MY Z3 2000 ESTORIL BLUE INDIVIDUAL MODEL for SALE

munroe13 · Post by **munroe13** » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 19:16

please see these links, any questions will be great, I am looking for a quick sale to be honest

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/2000-BMW-Z3-2-0-E ... a16f83[url]

OR

http://pistonheads.co.uk/sales/1874887.htm[url]

gookah · Post by **gookah** » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 20:05

Just curious, why did you put in the advert

"2000 BMW Z3 2.0 Estoril Blue M-Looks POWER ROOF" not Z4

may have well as said not X5 or M3 or any other model it isn't
You described it well enough I would say

munroe13 · Post by **munroe13** » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 20:48

gookah wrote:Just curious, why did you put in the advert

"2000 BMW Z3 2.0 Estoril Blue M-Looks POWER ROOF" not Z4

may have well as said not X5 or M3 or any other model it isn't
You described it well enough I would say

Incase someone fancied a Z4 and couldnt and seen my Z3 and fancied that instead

)

seb.a.james99 · Post by **seb.a.james99** » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 20:55

nice car! good luck with the sale

Canman · Post by **Canman** » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 21:57

im just glad i have the weak engined 1.9 4 cylinder which actually runs like a dream. 7 previous owners

, very unique

oh sorry, welcome to the forum.

yalden · Post by **yalden** » Wed 21 Jul, 2010 22:46

Good luck with the sale, btw your plate is off centre!

DC · Post by DC » Thu 22 Jul, 2010 08:14

Canman wrote:im just glad i have the weak engined 1.9 4 cylinder which actually runs like a dream.

Me too.
I find adverts like this an insult to my intelligence.

Post by **Robert T** » Thu 22 Jul, 2010 09:12

Hmmm.

M44 1.9 = 140 bhp, 1275 kg, 109.8 bhp/tonne
M52 2.0 = 150 bhp, 1345 kg, 111.5 bhp/tonne

Difference = 1.7 bhp/tonne

A well timed sneeze would make more difference!

R.

DC · Post by DC » Thu 22 Jul, 2010 09:28

Robert T wrote: M44 1.9 = 140 bhp, 1275 kg, 109.8 bhp/tonne
M52 2.0 = 150 bhp, 1345 kg, 111.5 bhp/tonne

Difference = 1.7 bhp/tonne

Didn't realize they where so close,
A straight six would I think be a lot smoother, sometimes figures don't tell the whole story.
I'm more than happy with my 1.9 but I'm sure would be just as happy with a 2.0, a 2.2 or better still a 2.8

Desiro · Post by **Desiro** » Thu 22 Jul, 2010 09:54

munroe13 must be really pleased with this, his ad keeps getting bumped to the top.

MarkR · Post by **MarkR** » Thu 22 Jul, 2010 12:57

Why an M badge?

TaffZee · Post by **TaffZee** » Thu 22 Jul, 2010 13:44

MarkR wrote:Why an M badge?

A Sheep In Wolves Clothing

Jonttt · Post by **Jonttt** » Thu 22 Jul, 2010 14:45

TaffZee wrote:
MarkR wrote:Why an M badge?
A Sheep In Wolves Clothing

To be honest it looks a nice car and you can't blame a seller "bigging up" a nice car but there is a fine line between being factually incorrect and some things are down to personal taste and not pure stats.

At the risk of upsetting people with 2.0 litre cars I've always considered the 2.2 to be the best "compromise" all round Z3, strangely the 2.2 engine is not mentioned by the seller which is convenient. To be fair its priced less than you would expect a 2.2 with that spec to go for (but not by much for a non sport).

Pitty there aren't more pics of the interior etc....

indizee · Post by **indizee** » Thu 22 Jul, 2010 14:54

I agree with RobertT, Canman, there is nothing weak about yours or any other Zed. Mine isn't an ///M, but that's not why I have a Z3.

TitanTim · Post by **TitanTim** » Thu 22 Jul, 2010 16:42

Guys, all the bloke is trying to do is flog his Z3

What's it matter if not the perfect Zed!

Tim

yalden · Post by **yalden** » Thu 22 Jul, 2010 17:35

At least it's not silver...

TitanTim · Post by **TitanTim** » Thu 22 Jul, 2010 17:43

yalden wrote:At least it's not silver...

Tim

MarkR · Post by **MarkR** » Fri 23 Jul, 2010 07:57

I asked 'Why an M badge?' That Z3 is a fantastic example of the car. All upgrades done very well. I would be well proud to own it. I would remove the M badges though to be 100% happy. Be happy with what you have, don't pretend.