| Author |
Message |
tim
Guest
|
 Posted:
Tue Mar 22, 2005 4:03 am Post subject:
Z4 - bad points? |
|
|
Are there any? Electric hood leaks? Poor rear-view mirror perhaps? Noisy?
All thoughts welcomed.
TIA
tim
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Tom Korth
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Mar 22, 2005 5:45 am Post subject:
Re: Z4 - bad points? |
|
|
"tim" <timmuffty@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:423f52bd$0$2765$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
| Quote: | Are there any? Electric hood leaks? Poor rear-view mirror perhaps? Noisy?
All thoughts welcomed.
|
The "power top" (I'm in the U.S.) works very well. I had a very slight
water leak which was easily fixed under warranty by adjusting the
weather-stripping. There is a small (about 3"x3") plastic piece in the top
mechanism which broke, but it was very easy to replace. I don't have the
auto-dimming mirror, so mine is fine. As in any modern roadster, rear
vision isn't wonderful with the top up, but the Z4 beats my wife's 2000 Saab
convertible.
Wind noise is not bad with the top down and very good with the top up - if
you order the "electric hood". IIRC, the manual top is unlined and,
therefore, noisier.
My main complaint is a rather stiff ride, probably due to the OEM runflat
tires. On the other hand, cornering is greatly improved over the Z3 and the
added trunk ("boot") space is appreciated on long trips.
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Malt_Hound
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Mar 22, 2005 7:28 pm Post subject:
Re: Z4 - bad points? |
|
|
tim wrote:
No. There are no points in *any* modern automobile as they are all
fitted with electronic ignition.
| Quote: | Electric hood leaks?
|
The hood is not electric. The soft-top might be though, though the
electric part seldom leaks.
| Quote: | Poor rear-view mirror perhaps?
|
Well, it's not the richest looking mirror I've ever seen.
No. In fact many will replace the exhaust with one that is even noisier.
| Quote: |
All thoughts welcomed.
|
I bet you did not welcome the above thoughts. ;-)
Sorry, I have a Z3, but no actual experience with a Z4. I just couldn't
resist being a smart @$$.
-Fred W
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sam Smith
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Mar 23, 2005 6:45 pm Post subject:
Re: Z4 - bad points? |
|
|
"tim" <timmuffty@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:423f52bd$0$2765$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
| Quote: | Are there any? Electric hood leaks? Poor rear-view mirror perhaps? Noisy?
All thoughts welcomed.
TIA
|
I'm getting a new Alpina Roadster S Lux this June - so I will let you know!
---
Sam |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DRP535
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Mar 24, 2005 8:19 pm Post subject:
Re: Z4 - bad points? |
|
|
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 23:03:19 -0000, "tim" <timmuffty@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | Are there any? Electric hood leaks? Poor rear-view mirror perhaps? Noisy?
All thoughts welcomed.
|
Geezzzz where do I start?
Oh I know! The looks. It's so hideously ugly you can't get within 30 feet
of one without retasting your last meal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CFL
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Mar 25, 2005 1:39 am Post subject:
Re: Z4 - bad points? |
|
|
DRP535 wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 23:03:19 -0000, "tim" <timmuffty@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Are there any? Electric hood leaks? Poor rear-view mirror perhaps? Noisy?
All thoughts welcomed.
Geezzzz where do I start?
Oh I know! The looks. It's so hideously ugly you can't get within 30 feet
of one without retasting your last meal.
I like the looks...Strange me. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alan
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Mar 25, 2005 5:34 pm Post subject:
Re: Z4 - bad points? |
|
|
Sam Smith wrote:
| Quote: | "tim" <timmuffty@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:423f52bd$0$2765$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
Are there any? Electric hood leaks? Poor rear-view mirror perhaps? Noisy?
All thoughts welcomed.
TIA
I'm getting a new Alpina Roadster S Lux this June - so I will let you know!
---
Sam
You're very lucky Sam- the Roadster S is an absolutely wonderful Car. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MAd MAx
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Mar 26, 2005 1:06 am Post subject:
Re: Z4 - bad points? |
|
|
Is there a pic anywhere available ?
Thanks
"Alan" <alan@no.net> a écrit dans le message news:
d210h5$134$1@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
| Quote: | Sam Smith wrote:
"tim" <timmuffty@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:423f52bd$0$2765$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
Are there any? Electric hood leaks? Poor rear-view mirror perhaps?
Noisy?
All thoughts welcomed.
TIA
I'm getting a new Alpina Roadster S Lux this June - so I will let you
know!
---
Sam
You're very lucky Sam- the Roadster S is an absolutely wonderful Car. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Randy
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tom Korth
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Mar 26, 2005 4:22 am Post subject:
Re: Z4 - bad points? |
|
|
"Alan" <alan@no.net> wrote in message
news:d210h5$134$1@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
| Quote: | Sam Smith wrote:
"tim" <timmuffty@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:423f52bd$0$2765$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
Are there any? Electric hood leaks? Poor rear-view mirror perhaps? Noisy?
All thoughts welcomed.
TIA
I'm getting a new Alpina Roadster S Lux this June - so I will let you
know!
---
Sam
You're very lucky Sam- the Roadster S is an absolutely wonderful Car.
|
Maybe I'm missing something, but a .4 second improvement in 0-60 time over
the 3.0 doesn't seem like much for an additional 75HP and $25,000. I guess
that's why neither Alpina nor BMW is marketing it here in the U.S.
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MAd MAx
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Mar 27, 2005 3:31 am Post subject:
Re: Z4 - bad points? |
|
|
Thanks Randy and sorry. Didn't even think to go googling.
Nice car.
"Randy" <joe@burgershack.com> a écrit dans le message news:
d220qc$kku$1@joe.rice.edu...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andrew Thomas
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Mar 27, 2005 5:18 pm Post subject:
Re: Z4 - bad points? |
|
|
Tom Korth wrote:
| Quote: | Maybe I'm missing something, but a .4 second improvement in 0-60 time
over
the 3.0 doesn't seem like much for an additional 75HP and $25,000. I
guess
that's why neither Alpina nor BMW is marketing it here in the U.S.
|
If you measure the worth of a car only by its 0-60 time then sure, it's
poor value for money. But then 0-60 is a pointless measurement; where
Alpina is sold, 0-120 mph (or, better still, 60-120 mph) is far more
interesting. Ergo, from the American point of view, few will find
value in it, so it won't be sold there.
It would have been better had you compared it to the UK base price, not
the US base price. It's a £9,000 premium over the Z4, adjusted for
spec. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tom Korth
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Mar 28, 2005 1:07 am Post subject:
Re: Z4 - bad points? |
|
|
"Andrew Thomas" <andrewj_nospamthomas@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:1111925909.061029.31820@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Tom Korth wrote:
| Quote: | Maybe I'm missing something, but a .4 second improvement in 0-60 time
over
the 3.0 doesn't seem like much for an additional 75HP and $25,000. I
guess
that's why neither Alpina nor BMW is marketing it here in the U.S.
If you measure the worth of a car only by its 0-60 time then sure, it's
poor value for money. But then 0-60 is a pointless measurement; where
Alpina is sold, 0-120 mph (or, better still, 60-120 mph) is far more
interesting. Ergo, from the American point of view, few will find
value in it, so it won't be sold there.
|
Agreed. 60-120 mph opportunities aren't too common in the U.S.
| Quote: | It would have been better had you compared it to the UK base price, not
the US base price. It's a £9,000 premium over the Z4, adjusted for
spec.
|
I didn't realize that our currency had slipped quite so much. On the BMW UK
website, "building" my Z4 3.0 (U.S. $44,000 in the U.S.) comes to about
£34,000, or about U.S. $63,000 in the UK. As you said, that narrows the
Alpina difference considerably!
Tom |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Damo
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Aug 30, 2005 6:34 am Post subject:
Re: Z4 - bad points? |
|
|
Hi Tom,
I have an Alpina Roadster S and the price difference(in the UK) between
that and a Z4 3.0 with the additional extras(as offered with the Lux
package) is only £1145. The Roadster S Lux is now being offered at
£38,850 and the 'standard' Z4 with the same options as the Lux is £37,705!
The 0-60 on the Roadster is 5.0 secs although the UK mags have got this
down to 4.7 on dry road test which is considerably quicker than the 5.7
for the standard 3.0L. On top of this is the superior handling and ride
(no run flats).
As previously stated the 0-100 or 0-120mph are much quicker! The Alpina
is a better car to the standard Z4 in almost every way! Not to mention
it will hit 169mph compared to the 3.0L 155mph (limited, unlimted is
about 160mph)
The depreciation on the Alpina is less than the standard Z4 so the £1145
pays for itself in the first year.
I don't mean to harp on about it but the facts and figures speak for
themselves!
Cheers
Pete.
Tom Korth wrote:
| Quote: | "Andrew Thomas" <andrewj_nospamthomas@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:1111925909.061029.31820@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Tom Korth wrote:
Maybe I'm missing something, but a .4 second improvement in 0-60 time
over
the 3.0 doesn't seem like much for an additional 75HP and $25,000. I
guess
that's why neither Alpina nor BMW is marketing it here in the U.S.
If you measure the worth of a car only by its 0-60 time then sure, it's
poor value for money. But then 0-60 is a pointless measurement; where
Alpina is sold, 0-120 mph (or, better still, 60-120 mph) is far more
interesting. Ergo, from the American point of view, few will find
value in it, so it won't be sold there.
Agreed. 60-120 mph opportunities aren't too common in the U.S.
It would have been better had you compared it to the UK base price, not
the US base price. It's a £9,000 premium over the Z4, adjusted for
spec.
I didn't realize that our currency had slipped quite so much. On the BMW UK
website, "building" my Z4 3.0 (U.S. $44,000 in the U.S.) comes to about
£34,000, or about U.S. $63,000 in the UK. As you said, that narrows the
Alpina difference considerably!
Tom
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dori A Schmetterling
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Aug 30, 2005 3:22 pm Post subject:
Re: Z4 - bad points? |
|
|
A difference of 1 s to get to 60, a diff between 5.7 s and 5.0 or even 4.7
s.... If you're a professional and crash your gearboxes you might be able to
feel the difference...IF you look at a stopwatch.
And so you can reach 169 instead of 155 mph. How does that help you on a
European motorway? Do you spend a lot of time on those few sections of
German motorway that are unlimited AND when they are not busy? How much
quicker will you get to your destination with the extra few mph at the top
end?
What really matters, especially on single-carriageway roads, is the 50 - 70
mph acceleration. And I doubt a fraction of second diff means much. Maybe
you need more torque, and for that you need a diesel... :-) Try a Merc CLK
D...?....
Choose the car you like the look and feel of...
DAS
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---
"Damo" <damien@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:jIOQe.390$w4.331@newsfe7-win.ntli.net...
[...]
| Quote: |
The 0-60 on the Roadster is 5.0 secs although the UK mags have got this
down to 4.7 on dry road test which is considerably quicker than the 5.7
for the standard 3.0L.
[...]
Not to mention
it will hit 169mph compared to the 3.0L 155mph (limited, unlimted is about
160mph)
[...] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in