# TT roadster or Z4M? Ordered this today...



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

*Which roadster...*​
Z4M roadster1661.54%TT 3.2 roadster1038.46%


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

Well, after months of debating and waiting for a "hot" TT, with uncertainty that the either the 3.6 or the TTS will be available with S-tronic and in the roadster, I've decided to make a decision - a 6 month old Z4M or a new TT 3.2 roadster. Both cars are around the same price.

- The Z4M would be a (low mileage demo) healthily specced car - nav, hifi DSP, bluetooth, PDC, heated seats, etc. in addition to the standard goodies - xenons, electric seats, MFSW, rain sensor, etc. Plus points - 338bhp, stonking performance, amount of kit. Minus points - 15mpg, stiff clutch and gearshift, depreciation, servicing costs.

- The TTR would be - (probably) Ibis white, S-tronic, 6CD, Bose, RS4s and not much else. Plus points - new, residuals, interior quality, rarity. Minus points - hairdresser-esque?, poor dealers, amount of kit.

I appreciate that this is a TT forum, however the "Other Marques" section is usually quite balanced. What would you get in the same position?


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

Honest opnion?

The Z4M was too much of a depreciation risk for me. I was so close to buying one, but after some research into second hand values and the reasons why such big discounts are available, I got shocked and scared off! Add to that running costs e.g Highest rate of tax, rising fuel costs, 15mpg max etc, and I've instead gone for a TTR (albeit a 2.0).


----------



## 225sTTeve (Jan 13, 2006)

Tough one as both are very good cars - The new TT Roadster is such an improvement on the old one but the Z4M in comparisson is a bit of an animal.

340 BHP and rear wheel drive - the way to go. If I didn't need 4 seats for the weekend fun car the Z4M would be in my garage right now.


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

kmpowell said:


> Honest opnion?
> 
> The Z4M was too much of a depreciation risk for me. I was so close to buying one, but after some research into second hand values and the reasons why such big discounts are available, I got shocked and scared off! Add to that running costs e.g Highest rate of tax, rising fuel costs, 15mpg max etc, and I've instead gone for a TTR (albeit a 2.0).


KMP I remember your post on Z4um - as a new car they're a disaster, however the one I have seen has already lost Â£13k in 6 months  which makes me wonder how much further they can fall over the next couple of years.

After your TVR/R32 and Z4M considerations won't you be a bit disappointed with the 2.0T (I know the real-world reality is that these cars would probably be no quicker point to point)? Actually from your thread in the Mk2 forum it looked like it was heading upwards of Â£31k, the cheapest Z4M from BMW is under Â£30K - were you not tempted? I suppose you'll be able to run the TTR for 6-8 months with very little depreciation.



225sTTeve said:


> Tough one as both are very good cars - The new TT Roadster is such an improvement on the old one but the Z4M in comparisson is a bit of an animal.
> 
> 340 BHP and rear wheel drive - the way to go. If I didn't need 4 seats for the weekend fun car the Z4M would be in my garage right now.


Hmmm - got me thinking


----------



## mobbster (Mar 5, 2005)

Fantastic car with loads of power !! one big problem the biggest disapointment WITH ANY BMW is the satnav its rubbish with a capitol R !!! All the best on your decision.


----------



## vagman (Sep 6, 2002)

I'm not a great fan of the TTR (mkI or mkII), but a 3.2 V6 quattro s-tronic will be a bit special.

If you add Mag Ride then you will have a truly great car. 

However, the BM must be very tempting....especially the M bit. 8)

Interior wise though, it is a wee bit Conference League when compared to the Champions League TT.


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

Wondermikie said:


> KMP I remember your post on Z4um - as a new car they're a disaster, however the one I have seen has already lost Â£13k in 6 months  which makes me wonder how much further they can fall over the next couple of years.


The Z4M I was looking at was 6 months old and had been discounted down to Â£34k (Â£40k+new!). The problem is that even with those discounts the price difference between the Z4M and a 3.0 is still massive, meaning another 6 months can see it head south of Â£30k with ease. The dealers openly admit that residuals are very weak and it's not a risk I can afford to take.



Wondermikie said:


> After your TVR/R32 and Z4M considerations won't you be a bit disappointed with the 2.0T (I know the real-world reality is that these cars would probably be no quicker point to point)?


It will never be as quick as the TVR (not a lot will!), but having driven Bristol's 2.0T demo last week I was genuinely shocked as to how rapid it felt. It made my old standard 225 TT seem like a snail and it felt much faster than my R32. Whether that's down to the lightweight FWD etc who knows, but it is a sweet revving engine and one thing I will be looking forward to is the economy!



Wondermikie said:


> Actually from your thread in the Mk2 forum it looked like it was heading upwards of Â£31k, the cheapest Z4M from BMW is under Â£30K - were you not tempted? I suppose you'll be able to run the TTR for 6-8 months with very little depreciation.


With the spec the TT came in at around Â£33k,but I haggled some good discount and that means I can be safe in the knowledge that it will stay depreciation free for 6 months at least. So with waiting lists for a 2.0 still long, after those 6 months I would have paid a fair wedge off the equity and that + my discount will mean I will be in a decent position if(when! lol) I get bored again.


----------



## BreTT (Oct 30, 2002)

Are you serious? 15mpg??? That is ridiculous in a modern performance car especially one as small as the Z4M. That said, if was a choice between the two, I'd still plump for a Z4M.

15mpg??? I'm averaging almost 22mpg in my CLK55 - makes it look quite frugal really.


----------



## 225sTTeve (Jan 13, 2006)

I must admit I hadn't factored depreciation into my thinking on the Z4M and I certainly didn't think about when I bought my S4. I have lost a serious amount of money in 8 months but would that stop me next time..... probably not.

Whilst I don't have money to throw around if like me you value the enjoyment from the car more highly than the money you will lose then it won't be so important.

Out of interest how much more do people think a used Z4M will depriciate over a new TTR in say two years?

MPG would be an issue for me if car is to be used as a daily driver but as I say mine is for the weekend so this is not a concern.

Given the above depreciation and MPG / annual mileage may need to be considered??????

Good luck in your choice.

P.S just think of the fun with both the straight line speed and the handling of the BM


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

kmpowell said:


> ...The problem is that even with those discounts the price difference between the Z4M and a 3.0 is still massive, meaning another 6 months can see it head south of Â£30k with ease. The dealers openly admit that residuals are very weak and it's not a risk I can afford to take.


TBH the depreciation is the biggest thing holding me back. I know someone who traded an 06 roadster (5k miles) yesterday for Â£27.5k (not a good spec though) which really is shocking.



kmpowell said:


> ...It will never be as quick as the TVR (not a lot will!), but having driven Bristol's 2.0T demo last week I was genuinely shocked as to how rapid it felt. It made my old standard 225 TT seem like a snail and it felt much faster than my R32. Whether that's down to the lightweight FWD etc who knows, but it is a sweet revving engine and one thing I will be looking forward to is the economy!


My scariest car moment came in a T350T when I was absolutely bricking it :lol: Is the economy that much better with the 2.0T - will you get 25mpg out of it? The only bad point I found with the 2.0T is that the power tails off after 5k rpm - the engine is like a diesel except with another 1000rpm of useful revs.



kmpowell said:


> With the spec the TT came in at around Â£33k,but I haggled some good discount and that means I can be safe in the knowledge that it will stay depreciation free for 6 months at least. So with waiting lists for a 2.0 still long, after those 6 months I would have paid a fair wedge off the equity and that + my discount will mean I will be in a decent position if(when! lol) I get bored again.


Sounds fair enough, you only lost Â£500 on the R32 didn't you, that's the secret of running a premium car for little Â£Â£Â£'s. After 6 months you'll be due a change anyway


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

BreTT said:


> Are you serious? 15mpg??? That is ridiculous in a modern performance car especially one as small as the Z4M. That said, if was a choice between the two, I'd still plump for a Z4M.
> 
> 15mpg??? I'm averaging almost 22mpg in my CLK55 - makes it look quite frugal really.


My current Z4 3.0 only does 22mpg so I'm being realistic with the mpg at 15. I don't do too many miles just now, and it's all driving through Leeds at peak time 'cos I'm too lazy to get up any earlier, so it's not all bad.



225sTTeve said:


> I must admit I hadn't factored depreciation into my thinking on the Z4M and I certainly didn't think about when I bought my S4. I have lost a serious amount of money in 8 months but would that stop me next time..... probably not.
> 
> Whilst I don't have money to throw around if like me you value the enjoyment from the car more highly than the money you will lose then it won't be so important.
> 
> ...


Did you buy a new S4?

The cars I am looking at have already gone from Â£47k to 33K in 6 months. How much further can they go? Well, as per other post I know of cars traded for Â£27.5k this week, although what makes me think is that cars are only popular for a certain amount of time. In 2 years time will the TTR still be as popular? Will the Z4M be rarer? Who knows.

My annual mileage isn't that bad, and as above I only get 22mpg now so I suppose 15mpg wouldn't actually cost that much more, in the scheme of things the additional road tax and fuel isn't really the problem - it's just the depreciation.


----------



## senwar (Apr 21, 2003)

Mike - you won't only get 15mpg

I'm averaging about 21-24mpg and I'm driving it pretty hard. On a run I'm getting 30 which I'm really chuffed about.

Sorry if I've missed this but are you looking at a roadster or coupe for the M?

I do really like the TTR - think it looks great with roof down but with roof up, not so sure. The difference for me is the TT both Mk1 & 2 was designed as a coupe and a roadster developed from that. The Z was the other way round and personal opinion is I think it works better.

Obviously its going to be a personal choice but honestly don't let the mpg put you off. The depreciation is absolutely appalling to be fair, but the motors were far overpriced in the first place in my opinion. Being a plank that bought new, its going to hit me significantly - but I have to put that to the back of my mind and at the moment, I see this as a 3 year purchase minimum.

Good luck with your choice.


----------



## Love_iTT (Aug 18, 2002)

Once I had decided to change my MKI TTR the next obvious car was the MKII TTR, I looked at loads of photographs and up until seeing it in the flesh I was 99% there (in my mind anyway!) but I wanted to see it in real life before making that final decision, I was happy with everything apart from the hood - quite important considering it's a roadster - once seeing it, my mind was made up in about 10 seconds, a definate NO NO.

Why? The hood operates in a totally different manner to the MKI, it opens and closes in a 'Z' fashion rather than the MKI which just rolls up and over, this means that the top-front section of the hood is always showing and is going to be open to the elements - UV, dust and general crud - while the rear outside portion to the roof will be protected by it. This will no doubt show it's effects later on when the hood is raised, the front outside portion will eventually become 'Different' in it's looks compared to the rear section.

When folded down, then two major points I didn't like. 1st, there is a lovely curve of the bodywork where the hood goes into, the trouble is the hood looks more like a 50p piece instead of a curve like the bodywork. Secondly, there are some flaps at the side by the door pillar which raise and lower to allow the hood mechanism to be hidden when the roof is down, the trouble with these is that they don't hide very much and you can still see the mechanism.

At least with the MKI you had a choice to put the torneu cover on if you could be arsed (most of the time I did but I know many people never bothered with it at all).

It just looked very scruffy when the hood was down compared to the MKI, so even though it was overall a technically a better car than the MKI, it just didn't look very good.

This of course is all subjective and is just my opinion and there are going to be good and bad points on every single car but for me, these were important enough for me to say no to and look for something else. I haven't a clue about the Z4 as they have never appealed to me at all so I can't comment on these but whatever you choose then I'm sure (hope) that you'll be happy with it. :wink:

Graham


----------



## coupe-sport (May 7, 2002)

Mikey -

Head - TT

Heart - Z4M

Two lovely cars though.

James.


----------



## p1tse (Sep 20, 2004)

why are you wanting to change the z4 3.0 in the first place? might make helping the decision.

is it new looks you want?
more power?
just something different?

what does the z4 3.0 not tick?

if you fancy something different and was thinking heading for a TT, but then your not 100% there with head and heart. so you thought about the z4m, which is a bit more exclusive and you know how the z4 drives, and so the extra grunt would keep the smiles longer.

but what about a boxster 987 s?

i'm thinking of a z4 3.0 in the future, as thinking it would be in budget on the used car front. but if i had the money for the other two i'll go 987 without a doubt.


----------



## coupe-sport (May 7, 2002)

> On a run I'm getting 30 which I'm really chuffed about.


38 on a run to cardiff and back today. Very suprised 

James


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

Thanks for the responses to this poll, guys.

In the end I just couldnâ€™t stretch to the Z4M, I could have put one on the drive, but I think there is a difference between having one and â€œaffordingâ€ one, especially with the depreciation and running costs as they are. After 6 months of searching and haggling, making numerous phone calls, tracking the market, I also found the BMW dealers unwilling to do a decent deal, which I find unbelievable given the current lack of demand for these cars. They want to make Â£5k on everything they sell, without realising that they could shift three times as many cars if they only made Â£2.5k on each.

Unfortunately I just didnâ€™t like the Mk2 TT roadster enough either â€" as much as I have tried to like it, I just couldnâ€™t commit to buying it.

So after making a cheeky offer to a Merc dealer for their demo SLK350, I will be picking it up as soon as I have moved on my Z4, or at the end of July if I fail to sell it privately. The SLK is very nicely specced â€" March 07, Iridium Silver, black leather, 7 speed auto, heated seats, airscarf, phone kit, rain sensing wipers â€" in addition to the decent level of standard kit.

The torquey engine and auto box probably suit my city trundling anyway, and as a daily driver it makes a lot more sense than the ///M. No pics yet unfortunately, but these are closest.


----------



## coupe-sport (May 7, 2002)

Nice one Mike. Better change your sig too 

Cheers

James


----------



## p1tse (Sep 20, 2004)

another nice choice, but i don't understand why your changing from the z4?


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

p1tse said:


> another nice choice, but i don't understand why your changing from the z4?


Just time for a change I guess. Got a good deal on the Z4 for you if you want :wink:


----------



## senwar (Apr 21, 2003)

Glad you finally got something you want Mike.

Shame you didn't stick with a Z but hope you're happy with your new one when it arrives


----------

