ZM and 3.0 sport

UK forum for general and technical discussion about the Z3 roadster
Post Reply
johnz3
Joined: Wed 13 Sep, 2006 10:27
Posts: 670

  Z3 roadster 3.0i
Location: Pitsea

ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by johnz3 »

First off this is not a what is the best car post. It is to enable me to find out why the difference in price. I brought my 2002 3.0 sport privately which now has 65k miles. Paid £4250 and with a good service and the fixing of an oil leak lets say £4750. Now got cruise control, footwell lighting and a couple of others niceties so lets say worth £5000. To buy a ZM would cost around £10000. Is the price difference just about performance or is there something else. Thanks.
Del
Joined: Sat 19 Nov, 2011 18:35
Posts: 2136

  Z3 roadster 1.9

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by Del »

What makes the M more expensive?:-
Rarity, performance, unique mechanicals and desirability of a genuine "M" BMW. The engine is for example completely different it is not just an enlarged 3.0 unit. It has a different block & bottom end, the upper engine is also completely different as is the throttle/inlet system and exhaust.
maurice the martian
Joined: Tue 26 Jan, 2010 19:44
Posts: 1026

  Z4 roadster 3.0i
Location: mars

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by maurice the martian »

Snob value..ha ha.
M
Only kiddin
Smartbear
Joined: Wed 29 Jan, 2014 19:46
Posts: 115

  blank

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by Smartbear »

I bet most owners of the 3litre rarely if ever have them flat out-after all its a very fast car.
With this in mind I'd be really surprised if any m owners buy them for the increased performance as even stretching the legs of a 3.0 would quickly end in a jail sentence?
Maybe it's the rareity value?
Regards
beerbelly
Joined: Fri 07 Feb, 2014 20:12
Posts: 177

  blank

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by beerbelly »

drive an m car and you will soon realise the 3.0 isn't even on the same playing field. pushed hard the 3.0 isn't a particularly fast car drive the m with the same gusto and it is an animal. tbh there completely different cars
User avatar
Brian H
Joined: Tue 16 Dec, 2008 19:55
Posts: 2505

  Z3 roadster 3.0i

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by Brian H »

John,

There are many differences between the ///M and a 3.0, the engine, brakes, suspension etc. are all slightly different which when all added up makes a totally different car. Basically the ///M is a highly tuned car.
beerbelly wrote:drive an m car and you will soon realise the 3.0 isn't even on the same playing field. pushed hard the 3.0 isn't a particularly fast car drive the m with the same gusto and it is an animal. tbh there completely different cars
I do not usually rise to these sort of comments but BB to say the 3.0 " isn't on the same playing field" or "isn't a particularly fast car" I think is quite harsh, I do agree with you that the ///M is a faster car but do not underestimate the speed of a 3.0 if driven well.

Brian
beerbelly
Joined: Fri 07 Feb, 2014 20:12
Posts: 177

  blank

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by beerbelly »

ok I will rephrase my comments yes sure the 3.0 is fairly nippy what I meant was in comparison to an m one feels like a sharp well balanced shatteringly fast finely honed weapon the other feels like a fast comfortable grand tourer there aimed at two different markets if you rode fast bikes like the difference between a gsxr1000 and a busa both look similar on paper with similar power top speed ect but completely different animals unfortunately race track inspired technology is expensive hence m cars are more money
Thesurveyor
Joined: Tue 15 Oct, 2013 13:36
Posts: 119

  M roadster S50
Location: Kent

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by Thesurveyor »

It's boring but true. Demand vs. supply.
Just looked on Pistonheads classified and there is one M roadster in uk and one in Holland for sale. (How many left" reckons about 550 left in total) I counted 4,Bugatti Veyrons for sale on same site.
User avatar
Mike123
Joined: Tue 21 Mar, 2006 14:34
Posts: 323

  M roadster S50
Location: Leamington Spa

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by Mike123 »

Not driven any other Z, but 80k+ miles in the M over 10 years, so I've got to know it quite well. I've driven a lot of fast miles in many different cars, some more powerful, some less, so BHP is not the simple answer to speed or enjoyment, and I'm sure the smaller engined Zs can be great to drive, they are small, well balanced, rear wheel drive - key components of a sports car to me. I'm sutre I would enjoy an MX5 or a Boxster in the same way.

The real attraction to me is that the M has basically a bit too much power for its chassis, which means that it has a certain edginess - if you abuse it, it will kill you :evil: - but if you learn to handle it, it will reward you with a level of pure thrill that only cars of this type can give. I can't think of many similar cars, maybe a really well sorted Cobra replica, maybe an early 911, neither of which appeal to me personally in many ways, which is why I'm keeping mine for some time to come.
Joycey
Joined: Mon 11 Jul, 2011 22:15
Posts: 290

  M roadster S52
Location: Basingstoke

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by Joycey »

All these comments are valid and true but for me the difference:

I owned my 2.8 for 4 years and loved it (could'nt bring myself to sell it so my dad now owns it). I would say it's a fast car but more like a powerful cruiser and did'nt really come to life until the rpm's got high. Even then when at high speed lacked that confidence holding the road.

My M on the other hand (Year into ownership), slightly tweaked over your standard S50 has that edge. You can put your foot down in any of the lower gears up to 3rd and you'll be lighting the back end up. Also whilst driving it hard it does fill you with confidence like its holding the road well. it's like an animal that can leap at any moment. The car is stiffer, slightly lower, obviously quicker, the styling is aggressive. You have to treat it with respect or you wont be alive for very long.

Now the 3.0 compared the M. The styling is the biggest thing to me, the front and rear bumpers the grills also the twin exhausts and most importantly of all the interior. I believe the price to be more to do with owning a part of the BMW "M" heritage which if you do drive into bmw you get treated differently regardless of the age.

Sometimes i need to burrow my dads estate so i leave him with the "M" and after driving it he thinks the ammount of power in there is stupid. He prefers the feel of his powerful crusier and comfort in the 2.8

Intresting discussion

Lee
User avatar
akirk
Joined: Fri 20 Apr, 2012 08:11
Posts: 122

  Z3 roadster 3.0i

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by akirk »

I have a 3.0 and the reality is that you could easily lose licences / kill yourself with the power it has - in dry conditions it is a safe easy car to drive, in the wet / slippery conditions you do need to concentrate much more...
I am not sure that in an 'm' you would necessarily use the extra power - I was driving a 911 a week ago which has a similar power to the M and it was mainly wasted - I couldn't see it going cross-country much faster than my 3.0 - at that point the driver is probably the biggest difference...

I suspect though that the M is desireable simply because it is top of the pack - there is something about having the fastest etc. part of human nature to want the best...
however if you put it into a price / performance / fun equation, then probably the 3.0 is one of the best value cars around - def. better than the M / 911 on that basis
but it is not all about cost, so I can see why a 911 / M might be bought instead
Flight
Joined: Mon 16 Sep, 2013 20:43
Posts: 97

  blank

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by Flight »

The 3.0i and the M are both touring cars, and neither can be considered as a sports car, both having dodgy handling. The 3.0i has more than sufficient performance for its roll in life, who needs the M.? I would suggest any one looking for a proper sports car having power to spare and perfect handling should try Lotus.
cheers
Flight
johnz3
Joined: Wed 13 Sep, 2006 10:27
Posts: 670

  Z3 roadster 3.0i
Location: Pitsea

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by johnz3 »

Hi Everyone.

Thanks for the comments. Really useful.
User avatar
Mike123
Joined: Tue 21 Mar, 2006 14:34
Posts: 323

  M roadster S50
Location: Leamington Spa

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by Mike123 »

Flight wrote:The 3.0i and the M are both touring cars, and neither can be considered as a sports car, both having dodgy handling. The 3.0i has more than sufficient performance for its roll in life, who needs the M.? I would suggest any one looking for a proper sports car having power to spare and perfect handling should try Lotus.
cheers
Flight
Spoken with the full authority of someone who has little actual experience of driving Zs. :dunce:

Remind me again what Lotus stands for, isn't it "Lot's Of Trouble, Usually Serious" :wink:
User avatar
Jonttt
Z Register member
Joined: Sun 28 Dec, 2008 16:32
Posts: 6554

  M roadster S54
Location: Liverpool

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by Jonttt »

Flight wrote:The 3.0i and the M are both touring cars, and neither can be considered as a sports car, both having dodgy handling. The 3.0i has more than sufficient performance for its roll in life, who needs the M.? I would suggest any one looking for a proper sports car having power to spare and perfect handling should try Lotus.
cheers
Flight
Wow, that had to be the worst statement I've read in a long time :lol:

It is so far off the mark I simply cannot be bothered listing the many reasons why it is :?
Happiness is not around the corner........happiness is the corner
Image Video or Journal Garage: 2015 FFRR Black Edition, Porsche Boxster GTS, 1997 Porsche Carrara C4S, Ex 2001 BMW S54 Z3m Roadster
User avatar
Jonttt
Z Register member
Joined: Sun 28 Dec, 2008 16:32
Posts: 6554

  M roadster S54
Location: Liverpool

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by Jonttt »

Re the 3 v ///M debate the best examples of the differences are actually on the road driving. I've done numerous fast road runs with well sorted 3 litres in the group. Driven hard they are quick but for example driven hard out of a 2nd gear roundabout the ///M has to be held back or it would drive through the 3 litres through 3rd gear. Yes small differences but it's the small differences which people pay the premium for.

Put the glorious S54 engine into the equation as well and that is just icing on the cake :wink:

Ps for what it's worth my favourite none ///M Z3 is the 2.2 sport, great engine that really suits the Z3 :wink:
Happiness is not around the corner........happiness is the corner
Image Video or Journal Garage: 2015 FFRR Black Edition, Porsche Boxster GTS, 1997 Porsche Carrara C4S, Ex 2001 BMW S54 Z3m Roadster
User avatar
lightning
Joined: Tue 27 Nov, 2007 08:15
Posts: 818

  Z3 roadster 3.0i
Location: Stockport

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by lightning »

Flight wrote:The 3.0i and the M are both touring cars, and neither can be considered as a sports car, both having dodgy handling. The 3.0i has more than sufficient performance for its roll in life, who needs the M.? I would suggest any one looking for a proper sports car having power to spare and perfect handling should try Lotus.
cheers
Flight
I sold my Lotus Elise S2 111s and bought a Z3 3.0 M Sport (not ///M just the M Sport, which has uprated suspension and better seats, otherwise regular 3.0)

The Z3 was at the top of the price range at £6,000 but that still left £10,000 in the kitty after selling the Lotus.

I prefer the Z3! The Lotus is great on a trackday but hard and rattly elsewhere. The Z3 3.0 is just as fast, is better made, and uses about the same amount of fuel. Plus l can drive it to France without wearing ear defenders.

Obviously the Lotus was the better driver's car, on the occasion you were in the mood for it. But in day to day and general driving the Z3 takes it.
Del
Joined: Sat 19 Nov, 2011 18:35
Posts: 2136

  Z3 roadster 1.9

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by Del »

I appreciate the Lotus is light and that weight is perfectly distributed, but didn't certain models have that rather "weedy" Rover engine which was infamous for blowing head gaskets?
User avatar
Alfie
Z Register member
Joined: Thu 29 Apr, 2004 14:28
Posts: 3312

  M roadster S54
Location: Broadchurch....

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by Alfie »

I went from a Z3 3.0i to an S54 ///MR.
Both excellent cars but very different from each other.
I'm not going to bang on about why coz it's mostly been covered above, but for so many reasons, if a potential buyer can stretch to an ///M (price-wise) then JUST DO IT..!

And if a Lotus came out with us for a day 'cruising the lanes', most of it would be going home in a bucket.... :twisted:

A.
Image
User avatar
akirk
Joined: Fri 20 Apr, 2012 08:11
Posts: 122

  Z3 roadster 3.0i

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by akirk »

Jonttt wrote:Re the 3 v ///M debate the best examples of the differences are actually on the road driving. I've done numerous fast road runs with well sorted 3 litres in the group. Driven hard they are quick but for example driven hard out of a 2nd gear roundabout the ///M has to be held back or it would drive through the 3 litres through 3rd gear. Yes small differences but it's the small differences which people pay the premium for.

Put the glorious S54 engine into the equation as well and that is just icing on the cake :wink:

Ps for what it's worth my favourite none ///M Z3 is the 2.2 sport, great engine that really suits the Z3 :wink:
good description of the difference - it is small differences though - in your example, another 100 yards and the 3.0l would be back on your tail - the limitation for any car is speed limit / road conditions / (or most likely the driver) etc. - not the performance of the car... do we need more than the 3.0l - no, of course not, is the extra fun and a grin a minute to drive of an M worth it - undoubtedly :D - as you say the 2.2 is a good engine as well, and others like the 1.9 for its balance etc. - I guess we are lucky to have a range of enjoyable options... I considere moving from the 3.0 to an M but for me the price difference is not worth it - I wouldn't get 2-3 times the fun out of an M...

Alasdair
Smartbear
Joined: Wed 29 Jan, 2014 19:46
Posts: 115

  blank

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by Smartbear »

I've got a bit of experience with some of the cars discussed here,
Image
We have a 2.2 z3 which is a lovely, smooth driving road car & a 3.0si which is similarly smooth engine wise but the chassis/suspension makes it feel firmer & more twitchy.
The engine is a beauty with lots of midrange torque.
Image
Before the zeds I had a toyota engined elise as a daily driver for two & a half years, yes the engine was a bit weedy as mentioned earlier in the thread but that doesn't really matter when the car only weighs 850kg (earlier s1 cars weighed 720kg) and its 134hp let it accelerate to 60mph as fast as a 3litre z car as lightening on here would agree with.
On a twisty track a z wouldn't see which way the lotus went as its one of the most nimble/best steering cars ever made.
For road use however I find the z3 (and z4) much nicer places to be, Mrs smartbear much prefers them as well.
Regards
BryZzz
Joined: Sun 20 Oct, 2013 00:56
Posts: 19

  Z3 roadster 2.8

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by BryZzz »

sold my 2.8 and got an M :D

Sorry, but incomparable :o
User avatar
Topperz
Joined: Tue 20 Nov, 2012 20:08
Posts: 89

  Z3 roadster 2.0

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by Topperz »

Errr wasn't the lotus engine the rebadged, unreliable rover k series.....nice

Regardless of what size,the bmw 6 cylinder is renowned for reliability,smoothness and a stunning retro sound track

Just my 10p worth....I've only got a 2.0 as they didn't make mine in any other variant,so the rarity factor again kicks in
The only bad thing about owning a Z3 is bedtime .......boing!! time for bed said zebedee

Z3 cosmos black individual 2.0

X1 /MSport XDrive 2.0d mineral white
Smartbear
Joined: Wed 29 Jan, 2014 19:46
Posts: 115

  blank

Re: ZM and 3.0 sport

Post by Smartbear »

Topperz wrote:Errr wasn't the lotus engine the rebadged, unreliable rover k series.....nice

Regardless of what size,the bmw 6 cylinder is renowned for reliability,smoothness and a stunning retro sound track

Just my 10p worth....I've only got a 2.0 as they didn't make mine in any other variant,so the rarity factor again kicks in
No, my lotus had a reliable toyota engine as did all the cars lotus made after 2005 :wink:
Regards
Post Reply