POLL What's the best sized engine for the Zed?

[Lee]

3.2?

what about the 3.2?

 

[Ianmc]

"I'm going to throw it out there. I've owned an M, 2.8 and a 2.2. Best all rounder for me was the 2.2".

You compared the 2.8 with the 2.2, wondering how you see the 3.2 in comparison, having driven all three?

 

[andyglym]

so the 2.8 can be mapped to make it much better? Is that easy?

It can be re-mapped very easily but being normally aspirated there is limited gain. Normally in the region of 10 or so BHP and about 30 torques. Not a massive gain but enough to be noticeable. Not that expensive either.

Example

http://www.quantumtuning.co.uk/car-remap-tuning-remapping.aspx?Make=BMW&Range=Z3

 

[ljauto]

drove a 1.9 owned a 2.2 for 5 years drove a 3.0 and bought a 2.8, for me 2.8 all day as mentioned its not just about the power but there's enough the 2.8 has better gear ratio than 2.2 so it feels longer legged, found it 5mpg+ more economical too , will pull in 5th from 30 and won engine of the year I think ?

 

[Gundun]

The 2.2s also came with a sports exhaust system standard which pop are fart on the overrun

Now THAT I didn't know! More info please...?

 

[Antm72]

My 2.8 has had a remap its far more progressive now with a let more get up and go a totally different power curve thats in from tick over and pulls right through.
Whilst mentioned the gains may not be massive in the scheme of things but it makes the engines characteristics far different to stock.
Drove a few 1.9's whilst looking and although a nice drive never gave me the feeling of a sports car capable but not quite there.
Alot of owners with the 2.0 long for alittle more from what i have read and as with anything its down to choice and money. I'm sure we would all like a 3.2 ///M but are now highly priced.
Economy was looked at when i brought but it seemed negligible in the scheme of things so the 2.8 was my choice and an affordable one.

 

[Lee]

"I'm going to throw it out there. I've owned an M, 2.8 and a 2.2. Best all rounder for me was the 2.2".

You compared the 2.8 with the 2.2, wondering how you see the 3.2 in comparison, having driven all three?

Ah I get ya, Well to me the M is in a totally different league of its own. I did use my M as a daily and found it so much more refined when your giving it hell. It's got so many subtle changes that make it unique and a pedigree but this also comes with a price. 7 sets of rear tyres over 2 1/2 years I had to do the shims twice and its even had two Vanos's in its time.

Now THAT I didn't know! More info please...?

No much to say other than this came as standard, It might be a facelift thing I cant remember.

 

[Ianmc]

My first Z3 was a 1.8 in 1997, pretty car that my wife loved. Replaced with a MR (S50) in 1999. Wife didn't like this as she kept stalling it. No traction so rear tyres didn't last long. Raw engine. Replaced with MC (S54) in 2005, has traction, fly by wire, all the options. Wife not encouraged to drive it. Have driven it over 200K miles and it remains best car I have owned. Guess the best engine is the one your car has - as long as it's a straight six of course!

 

[Lee]

My first Z3 was a 1.8 in 1997, pretty car that my wife loved. Replaced with a MR (S50) in 1999. Wife didn't like this as she kept stalling it. No traction so rear tyres didn't last long. Raw engine. Replaced with MC (S54) in 2005, has traction, fly by wire, all the options. Wife not encouraged to drive it. Have driven it over 200K miles and it remains best car I have owned. Guess the best engine is the one your car has - as long as it's a straight six of course!

I do love the S50/S54 engines, the mechanical scream they give out in the high rev's! After having some bigger and scarier cars it made me realised what I actually wanted from an engine.

You should look at this N52 I have in my coupe. 40mpg and 260bhp not both at the same time

 

[Ianmc]

Beats my 25mpg, obtainable as long as I don't do too many "wheelies"!

 

[Nodzed]

I do love the S50/S54 engines, the mechanical scream they give out in the high rev's! After having some bigger and scarier cars it made me realised what I actually wanted from an engine.

You should look at this N52 I have in my coupe. 40mpg and 260bhp not both at the same time

Your Coupe is lovely to drive mate cracking engine and the gearing is spot too, just needs an angle grinder to be taken to the roof

 

[Ianmc]

Nah, scuttle shake loosens fillings!

 

[Grumps]

Yeah I looked at from an overall point of view. The 2.2 is a newer design engine so it has the twin Vanos setup and the majority of the 2.8s are single. The 2.2s also came with a sports exhaust system standard which pop are fart on the overrun. The MPG figure overhaul are slightly better not that this makes a difference. Like you said the other weekend when we went out there's not much between the two engines but its the torque that makes the difference for the 2.8. I would like the 2.8 more if BMW didn't restrict it so much, its in such a lazy format in its stock form.

2.2 Pros: Twin Vanos / Exhaust setup Cons: Weak CCV system & flyby wire throttle

2.8 Pros: Very Reliable Engine Cons: Heavily restricted engine in stock form

Find me a cheap inlet manifold and it won't be! Me and Minty did the Dutch run together and filled up at the same time and the most we were out on a fill up was 3 litres. Nothing considering the mileage we did and a 600cc difference.

 

[TaffZee]

My current engine in a Z3, would be sweet.

 

[Stevo7682]

I would say any other engine bar the m43 i have
Its smooth enough but seriously lacking in the ponies department can feel a bit breathless at times

 

[Gundun]

I would say any other engine bar the m43 i have
Its smooth enough but seriously lacking in the ponies department can feel a bit breathless at times

I'm going to be hated by the Massive M44 fans here but when looking for my first Z3 I picked the M43 because the 8 valves packs more punch at low rev than the 16v...very few skiddies thought...

 

[Ianmc]

I think the 16v M44 has 138 bhp, the 8v M43 113 bhp.

 

[Stevo7682]

1

I think the 16v M44 has 138 bhp, the 8v M43 113 bhp.

118 bhp i need every hp i can get
@Gundun certainly the 8v has more grunt a low revs but i still think its a bit underpowered in the zed

 

[Parmst]

I don't know which engine is best but my m43 is a great wee engine, fast enough to get me into trouble and yes at times I wish it had more power but enough to change it -condition was more important to me when I was looking to buy. The only other I have driven was an 1.9 m44 auto and i hated it, just seemed to need to change up long beforen it did, I have a 318i auto and love it.

 

[oldcarman]

so the 2.8 can be mapped to make it much better? Is that easy?

Just involved money Cooper! Remove send in receive back put back where it came from and go, go, go!! At least I think that's all oh and maybe do the manifold change that @Rha, @Gooka, etc have made! JIM