My experience with my 1.9 and my 3.0

[Poprin]

I know that I've read countless threads about the 1.9 v's 6cyl debate, but now that I have both sitting on my driveway I'd like to wade in with my first hand experience.

Firstly I am over the moon with my 3.0. BUT I would also say that I have a new appreciation for my 1.9 that was only anecdotal in nature before. I have an very early 1.9 M44 and an early facelift 3.0 roadster so I'm on pretty much both ends of the scale. The similarity's between the cars are obvious but the differences before driving them both I think are not. They are like two totally different cars in my opinion.

Immediately obvious from getting in the facelift 3.0 is the quality of the interior is much better. The lining on the roof, the finish on the dash and the storage boxes and switch gear. It's just better. It feels like a much more refined car to the 1.9 which is a blessing and curse. If I was going to use this as a daily driver it would be the better choice but as a weekend back road blaster? The controls however are a mixed bag. The fly-by-wire throttle is horrible compared to the response of the 4cyl. The gearbox feels like I'm driving a 20 year old transit that's done 200k miles.

However then you have the performance.... Well this is the key isn't it? This is the fundamental reason why once you've tried it you can't realistically have the 1.9. Endless torque, a sweet spot that starts at 1.5k revs and finishes at 6k! The noise... In any gear at any speed it flies, it feels like a muscle car... like a refined TVR.

Then we have the handling. In stock form (I must take into account mine has done 122k) it just isn't up to the task of keeping the 3.0 in check. Which does make it fun but quite frankly the engine overwhelms the cars capability to keep it under control pretty damn quickly. It feels much heavier than the 1.9 and more nose heavy through the twisties than the nicely balanced 16v.

I would argue that both cars are fantastic in their own way. I essentially need the 3.0 because my social life involves going out driving with a group of people that have car collections including TVR's, Porches, Ferrari's and everything in between. I used to go with them in 1.9 all the time but to say you were left wanting would be an understatement. But when it comes to jumping in the car on a sunny day, going out on my own and pointing it at my favorite twisty back road I think the 1.9 does a better job. I can't actually believe I'm saying that after looking for a 6cyl for the best part of a year!!

The 1.9 is like a scalpel. It feels balanced, once you settle it into the bend you can bring the power in and the car rotates on it's axes beautifully. The gearbox, the throttle and the clutch allow you to crack out some fancy foot work. Double-de-clutch and rev matching is a breeze. It feels like a classic British sports car made by Germans.

The 3.0 is like a meat cleaver. It's a bit unwieldy through the bends, it wants to understeer first. The gearbox and the throttle response are horrible. BUT then you get out the other end of the bend and press the loud pedal and tear the world a new ****hole.

 

[Alan W]

Then we have the handling. In stock form it just isn't up to the task of keeping the 3.0 in check. Which does make it fun but quite frankly the engine overwhelms the cars capability to keep it under control pretty damn quickly. It feels much heavier than the 1.9 and more nose heavy through the twisties than the nicely balanced 16v.

I'm glad I read that as I thought it was just me.. I have always had concerns about my 2.8's handling.. in a straight line or on gently winding A roads with pedal to the metal.. yee-haaaaa!!! On an unsettling road service or more challenging circumstances I am not so convinced and I also feel that the weight and power of the engine can overwhelm the car at times. My auto box is silky smooth and makes cruising a sheer pleasure.. but the trade off is you haven't got that added element of using a manual gearbox to keep the beast in check.

Part of me want to enter the money pit of upgrading and lowering suspension and tweaking the handling.. whilst the other part of me want to keep the car stock and accept its shortcomings.

One compromise could be to keep car as it is and to buy a cheap 2.8 manual and really go to town on it.. lowered, fat wheels etc and to then relive the days of when I was an arrogant yoblet in a souped up Cortina lol!!

 

[Dino D]

What mileage has the 1.9 done and the 3.0l?

If your 3.0 is on 122k and original suspension you need to at least get fresh shocks and their easy to reach bushes done when you can because on worn components the power and torque makes it seem unsafe in the wet (and sometimes in the dry given the speeds it can pile on).

Fresh suspension and you cannot believe how confident it can be. Until my refresh last year I thought my 2.8 had turned into a TVR and was plotting to throw me into every hedge, even on a straight road!

The fly by wire is something I didn't get on with in my e46. I believe there is a software upgrade that can help - the facelift e46's felt better than the originals in that regard so I'm thinking they may have changed something (some i test drove really kangarood at low speeds!). The Clutch delay valve removal will help here.

For cornering feel I'd say don't go bigger than 17inch. on 18inch the outright grip in the dry is higher but you have less of that balance you like on the 1.9.

Not sure if 16's will fit over the 3.0l brakes but I can tell you 16's with 225tyrs all around on a 2.8 are a lot of fun but I can't get on with the looks!

The 6cyl is more of brute for sure and ensure all is in top top form to really push on given the way it gathers speed.

Don't forget to test your LSD - its a safety critical test that must be conducted in a large area with a smooth slightly damp surface
Make sure the DSC switch pressed for 5secs and enjoy.

Now the big question, as you have discovered they are so different do you keep both??!!

 

[Paul M]

I have had my 1.9 for a short time and love it to bits. Mine is an early 97 car and has now done 120k. The more I use the car the more fun it becomes, it's a long time since I had a rear wheel drive car!
The longer I have the car the more I prefer the 1st generation car. I do not like the shape of the 2nd generation rear end.

 

[Poprin]

Hey Dino. The 1.9 has done 94k and has had a few new suspension bits (all standard). The 3.0 is on 122k and feels tighter than my 1.9. I think the bushes are new and it has a front strut brace. Although I think the front shockers are past best. The 3.0 definitely doesn't feel unsafe and I haven't actually made it understeer yet because I'm still acclimatizing to the car at present. It puts the power down very well and I've only had the DSC cut in once pulling out of a junction with a bit too much enthusiasm so definitely nothing wrong with old girl. She's running on 17" standard style 42's I think with decent Nankang matching tires all round with at least 6mm on each corner.

I believe the car is performing as it should, if anything the 1.9 could do with some fresh bushes up front. As I said I think the car is fantastic and I wouldn't swap it for anything around the same price point. The fact that it has too much power than it can handle makes it as characterful as it is I think.

 

[Poprin]

I have had my 1.9 for a short time and love it to bits. Mine is an early 97 car and has now done 120k. The more I use the car the more fun it becomes, it's a long time since I had a rear wheel drive car!
The longer I have the car the more I prefer the 1st generation car. I do not like the shape of the 2nd generation rear end.

Paul I am 100% with you. I've got them both side by side on the drive way and to my eyes the pre-facelift is the better looking car. This 3.0 was a bargain that I would of been a fool to pass up so that's why I have it. But to be honest I am over the moon with it. Life is always a compromise and when you are buying a car of this vintage condition is king. Also the interior on the facelift is much better IMO.

 

[Poprin]

My driveway has looked worse to be fair...

 

[Paul M]

I know that I've read countless threads about the 1.9 v's 6cyl debate, but now that I have both sitting on my driveway I'd like to wade in with my first hand experience.

Firstly I am over the moon with my 3.0. BUT I would also say that I have a new appreciation for my 1.9 that was only anecdotal in nature before. I have an very early 1.9 M44 and an early facelift 3.0 roadster so I'm on pretty much both ends of the scale. The similarity's between the cars are obvious but the differences before driving them both I think are not. They are like two totally different cars in my opinion.

Immediately obvious from getting in the facelift 3.0 is the quality of the interior is much better. The lining on the roof, the finish on the dash and the storage boxes and switch gear. It's just better. It feels like a much more refined car to the 1.9 which is a blessing and curse. If I was going to use this as a daily driver it would be the better choice but as a weekend back road blaster? The controls however are a mixed bag. The fly-by-wire throttle is horrible compared to the response of the 4cyl. The gearbox feels like I'm driving a 20 year old transit that's done 200k miles.

However then you have the performance.... Well this is the key isn't it? This is the fundamental reason why once you've tried it you can't realistically have the 1.9. Endless torque, a sweet spot that starts at 1.5k revs and finishes at 6k! The noise... In any gear at any speed it flies, it feels like a muscle car... like a refined TVR.

Then we have the handling. In stock form (I must take into account mine has done 122k) it just isn't up to the task of keeping the 3.0 in check. Which does make it fun but quite frankly the engine overwhelms the cars capability to keep it under control pretty damn quickly. It feels much heavier than the 1.9 and more nose heavy through the twisties than the nicely balanced 16v.

I would argue that both cars are fantastic in their own way. I essentially need the 3.0 because my social life involves going out driving with a group of people that have car collections including TVR's, Porches, Ferrari's and everything in between. I used to go with them in 1.9 all the time but to say you were left wanting would be an understatement. But when it comes to jumping in the car on a sunny day, going out on my own and pointing it at my favorite twisty back road I think the 1.9 does a better job. I can't actually believe I'm saying that after looking for a 6cyl for the best part of a year!!

The 1.9 is like a scalpel. It feels balanced, once you settle it into the bend you can bring the power in and the car rotates on it's axes beautifully. The gearbox, the throttle and the clutch allow you to crack out some fancy foot work. Double-de-clutch and rev matching is a breeze. It feels like a classic British sports car made by Germans.

The 3.0 is like a meat cleaver. It's a bit unwieldy through the bends, it wants to understeer first. The gearbox and the throttle response are horrible. BUT then you get out the other end of the bend and press the loud pedal and tear the world a new ****hole.

My driveway has looked worse to be fair...

View attachment 44817

Do you think the 1.9 would benefit with having a strut brace?

 

[the Nefyn cat]

Age and quality of the tyres can make a hell of a difference, check the sidewalls and you should find the build-date for them, it'll be a 4-digit number, the first two are the week, the second two will be the year. Anything over 5-6 years is generally reckoned to be past it's use-by date. And if, as mentioned earlier, the dampers are the originals, they'll be dead by now.

 

[Poprin]

Do you think the 1.9 would benefit with having a strut brace?

Difficult to answer that just yet Paul. The 3.0 drives much tighter than my 1.9 but I don't know if this is down to the strut brace or bushes. Only collected the car Friday and have not really had chance to look at any oily bits properly yet (not that I'm much of a mechanic!) Might be able to give you a more informed answer on that when I check the condition of the rest of the suspension and that it hasn't had anything else changed from standard underneath. Appears to be on stock springs and dampers but it drives tight enough to make me thing it might have been poly bushed at some point.

 

[Paul M]

Difficult to answer that just yet Paul. The 3.0 drives much tighter than my 1.9 but I don't know if this is down to the strut brace or bushes. Only collected the car Friday and have not really had chance to look at any oily bits properly yet (not that I'm much of a mechanic!) Might be able to give you a more informed answer on that when I check the condition of the rest of the suspension and that it hasn't had anything else changed from standard underneath. Appears to be on stock springs and dampers but it drives tight enough to make me thing it might have been poly bushed at some point.

Mine had MOT referrals from a few years ago for bushes, and looking at paperwork, they seem to be done. My shocks could be better though.
Plus 4new tyres.

 

[Zeti]

Thanks for the very accurate and objective twin test drive!
It's very important when it comes from a Zed enthusiast.
And I agree with your decision to keep both Zeds and to enjoy them in special occasions for each one!

 

[Gundun]

Very interesting analysis: I got my 1.9 and the 2.2 seven years apart from each other, but, for some reason, I have always had the feeling i could trash the 1.9 around the corners more ruthlessly then the 2.2, but I've always blamed it on the age (mine)

The 6-banger has a fantastic way of pulling you out of the bends, but the handling feels like a more serious car to me, today whereas the 1.9 felt a lot more like a go-kart and it was really confidence inspiring within all its limits.

 

[NZ00Z3]

With regards to the handling of the Z3, I agree with all the comments to do some replacements of shocks, struts and bushings. Also include control arms and both ends (ball joints) of the tie rods. Having done this work on my 2.0 L using standard components and rubber bushings (Z3M rubber control arm bushings), I can say the car handles like a dream, no tramlining, good cornering etc. A pleasure to drive compared to the scatty cat that it was with worn parts.

Our cars are all getting older and in need of attention to get the best out of them.

 

[madleemark]

nice write up on your fine brace of z3, the 1.9 does seem a more forgiving and balanced car to me, the bigger engined z3 seem a bit of a thug at times, and could not agree more on the gearchange,fresh oil helps, nothings perfect i guess. will you be keeping both?

 

[Poprin]

I'm afraid keeping both is not possible because I have a daily driver also. Currently have 4 cars on the drive and two people in the house! I'll miss the 1.9 dearly and will be sad to see it go. I'm quite attached to it as its made me happy and allowed me to go to countless shows and car meets over the past two years.

 

[madleemark]

we cannot keep them all, shame tho when you have had good times with them!

 

[Shelly]

I love your blue Z3
She's lovely

 

[Nodzed]

Can comment on a 1.9 but this must go up in stages, after recently getting another 2.8 and driving about 200 miles in it, it makes the ///M feel like a truck! The box, clutch steering are all lighter, the handling isn't as good but the ride is MUCH better but it is soon apparent the power delivery is totally different with the 2.8 being quickish but controlled the ///M is just a brute. I would say the 2.8 is a much better Sunday afternoon driver but the ///M is great fun for short fast runs. One thing I would say @Poprin you soon get used to the extra power and it soon wont impress you quite so much - until you get back into a lesser HP car.

 

[miller1098]

Can comment on a 1.9 but this must go up in stages, after recently getting another 2.8 and driving about 200 miles in it, it makes the ///M feel like a truck! The box, clutch steering are all lighter, the handling isn't as good but the ride is MUCH better but it is soon apparent the power delivery is totally different with the 2.8 being quickish but controlled the ///M is just a brute. I would say the 2.8 is a much better Sunday afternoon driver but the ///M is great fun for short fast runs. One thing I would say @Poprin you soon get used to the extra power and it soon wont impress you quite so much - until you get back into a lesser HP car.

I feel the same,our 2.8 is lovely for a cruse much more relaxed but still pretty quick.ive been to the alps in the 2.8 I'd like to take the M but I think I would really enjoy it in a 1.9