[Bimmerfun82]

I’ve been thinking about the new M2 and watching numerous reviews. If they don’t offer a manual Z4 in the last couple MY, I might consider switching to grab a manual before they disappear.

One thing they unfortunately share is the same gas tank capacity at 13.7 gallons. We went on a road trip this weekend - 26 mpg on the way up in mostly sport+ mode and 34 mpg on the way home mostly in eco pro. That equates to 280-450 miles/tank. The M2 gets 16-23 in manual so that’s 220-315 miles of range. That’s pretty awful.

[CJ421]

I make a matrix and rank categories I value when I'm between products. I really like the M2 but not enough, even with a manual, to make me give up the convertible top and the sports-car look and feel of the Z4. (And especially the matte paint, which you can't get on the M2.)

Then there's the financial side. Today's interest rates are pretty high unless you're paying cash. The M2's maintenance is also going to be higher, especially tires and brakes, and I suspect insurance rates would be higher, too.

Charles

[Bimmerfun82]

Originally Posted by CJ421

I make a matrix and rank categories I value when I'm between products. I really like the M2 but not enough, even with a manual, to make me give up the convertible top and the sports-car look and feel of the Z4. (And especially the matte paint, which you can't get on the M2.)

Then there's the financial side. Today's interest rates are pretty high unless you're paying cash. The M2's maintenance is also going to be higher, especially tires and brakes, and I suspect insurance rates would be higher, too.

Charles

Great points. I love the frozen grey on the Z4, and the lighter weight for sure means less maintenance. Well, let's hope they release that manual...

[BEAR-AvHistory]

Originally Posted by Bimmerfun82

I’ve been thinking about the new M2 and watching numerous reviews. If they don’t offer a manual Z4 in the last couple MY, I might consider switching to grab a manual before they disappear.

One thing they unfortunately share is the same gas tank capacity at 13.7 gallons. We went on a road trip this weekend - 26 mpg on the way up in mostly sport+ mode and 34 mpg on the way home mostly in eco pro. That equates to 280-450 miles/tank. The M2 gets 16-23 in manual so that’s 220-315 miles of range. That’s pretty awful.

IIRC the sport functions S & S+ lock out 8th gear. Long range mileage 31/32mpg @ 85mph in D mode requires 8th to be functional.

[Bimmerfun82]

Originally Posted by BEAR-AvHistory

IIRC the sport functions S & S+ lock out 8th gear. Long range mileage 31/32mpg @ 85mph in D mode requires 8th to be functional.

Makes sense. We were at 40-65mph while in S+, and the first 1/3 of the trip on the highway was at 65-80 mph in comfort or sport mode.

[IM2C]

Guys, are we seriously talking about gas mileage of a 400+ HP car?
You get Z4 or M2 because you want it. For the subjective experience and all the other intangibles that come with it. No need to justify it.

Or go get a slightly used Camry.

[Bimmerfun82]

Originally Posted by IM2C

Guys, are we seriously talking about gas mileage of a 400+ HP car?
You get Z4 or M2 because you want it. For the subjective experience and all the other intangibles that come with it. No need to justify it.

Or go get a slightly used Camry.

Range, not necessarily gas mileage. I.e., how far you can go on a tank of gas. Porsche has an extended fuel tank for a reason. 13.7 gallons is pathetic.

[Pprior]

I don’t know why you say we can’t consider gas mileage in a high performance car. I for one love how BMW turbo engines can get pretty darn good mileage if you dial the boost down with eco mode. Beauty and the beast and all. Shrug.

[Balr14]

Originally Posted by Pprior

I don’t know why you say we can’t consider gas mileage in a high performance car. I for one love how BMW turbo engines can get pretty darn good mileage if you dial the boost down with eco mode. Beauty and the beast and all. Shrug.

Me too. Gas mileage wasn't a priority in buying a Z4, but it's very much appreciated. It's definitely better than the last 3 performance cars I owned.

[Bimmerfun82]

G80cx 503 hp = 18/16/22; tank - 15.7 - 281
G82c 473 hp = 19/16/23 - 15.7 - 296
G87 454 hp = 19/16/24; tank - 13.7 - 260
Z4M40i 382 hp = 15/22/29; tank - 13.7 - 342

All ZF8 numbers Mpg comb/city/hwy; gallons; range miles at average mpg

Here’s some comps:
Corvette 490hp 19/16/24 - 18.5 - 352
Boxster GTS4.0 394 hp 19/17/24 - 16.9 - 321
911 Carrera 379 hp 20/18/24 - 16.9 - 338
CT4-V Blackwing 18/15/23 - 17.1 - 310

On Porsche can option ext fuel tank for significantly higher range

[IM2C]

Originally Posted by Pprior

I don’t know why you say we can’t consider gas mileage in a high performance car. I for one love how BMW turbo engines can get pretty darn good mileage if you dial the boost down with eco mode. Beauty and the beast and all. Shrug.

You can consider whatever you want.
These are fun toys, not utility vehicles, people. How is everyone so entitled to 3.0 seconds 0-60, 500 mile range for sub $50k? WTF

[Bimmerfun82]

Originally Posted by IM2C

You can consider whatever you want.
These are fun toys, not utility vehicles, people. How is everyone so entitled to 3.0 seconds 0-60, 500 mile range for sub $50k? WTF

Who said anything about $50k? Or 3.0s to 60? Or 500 miles of range? Or entitled? Ridiculous.

Let’s go back to the quandry. I am hesitant to get an M2 manual because of the range.

[Pprior]

Originally Posted by IM2C

You can consider whatever you want.
These are fun toys, not utility vehicles, people. How is everyone so entitled to 3.0 seconds 0-60, 500 mile range for sub $50k? WTF

Maybe for you. For me it’s a dd. We don’t all have the same reasons for purchase.

[BEAR-AvHistory]

Originally Posted by Pprior

Maybe for you. For me it’s a dd. We don’t all have the same reasons for purchase.

Key point. I want long a range cruiser that can run in the 85MPH range & still have a good punch to pass.

The Z4 M40i can deliver this and if I have to can make a 400+ mile round trip run at a good speed. Normal run is a bit over 200 miles each way & I fill at the start of each leg.

Only negative thought I had about getting the Z4 was the 13 gallon tank. Turned out to be a "not to worry". Really some fantastic engineering in the B-58 & S-58 engines.

FWIW the M4C mileage is down about 2/3MPG off the Z4 at similar speeds. That said with its bigger tank can also go out & back with out a top off if necessary.

Having one that can run 11 second quarter miles & a 3 second 0-60 just adds to the fun.

Back to the quandary: Current estimates are EPA 24MPH Highway. C&D when they do a full test will do a 75MHP run to test for range. Has been pretty accurate for the other M's when compared to what the guys are actually getting.

C&D got this on the M4 (473BHP) 75-mph Highway Driving test: 29MPG. This compares with the EPA assigned 22MPG Highway. The M2 has less power (453BHP) & is lighter so it should do well.

[jdhiro]

I don't mean to offend anyone, but in my very personal opinion, the new M2 is a design disaster. If I had to pick between the two cars, I'd go with the Z4, manual be damned.

That said, I'm not buying a Z4 yet because they don't have a manual or DCT.

[stlcdr]

I currently get around 26mpg on my 30 mile daily commute. I got the same in a 1.4 liter turbo. Not complaining at all.

I’m not sure where the M2 is in the same category as the Z4, though. Maybe I can’t see the Venn diagram intersect, as am so far over on the other side?

[Bimmerfun82]

Yeah it’s just for the manual… if they don’t offer it on the Z, I’ll probably get the M2…. Just wish they would do something about the range so I don’t have to make frequent trips to the gas station.

[SpeedyATL]

I'm thrilled with the range of my Z. My daily commute is pretty short (7 miles), so I can easily go a couple of weeks between fill-ups. And if we take a longer trip, 300+ miles is well more than enough range between stops for me.

Also, more fuel capacity = more curb weight. Aside from having to find room in the chassis for a larger tank, if there is more fuel capacity, that fuel would add to the overall wet weight of the car by about 6lbs per gallon.

[mjposner]

For me convertible top > manual.

I use sport individual and get a range of about 225 around town, but can easily get 400 on highway in eco mode at 85 and on cruise (flat Florida).

[Bimmerfun82]

Just filled up after our trip - 355 miles on one tank (filled up with 20 miles of range left, odo at 335). Averaged 28 mpg on mixed driving, approx. 33% comfort/sport +/ eco.

The misleading part of the EPA numbers is they take the eco pro and auto start stop into account, at least that’s my understanding.

I could baby the M3 and get 18 in mixed driving. The 29 mpg 75 mph text from C&D is not how I drive on the highway most of the time unless it’s a long road trip. So I got 22 hwy in the M3. Overall average over 9k miles was 15.8.

On the M2 with manual I bet I’d get even lower - sub 15. So 11-12 gallons excluding reserve is 165-180 miles.

[Balr14]

Originally Posted by jdhiro

I don't mean to offend anyone, but in my very personal opinion, the new M2 is a design disaster. If I had to pick between the two cars, I'd go with the Z4, manual be damned.

That said, I'm not buying a Z4 yet because they don't have a manual or DCT.

I have had the Porsche PDK. My son has the Mustang GT500 DCT. One of the reasons I bought a Z4 is the ZF 8 speed auto. If you think a DCT will perform better, you will be disappointed.

[Bimmerfun82]

Originally Posted by Balr14

I have had the Porsche PDK. My son has the Mustang GT500 DCT. One of the reasons I bought a Z4 is the ZF 8 speed auto. If you think a DCT will perform better, you will be disappointed.

I prefer this ZF8 in the Z4 to my DCT in my e93. DCT’s can be rough at low speeds, and some of the allure was lost for me when I realized my VW alltrack had a DCT. The ZF8 is very, very good and imo not worth holding out for. A manual transmission is a different story.