I need some help with car choices

[Ado1379]

Hi guys, I’ve just sold my Z3 (1.9) to buy myself another Z3 with a bigger engine. I think I’m settled on the 2.2 with a lot of owners saying it’s the ‘sweet spot’ but I suppose I’ll make my mind up post test drives.

I’ve seen a few at reasonable prices but mileage wise what is considered a lot? I’m looking at a 2.2 with 134,000 on it for a 2002. I know theseengines are pretty well built but is this something I should be concerned about? Any tips on looking would be helpful too.

tha is

 

[hard top]

I would obviously want to have a look at the car service reports.

 

[Ado1379]

Yes I’m going to be doing this. And I’ve asked if I can plug my INPA into the car to have but more info on the engine. It was just a generalisation really?

 

[Woodsta888]

Engines can be swapped - the internal sill ends is where I'd be looking but are hard to see. Mirror and torch and look at the rear beam hangers to the car and in those corners - really you need to take the outer sills off and the wheel arch liners but understandably current owner would baulk at that proposal. Outer sills in good condition may have been replaced - but if original could go someway to inner sills being OK if they are good. But have a good look at the outer sills where they finsih underneath the car and the chassis around there and the ends of the outer sills.

134k is only 6k/yr and as hardtop says - if it has been regularly serviced then good. A competent DIY'er you'll know by talking to them and what's in their garage. Clock the oil they are using. Tyres - cheap tyres - cheap maintenance.

In service history/receipts - see what running gear components have been replaced - be expected at 20 yrs old and 134k miles that bushes and suspension components will be worn. Any originals whilst passing MOT will at some point need changing after 134k miles

Good luck.

 

[Ado1379]

Thank you very much. After owning the 1.9 I know all too well that these ‘bolt on’ sills can hide a fair bit. Luckily I can weld so hopefully anything that is hidden won’t be too much a pain. I can just imagine his face as I turn up with my socket set and start removing the wing panels and sills

I have gone back a few years in the mot history and anything shows up on the advisory doesn’t show up the next test so I’m going out on a limb and saying that it’s been looked after. It’s just hard to say without giving it a look myself.

thanks for your input

 

[andyglym]

Hi mate, @Mint has a 2.2 with starship miles on and gets driven as it should (trying to keep up with my 2.8 ) and does a great job, absolutely bulletproof if looked after. 134k miles is nothing if well maintained.

2.2, 2.8 & 3.0 all superb and if I'm honest it's really down to what you prefer, prefacelift (2.8) or facelift (2.2 & 3.0).

 

[Jam03]

2.2 is a great engine. Sounds lovely and has enough power for most occasions and is very happy at an indicated 80mph on motorways. Mine like a bit of oil…2l in 6000miles. The only annoying thing is the fly by wire throttle is locked out when the brake is applied, so no traditional heel and toe rev matching is possible if you like that kind of thing.

 

[Ado1379]

Thanks guys, you’re all confirming what I’ve read on here which is good! Honestly can’t wait for those sports seats too

 

[Z Victor 1]

Don't know where you are, but there's a good looking topaz 2.2i sport, 99k asking £3200 at Stoke on Trent on fbook marketplace. I'd be having a look if I wanted one. I had a Z3 2.2i sport , great car. Now I've got a Z4 2.2i.It's a nice engine.

 

[Mint]

Yes, as Andy says my 2.2 Sport is now on over 200,000 miles. Regular oil changes are key.
Good luck

 

[Zephyr]

came into the Zs pretty recently and had a taste of all engines before I decide.
the 3.0 is a beast to handle and the 2.2 is what the car should come as standard.
the 1.9 is for boring people like myself.
you will never regret the 2.2.

 

[Mus Musculus]

came into the Zs pretty recently and had a taste of all engines before I decide.
the 3.0 is a beast to handle and the 2.2 is what the car should come as standard.
the 1.9 is for boring people like myself.
you will never regret the 2.2.

I agree.

The 1.9 engine is pedestrian, but the 2.2 reaches the sweet spot. The 2.8 (arguably better than 2.2) I don't know, but the 3.0 is certainly an unnecessary beast...

Having said that, my Spitfire is only 1.3, so what do I know?

 

[Ado1379]

So I’m torn between 2.
the first one is a 2.2 sport in blue with black interior, aircon, heated seats, electric roof. 120,000 miles with full service history. It’s a hell of a drive but that doesn’t bother me.

the second is a 2.8 in red. 120,000 again with full service history but not sure on optional extras yet. But it’s £500 more. About 40 minutes from my dads house and comes with Spare alloys.

both in decent condition, the blue one comes with newly painted rear wings as the ones on the car are peeling laquer.

is £500 worth the engine difference?

 

[Zephyr]

but, isnt the blue a facelift and the red an older model?

 

[andyglym]

A test drive of both is your best option if get round to it.

 

[Ianmc]

For me, the only real "must have option" is aircon (helps keep the interior dry all year around). Most other options can be retrofitted fairly easily if required.

 

[IanA]

is £500 worth the engine difference?

Yes, yes, yes!!!

I have a 2.0 and a 2.8. The 2.0 drives really nicely but to get any performance it has to be howling. It picks up nicely from really low revs as well.
However, the 2.8 is the fun one. The extra 50bhp and the torque really make a big difference.
You'll be able to sell a set of wheels to offset the price difference. Also- try an offer?

 

[Z Victor 1]

Not that much difference between the 2.2 and 2.8, I had both and on the road the extra 20 bhp wasn't a big deal. Both very nice cars. Another point worth noting is that the 2.2i Sport comes with lsd, sport suspension and sport seats etc.

 

[abh29]

I am sure we are all careful about not assuming the mileage to be true.
Since the MoT website has been updated to record miles from quite a few years ago,I suspect ours was clocked as a service record and MoT miles are a couple of thousand out. But then last year I had to return to the MoT garage after I got home ,when I noticed the milage on certificate was 4,000 miles out. In fact it still has not reached that milage. A few years ago my e61 passed MoT and I noticed before I left the garage the mileage was 888,000 not the true figure of 125,000. Just buy on condition

 

[Ado1379]

There really isn’t much difference between the 2 cars other than the engine size and 1 has air con. I’m actually surprised and the paint condition on both of them given the price range I’m looking in and the mileage isn’t too bad considering they’re both 24 years old. Rebuilding engines and mechanical work isn’t beyond me so I’m not really asking about that aspect. I’m just trying to see if the 2.8 is worthy for f the £500 mark up and stretching myself for it.
I am leaning towards the 2.8 for a few reasons, air con aside it is so much closer and my dad has offered to pick it up for me until I can fly over and bring it back to Northern Ireland. Also bodywork wise I think it’s slightly better, and in my opinion the 2.8’s seem to hold value more over the smaller engine sizes. (Please correct me if this isn’t true) not that I’m buying it t thinking of the next owner anyway. I’ll keep you all updated and share some pics of the one I go for as I’m sure you are all on the edge of your seats