Encouraged by 2 things I saw in Road and Track regarding BMW

atyclb said:

should be 2200 pounds, I believe

Click to expand...

Correcto-mundo! Also, it will have either a 2.2 or 2.4l 16valve 4 cyl engine good for an estimated 240hp. The Z5 may be available as early as 2004.

The computer enhanced pics were tolerable, but we'll have to wait to see what the final pics of it look like. If Bangle's involved I can only fear for the worst.

TD said:

No manual tranny available = No sale to TD

This is going to be SMG-only. Sorry, but I'm not ready to give up my third pedal just yet.

Click to expand...

Good for you! I was once on the SMG/manual fence, but I finally jumped onto the manual side, and I can't wait until my car gets here. I cannot imagine giving up the clutch and throwing the shifter around. If I want to press buttons to shift, I'll play GT3 on my PS2.

TD said:

No manual tranny available = No sale to TD

This is going to be SMG-only. Sorry, but I'm not ready to give up my third pedal just yet.

Click to expand...

The Z5 is an interesting proposition, but it has three very strong negatives, at least as far as I can tell now:

1) 2 seats. BMW, what happened to building sports *sedans*? If I want two seats, I'll buy a Z. As Hack points out, no baby seat (or anything) is coming with the driver and his/her single passenger. Not practical.

2) SMG. I'm with TD on this one. Give me a clutch pedal or give me death.

3) 2.0L, 240 hp 4 cyl. Hmm, that sounds familiar. I'm very concerned this will be an S2000 clone, with no grunt down low. S2000s are a whole lot of no fun in my book, and an S2000 whose top doesn't go down sounds even worse, even with a blue propeller on the hood.

LIGHTWEIGHT!

finally. bmw has figured out that putting bigger motors into increasingly fat, porky cars isn't working.

like we didn't know that from the original e46m3PTG car with the inline 6 and the new m3 (3450lbs) and the m5 (3980lbs).

it bodes well for the upcoming 2 series and the z5. the bigger key? that they are getting their suppliers familiar with aluminum construction to make it a broader based lightweight chassis alternative.

:thumb:

JST said:

The Z5 is an interesting proposition, but it has three very strong negatives, at least as far as I can tell now:

1) 2 seats. BMW, what happened to building sports *sedans*? If I want two seats, I'll buy a Z. As Hack points out, no baby seat (or anything) is coming with the driver and his/her single passenger. Not practical.

Click to expand...

I think you need to get more sleep. First you say that you are talking about the Z5. Then you say that if you want 2 seats you'll buy a Z. Uuummm...you're already talking about a Z, a Z5. Given the number of cars that are discussed regularly here that have a Z in their names you may want to be more specific.
While it does sound like an interesting car, I'm also not sure I'm ready to give up the third pedal.

cenotaph said:

I think you need to get more sleep. First you say that you are talking about the Z5. Then you say that if you want 2 seats you'll buy a Z. Uuummm...you're already talking about a Z, a Z5. Given the number of cars that are discussed regularly here that have a Z in their names you may want to be more specific.
While it does sound like an interesting car, I'm also not sure I'm ready to give up the third pedal.

Click to expand...

Oh, yeah, I guess that's a good point. The Z I was referring to is the Nissan 350Z.

robg said:

blackdawg-
so why do you say that you'd get a Nissan Z over the Z5? The Z5 sounds even more enticing than the Nissan...RWD, lighter weight, better handling, looks better,

Click to expand...

I think you were actually looking at my post, rather than blackdawg's.

I don't necessarily mean that I would buy the 350Z over the Z5; having not driven either, it's a bit hard to compare and pick a winner. All I was suggesting is that the 2 seat sportscar segment is a crowded field. I'd much rather that BMW focus its efforts on building a worthy sports sedan, rather than further developing a line of 2 seat sports car that I (and most people I know) could never really justify owning as a primary automobile.

After all, sports sedans are the cars that built BMW, and BMW's success with post-war 2 seaters (other than, perhaps, the Isetta) has been decidedly less stellar. The 507, the Z1, the Z3; even the M coupe and the Z8. All of these are interesting cars, but none define their segment in the way that BMW sedans have come to do. None are the heavyweight (or even lightweight) favorite, if you will. Couple that with the small volumes of even a segment leading 2 seater, and you can see why I think the R&D money might be better spent elsewhere (like on Bangle's severance package, for example).

Here's what I want: The 1 series, sans ugly bodywork, with appropriately firm suspension. Toss in a 6 speed manual and either a big 4 (2+ liters) or a small six (2.5 liters) with approximately 250 hp and (most importantly) good torque characteristics. Call it the M125. Sell it to me for 35K. Do all of that and I'll shut up about Bangle, and I'll even take the gratuitous slam on the E65 out of my sig.

JST- you're right I meant you and not Blackdawg.

You speak the truth. I agree w/ everything you've said. Personally, I think they could do the 1 series for under 30k-- and I think that's definitely BMW's intention-- even under 25k. It would be the perfect BMW if they can de-Banglefy it and give it a decent engine. Sadly, I think it may be one of the worst Bangle atrocities to date, and I'm sure BMW will make sure the base car is equipped w/ absolutely nothing. Anyway, for me the 1 series is a long ways out- even if it comes out in 2004- I'd wait atleast 2 years for the inevitable production problems to subside and for the initial demand to calm down.