im back now even more undecided then before!

nicolawright · Post by **nicolawright** » Tue 22 Nov, 2005 11:21

hey all,

right i was toying over a bmw z3 2.8 a few months ago - but that all ended when morethan decided i couldnt change cars. still have to wait till april to get my no claims bonus.

but as ever im love spending time researching my next car! but now im really torn over so many different ones.

i have a budget of around £9k which I think should get me a 1999 2.8. But I'm also thinking about a 1999-2000 TT coupe 225 for £10k. I have checked nissan 350z and I may be able to import one for an all in price of £10-11k. Also on autotrader I have seen early 2.5 boxsters for £13k (above my budget but they're boxsters!!!)

i've also though about something cheaper like a hot hatch, and save the other money for holidays, shopping etc! i quite like alfa 147s and as i currently have a clio, a 172 renault sport is an easy choice.

so many cars - im just really confused. as soon as i settle on one, i tend to change to another one a few days later. i wonder whether anyone else went through this before getting a z3. also worried as z3s are becoming more accessible in price they might turn into chav racer which would be so frustrating. i can't see that fate with the others - well maybe tts or and def with the hot hatches...

right well hmmm.. lots to think about!!

nicky xx

Marvellous · Post by **Marvellous** » Tue 22 Nov, 2005 23:25

Get th' sen a Z3 an' be done wi' it

Mick

runningback · Post by **runningback** » Wed 23 Nov, 2005 07:58

the Z3 is the only Roadster out of your choices.
the 2.8 engine is one of the best engines BMW has ever produced IMHO, silky smooth and plenty powerful.
if you add a bit to your budget as you have for the other cars you can get a post 2000 model.

Personally i'd steer clear of the importing thing, too many unknowns and warranty issues.
to add too the confusion i'd add the Honda S2000 to the mix.

///M_aniac · Post by **///M_aniac** » Wed 23 Nov, 2005 08:32

Nicky,

you ain't going to get an unbiased suggestion/opinion from me......

Get a 2.8 Zed!

Sorted.

nicolawright · Post by **nicolawright** » Wed 23 Nov, 2005 10:44

i think it's gonna be a head to head between the 2.8 z3 and 225 tt coupe. i do love the exterior styling on both but the inside of the tt seems to look more expensive and sexier!

i can get the z3 for cheaper - but i think i will need to get the hardtop fitted as it will be left outside all year long which prob mean it'll cost in same region as tt. but that option of a drop top in the summer is so tempting...

i'm still feel very

!!

nicky x

John Boy · Post by **John Boy** » Wed 23 Nov, 2005 10:48

For many people the hard top for a Z3 is not a requirement, even in the winter. The cars heat up pretty quick (small cabin area etc) and maintain that heat very well. I was going to get a hard top, but after the first winter going by without a problem, I decided it's not essential.

Austin Powers · Post by **Austin Powers** » Wed 23 Nov, 2005 11:23

nicolawright wrote:i think it's gonna be a head to head between the 2.8 z3 and 225 tt coupe. i do love the exterior styling on both but the inside of the tt seems to look more expensive and sexier!

i can get the z3 for cheaper - but i think i will need to get the hardtop fitted as it will be left outside all year long which prob mean it'll cost in same region as tt. but that option of a drop top in the summer is so tempting...

i'm still feel very !!

nicky x

So get a TT roadster then?
IMHO, TT sure has the looks, but have you ever driven a TT in coupe version?
BTW: You do have something else with Zed beside the rag top - RWD.
On the other side, in TT you get a quattro.
Tough call.
I would go with a Zedster...

BW
Austin

Paul.Stuhlfelder · Post by **Paul.Stuhlfelder** » Wed 23 Nov, 2005 12:14

I did consider a TT before the ///M, I fancied one of the newer v6's with a DSG box, but decided against it in the end.

A: Every tom dick & harry has a TT these days.
B: They just look too squashed from the side.

nicolawright · Post by **nicolawright** » Wed 23 Nov, 2005 13:49

tt convertibles are even more expensive than the coupes and priced out of my budget. with z3 prices dropping do you think they might get snapped up by boy racers and other such chavs.

what's wrong with the drive in the tt coupe? i have a test drive booked for next week. i'm slightly concerned by the rear visbility but i think that is true of most coupes, sports cars even the z3. 4WD does provide a safer drive in all conditions i would have thought? rwd or though more sporty might get a bit messy in the wet right? i hear even the 2.8 can over power the z3's chasis.

///M_aniac · Post by **///M_aniac** » Wed 23 Nov, 2005 14:39

On the contrary, from what I've read and those I have driven, the 2.8 is perfect for the Z3 chassis.

BimBeema · Post by **BimBeema** » Wed 23 Nov, 2005 15:35

The 2.8 engine is great - I wish my 2.2 was a 2.8! You learn how to use the power!

My mate has 1.8 turbo 225hp TT - very quick compared to my 2.2, very nice interior but driving is abit bland to say the least, not really involving enough, depends if you want a drivers car (z3) or a bland car!

Austin Powers · Post by **Austin Powers** » Wed 23 Nov, 2005 15:55

nicolawright wrote:tt convertibles are even more expensive than the coupes and priced out of my budget. with z3 prices dropping do you think they might get snapped up by boy racers and other such chavs.

what's wrong with the drive in the tt coupe? i have a test drive booked for next week. i'm slightly concerned by the rear visbility but i think that is true of most coupes, sports cars even the z3. 4WD does provide a safer drive in all conditions i would have thought? rwd or though more sporty might get a bit messy in the wet right? i hear even the 2.8 can over power the z3's chasis.

I doubt that a Zedster will become a boy racers car...
In our country, this usually (and luckily) hits Honda's and other japs...

Opel and VW follow.

What's wrong with the drive in the TT coupe.
Well, you allready answered yourself a bit.
The problem is, that I hardly see anywhere in this car...left, right, back or forward.
By Zedster you truly get a plastic rear window and worse visibility, but in every other direction, the view is better. Not to mention, the way up, when top down...

Quattro sure is safer than RWD to an unexperienced driver, but believe me when I tell you, you will love rwd when you'll get used to it.
Quattro can be a lot dangerous in your head...you see, I think of it like this, I drive a RWD, attention, wet weather, drive carefully. By having a quattro, this limit would be much higher, sure it grips further than rwd, but when it goes over the limit, it goes much faster than a rwd car if you know what I mean. The problem is allways the driver, not the car.

Oh, and BTW, the first TT's are not known as a perfectionists in handling...remember the "follow up" on TT's?

Anyway, TT is a lovely car. 2+2 seater. Quattro. Aluminum chassis. Good engines.

Still, I would go for a Zedster.

LP
Austin

greg_ch · Post by **greg_ch** » Wed 23 Nov, 2005 22:06

Allround the TT coupe is a great and very well built car and more practical than a Z (The fold down seats are very handy). The problem with the TT imo is that the 4WD system is fairly basic. Combine that with the driver aids kicking in very early (compared to a Z) it turns it in to a dull car to drive. This will sound a bit crazy but my X3 is much more fun to drive

chaosss · Post by **chaosss** » Thu 24 Nov, 2005 09:10

I drove the 3.2TT with the DSG gearbox thing and without a doubt the gearbox was fantastic and the engine was smooth.

BUT and it is a huge one for me I found it so bland to drive. It was just so boring. It was quiet, refined etc. which is lovely for a big saloon car on the motorway but just no fun.

However this is my personal opinion and probably not one that is shared with everyone. Personally I would probably buy the Golf R32/Audi S3 3.2 instead of the TT as they are more practical and very similar otherwise.

Robin · Post by **Robin** » Thu 24 Nov, 2005 10:35

I haven't driven a TT. The jelly mould shape of the TT doesn't appeal compared to the good looks of the Z3.
If the TT is bland to drive like a large saloon, as you mentioned, then you'd just be buying something purely because it looked different to a saloon & paying lots for it in the process.

Part of the Z3's character in terms of driving feel comes from RWD & that sensation in a roadster of sitting almost right on top of the rear axle. I'd miss the fun of being able to kick the back end out when pulling out from junctions if it wasn't RWD.
Another advantage of the Z3 is that in the eyes of some it's too hairdressery to ever be mistaken for a chav mobile. So I guess that's one thing to be greatful for, because I'd rather be mistaken for being a hairdresser than a chav

BimBeema · Post by **BimBeema** » Thu 24 Nov, 2005 11:04

Thats what I was looking to say - the TT is more like a saloon disguised as a sports car rather than a true sporty car!!!

re Chavs - could you imagine what'd happen if it did become a Chav car - it'll propbably get a burberry pattern hard top and burberry pattern interior and the BMW badges will be replaced with Burberry badges!!!!

I wonder if anyone can photoshop that for a laugh!

Austin Powers · Post by **Austin Powers** » Thu 24 Nov, 2005 11:09

BimBeema wrote:Thats what I was looking to say - the TT is more like a saloon disguised as a sports car rather than a true sporty car!!!

re Chavs - could you imagine what'd happen if it did become a Chav car - it'll propbably get a burberry pattern hard top and burberry pattern interior and the BMW badges will be replaced with Burberry badges!!!!

I wonder if anyone can photoshop that for a laugh!

Actually, this could look good...

Except for the badges...
Imagine...oxford green...
Anyway: OT: is the pattern registered trademark? Anyone?

BW
Austin

nicolawright · Post by **nicolawright** » Thu 24 Nov, 2005 16:56

i see what you guys are saying... i can't really comment until i have driven both. but i take the points about the drivers aid in the tt making it more dull to drive - but can't you just switch them off if you fancy a bit of fun??

to be honest moving from a 1.2 Clio to anything more spritely will bring a smile to my face. my main issue with the tt is the visibility - if reversing, blind spots etc are a prob then i wouldnt get one..

c_w · Post by **c_w** » Thu 24 Nov, 2005 17:34

nicolawright wrote:i see what you guys are saying... i can't really comment until i have driven both. but i take the points about the drivers aid in the tt making it more dull to drive - but can't you just switch them off if you fancy a bit of fun??

to be honest moving from a 1.2 Clio to anything more spritely will bring a smile to my face. my main issue with the tt is the visibility - if reversing, blind spots etc are a prob then i wouldnt get one..

The Z3 might feel a bit funny to drive at first in terms of visibility as it feels like there is a huge blind spot, plus the door mirrors are really far back which is all things you get used to after owning one!!!

///M_aniac · Post by **///M_aniac** » Thu 24 Nov, 2005 17:53

Audi TTs remind me of egg slicers.

http://images.google.co.uk/images?q=tbn ... olated.jpg

Who wants to drive a four-wheeled kitchen utensil??

BartS · Post by **BartS** » Thu 24 Nov, 2005 18:05

for what it's worth... i have an Audi as well as company car... and although it is an A3 and not a TT if the built quality is anything to go by... then stay away from it.

Audi get nowhere near the built quality of my Z3 3.0....whilst the Audi gets driven muchmore sensibly (but 25k a year compared to 5k in the zed)

get the zed!!!!

Frankie · Post by **Frankie** » Thu 24 Nov, 2005 18:07

Unless you're an accountant I wouldn't get an Audi TT

Get th' sen a Z3 an' be done wi' it

Ditto!

nicolawright · Post by **nicolawright** » Thu 24 Nov, 2005 19:17

are heated seats and mirrors options on a 2.8 or standard?

are 2.8s 5-spd gear boxes?

John Boy · Post by **John Boy** » Thu 24 Nov, 2005 19:29

I can't say if all 2.8s have heated seats and mirrors, but mine has them.
They are 5 speed.

Gazza · Post by **Gazza** » Thu 24 Nov, 2005 19:43

I considered the 225 bhp TT coupe, love the shape,lots of them about though and driven by the "younger set",more of a chav mobile i think.

Fancied a roadster and drove the 2.8 Zed, not so many around,more people seem to admire the Zed, roof up or down, young and old alike --- I LOVE EVERYTHING ABOUT IT, GET A ZED
.
I've got heated seats dunno about mirrors.

Gazza.

risquenun · Post by **risquenun** » Thu 24 Nov, 2005 21:40

I had an Audi A4 2.8 quattro a while ago -6 months out of warranty a camshaft snapped due to metal fatigue - £3000 -Audi didn't want to know.. the car cost me £37000 and was the most unreliable car I ever owned.
My advice - buy the Beemer.........

nicolawright · Post by **nicolawright** » Thu 24 Nov, 2005 23:25

thanks for all the help guys.. z3 does seem like more fun.. also when looking at autotrader there are more z3s to choose from in my budget than with tts..

what's the furthest anyones travelled to get the zed they wanted? once i've decided it's the right car i think i'd be prepared to travel for my special car!

also can someone explain the revisions between 1997-2000 (these are the reg yrs in my budget)

they're supposed to be some revision in 1999 right?

but then i've seen some z3s from 2000 which are facelifted..

also would be really helpful if someone could actually point out the reg plate for the revisions/facelifts e.g. 1999 V

sorry to be really annoying..!

chaosss · Post by **chaosss** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 08:54

Hi,

The major facelift happened in 99/00. This means you get the revised interior switchgear, the exterior lights changed, the hood is double skinned rather than single and for the 2.8 versions the engine used is the double vanos unit found in the E46 rather than the single vanos which is used in pre facelift and came from the E36.

In 2001 the Z3 gained clear indicators and as far as I am aware that was the only change. Mine is one of the facelift models (1999 V Reg) but has the post 2001 lights.

I believe the facelift and revisions you mention above for 99/00 are the same ones. A lot of people say the revision happened in 2000 but there are 1999 cars that have them (as per mine). I don't think there are any facelift models available on a T plate though.

Many V reg cars are pre-facelift though so you will have to ask the owner. The easy way to tell externally is that the post facelift has the L shape rear lights although as soon as you looked at the interior you would know. All the interiors on your other thread belong to facelift models.

I travelled from Bath to Manchester to buy mine.

nicolawright · Post by **nicolawright** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 09:31

thanks for that chaosss..

does anyone have pics which clearly illustrate a prefacelift model and a facelifted model. maybe two constrasting pics of the front and two of the rear. i have seen a lot of 1999 v on autotrader would be nice to know exactly which ones are facelifted - even better if the seller doesn't know!!

also will all the post 1999 facelifted models have the button fitted which allows the rear windows of the hardtop to be heated? or was this always an option?

thanks again for everyone who's helped out so far... i have been on other car forums (like tts) and must admit z3 owners are the most friendly - another incentive to get a zed eh?

nicky xx

BimBeema · Post by **BimBeema** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 09:49

I believe (not sure if its 100% correct or not) that the facelifted models also have slightly wider body to to improve handling that was associated with the initial Z3 models, also it was slightly lower (or perhaps that is just the sports models), the face lift models also had a different shaped boot and more curvacious rear end and slightly longer bonnet and chrome surrounds in the front lights. These are subtle differences that you probably wouldn't notice if you were seeing only one at a time but I have def noticed these differences as my father has pre-facelift model and I have a facelift model so have been able to compare side by side!

chaosss · Post by **chaosss** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 10:00

Here is a pic of the rear of a facelift, I am sure someone here has a good pic of the rear of a pre-facelift

chaosss · Post by **chaosss** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 10:12

with regards to the heated button for the hard top is this part of the fitting kit that comes with it, or you buy seperately from a dealer?

Austin Powers · Post by **Austin Powers** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 12:11

nicolawright wrote: what's the furthest anyones travelled to get the zed they wanted? once i've decided it's the right car i think i'd be prepared to travel for my special car!

My quote-answer to similar question:

Buy well. As someone said: when you find the right one - you will know.
I was searching the right one for 6 months and drove 5000 km (3000 miles +) to find "the true love"

Now, as an owner, all that kilometres/miles seem to be worth it.

The lifting happened from 06/1999 on...
No problem to recognize...
Go to the rear end, if the lamps are in a shape of L, you have a facelift winner. (See pic above).

About the dimension: prefacelift models up to 2,8 engine were narrower.
After the facelift (all models except M division) all the Zeds are wider.

BW
Austin

c_w · Post by **c_w** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 12:38

My brother has a facelifted 1999T plate 2.8 so the crossover was deginitely middle of 1999 BUT I've seen a pre-face lifted V-plate in a thread on here from a Z3 meet, this must have been registered late or something.

I quite like the styling of the pre-facelift 2.8 as its the same as the ///M but the facelift still looks good too and with the interior switch gear improvements and thicker roof I'd always go for a face lifted one.

Geoff H · Post by **Geoff H** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 13:53

chaosss wrote:Here is a pic of the rear of a facelift, I am sure someone here has a good pic of the rear of a pre-facelift

Pre facelift 2.8 to compare

greg_ch · Post by **greg_ch** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 15:50

Don't know if it's the angle of the picture or an aftermarket set of exhaust tips but the facelifted model has much larger diameter exhausts.

Austin Powers · Post by **Austin Powers** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 16:03

greg_ch wrote:Don't know if it's the angle of the picture or an aftermarket set of exhaust tips but the facelifted model has much larger diameter exhausts.

Aftermarket...

BW
Austin

nicolawright · Post by **nicolawright** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 16:27

it all makes sense now - the l shape rear lights. at first i was like what are you lot on about.. but the pics make it clear. given the way the lights are done - you cant really upgrade a pre-face lift car to make it look facelifted can you? so basically if i see the l shaped lights it's def a face lift right??

sorry if you guys feel like you're

trying to explain this to me

nicky xx

Austin Powers · Post by **Austin Powers** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 16:38

nicolawright wrote:so basically if i see the l shaped lights it's def a face lift right??

Yes.

BW
Austin

nicolawright · Post by **nicolawright** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 17:50

what do you think?

http://www.rdsurrey.com/vehicle-details ... 3&ID=48271

not my favourite colour.. but facelift and good price. nearest facelifted 2.8 to me - still 15 miles..

as i said before i should really wait until next april to buy to get my NCB up.

just wondered if anyone had a plan for me to get a zed now.. i have a clio 1.2 which i have already paid morethan to insure which expires april 2006. the cheeky buggers wont let me change to a higher spec car like a zed despite getting reasonable offers from admiral.

so i can either:

a) wait till next april and get the zed in april and get a cheaper premium..
b) get it now.. get some money back from morethan but lose half a year of no claims.. i.e. start again from now..

Gazza · Post by **Gazza** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 18:21

Nice price, but dodgy number plate 666 number of the beast and all that.

Gazza.

///M_aniac · Post by **///M_aniac** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 18:25

Well, you'll have to purchase sooner or later, Nicky...

Austin Powers · Post by **Austin Powers** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 18:58

Oxford_gruen_II wrote:Well, you'll have to purchase sooner or later, Nicky...

True.
And probably, this is the best time to buy ti.
The prices are low, and will rise quite a lot in presaison time...

This one, the 2,8 facelift is quite cheap...
15 miles?
I think I would take a look...

Or is the snowstorm a problem?
By us, in 2 hours, 15 cm...

and incoming...

BW
Austin

chaosss · Post by **chaosss** » Fri 25 Nov, 2005 19:21

That facelift one you posted does look cheap...£7999. Almost seems too cheap to me

Only problem is it is very low spec again (no air con, heated seats) and really I would be wanting to upgrade those lights to clear indicators style ones. Also are those the 16" standard alloy wheels. The rear one looks lost width wise

John Boy · Post by **John Boy** » Sat 26 Nov, 2005 07:34

But it has that nice fake ///M badge.

I would personally want heated seats again if I buying again. If it is going to be a daily runner through the winter, you'll really appreciate them on these cold winter mornings.

c_w · Post by **c_w** » Sun 27 Nov, 2005 23:17

nicolawright wrote:what do you think?

http://www.rdsurrey.com/vehicle-details ... 3&ID=48271

not my favourite colour.. but facelift and good price. nearest facelifted 2.8 to me - still 15 miles..

as i said before i should really wait until next april to buy to get my NCB up.

just wondered if anyone had a plan for me to get a zed now.. i have a clio 1.2 which i have already paid morethan to insure which expires april 2006. the cheeky buggers wont let me change to a higher spec car like a zed despite getting reasonable offers from admiral.

so i can either:

a) wait till next april and get the zed in april and get a cheaper premium..
b) get it now.. get some money back from morethan but lose half a year of no claims.. i.e. start again from now..

From a quick glance at the rear picture it doesn't look straight to me, bootlid is mis-aligned and there's either some kind of rubbing strip been put on the boot lid edge or a large gap that shouldn't be there.

Personally I wouldn't go for a car you weren't happy with. That car seems quite cheap to me, I'm sure a lot of people on here with early 97R plate 2.8s would be unhappy to see that price from a dealer! For me the spec is not the bets, those seats aren't easy on the eye, the small wheels, and lack of extras would put me off.

nicolawright · Post by **nicolawright** » Mon 28 Nov, 2005 17:40

C_w thanks for pointing out your concerns. I never saw that car in the end but hopefully have found one which may work out for me. As I have said in another post - i'm trying to keep calm about this all but it's so hard not to feel excited!!!

OliZ · Post by **OliZ** » Mon 05 Dec, 2005 21:33

BimBeema wrote:I believe (not sure if its 100% correct or not) that the facelifted models also have slightly wider body to to improve handling that was associated with the initial Z3 models, also it was slightly lower (or perhaps that is just the sports models), the face lift models also had a different shaped boot and more curvacious rear end and slightly longer bonnet and chrome surrounds in the front lights. These are subtle differences that you probably wouldn't notice if you were seeing only one at a time but I have def noticed these differences as my father has pre-facelift model and I have a facelift model so have been able to compare side by side!

According to BMW, the width is exactly the same for all models, except for the early 1.8/1.9 and the M roadster. Check out this post
Also, the bonnet is the same part in the ETK for all models, so there can't be a difference in length.

c_w · Post by **c_w** » Mon 05 Dec, 2005 22:18

The only body changes were the rear arches and boot lids; bonnet is definitely the same on all models.

Mr Tim · Post by **Mr Tim** » Tue 06 Dec, 2005 19:24

Hi Nicky
i went to take look at the Z3 in the garage were i brought mine ok here are the fact`s
its a 2002 2.2i reg 03/05/2002 and has done 25,000 miles £12500 hey this only 3.5 years with air con

Mr Tim