1.9 or 2.0
1.9 or 2.0
Hey everyone, been looking at this forum for a while and fallen in love with the idea of getting a Z3 (some of your cars are AMAZING!!). Anyway Im only 21, so looking at getting either a 1.9 m44 or a 2.0 in the next few weeks, but was wondering if there was a real difference in performance between the 140bhp and the 150bhp and if there was any difference between fuel consumption (anything will be faster than my 1.2 Punto ).
Any help will be appreciated!
Thanks in advance!
Any help will be appreciated!
Thanks in advance!
1.9 or 2.0
I have a 2.0 never drove the 1.9 but I dont think there is much in it, just the 1.9 is a 4 cylinder & the 2.0 is a six & a lot of people prefer the sound of the six cylinder engines
Heath on Tapatalk
Heath on Tapatalk
- BladeRunner919
- Joined: Fri 17 Feb, 2012 20:18
- Posts: 2225
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
I'd drive both and see what you think. I personally prefer the 4 cylinder engines because I like the characteristics, despite the lower power, but there are plenty of people that would say the opposite. It's true that the 6 cylinder engines sound better.
For me, the fun is in the small-car, roof-down thing and the actual engine is somewhat secondary.
For me, the fun is in the small-car, roof-down thing and the actual engine is somewhat secondary.
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
Ok then, definitely gonna have to arrange some test drives, cheers for the help.
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
I've had both and there isnt much in it performance wise it's way they do it.
The narrow body 1.9 16v revs beautifully and feels nimble very MX-5ish mind you it was 13 years ago I had mine and only for 18 months till I got my 2.0 which in comparison feels bigger and delivers it's power in a slightly more relaxed way, plus the sound is lovely
Both are great cars, try both and see which one suits you and enjoy
The narrow body 1.9 16v revs beautifully and feels nimble very MX-5ish mind you it was 13 years ago I had mine and only for 18 months till I got my 2.0 which in comparison feels bigger and delivers it's power in a slightly more relaxed way, plus the sound is lovely
Both are great cars, try both and see which one suits you and enjoy
99 2.0 Topaz Individual
-
- Z Register member
- Joined: Sat 30 Jul, 2005 19:34
- Posts: 4054
- Location: Belfast
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
I had a 2.0 and delighted in every minute of ownership--silky smooth 6 pot engine and a lovely exhaust note.
The 1.9s are more economical for the same sort of performance.
I'd have another 2.0 in a heartbeat, but just drive both and see which one you like best.
Good luck with the search.
The 1.9s are more economical for the same sort of performance.
I'd have another 2.0 in a heartbeat, but just drive both and see which one you like best.
Good luck with the search.
BMW Z3, the only way to build a true roadster
- The most powerful letter in the world.
- The most powerful letter in the world.
Cloz wrote:There is something that will never change is my love for Z3
smartypants wrote:Conor?
With an M??
The World's gone mad
smartypants wrote:The Z3 rear is a great thing to behold
- OldskoolRS
- Joined: Mon 06 Feb, 2012 14:23
- Posts: 412
- Location: Wokingham
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
I actually found the 1.9 a hoot to drive once the top was down as it feels much faster. At 21 you might be wise to get some quotes first incase even the 1.9 is more than you're willing to pay. Hopefully it won't be and while you're at it get quotes for the 2.0 and 2.2 just to be sure. When I was looking I soon realised that if you narrow your selection too far then there aren't so many cars to chose from. I tried all types bar the 2.0 litre and M versions and they all appealed on different levels. The 2.2 I tried didn't seem that much slower than the 3.0 I ended up with. If I hadn't picked the 3.0, I probably would have bought a clean 1.9 private sale that I found (it was half the price, so a less 'serious' purchase, but a fun drive non the less).
To be honest, there are times that my 3.0 litre doesn't feel as powerful as I'd expect (low revs and in too high a gear is usually the cause, plus I drive a 320d as a company car), so it's sometimes more about making the most of what you have got and keeping the revs up to make progress.
To be honest, there are times that my 3.0 litre doesn't feel as powerful as I'd expect (low revs and in too high a gear is usually the cause, plus I drive a 320d as a company car), so it's sometimes more about making the most of what you have got and keeping the revs up to make progress.
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
and your carrying another cylinder with anything above the 1.9.....get your self an M44 1.9 16v 140BHP and 1 less cylinder than the others
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
When did BMW start producing 5 cylinder engines?swamper wrote:and your carrying another cylinder with anything above the 1.9.....get your self an M44 1.9 16v 140BHP and 1 less cylinder than the others
Cheers R.
Arctic Silver '99 Z3 1.9 & Black '59 Frogeye 1275cc
- LookinFoolish
- Joined: Sun 31 Jul, 2011 18:36
- Posts: 294
- Contact:
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
I'm 22 and own a Z3 and i have to say, regardless of speed, it's the look. I saw one today and i looked at the cars surrounding it and none looked anywhere near as good. Ok, maybe i'm a bit biased, but they are absolutely beautiful cars and the 1.9 is economical/fast enough without being a complete gas guzzler. It's a nice, sensible choice, especially for your age group. I really wouldn't care about getting a specific litre Z, but i'd care about getting a well looked after Z with low mileage and you'll be pleased
1997 BMW Z3 1.9l
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
long day Rob....i think he'll get my point i meant 2 less...
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
Nicely put lookingfoolish i agree with 100%
Si-forks on tapatalk
Si-forks on tapatalk
E30 318 1988 Gone
E36 320 1992 Gone
E36 328 1995 write off
E39 525d M Sport 2003 Current
E37 Z3 M44B1.9 1997 Current
E36 320 1992 Gone
E36 328 1995 write off
E39 525d M Sport 2003 Current
E37 Z3 M44B1.9 1997 Current
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
Ok guys, been a while but I finally got my Zed, Montreal Blue 1.9 M44 and I love it, been looking for any excuse to drive topless since having it, will get some pics up soon hopefully!
-
- Joined: Mon 09 Apr, 2012 03:08
- Posts: 41
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
Nice choice, get a few pictures up...its one of the only things I think sucks about being in my twenties, not being able to insure any of the larger engined performance geared cars without paying over 2k on insurance, hence why I also opted for the M44 1.9 16v... I'm more than happy with the MPG on my 1.9 although its not as fast as the 6 cylinder engines its truly a great/fun car to drive and in my honest opinion you've made the right choice and picked the best colour , lol, not that I'm biased towards montreal blue m44's not at all...... ,looking forward to seeing how it progresses over the coming months
Enjoy it
G
Enjoy it
G
.
-
- Joined: Fri 19 Jun, 2009 10:27
- Posts: 2093
- Location: Daglan, France
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
Get a 1.9 if you can still find a decent one, as they have the sharpest steering of any 6 cylinder Z3, thanks to not having another 50 pounds of engine weight in front of the axle line. A far better engine than the VW 16V Golf GTI engine of the same period, with more torque and better fuel economy.
It gives about the same performance as the 2 litre engine, and is also able to take a pair of Kent 312R camshafts, which will transform the car into a 2.2 equivalent, and with a decent cylinder head job too it would probably stay with a 2.8 to about 80 mph.
Forget the rubbish about how 'wonderful' the sixes sound - unless you like a boomy drone! Noisey exhausts are for the immature and the deaf . . .
It gives about the same performance as the 2 litre engine, and is also able to take a pair of Kent 312R camshafts, which will transform the car into a 2.2 equivalent, and with a decent cylinder head job too it would probably stay with a 2.8 to about 80 mph.
Forget the rubbish about how 'wonderful' the sixes sound - unless you like a boomy drone! Noisey exhausts are for the immature and the deaf . . .
A Z3 is not just for Christmas - it's for life!
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
Forget the rubbish about how 'wonderful' the sixes sound - unless you like a boomy drone! Noisey exhausts are for the im
mature and the deaf .... ( Boring old farts better stick with a 4 cyl then )
mature and the deaf .... ( Boring old farts better stick with a 4 cyl then )
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
putting a good free flow stainless system with sports cat ....... brings the sound of the 4 cylder models to another level ...... its not your corsa with a drainpipe stuck on the back
its raspy but not loud ...and it looks great
its raspy but not loud ...and it looks great
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
WELL SAID i spent a lot of money haveing a hand built quad system on my 2.0 and its sounds great ,,hes not as Mr fishwick seems to think. hes possably fed up with all the locals with big bore pipes on there 2 cvs to notice the differance.
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
Please tell me more sounds right up my street !Mike Fishwick wrote:
It gives about the same performance as the 2 litre engine, and is also able to take a pair of Kent 312R camshafts, which will transform the car into a 2.2 equivalent, and with a decent cylinder head job too it would probably stay with a 2.8 to about 80 mph.
Si-forks on tapatalk
E30 318 1988 Gone
E36 320 1992 Gone
E36 328 1995 write off
E39 525d M Sport 2003 Current
E37 Z3 M44B1.9 1997 Current
E36 320 1992 Gone
E36 328 1995 write off
E39 525d M Sport 2003 Current
E37 Z3 M44B1.9 1997 Current
- OldskoolRS
- Joined: Mon 06 Feb, 2012 14:23
- Posts: 412
- Location: Wokingham
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
Me too...I'm wondering what similar could do to a 3.0 Z3.si-forks wrote:Please tell me more sounds right up my street !Mike Fishwick wrote:
It gives about the same performance as the 2 litre engine, and is also able to take a pair of Kent 312R camshafts, which will transform the car into a 2.2 equivalent, and with a decent cylinder head job too it would probably stay with a 2.8 to about 80 mph.
Si-forks on tapatalk
-
- Joined: Fri 19 Jun, 2009 10:27
- Posts: 2093
- Location: Daglan, France
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
The 1.9 should run very well on KEnt 312 R cams - we had them on Heather's Corrado a few years ago, with a good cylinder head job, and it went frm lifeless to lively, with far better fuel cnsumption too! It's an advantage of a non-vanos engine that camshafts are simple to make. Have a look at the Kent Cams website.
The 3 litre engine already uses a hotter inlet cam than the 2.8, and has larger inlet valves, Shrick being the onlymreal choice, at about £1200 a pair plus fitting - see the CA Autotechnic site, as they seem tobe the only dealer in the UK, and charge accordingly. I would prefer to have the work done in Germany.
A visit tothe Alpina factory showed that standard BMW cylinder heads are terrible - big steps in the inlet ports for example - I would spend money on a head job before camshafts.
The 3 litre engine already uses a hotter inlet cam than the 2.8, and has larger inlet valves, Shrick being the onlymreal choice, at about £1200 a pair plus fitting - see the CA Autotechnic site, as they seem tobe the only dealer in the UK, and charge accordingly. I would prefer to have the work done in Germany.
A visit tothe Alpina factory showed that standard BMW cylinder heads are terrible - big steps in the inlet ports for example - I would spend money on a head job before camshafts.
A Z3 is not just for Christmas - it's for life!
- OldskoolRS
- Joined: Mon 06 Feb, 2012 14:23
- Posts: 412
- Location: Wokingham
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
Kind of academic at the moment, but interesting to know. TBH since I replaced a camshaft sensor recently the car is going quite fast enough, but no harm finding out what options there are. FWIW mine can be a little boomy low down, but oddly only with the hardtop on. Open roof or soft top it's fine and makes such a lovely noise once opened up I find it hard to stop myself.
- LookinFoolish
- Joined: Sun 31 Jul, 2011 18:36
- Posts: 294
- Contact:
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
I have seen some dislike for the 1.9 on youtube reviews and all i can say is that the Z3 is a roadster. An open top roadster. By definition, the car is built for cruising on long open roads, with the top down. Speed shouldn't really be a big factor. Don't get me wrong, i'd love a big powerful Z, maybe even the M version, but a roadster is a beautiful thing and has so much history to it that if you base your car around pure speed alone, i believe you'll miss out on what the car is mainly designed for.
1997 BMW Z3 1.9l
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
Just seen you've gone for the 1.9, hope it goes well!!!
- BladeRunner919
- Joined: Fri 17 Feb, 2012 20:18
- Posts: 2225
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
You're so right. Especially when you have one of these in the garage, which would make an ///M driver cry all day longLookinFoolish wrote:I have seen some dislike for the 1.9 on youtube reviews and all i can say is that the Z3 is a roadster. An open top roadster. By definition, the car is built for cruising on long open roads, with the top down. Speed shouldn't really be a big factor.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
- OldskoolRS
- Joined: Mon 06 Feb, 2012 14:23
- Posts: 412
- Location: Wokingham
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
If I had one of those I think it would be my family that would be crying before long...BladeRunner919 wrote:You're so right. Especially when you have one of these in the garage, which would make an ///M driver cry all day longLookinFoolish wrote:I have seen some dislike for the 1.9 on youtube reviews and all i can say is that the Z3 is a roadster. An open top roadster. By definition, the car is built for cruising on long open roads, with the top down. Speed shouldn't really be a big factor.
The different engines imbude the car with different characters (and running costs of course). I tried most versions in my search (apart from the 2.0 and ///M) and would have been happy with any of the ones that were in decent condition. In fact I couldn't make my mind up for a couple of days between 1.9, 2.2 and 3.0 examples that were all in good condition and priced suitably. I'm glad I chose what I did, but I think I would have been happy with any of them.
It doesn't matter what car you buy (///M included) there will always be someone richer with something more powerful, so although you could be a big fish in a little pond, out in the wider world there are Veyron owners, etc who probably would view the fastest Z3 as a slow car...Best just to enjoy whatever you have and don't worry about trying to impress anyone IMHO. Of couse fellow Z3 owners willl be impressed by your well turned out example, but then we have good taste.
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
BladeRunner919 wrote: You're so right. Especially when you have one of these in the garage, which would make an ///M driver cry all day long
What?.... a photograph of a motorcycle?
Z3 2.8 Progress Journal (Mine)
Z3 1.9 Sport Progress Journal (Wifey's)
I have an element of 'M-styling' on my car, If that's a good enough reason for the manufacturers to adorn a 320 with the M badge, then its certainly a good enough reason for me..
- BladeRunner919
- Joined: Fri 17 Feb, 2012 20:18
- Posts: 2225
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
Err no. The bike in the picture. Well not the actual bike in that picture, but one exactly like that.gookah wrote: What?.... a photograph of a motorcycle?
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
It's a bit small...BladeRunner919 wrote:Err no. The bike in the picture. Well not the actual bike in that picture, but one exactly like that.gookah wrote: What?.... a photograph of a motorcycle?
Z3 2.8 Progress Journal (Mine)
Z3 1.9 Sport Progress Journal (Wifey's)
I have an element of 'M-styling' on my car, If that's a good enough reason for the manufacturers to adorn a 320 with the M badge, then its certainly a good enough reason for me..
- Badman gee
- Joined: Sun 14 Nov, 2010 10:45
- Posts: 2299
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
yep boring old fartspete59 wrote:Forget the rubbish about how 'wonderful' the sixes sound - unless you like a boomy drone! Noisey exhausts are for the im
mature and the deaf .... ( Boring old farts better stick with a 4 cyl then )
- Badman gee
- Joined: Sun 14 Nov, 2010 10:45
- Posts: 2299
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
wouldnt make me cry,BladeRunner919 wrote:You're so right. Especially when you have one of these in the garage, which would make an ///M driver cry all day longLookinFoolish wrote:I have seen some dislike for the 1.9 on youtube reviews and all i can say is that the Z3 is a roadster. An open top roadster. By definition, the car is built for cruising on long open roads, with the top down. Speed shouldn't really be a big factor.
- nobynom8ss
- Joined: Tue 13 Apr, 2010 17:08
- Posts: 87
- Location: wigston
Re: 1.9 or 2.0
not to sure where this one is going i have got a 929 fire blade and a z3 all be it only a 2.8 how ever the bike spends more time in the garage . And i spend more time in the z . Any way back to 1.9 or 2.0 hi and welcome if you can afford a 2.0 go for it they look much better close up . but at the end of the day what ever you do get as long as it is a z enjoy
and get the top down
and get the top down