Think you should try 19" next 
my experience with the 15" 16" &17 rims and conclusions..
- Thread starter joey
- Start date
Mr-P
Zorg Addict
If I recall correctly when I was looking for a full set could be tracked down for about £300 or there abouts.
Just to add Conti contact sports are amazing tyres.. Prob why the 16" are performing best IMO. I have 17" 225F 245R with no tram-lining issues etc.
One thing I do agree on is alloy wheel weight. This will make a huge difference in drivability, feel and acceleration.
One thing I do agree on is alloy wheel weight. This will make a huge difference in drivability, feel and acceleration.
Mr-P
Zorg Addict
Agree re the weight issue standard M wheels are oh so heavy and a killer. This is unsprung weight which is 4 times great than sprung weight.
So 1kg in unsprung weight is the same as 4kg sprung.
+1 on the conti's they are really grippy and inspire lots of confidence, they will be my tyre of choice from here on in....also
unsprung weight bad!..very bad, I didn't weight them but have hefted them around and thought there was a significant difference in weight between the 16 and 17 rims, at a guess 4kg per wheel is not an over estimation, given the lower profile tyre will also be heavier ...thats 3 and a half stone in unsprung weight...which according to mr-p's calculation of a 1-4 ratio on sprung to unsprung thats like having someone in the passenger seat all the time..
no wonder the car felt well..."less" in every way.
you live and learn..
unsprung weight bad!..very bad, I didn't weight them but have hefted them around and thought there was a significant difference in weight between the 16 and 17 rims, at a guess 4kg per wheel is not an over estimation, given the lower profile tyre will also be heavier ...thats 3 and a half stone in unsprung weight...which according to mr-p's calculation of a 1-4 ratio on sprung to unsprung thats like having someone in the passenger seat all the time..
no wonder the car felt well..."less" in every way.
you live and learn..
Mr-P
Zorg Addict
Problem with this is the inertia that is required to get all this moving and then again to slow it all down. Weight is a killer even if you have a big lump in the front.+1 on the conti's they are really grippy and inspire lots of confidence, they will be my tyre of choice from here on in....also
unsprung weight bad!..very bad, I didn't weight them but have hefted them around and thought there was a significant difference in weight between the 16 and 17 rims, at a guess 4kg per wheel is not an over estimation, given the lower profile tyre will also be heavier ...thats 3 and a half stone in unsprung weight...which according to mr-p's calculation of a 1-4 ratio on sprung to unsprung thats like having someone in the passenger seat all the time..
no wonder the car felt well..."less" in every way.
you live and learn..
This is one reason I am selling the M and moving back to something that will be possibly +400Kgs lighter(and that will be without really trying) and if it all works out will only be 100BHP down on the M.
Yes the big powerful stuff may get away on the long straights but wait until the corners.
I have always thought that a tuned, modded (air intake etc etc) and possible re-mapped 2.2 would be the pick of the bunch or my personal preference a 1.9 remapped with suspension upgrades and a DASC under the hood..with the light little 4pot at the front and upgraded suspension a DASC 1.9 would be a nimble little beastie!...
the main reason I didn't buy a 2.8 was because the extra 50kg over the front axle with the 6 pot is IMO not as evenly balanced I drove one and didn't take to it...this is why I think the 2.2 is a good stock and therefore reliable middle ground between the two..
what are you thinking about buying as a replacement mr-p? apparently there is now a company that supply the parts to retro fit a mini turbo charger to an M44 engine..
I'm not sure how reliable it would be but I would love to see it done!....or are you thinking of something other than a Z3?
the main reason I didn't buy a 2.8 was because the extra 50kg over the front axle with the 6 pot is IMO not as evenly balanced I drove one and didn't take to it...this is why I think the 2.2 is a good stock and therefore reliable middle ground between the two..
what are you thinking about buying as a replacement mr-p? apparently there is now a company that supply the parts to retro fit a mini turbo charger to an M44 engine..
I'm not sure how reliable it would be but I would love to see it done!....or are you thinking of something other than a Z3?
Mr-P
Zorg Addict
Problem being joey the Z's to heavy as standard in any format and a lot has to be thrown away to get to a realistic weight.
As standard their kerb weights are from 1,175 to 1,445 Kg too much for such a small car.
My B10 only weighs in at 1530 Kg
I will probably be going back to a real hair dressers car, an MX5 MKI and if not already I will supercharge it. I should be able to get it down to sub 900kg with not too much hard work.
you know..I looked at MX5's hard when I came to purchase my ragtop and drove a few and must say I liked them, I tried 3 1.6 mk1 and a 1.8 mk2? and found them all fun to drive and I have no doubt they are reliable and will run and run I actually preferred the Mk1 but....
they are so common that on each test drive I passed at least 2 other MX5's and I must admit i'm that shallow I could drown in a puddle ! so this (slightly ashamedly) was a factor.., and the styling is to my eye a little uninspired compared to the lines of a Z3, I agree that the actual handling is marginally worse on a stock Z3 vs Stock MX5 but thought that with some careful mods this could be equalled out and I ma finding this to be the case,also I wanted something "prestige" which the MX5 IMO is not..
I agree though the Mazda is likely the better platform for a small front engined sports car and the kerb weight is considerably lower so your power to weight ratio's are much better ..one weighing in at under a ton with a supercharger will be a lovely drive and the perfect balance between power and handling, if I had garage space I would own an MX5 as well but if I can only own one (this being the case at the moment) it had to be the Z3..
I will be really interested in coming for a spin when you get it all sorted it sounds like it will be a great little car,
my plans over the next few years involve renting some garage space so I can own a few different cars for a short spell, whilst keeping the Z sorn and garaged on and off.
my list
Porsche Boxster
Mazda MX5 Mk1
Fiat barchetta
Alfa romeo spider
Jaguar XK8
I plan to own each one for 6 mths to a year and use it as my daily drive and sell on as close to the purchase price as possible, if i'm clever and buy in say dec- jan and sell in may-june I might even be able to make a few quid, I will use the Z between purchases..
they are so common that on each test drive I passed at least 2 other MX5's and I must admit i'm that shallow I could drown in a puddle ! so this (slightly ashamedly) was a factor.., and the styling is to my eye a little uninspired compared to the lines of a Z3, I agree that the actual handling is marginally worse on a stock Z3 vs Stock MX5 but thought that with some careful mods this could be equalled out and I ma finding this to be the case,also I wanted something "prestige" which the MX5 IMO is not..
I agree though the Mazda is likely the better platform for a small front engined sports car and the kerb weight is considerably lower so your power to weight ratio's are much better ..one weighing in at under a ton with a supercharger will be a lovely drive and the perfect balance between power and handling, if I had garage space I would own an MX5 as well but if I can only own one (this being the case at the moment) it had to be the Z3..
I will be really interested in coming for a spin when you get it all sorted it sounds like it will be a great little car,
my plans over the next few years involve renting some garage space so I can own a few different cars for a short spell, whilst keeping the Z sorn and garaged on and off.
my list
Porsche Boxster
Mazda MX5 Mk1
Fiat barchetta
Alfa romeo spider
Jaguar XK8
I plan to own each one for 6 mths to a year and use it as my daily drive and sell on as close to the purchase price as possible, if i'm clever and buy in say dec- jan and sell in may-june I might even be able to make a few quid, I will use the Z between purchases..
If you want light weight fun you need a Mk2 golf with a 1.8T ihi conversion :O
Friend had one it weighed around 790kg with 290bhp.. Went for a run with few friends, one in Tvr cerebra one in M coupe and other in Ferrari 360 spider..
Yep the golf thrashed the lot.. Unbelievable pace...
Friend had one it weighed around 790kg with 290bhp.. Went for a run with few friends, one in Tvr cerebra one in M coupe and other in Ferrari 360 spider..
Yep the golf thrashed the lot.. Unbelievable pace...
thats is distinguished company for the golf...but i'm not surprised it came out tops....I had various mates with hot hatches in the late 80s and they were all high performing little monsters!
the pick of the bunch was a rally prepped Renault 5 that was just ridiculous, I was a biker in those days and of all the cars my mates had this was the only one that stood a chance against my yamaha fz600 off the line...although in reality none of them really stood a chance!
there were 205's, Golf GTi's, XR3 i's and of course the ubiquitous XR2...its a wonder we weren't all locked up!
the pick of the bunch was a rally prepped Renault 5 that was just ridiculous, I was a biker in those days and of all the cars my mates had this was the only one that stood a chance against my yamaha fz600 off the line...although in reality none of them really stood a chance!
there were 205's, Golf GTi's, XR3 i's and of course the ubiquitous XR2...its a wonder we weren't all locked up!
Mr-P
Zorg Addict
If I didn't want the luxary of being able to drive the car everyday I would go straight back to a Westfield.
My last one I owned for 11 years and it ended up at 240bhp in 560kgs(full tank) know that was fun and would kick most cars into touch.
My last one I owned for 11 years and it ended up at 240bhp in 560kgs(full tank) know that was fun and would kick most cars into touch.
And we said that the children of today do stuff we would never have done in "our days".thats is distinguished company for the golf...but i'm not surprised it came out tops....I had various mates with hot hatches in the late 80s and they were all high performing little monsters!
the pick of the bunch was a rally prepped Renault 5 that was just ridiculous, I was a biker in those days and of all the cars my mates had this was the only one that stood a chance against my yamaha fz600 off the line...although in reality none of them really stood a chance!
there were 205's, Golf GTi's, XR3 i's and of course the ubiquitous XR2...its a wonder we weren't all locked up!
....I think we weren't any better
In the early 80's I had a Mk1 Fiesta Supersport and then a Mk1 GTE Astra and although neither were very powerful they were great fun to drive, the Fiesta was only about 70bhp but only about 700kg. I'm certainly not against the addition of airbags and the like but the weight of normal cars has rocketed, when you look at some of the performance figures you seem to need 150bhp or more to achieve similar performance. Some new cars seem to be starting to use lightweight composite materials but they need to look at junking some of the hardware, electric motors and gadgets for everything (bugger I'm sounding like a right grumpy old git ). The only accessible car that has started to go back to a more basic and fun formula is the GT86, but there may be others? Even the MX5 gains weight every year and I can't see BMW ever producing a lightweight roadster again, but you never know, perhaps Kia or Dacia might surprise us one day
). The only accessible car that has started to go back to a more basic and fun formula is the GT86, but there may be others? Even the MX5 gains weight every year and I can't see BMW ever producing a lightweight roadster again, but you never know, perhaps Kia or Dacia might surprise us one day
Problem with the zeds you can't really strip much weight either. Non Ms losing the space saver is about it!
What is it that makes the z3s heavy? There not full of gizmos like most modern cars. The straight 6 lumps must be the biggest culprit ?
It's a good point..electrical everything adds weight..all of those magnets coils and wiring looms...air bags +crumple zones and "elf and safety hardware"...I reckon cars weigh 30% more than they did in the 80s..
The mk1 mx5 had 90bhp and is not incomparable to a 1.9 Z3 performance wise..
If you want a really drivable car buy pre 2002 with lowish miles..my mechanic thinks this the cut off point where cars really changed and became rolling hardware..
Hence all if my future cars will be there at older until time dictates not..
The mk1 mx5 had 90bhp and is not incomparable to a 1.9 Z3 performance wise..
If you want a really drivable car buy pre 2002 with lowish miles..my mechanic thinks this the cut off point where cars really changed and became rolling hardware..
Hence all if my future cars will be there at older until time dictates not..
I've never driven a 1.9 but I would be interested to do so to see the difference in nimbleness
Your more than welcome to drive mine if you find yourself Guildford way..
I think they are the best engine/ chasis matched variant if the airbox mod is done as well as a remap...add a supercharger and you really are in the sweet spot..the M44 is not very tunable outside of those adjustments but I reckon you could squeeze more out with the best plugs, leads and just making sure it's putting out it's full 140 bhp..before a remap...
And tbh better to drive small engined car flat out than nurse a bigun along at 40%...
I think they are the best engine/ chasis matched variant if the airbox mod is done as well as a remap...add a supercharger and you really are in the sweet spot..the M44 is not very tunable outside of those adjustments but I reckon you could squeeze more out with the best plugs, leads and just making sure it's putting out it's full 140 bhp..before a remap...
And tbh better to drive small engined car flat out than nurse a bigun along at 40%...