carcounsel.com |HID|

Both models share the same six-speed manual transmission, but the clutch is altogether lighter and smoother in the 3.0si. It makes for easier stop-start progress and is less wearing on the left leg over long distances. And whereas the Z4 M has hydraulically-assisted power steering, tuned for maximum feedback, the 3.0si is considerably less physical to steer. It has the same Servotronic electrically-assisted set-up as the Z4 roadster; not the most communicative for racing or track day use, but requiring less effort and arm-wrestling during normal road use. Most marked, though, is the difference in the suspension tunings. As with most BMWs, the 3.0si Coupe is tautly-sprung – and super-rigid in its structure – but it’s much less of a boneshaker than the Z4 M. The M, even on relatively well-surfaced roads, is unforgiving and – after an hour or so – somewhat unrelenting. Sitting so low to the ground, it’s a spine-jarrer. (3.0Si Sport models add the M alloys, seats, steering wheel and suspension, though this seems somehow to miss the point). ...the Z4 3.0si Coupe actually feels, in real-life conditions, hardly any slower than the Z4 M. It develops its peak torque of 232lb-ft at a low-down 2,750rpm, giving tons of pulling power low- and mid-range, whereas the Z4 M’s 269lbft doesn’t come into its own until 4,900 rpm: for most overtaking manoeuvres, or simply storming on down an empty country road, there’s very little in it. And while the Z4 M has nearly 80bhp more, which doesn’t peak until 7,900rpm, is fair play on a track, the 3.0si’s 6,600rpm peak is more like it for road driving, unless you’re prepared to seriously assault your eardrums on a regular basis. In the lesser-powered car’s favour, too, is its lighter engine: it feels less nose-heavy and more predictable on high-speed cornering… – 4Car

Commentary: I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – if BMW gave the Z4 coupe the M version’s M variable differential, hydraulic steering and conventional tires, it would be the ultimate 2 seater in BMW’s lineup…

It’s the connectedness that impresses. You tap into what’s going on at the road surface through the meaty steering and the seat of your pants… The further you drive, the faster you go, the more impressive the X5 becomes. It actually does feel like a sports car on stilts – and sounds like one too. It shrinks around you until you almost forget what you’re driving. – evo

note: This only applies to cars equipped with the Sport package and 18” wheels or the 4.6 and 4.8is models (20” wheels, Bilstein dampers). The Sport package 4.4i’s 19” wheels are too much for the Sachs-Boge dampers to handle and the base model’s softer front suspension and smaller rear swaybar make it feel less like a BMW and more like your average SUV.

As the old saying goes, “people buy power but they drive torque” and this is especially true when your engine is teamed with an automatic transmission. This fact, when combined with rising fuel prices have made many including myself portend that the modern turbodiesel rather than the hybrid is what America needs right now. Reading a piece like this comparison of a 2.5 liter gas engine and 3.0L turbodiesel you’ll see why.

Here’s an excerpt:

Maybe it’s torque that adds excitement… This is more fun; press the accelerator and this BMW just thrusts forward, usually without bothering to change down, because there’s no need and the gearbox knows it… More urge, less effort. And here’s the clincher; the engine is almost as smooth as the 325i’s. It emits hardly any diesel rattle, and it has a voice. A proper note; deep, authoritative, six-cylinderish. This is not just a great diesel. It’s a great engine… this isn’t about buying a diesel to save money and suffer pain. It’s about buying a diesel because you’ll have more fun with it.

But just as diesel prepares for its walk onstage and play up its efficiency advantage, engineers are finding ways to squeeze even more power and efficiency out of gasoline engines, and strangely enough its by mimicing certain aspects of the diesel such as direct injection and high compression ratios.

That’s what BMW is set to do with their engine line in the coming years… The VALVETRONIC technology quietly introduced in this generation of engines will soon be augmented by direct injection. The twin turbocharged engine in the 335i coupe is the first to get the technology, but it will make it into the normally aspirated engines soon…

The result:

Peak output for the new DI engine is up from 265bhp to 272bhp… the new engine has real bite and punch, feeling a touch more aggressive than today’s 330i unit despite the official figures. At this stage of the development there’s a subtle but clear change in engine note, too. It’s less of a turbine hum and a tad gruffer – put it down to the new injection system… relaxed driving in stop-start conditions would return around 40mpg – virtually the same as offered by the diesel 330d. – Autocar

It’s true what they say: competition does improve the breed…

NOTE: At this point in time its not the engines but the fuel that’s a limiting factor – both technologies require lower sulphur content than we currently have available.

I recently stumbled upon an article I wasn’t aware I had been quoted in over a year ago. The topic: the prospect of Porsche building a Cayenne Hybrid using Toyota technology and the potential of an 5 hybrid. Here are the excerpts…

According to [the] founder of auto research firm carcounsel.com, the Cayenne already suffers an identity crisis. “It’s no secret Cayenne is a way to make a quick buck, a necessary evil so Porsche can afford to further develop their performance cars without having to become mass market, as BMW is doing,” he said. “But from a company that claims there is ‘no substitute’, it’s difficult to imagine where a Toyota-powered Cayenne fits in.”

“BMW has a tradition of waiting to learn from the mistakes of first generation products rushed to market by other companies,” Chanduwadia said. “Witness the X5 itself – it trailed the Mercedes Benz ML to market but made it look antiquated in comparison.” He said he expects BMW, with its “more long-sighted approach” to put hybrid technology in the next generation of the X5 model [at earliest].

...is a question I get asked as often as “What do you think of hybrids?”

The answer: a 1995 M3 3.0 (not to be confused the ‘96 and later 3.2L versions which – as good as it they were had a taller, less balanced chassis setup and a more constricted intake manifold).

It certainly isn’t a car for everyone but it’s met my needs (daily use, advanced driver training, shuttling clients to dealers and serving as a benchmark for chassis dynamics) perfectly for the past ten years. I’m proud to have chosen it before the magazines started gushing over it and my continued happiness with it also embodies a fundemantal car counsel philosophy: you’ll lose less money on a car you want to keep than one you pay less for and trade after a few years.

(It’s also nice to know that automobile magazine founder David E Davis considers my car his favorite among all the ‘all-stars’ his magazine has chosenover the years…)

But enough about my car – what do you drive, and what does it say about you?

On paper and in motion the Porsche Boxster is a textbook example of how a car should be laid out (flat engine mounted in the middle of the chassis) and dialed in (rigid body, uncorrupted steering, low inertia handling, a suspension that maintains body control and travel). But some have said of Boxster (and Cayman) that it lacks the edge that makes the 911 so rewarding – its not just the fact that the power’s been capped to protect the 911’s sales numbers but rather the sense that anyone and their 16 year old could extract all it has.

Now that M engineers have stripped the Z4 of electric steering and runflat tires and stuffed it full of motor, magazines are running a string of ubiquitous comparisons, and I’m seeing a surprising trend: German cars, particularly BMWs, have often been criticised for lacking soul and being laden with too many electronics. The Z4M is a refreshing departure from that stereotype.

Here’s a quote from evo
:

Objectively, the Boxster S should win. It copes more convincingly with a wider range of roads and conditions thanks to polished damping, silken steering and a benign, infinitely adjustable on-limit balance. It’s not challenging but, given a clear road, it is totally absorbing. However, if you’ve stepped out of the M Roadster…the Porsche feels a bit flat, lacking poke and playfulness… The M Roadster…doesn’t set a new benchmark for sports car dynamics (that accolade still belongs to the Boxster), but it’s a bold, ballsy car that exhilarates and challenges in a way the oh-so-accomplished Porsche can’t match… that’s enough to give it the nod by the narrowest of margins.

A: That would depend on the year…

The E36’s M50 and S50 motors were pretty free breathing and cammy, perfect for a weekend in the canyons and best paired with a manual.

By contrast the M52 and S52 were more torquey in everyday conditions but they didn’t sing at high revs. The manual M52 was paired to long gearing that saps some of the fun but is still preferable to the 4 speed automatic.

E46s had terrible manuals thanks to the CDV and electromechanical or electronic throttle. 01-> rear wheel drive cars had a ZF tranny rather than a GM one with closer gear ratios.

Similarly the E46’s M52TU (‘99-’00) was pretty muffled while the ‘01 and later 325i liked revs. Oddly the 3.0L is relatively rough due to its long stroke – the ZHP Performance Package’s different cams and management gave it more zeal but its hard to shake the fact that this engine was meant to haul the mass of the X5 around.

So far my answer is simply taking into account engine note and torque curve, but there’s more to consider such as build quality (the E36 feels more disposable, the E46 more like the E39 - meant for a long service life) throtttle response (which McLaren F1 designer Gordon Murray agrees is more important than horsepower – >‘96-’98 M52/’96-’99 S52 sharpest) or chassis feel/handling balance. (I don’t care for anything on staggered rims, aftermarket Limited Slip for non Ms after 96 is a must. The 95 M3 my favorite E36 chassis, followed by sport pack non M – the 3.2L M chassis is too biased towards high speed stability. Considering E46s, ZHP E46 on lighter wheels or 03 and later 325i sport feel best, the Xi surprisingly is most neutral of all and can be faster from point to point as you don’t need to slow for rough pavement – it feels the closest to the way BMWs used to feel – long suspension travel, dirm damping).

The E46 had 3 steering iterations: heavy/vague (due to slop in bushings)/slow, light/precise/slow, then heavy/precise/quick (some say excessive weighting), I can’t decide if I like the 2nd or third one better overall – depends on tire size (my favorite being 205/50R17s all around). Suspensions didn’t gel until the 02-03 model year – before that the base models seemed underdamped/somehow Japanese and the sport packages too nose led and soft at the rear. Later base cars were almost too firm – many who get sport packages would be surprised at the balance and composure of the base cars…

Basically you have to try them all as I have and decide what you’re most sensitive to, but at least now you have a sense of how many differences there are from year to year…

Click here...

(Is it just me or is there some resemblance to the Pontiac GTO?)

In 2007, European BMWs will be equipped with a stop-start feature that turns off the gasoline or diesel engine when the car comes to a stop. The engine restarts immediately when the driver lifts his or her foot off the brake pedal… A new alternator management system BMW calls Brake Energy Recuperation… keeps the battery charged at 80 percent to reduce the load, or drag, that the alternator places on the engine while the vehicle is cruising. When the driver applies the brakes, a sensor commands the alternator to produce a short blast of electricity to bring the battery up to a 90 percent charge. When the driver accelerates, the alternator is allowed to spin freely so no drag is placed on the engine. BMW will begin installing the Brake Energy Recuperation systems in 2007 on European market vehicles… “BER, together with the stop-start system, it’s about an 8 percent fuel economy improvement, depending on the driving cycle,” Borgmann said. “That’s about half the value of a hybrid system with very simple systems. – AutoWeek

...a series of rapid-fire bumps peels back the 330i’s immense composure, the suspension struggling to keep the wheels on the ground on occasion and giving you quite a rough ride… you can’t help wondering what the 330i might be like without heavy runflat tyres (in this instance Michelin Pilot Sports) taxing the suspension… The BMW has its flaws… Chief of which is the short-travel suspension. On smooth roads it’s brilliant, but as the surface deteriorates some of the 330i’s composure goes with it. – evo