Old Z3???

Greetings,

I am in the market for a very solid used "small car". Have noticed that a
'96-'98 Z3 can be had for reasonable money ($5-8k in midwest US per Kelly
BB).

Have never owned a "sports car". Have owned several sports
motorcycles.

I'm retired, and put only 2-3k miles on a car annually. A Z3 may or may
not fit my needs.

A '97 Z3 roadster (E36/7) is built on the E36 platform? Equivalent
to a '97 318is chassis in the US? I am trying to penetrate BMW E-
designations (not easy). What differences might I find (aside from
body and interior)?

Consider:

http://consumerguideauto.howstuffwor...002-bmw-z3.htm

They rate Ride Quality as 4/10, Quietness as 2/10, Value within
Class as 2/10, overall 37/100. For the 318i: Ride Quality as 4/10,
Quietness as 4/10, Value within Class as 5/10, overall 46/100. Does
all this make any sense?

A '96-'98 318is could be considered to be "very dependable"? Would a
Z3 be as reliable, etc as, say, a 318is of the same year?

I once test-drove a Porsche 944. Wasn't much impressed with the
power/weight ratio. Even the salesman told me it wasn't really a
daily transportation type vehicle. Subsequently heard some 944
horror stories about repair and maintenance costs. Might a Z3 be
similar wrt costs?

Any/all opinions, info, etc much appreciated.

Puddin'

"Law Without Equity Is No Law At All. It Is A Form Of Jungle Rule."

"Puddin' Man" > wrote in message
...
>
> Greetings,
>
> I am in the market for a very solid used "small car". Have noticed that a
> '96-'98 Z3 can be had for reasonable money ($5-8k in midwest US per Kelly
> BB).
>
> Have never owned a "sports car". Have owned several sports
> motorcycles.
>
> I'm retired, and put only 2-3k miles on a car annually. A Z3 may or may
> not fit my needs.
>
> A '97 Z3 roadster (E36/7) is built on the E36 platform? Equivalent
> to a '97 318is chassis in the US? I am trying to penetrate BMW E-
> designations (not easy). What differences might I find (aside from
> body and interior)?
>

You have a good grasp of the Z3. Might I suggest for your consideration, a
similar year 3 Series convertible. I'm not certain the Z3 is built on a 318
chassis or not, but now that you mentiion the possibility, I can see the
resemblence and you might be right.

I am not retired, but I generally have only me and my wife in the car, or me
and the dog, and occasionally me the wife and the dog. This last scenario is
when the extra seating comes in very handy.

The wife and I took a ride one pleasant Sunday to the electronics superstore
near us. We went to get a flat panel dislay for one of our computers. While
at the store, we decided to buy a Christmas present for our daughter, so we
selected a Toshiba notebook. We could not fit the two boxes into the trunk
of the car -- a '94 325i Convertible -- which means you would not get the
same payload into the trunk of a Z3.

Our problem was easily solved by puting one box into the back seat and the
other into the trunk. We could have taken the items out of the box and then
carried both items in the trunk, but if that's not an option AND you're
plying the highways and byways in a Z3, then you're gonna have trouble
because the back seat option isn't ging to be available to you.

I'm VERY happy with my 3 Series convertible as a fun car to drive. You will
be happy with the Z3 too, but the lack of space can become a serious issue
without proper planning, Trips to the electronics superstore can toss any
and all "proper planning" right out the window.

Take a look at the 3 Series cars as an alternative to the Z3. In the years
you are looking at, you can select a 325 or 328, and if you go a year or two
newer, the 330 becomes a very good option and does not exceed the price
point you have dialed in on. Well, there are the M-car convertibles, but
they are going to cost a bit more than you appear to be looking to spend.





> Consider:
>
> http://consumerguideauto.howstuffwor...002-bmw-z3.htm
>
> They rate Ride Quality as 4/10, Quietness as 2/10, Value within
> Class as 2/10, overall 37/100. For the 318i: Ride Quality as 4/10,
> Quietness as 4/10, Value within Class as 5/10, overall 46/100. Does
> all this make any sense?
>
> A '96-'98 318is could be considered to be "very dependable"? Would a
> Z3 be as reliable, etc as, say, a 318is of the same year?
>
> I once test-drove a Porsche 944. Wasn't much impressed with the
> power/weight ratio. Even the salesman told me it wasn't really a
> daily transportation type vehicle. Subsequently heard some 944
> horror stories about repair and maintenance costs. Might a Z3 be
> similar wrt costs?
>
> Any/all opinions, info, etc much appreciated.
>
> Puddin'
>
> "Law Without Equity Is No Law At All. It Is A Form Of Jungle Rule."
>

"Jeff Strickland" > a écrit dans le message de news:
...
>
> "Puddin' Man" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Greetings,
> >
> > I am in the market for a very solid used "small car". Have noticed that
a
> > '96-'98 Z3 can be had for reasonable money ($5-8k in midwest US per
Kelly
> > BB).
> >
> > Have never owned a "sports car". Have owned several sports
> > motorcycles.
> >
> > I'm retired, and put only 2-3k miles on a car annually. A Z3 may or may
> > not fit my needs.
> >
> > A '97 Z3 roadster (E36/7) is built on the E36 platform? Equivalent
> > to a '97 318is chassis in the US? I am trying to penetrate BMW E-
> > designations (not easy). What differences might I find (aside from
> > body and interior)?
> >
>
> You have a good grasp of the Z3. Might I suggest for your consideration, a
> similar year 3 Series convertible. I'm not certain the Z3 is built on a
318
> chassis or not, but now that you mentiion the possibility, I can see the
> resemblence and you might be right.
>
> I am not retired, but I generally have only me and my wife in the car, or
me
> and the dog, and occasionally me the wife and the dog. This last scenario
is
> when the extra seating comes in very handy.
>
> The wife and I took a ride one pleasant Sunday to the electronics
superstore
> near us. We went to get a flat panel dislay for one of our computers.
While
> at the store, we decided to buy a Christmas present for our daughter, so
we
> selected a Toshiba notebook. We could not fit the two boxes into the trunk
> of the car -- a '94 325i Convertible -- which means you would not get the
> same payload into the trunk of a Z3.
>
> Our problem was easily solved by puting one box into the back seat and the
> other into the trunk. We could have taken the items out of the box and
then
> carried both items in the trunk, but if that's not an option AND you're
> plying the highways and byways in a Z3, then you're gonna have trouble
> because the back seat option isn't ging to be available to you.
>
> I'm VERY happy with my 3 Series convertible as a fun car to drive. You
will
> be happy with the Z3 too, but the lack of space can become a serious issue
> without proper planning, Trips to the electronics superstore can toss any
> and all "proper planning" right out the window.
>
> Take a look at the 3 Series cars as an alternative to the Z3. In the years
> you are looking at, you can select a 325 or 328, and if you go a year or
two
> newer, the 330 becomes a very good option and does not exceed the price
> point you have dialed in on. Well, there are the M-car convertibles, but
> they are going to cost a bit more than you appear to be looking to spend.
>
>
>
>
>
> > Consider:
> >
> > http://consumerguideauto.howstuffwor...002-bmw-z3.htm
> >
> > They rate Ride Quality as 4/10, Quietness as 2/10, Value within
> > Class as 2/10, overall 37/100. For the 318i: Ride Quality as 4/10,
> > Quietness as 4/10, Value within Class as 5/10, overall 46/100. Does
> > all this make any sense?
> >
> > A '96-'98 318is could be considered to be "very dependable"? Would a
> > Z3 be as reliable, etc as, say, a 318is of the same year?
> >
> > I once test-drove a Porsche 944. Wasn't much impressed with the
> > power/weight ratio. Even the salesman told me it wasn't really a
> > daily transportation type vehicle. Subsequently heard some 944
> > horror stories about repair and maintenance costs. Might a Z3 be
> > similar wrt costs?
> >
> > Any/all opinions, info, etc much appreciated.
> >
> > Puddin'
> >
> > "Law Without Equity Is No Law At All. It Is A Form Of Jungle Rule."
> >


Gentlemen,

The problem sould have been avoided with a Coupé.
Recently a friend of mine gave me a 17'' monitor in its original box plus a
medium-tower PC and accessories. I easily put all the equipment into the
trunk.
At home, surprized of this feat, I tried to put the box of a 19"". It
entered as easily as the 17'' did. The sole problem was with the rear window
touching the edge of the box, avoiding to close the hatchback.
In my old E30 I even wouldn't have been able to put the box into the trunk
and I'm not sure that the monitor box would have passed through the rear
door.

A Z3 alone is probably not convenient because of its two seats only.
However, I'd recommend the coupé, because of the trunck's room and the I6
engine for its smoothness, regularity and power.
Rather economic, one youth failure over 130000 km (thermostat at 17000 km)
plus a broken fuel gauge that is common to all the series whatever their age
and their type are and a battery after 7 years. Two tire sets for 110000 km.
An average of 9 l/100 with 36 km kighway + 24 km in the city for the daily
commuting.

Should I add that I might put a carpet on the garage floor without fearing
stains on it !
That wasn't the same with the Spitfire !

I have some insight on this since I've had a 99 Z3 2.8 Roadster since
it was new. We're up to 143K miles and it is still fun every time we
head out for a drive. But like any used car there are a few things you
need to consider.

1) It might be inexpensive now but parts are still based on a car that
cost $40K when it was new and parts prices will reflect that reality.
2.) Typical maintenance items are.
A.) Radiator at 60 K miles
B. Thermostat housing at 60 K miles
C.) Lower front control arms and reaction bushings before 80 K
D.) Widow Regulators, both sides.
E.) Seat bushings on power seat hardware.

None of these are monumental but they cost some money to fix. If you
can do those kind of repairs yourself you could do all of it for less
than $600.00 in parts.

As far as ride comfort and noise -- its a convertible!

It holds enough that my wife and I can take it on a one week vacation
to the mountains where it shines compared to hardtops. There is
something exhilarating about driving through the mountains with an
open top car.

It can't be your only car unless you have lots of stuff delivered as
it is small but that is what makes it fun.

Good Luck

RJD

On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 22:25:47 -0500, Puddin' Man
> wrote:

>
>Greetings,
>
>I am in the market for a very solid used "small car". Have noticed that a
>'96-'98 Z3 can be had for reasonable money ($5-8k in midwest US per Kelly
>BB).
>
>Have never owned a "sports car". Have owned several sports
>motorcycles.
>
>I'm retired, and put only 2-3k miles on a car annually. A Z3 may or may
>not fit my needs.
>
>A '97 Z3 roadster (E36/7) is built on the E36 platform? Equivalent
>to a '97 318is chassis in the US? I am trying to penetrate BMW E-
>designations (not easy). What differences might I find (aside from
>body and interior)?
>
>Consider:
>
>http://consumerguideauto.howstuffwor...002-bmw-z3.htm
>
>They rate Ride Quality as 4/10, Quietness as 2/10, Value within
>Class as 2/10, overall 37/100. For the 318i: Ride Quality as 4/10,
>Quietness as 4/10, Value within Class as 5/10, overall 46/100. Does
>all this make any sense?
>
>A '96-'98 318is could be considered to be "very dependable"? Would a
>Z3 be as reliable, etc as, say, a 318is of the same year?
>
>I once test-drove a Porsche 944. Wasn't much impressed with the
>power/weight ratio. Even the salesman told me it wasn't really a
>daily transportation type vehicle. Subsequently heard some 944
>horror stories about repair and maintenance costs. Might a Z3 be
>similar wrt costs?
>
>Any/all opinions, info, etc much appreciated.
>
> Puddin'
>
>"Law Without Equity Is No Law At All. It Is A Form Of Jungle Rule."

"RJD" > wrote in message
...
>I have some insight on this since I've had a 99 Z3 2.8 Roadster since
> it was new. We're up to 143K miles and it is still fun every time we
> head out for a drive. But like any used car there are a few things you
> need to consider.
>
> 1) It might be inexpensive now but parts are still based on a car that
> cost $40K when it was new and parts prices will reflect that reality.
> 2.) Typical maintenance items are.
> A.) Radiator at 60 K miles
> B. Thermostat housing at 60 K miles
> C.) Lower front control arms and reaction bushings before 80 K
> D.) Widow Regulators, both sides.
> E.) Seat bushings on power seat hardware.
>


These itemsm are common across the 3 Series line, they're not unique to the
Z3. Good points, all. But not unique to the Z3.

On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:55:52 -0700, "Jeff Strickland" > wrote:

>Take a look at the 3 Series cars as an alternative to the Z3. In the years
>you are looking at, you can select a 325 or 328, and if you go a year or two
>newer, the 330 becomes a very good option and does not exceed the price
>point you have dialed in on. Well, there are the M-car convertibles, but
>they are going to cost a bit more than you appear to be looking to spend.

You make several good points, all of which merit consideration. I'll try
to become more familiar with the 3xx series say, '96-'00, as time
permits.

I should have mentioned that I am sort of a "loner retiree", it's just
me and my crazy birddawg, I'm not very active (health's not so great),
etc. Lack of cargo space would eventually inconvenience me, but,
hopefully, one can still rent a lite pick-up or such for $25 or so.
With careful planning, the inconvenience should be minimized.

Thanks,
P

"Law Without Equity Is No Law At All. It Is A Form Of Jungle Rule."

"RJD" > wrote in message
...
>
> As far as ride comfort and noise -- its a convertible!
>
> It holds enough that my wife and I can take it on a one week vacation
> to the mountains where it shines compared to hardtops. There is
> something exhilarating about driving through the mountains with an
> open top car.
>
> It can't be your only car unless you have lots of stuff delivered as
> it is small but that is what makes it fun.
>

+1.

I put 65,000 miles on my '97 Z3 2.8. As it replaced a motorcycle for
touring, my wife and I found the 6 cu.ft. of trunk space to be adequate for
4 week trips - if both pack very carefully and plan on doing laundry every 5
days or so. I recommend the 6 cyl. as it has plenty of power but still gave
me 26.5 mpg overall with mostly highway and spirited mountain road driving.
Having the E36 suspension and conventional tires, the ride was quite
comfortable for a roadster - much better than the later Z4; although the
handling was more boulevard than hard core sportscar. Also, unlike the
later Z4 and E46 'verts, the top was unlined and had a large plastic rear
window.

My only real expense out of warranty was a repaint due to excessive stone
chip damage - avoid the black paint if at all possible.

Tom

"Puddin' Man" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:55:52 -0700, "Jeff Strickland"
> > wrote:
>
>>Take a look at the 3 Series cars as an alternative to the Z3. In the years
>>you are looking at, you can select a 325 or 328, and if you go a year or
>>two
>>newer, the 330 becomes a very good option and does not exceed the price
>>point you have dialed in on. Well, there are the M-car convertibles, but
>>they are going to cost a bit more than you appear to be looking to spend.
>
> You make several good points, all of which merit consideration. I'll try
> to become more familiar with the 3xx series say, '96-'00, as time
> permits.
>
> I should have mentioned that I am sort of a "loner retiree", it's just
> me and my crazy birddawg, I'm not very active (health's not so great),
> etc. Lack of cargo space would eventually inconvenience me, but,
> hopefully, one can still rent a lite pick-up or such for $25 or so.
> With careful planning, the inconvenience should be minimized.
>


You might meet the next Mrs. Wonderful at the shuffleboard court and wish
you had the backseat.

I love my '94 325i convertible (E36), but I still drool with desire for the
clean E46 convertibles. I've not driven the 2-seater (Z3 or Z4), and this
experience might change my outlook but I doubt it. I think you can get a
nice 4-seater and get the meaningful driving experience. You may find the
insurance policy is cheaper too, but I don't know that to be factual.

In any case, my suggestion is to not get fixated on the Z3, but include the
entire line of 3 Series convertibles. My humble opinion is that the space is
very desireable, and the lines of the car draw lots of attention.

PS
I fitted my car with 17" rims (225/45ZR17, BFGoodrich) from a '95 M3. This
tire combination is the same overall diameter as the factory fitment, but
LOOKS waaay better. Perhaps this is what causes pedestrians to make positive
remarks about my old car.


PS2
All you need to say is 3 Series, not 3xx.Series. The E36 cars were built
until '99-ish, then became the E46. The E number defines the chassis, so any
3 Series from '93-ish until '99-ish is the E36, the Z3 is the E37 (as you
already pointed out) The 3 Series generation that follows is the E46. The
convertibles in this generation get a glass back window and a better top,
the earlier cars get a plastic window that folds in half, and the fold can
cause a distortion of your view out the back. Of course, the glass window
gets a defroster that the plastic window does not tolerate. I bring this up
because your price range appears to include the earliest E46 cars, and I
think the upgrades that the E46 brings to the table are well worth the cost
up, if any.

"Jeff Strickland" > a écrit dans le message de news:
...
>
> I love my '94 325i convertible (E36), but I still drool with desire for
the
> clean E46 convertibles. I've not driven the 2-seater (Z3 or Z4), and this
> experience might change my outlook but I doubt it. I think you can get a
> nice 4-seater and get the meaningful driving experience. You may find the

The two seaters are funny to drive, especially because you're sitting
(almost) on the rear wheels

> I fitted my car with 17" rims (225/45ZR17, BFGoodrich) from a '95 M3. This
> tire combination is the same overall diameter as the factory fitment, but
> LOOKS waaay better. Perhaps this is what causes pedestrians to make
positive

So, you're able to make the comparison of 16" wrt 17" with lower & wider
tires !
Did you fit the 245x40 on the rear ?
What's your feeling ? I'm interested because the Z3 on bad roads, with large
tires is a pain.
I've to avoid some streets of my city otherwise, a lack of inattention would
throw me against the curb.

Regards

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 13:10:28 -0400, "tom_k" > wrote:

>I put 65,000 miles on my '97 Z3 2.8. As it replaced a motorcycle for
>touring, my wife and I found the 6 cu.ft. of trunk space to be adequate for
>4 week trips - if both pack very carefully and plan on doing laundry every 5
>days or so. I recommend the 6 cyl. as it has plenty of power but still gave
>me 26.5 mpg overall with mostly highway and spirited mountain road driving.

Sounds good.

>Having the E36 suspension and conventional tires, the ride was quite
>comfortable for a roadster - much better than the later Z4; although the
>handling was more boulevard than hard core sportscar.

That's OK with me. Super-stiff suspension and the like would be more
minus than plus for most of my needs.

>Also, unlike the
>later Z4 and E46 'verts, the top was unlined and had a large plastic rear
>window.

Did you have to replace the rear window?

Anybody had to replace an entire convertible top? At what cost?

>My only real expense out of warranty was a repaint due to excessive stone
>chip damage - avoid the black paint if at all possible.

Check.

Much thanks,
P

"Law Without Equity Is No Law At All. It Is A Form Of Jungle Rule."