lowlander

Hi there,

I've been looking at autotrader and noticed that the M Roadster is now a bit of a bargain with cars from 11.5K.

I know the handling isn't the best but you do get good build quality, that engine and , hopefully, a reasonable reliable car for the money.

A TVR of the same age and mileage costs more (around 14-15K for 1998 chimeara). Which one do you think is the better car for the money?

Anyone know more about these?

Thanks.

Martin.

Varboy

I had a 3.0 which though not the M-Engined version was WX quick and a bit quicker when I remapped.

The ZM with 321bhp will be an absoulte peach. I guarantee you will love the Z. If you need practical though, avoid.

I haven't driven a TVR so can't assist there, but all I can say with a ZM, it's going to have the reliability.

THings to watch out for.

The Vanos which is the variable cam control mechanism. If the car has done 40K+ and he Vanos has not been changed, it will go at some point. MAKE SURE YOU GET A COMPREHENSIVE WARRANTY

check out this site

http://www.zroadster.net/forum/portal.php

SimonD

I ran a MCoupe for four years (much nicer than the roadster!) and loved it. It was only the arrival of kiddies that made me sell. I passed it on to a friend who unfortunately had a fair bit of trouble with it. The Vanos system failed twice - thankfully BMW covered most of the cost despite being out of warranty because of it's low mileage (c20k).
The build quality is not as good as other BMWs but it is adequate.

It's a cracking drive and certainly had the legs on my friends w/c 911. Handling is not really as secure or refined as the 911 - the rear is a bit primitive and the early models don't have traction control so take care in the wet. Despite this it's a hoot to drive and pretty forgiving of all but the most ham-fisted.

Give it a go....... but try the Coupe. It's gorgeous in a hideous kind of way and isn't so obviously a Z3..... which in it's more basic spec is a truly average car.