POLL What's the best sized engine for the Zed?

t-tony said:
I would agree, up to a point. If you like a lazy drive and like an auto, like I do, then it is more about the power and I like my 3.0:)

Tony.
Click to expand...
3.0 lazy power the way to go.
 
I have a 2.8 with an auto box which to me match perfectly but would be better suited to a bigger car.. as it is in my brothers 3 series with the same configuration.. a much more comfortable refined ride than my Z3 and a car that l could drove all day.. my car comes into its own on a nice empty motorway or fast A road but around town in south london the roads are sh*** and its a boneshaker.. but when the roofs down in the summer none if that matters!
 
Its all about finding the sweet spot that you enjoy.
Having bags of power is always a joy to have under your right foot. Having that power delivered uniformity is even better. But, it isn't the whole story.

More power means more weight up front which can make the car a little nose heavy and difficult to balance. That can destroy the thrill of getting into a corner and back out. Balancing the power when you've loads of it can be difficult to achieve. I can see that a 1.9 on lots of twisty turn roads would be great fun to drive. Lots of power can quickly get you into trouble.

Having said that - I agree with Tony - An auto with a big lump is a nice lazy drive until you poke the horses.
 
Lee said:
I'm going to throw it out there. I've owned an M, 2.8 and a 2.2. Best all rounder for me was the 2.2 :D
Click to expand...
Reserve judgment there mate, you haven't owned a 1.9 yet =))=))=))
 
I was expecting the charge of MassiveM44!:D
 
well I have to go for the 2.8 have just had a drive to Cheltenham lunch with the Mints and back (about 160 miles) 33mpg and plenty of horses as well so cant knock it :whistle:
 
Aren't they doing something about that size into @HT Old wreck? I think it's a shame they didn't fix it but I'm glad Mike did good monetarily. JIM
 
Lee said:
I'm going to throw it out there. I've owned an M, 2.8 and a 2.2. Best all rounder for me was the 2.2 :D
Click to expand...
Interesting from a devote petrol head @Lee but see where your coming from. The 2.8 is a fantastic engine but when up against a 2.2 there isn't that much between them. On price, pace and running costs I would stick with my 2.8 tho. I'd never sell unless I couldn't put food on the table.
 
Grumpy said:
Interesting from a devote petrol head @Lee but see where your coming from. The 2.8 is a fantastic engine but when up against a 2.2 there isn't that much between them. On price, pace and running costs I would stick with my 2.8 tho. I'd never sell unless I couldn't put food on the table.
Click to expand...

Yeah I looked at from an overall point of view. The 2.2 is a newer design engine so it has the twin Vanos setup and the majority of the 2.8s are single. The 2.2s also came with a sports exhaust system standard which pop are fart on the overrun. The MPG figure overhaul are slightly better not that this makes a difference. Like you said the other weekend when we went out there's not much between the two engines but its the torque that makes the difference for the 2.8. I would like the 2.8 more if BMW didn't restrict it so much, its in such a lazy format in its stock form.

2.2 Pros: Twin Vanos / Exhaust setup Cons: Weak CCV system & flyby wire throttle

2.8 Pros: Very Reliable Engine Cons: Heavily restricted engine in stock form
 
3.0 if I was to buy another Z3 would be my choice, had a 1.9 brilliant little car but lacked the grunt better handling though, had a 2.8 again brilliant car, but always wished I had gone for the 3.0, Billz didn't help stuck up me behind all the time, but he paid the price on the Elan Valley run, his front end looked like it had measles, more chips than Harry Ramsden...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lee
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top