, turn that 6 over, and you'll fall in love instantly - and you won't regret it

paulb1976 · Post by **paulb1976** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 09:30

Go raid the piggy bank - great little car

DC · Post by DC » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 10:02

You know you want one,
there are too many good but boring cars around, a Z3 is beautiful to look at, reasonable running costs and you'll love driving it.
I still remember with regret the Monte Carlo I could have bought 20 odd years since but didn't.

smartypants · Post by **smartypants** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 10:55

Have you bought it yet?

Mike Fishwick · Post by **Mike Fishwick** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 11:51

'Go wrong frequently?' I wonder where this 'expert' gets his information from - probably listening to another self-styled 'expert.' In such circles, if one knows nothing about a car, one must show one's knowledge by concocting something bad - particularly if the subject is a small sports car!

The Brits have a wierd problem with small sports cars - they really love to run them down. To actually LIKE one is in the same category as admitting that you are gay, or even worse, a bad driver . . .

A Z3 is like any other BMW car, with which it shares the majority of components, and they seem to be quite reliable. The only Z3-specific problems are really things such as splitting rear windows and - in a few extreme cases - damaged mountings for the final drive, a problem shared with the early E46 models.

Generally speaking, a Z3 is in the 'drive it and forget it' category, and is capable of being cheaply maintained by anyone.

rgf · Post by **rgf** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 12:03

This site has 8300 members so there might be a clue in there...

Go for it - you won't be disappointed!

markrnorton · Post by **markrnorton** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 13:15

great cars. no reliability problems

go for it !

chas 1 · Post by **chas 1** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 15:14

Its a great drive, a great looker, a real standout car, there a a few "buts" though.
Your z3 will probably be 10 years old or more. Would you buy any other car of that age?
Rust will probably be an issue. The boot weld issue is also a big factor, do you fance spending £3000 repairing your car if you have that problem. A mazda 5 it is not! That is a good thing, and (say it quietly) a bad thing.
I suppose what i am trying to say is that if you are a real petrolhead, and are willing to have some heartache , and expense, in return for a great looker, go for it, but unless you find a real standout car, be warned, it may be an expensive hobby. Not for the feint hearted, or the poor! Buy with a z3 expert present. Good luck.
Only my opinion...

Mike Fishwick · Post by **Mike Fishwick** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 15:48

Mind you - a 10-year old MX-5 will give plenty of trouble too - and rust a lot more than a Z3. So far, I have not heard of any rust problems with a Z3, apart from cosmetic ones around the boot lid release etc. I bet Mazda didn't use galvanised steel on the MX-5.

Spares are a lot cheaper than Mazda, too, and can be obtained at sensible prices.

It all depends on how the car has been treated. The drivers are the important thing, not a load of expensive rubber stamps in the service book.

smartypants · Post by **smartypants** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 16:04

I never found my Z3 servicing or parts costs to be anymore than the Mondeo ST24 and Fiesta I had before it! In fact it was better because it went 18k between services instead of the Ford 10k

Now my Golf GTI on the other hand.... THAT was expensive, and main reason for getting rid of it.

Z3 is NOT an expensive car to own - no more than any other car out there

smartypants · Post by **smartypants** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 16:05

Mike Fishwick wrote:It all depends on how the car has been treated. The drivers are the important thing, not a load of expensive rubber stamps in the service book.

(I want to buy my old Z3 back

)

mando · Post by **mando** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 16:14

Thanks for all your comments, I am off to look at it next week when the current owner gets back into the country.

Mike Fishwick · Post by **Mike Fishwick** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 16:19

Apart from normal servicing - oil changes, two sets of spark plugs, air, fuel, and oil filters, tyres, etc - all that the Red Zed has asked for in 105,000 miles are a clutch switch (warranty item) a thermostat, a washer pump, and a viscous fan clutch - all told about £150.

It's twelve years old now, and will soon be asking for a new roof and an exhaust system, but it deserves a bit of expense.

It's the cheapest car to run I have ever owned. My old Golf GTI consumed almost £10,000 over seven years, so I decided that it was more sensible to spend double that on an almost-new Z3. So far I have not been disappointed.

You should ask this 'expert' exactly what Z3 parts consume money.

Here's a picture of the VW money pit at Curborough - very pretty and quite quick, but not a sensible action.

smartypants · Post by **smartypants** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 16:33

mando wrote:Thanks for all your comments, I am off to look at it next week when the current owner gets back into the country.

Good man! Honestly, maybe some of us speak a lot from our heart and will defend the Z, but as far as I am concerned its all the truth! You won't be disappointed in any way shape of form... but of course any car can be a shed without a proper look over, but if you buy even a half decent one - you'll have very little worries

Good luck!

Hard Top · Post by **Hard Top** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 16:57

Mike Fishwick wrote: Here's a picture of the VW money pit at Curborough - very pretty and quite quick, but not a sensible action.

That's a shame, it looks like you were seriously into that.
Always had a soft spot for the GTI.

HT

mando · Post by **mando** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 18:16

may be a daft question, but...has anyone any (unbiased)recommendations for engine size, what car says to go for 1.9 as 3.0 is too much for the chassis.

Hard Top · Post by **Hard Top** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 18:31

Mine's a 1.9 16 valve, and I am more than happy with it, but the 6 cylinder?
Probably more fun and the one to go for in my honest opinion.

HT

DC · Post by DC » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 19:14

I would echo Hard Top but if I was 30 years younger I'd be wanting 2.8 at least.

TitanTim · Post by **TitanTim** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 19:26

I think for most BMW's what problems that do surface are generally known about and shouldn't be too much of a problem to sort out. Coming upto 2 years with my Zed and the only minor probs were dry belts which I had replaced and rear discs as an advisory on last years MOT. As mentioned most Z3's are coming upto or past 10 years of age now so will need a little fettling now and again. They are very robust cars and do seem to take alot of neglect but like any make of car, things will go wrong and need replacing.

Don't forget the larger the engine the heavier the nose, the 1.9 is arguably the most nimble in the handling dep't

Tim.

smartypants · Post by **smartypants** » Fri 02 Apr, 2010 22:54

mando wrote:may be a daft question, but...has anyone any (unbiased)recommendations for engine size, what car says to go for 1.9 as 3.0 is too much for the chassis.

I think the 2.2 (VERY BIASED OPINION!) is the absolute perfect fit for the Z3 - power wise, weight, and is the best sounding engine

2.0 sounds as good, but lacks a little less power

All in all, 6-cyl would be my preference, the straight six sound of the 2.0, 2.2 and 2.8 is beautiful

the 3.0 is overkill IMO, and doesn't really sound that great

Rob Tan · Post by **Rob Tan** » Sat 03 Apr, 2010 05:52

When I first started considering a Z3 I made the decision to go and sit in one. I figured I'd either hate it or like it, and if it was 'hate' then better I know now. Well ... I sat in one and fell in love with it. It felt like 'home'. I didn't buy that one (it was automatic and I wanted a manual drive car)...but from then on I knew I wanted one. Finally bought on in October.

billz · Post by **billz** » Sat 03 Apr, 2010 07:52

obviously you have not drove the 3.0 as it sounds as good if not better than the rest. When we bought ours we tried all models from the 1.9 through the range and the 3.0 was the more awsome of all of them.

smartypants · Post by **smartypants** » Sat 03 Apr, 2010 08:07

I test drove the 3.0 before I bought my 2.2, and a friend had the 3.0 for a while - so I knew it well. Its a lovely smooth sounding engine, but the 2.2 had much more character through the rev range and was louder

But I will admit even the 2.2 felt a little underpowered.... probably thinking about it the 2.8 is the best engine marriage for the Z3

Its horses for courses though, many love their 4-pot 1.9s

TitanTim · Post by **TitanTim** » Sat 03 Apr, 2010 10:18

I guess if BMW thought everyone was the same then all Z3's would have been a 1.9 or a 3.2

End of the day its all relative, you can have just as much fun in a 1.2 nimble handling hatch as well as something at the other end of the scale, its what you determine as fun out of a car? Personally for me I would lust after more power in a tin top than I would in a 2 seater soft top, maybe something to do with the rigidity of a tin top where a soft top takes that edge away. The appeal of a soft top is the soft top

Tim.

Jonttt · Post by **Jonttt** » Sat 03 Apr, 2010 13:15

I think the advice to drive a few different engines is the best advice you can get.

Everyone has differing requirements.

I "borrowed" a 1.9 for a weekend and realised how much I missed roof down motoring.

But for me I wanted a car to be able to drive hard and drop the top. I needed a car where I was the limiting factor and not the car to maximise my summer fun.

I think there is lots of logic that the 2.2 is the best all round engine for the Z3, especially if its an everyday driver and it does sound great, but you pay for this as they generally command a premium.

2.8/3.0 are as fast as an ///M in everyday use in a striaght line and driver skill would easily make up any difference to an ///M in the real world.

So many choices, the trying out should be part of the fun

beemz · Post by **beemz** » Sat 03 Apr, 2010 19:58

Very much doubt you would find anyone here that would say no to your question, myself included. I've had a Z3 2.8 only to stupidly sell it and have a number of other cars since. In my opinion and that's all it is, you won't find a better convertible for your money(So i bought another one). I found my original Z3 to be extremely reliable with no major expenses for repairs even up to 130000 miles. Realistically it depends on the cars history so vet them carefully. Read the advice from members on here who really are enthusiests of the vehicle and search the forum for buying advice. Think your mechanic must have Z3 mixed up with MGF.

estocks · Post by **estocks** » Sun 04 Apr, 2010 11:12

mando wrote:what car says to go for 1.9 as 3.0 is too much for the chassis.

Will you be driving it like you stole it?

The Z3 is a roadster. If you want to drive to Cannes with a couple of bags for a dirty weekend then you will arrive relaxed. The 6 cylinder engine will cruise all day.

The Elise (as a comparison) is a track day car. It has no carpets = track day car. If you took the same trip to Cannes, you would have back pain after an hour and need ear plugs all the way down.

The MX-5 is a sports car. It is light and has a small engine. It is like a classic mini, you build it up to 60MPH and throw it into the corners because it doesn't have enough power to accelerate briskly. It is ideal for B roads down to Devon.

All three cars are 2 seater convertibles, but all three have different uses in life.

Too much power for the Chassis sounds like a typical journalistic Clarksonism "yeah I shredded the tyres and blew up a gearbox driving like a joyrider, therefore it's unreliable"...

Mike Fishwick · Post by **Mike Fishwick** » Sun 04 Apr, 2010 12:04

Most decent cars can indeed have too much power (well, torque actually) for the chassis, in some conditions - it should be controlled by the best computer yet devised, which is positioned between the driver's ears!

In some cases this computer fails to recognise the conditions, and ignores the signs of impending doom, so problems arise. This can occur with any car - in Z3 terms from a 1.9 to an M Roadster, but it's no good blaming the car - the throttle works in both directions.

The more powerful the engine, the greater the amount of cowardice the driver needs, not to mention skill and judgement. I always remember the 1962 Triumph Bonneville brochure, which stated that it was 'A machine for the true enthusiast, who could handle the available power with skill and discretion.'

You can get into trouble with any car - that's the easy bit.

My take on the original question is that any Z3 is a nice car, the choice being down to the individual, in terms of their taste and insurance premium. Having said that, it's no good comparing a 1.9 Z3 to a 1.9 diesel - you will never stay with it - but both have their good points.

Geoff H · Post by **Geoff H** » Sun 04 Apr, 2010 14:57

Mike Fishwick wrote: I always remember the 1962 Triumph Bonneville brochure, which stated that it was 'A machine for the true enthusiast, who could handle the available power with skill and discretion.'

My 1962 Bonneville .... those were the days Mike

zroadster.net

should i buy 1

should i buy 1

Should i buy 1

Wrong?

just sold mine.

Mx-5

Re: Mx-5

Costs

Re: Costs

Power

Re: Power