[tranquility]

Alright, which one is best-looking, so based SOLELY on looks, nothing to do w performance or anything else that doesn't relate to beauty.

This poll is *public* because I want it to be as objective as possible, so anyone who owns or owned a Z4, please DON'T vote. However, you're welcome to make comments, like myself, I'll refrain from voting and say that I think I'm pretty objective as even though I own a 2nd gen, I think the 1st gen looked the best, so for me, it would've been:
1st gen>2nd gen>3rd gen.

1st gen:


2nd gen:


3rd gen:

[Efthreeoh]

It is an interesting question. As the owner of the E86 Coupe, I'll say that when the E85 debuted in 2002 I found it quite unattractive. At the time and still do, I thought as also an owner of the E37 Z3 Roadster, the E85 was a poor follow-on the the Z3. When the E86 Coupe arrived in 2006, putting the 2-hump metal roof and hatch on the car just totally transformed the look to my eye. Such to the point I can tolerate the E85 now, but I still think the front facia is a design letdown and the duck tail on the deck lid just still doesn't look right.

But the E89 Gen 2 Z4 is a better looking execution overall than the split Roadster/Coupe design of the E85/86. Had I not already owned a Z3 Roadster, I probably would have bought the 2009 E89 with the N52 and manual transmission instead of my E86 to have both a convertible and Coupe. The E89 really fixed the front end mishap of the Gen 1.

[Chihuahua]

E85 and it's not even close.

[GuidoK]

E85>G29>E89

I think it's all in the lenght to width ratio.
The E85 was wide and short. (length to width ratio: 1:2.297)
The E89 was approx just as wide but they made it ~6" longer. (length to width ratio: 1:2.368)
The G29 is even longer but also substantially wider (length to width ratio: 1:2.319)

The E89 has just too much of a GT vibe and too little sportscar vibe to me.
Both the E89 as the G29 are also way too heavy. Where the boxster only gained about 50kg over all the iterations, the Z4 (the car BMW designed to counter the Boxtser) gained ~200kg in top spec from E85 to E89 alone.
That's not very 'sportscar like'. I mean the E89 is a better build car with way better interior materials, and there's obviously the metal roof system, but to me those are not really important for the purpose the Z4 was developped. Certainly not if the trade off is a massive weight gain. The E85 still is a fairly light compact roadster that is ideal for carving the canyon roads and throw through hairpin corner on alpine passes.
The later generations get too heavy and the G29 gets too big for that, even though it has a very good chassis, and I really liked it's torque vectoring diff on those roads (I only drove a tuned M40i).
And not having a manual available on that car...thats also a big miss...

So where the boxster/718 stayed true to it's original design purpose (small kick ass little roadster), the z4 over the years wandered off to tend to more lazy, luxury (elderly?) oriented customers.

[stein_325i]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

It is an interesting question. As the owner of the E86 Coupe, I'll say that when the E85 debuted in 2002 I found it quite unattractive. At the time and still do, I thought as also an owner of the E37 Z3 Roadster, the E85 was a poor follow-on the the Z3. When the E86 Coupe arrived in 2006, putting the 2-hump metal roof and hatch on the car just totally transformed the look to my eye. Such to the point I can tolerate the E85 now, but I still think the front facia is a design letdown and the duck tail on the deck lid just still doesn't look right.

But the E89 Gen 2 Z4 is a better looking execution overall than the split Roadster/Coupe design of the E85/86. Had I not already owned a Z3 Roadster, I probably would have bought the 2009 E89 with the N52 and manual transmission instead of my E86 to have both a convertible and Coupe. The E89 really fixed the front end mishap of the Gen 1.

I agree. While the E89 wasn't my favorite driving Z4, I do think it is the best looking one. It just has a classical and sporty BMW look without being too fussy like the current Z4. I typically don't like hardtops at all in design, but I think BMW designs a very nice hardtop convertible whether it be Z4, 3er, or 4er.

[tranquility]

Some nice discussions. I fawned over the E86. I'm a fan of small and light cars, so the 1st gen was on my shortlist, but unfortunately by the time I was ready to buy, the 2nd gen came. It's definitely a very nice car, but like others have said, they went from a Cayman/Boxster (sportscar) fighter to more of a sports GT. I dunno how I really feel about that because maybe I am in that latter category driving-style-wise, but I still would've appreciated having a lighter/smaller car.

The only slight disappointment in the 1st gen was that it was created as a convertible, so I think the coupe is slightly heavier by 10kgs or something?...which is very weird, but I'd still go for the E86 because I'm not a fan of ragtops at all. The front is alright, maybe a bit dated but the back is so sexy. Maybe there are some humps that look a tad bit weird in the hatchback area, but overall, still a very sexy car.

The 2nd gen is overall nice too and I really like how they evolved the front but the back is not as good as the 1st gen's. The hardtop is preferable over the rag to me but the proportion seems a bit off, looks smaller than the rest of the car (which of course went to town at the buffet line haha). Its design was based on the 507, so I guess it has that going for it.

I personally don't get the purpose of the 3rd gen, they went back to a rag, the power is not a huge jump from the 2nd gen. The front looks great but the rear looks like some weird Japanese design, it's not cohesive to me, but owners are really pro-vocal about its looks.

Overall, it seems like BMW doesn't know what it wants to do w the Z line, there's no clear objective, it's like they failed to take out the Boxster/Cayman, so tried to take out the SLK350? and now I dunno what's its competitor(s).

[ToddBlack88]

Not voting, as I own one.

Personally I never liked, and still don’t, the e85 roadster. It’s just never looked right to me.

I think as a roadster variant, the second gen looks the best, substantially, but I don’t like it with the roof up. I think the e86 coupe is the best roof up version.

So for coupe/top up, I go 1st gen, 3rd, 2nd
Roadster I go, 2nd gen, 3rd, 1st.

[tranquility]

Originally Posted by Piper1

Why was it unfortunate? Was it you wanted new? At launch of new generation normally previous gen pricing goes down if you bought a light used. Not sure bout e86 but when I started my search the first was a ‘08 e85 was 20k ish in 2011 with 30k ish miles. Today brand new bmw doesn’t make anything to fit what I want so there’s nothing I’d buy new, only used.

To add since you mentioned little weight difference the e86 ended up with twice the rigidity than the e85 and still is stiffer over the other variants except the Zupra.

BMW knows the direction, they’re ending it.

Ya, I only want to buy new.

That's good to know, like I said, the E86 was my pick but my timing was wrong.

Too bad they're ending it, but if the 3rd gen is what they have to show for it, I guess they need to do something else, they totally lost their way, and this is besides the Z line.

[NickyC]

E85 and it’s not even close. Of all the BMWs I’ve owned, including my beloved F82 CS currently, my Z4 M Roadsters were my favorite cars ever. Can’t explain it, won’t ask you to agree with me, they were just my favorite BMWs of all time. If they remade the same car again I’d be first in line to buy.

[Redd]

*drop mic*

[tranquility]

Ya, the E85Ms were sexy w that quad exhaust rear but Z4MC is where it's at, takes it up a few more notches.

[PYE46M3]

as an owner of a Imola Z4M, I have to say the 2nd gen LCI looks best. The front end is very modern and stylish. The E85/E86 front end is dated. They both have weird rear ends. and the non-m E85/E86 in my opinion is hideous and super dated.

[Pheonix]

Currently have the Z4MC in the garage so I am biased for sure
Found this old picture taken when I 1st moved to the Bay Area.

[10"]

easily the 1st generation—-no question.

[RigaTony1982]

My 2023 arrived at port Monday, so I won't vote as well. I do think I like the looks of the 2nd generation the best. Add in the fact you could get it in Atacama Yellow and Valencia Orange and that seals the deal for me. The color options are a little bland on the G29.

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by Redd

*drop mic*

And that video is THE big reason why it's so strange, such a shame, they never made an M version of the E89.
I mean they've won everything with that car, it was hugely succesful.
But the E89 never came out with proper M brake technology (no semifloating discs), no proper LSD, no S engine (S65 would have sounded great in that car).

What's the point of making a racecar, that wins everything in it's class, and not have a special roadgoing version to commemorate that racing succes?!??
Especially if you have a whole "M" devision exactly for that.
They completely missed the boat with that.

Of course the racecar has completely different tech, the underpinnings are nothing like what bmw sets on the road, but making a special version with M3 controlarms/suspension/brakes/driveline and engine (maybe even a turbo v8 from one of hte SUV's), that is what BMW does best. But then they didn't

[freakystyly]

You could always make the frankenstein Z4 that BMW never did... Manhart threw the S85 V10 in one.

[W///]

Originally Posted by NickyC

E85 and it’s not even close. Of all the BMWs I’ve owned, including my beloved F82 CS currently, my Z4 M Roadsters were my favorite cars ever. Can’t explain it, won’t ask you to agree with me, they were just my favorite BMWs of all time. If they remade the same car again I’d be first in line to buy.

Agreed. When the E85 came out, it was instant love for me. There was just something so unique about it, and I loved the sharp character line.

While my Z4MR is still in pieces in the garage, that's one car I never want to sell, even though it's not a museum quality car. 92k miles, leaking like crazy, top doesn't work, but it's honestly just too special of a car (especially for the price) for me to ever want to get rid of it

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by freakystyly

Manhart threw the S85 V10 in one.

that was in an e85.
(and some of those conversions don't have the best track record when it comes to reliability)


And an e89 conversion with an m3 rear axle....I still have to see that one

[GuidoK]

Yes a truck engine also fits. But is the interior still useable?
How much did they have to hack away from the bulkhead and tunnel?
How does that affect the monocoque and what did they had to do to counter that?
Building a racecar isn't difficult. Building a high performance car that is still useable (and admissible on roads around the world) is!

[freakystyly]

I'm just talking out my butt here but the 3L straight 6s are long, and the Z cars naturally have a longer front end to help the engine sit further back and help balance the car. Kind of like shoe-horning an LS v8 in a Miata, there likely is a good amount of fab work involved. The overall balance and handling of the car is an afterthought at that point. Road legality of course is always questionable with custom work depending on location.

Anyways, I voted 1-2-3. I also have a soft spot for the Z3MC clownshoe so my taste in beauty might be off.

[GuidoK]

Originally Posted by freakystyly

I'm just talking out my butt here but the 3L straight 6s are long, and the Z cars naturally have a longer front end to help the engine sit further back and help balance the car. Kind of like shoe-horning an LS v8 in a Miata, there likely is a good amount of fab work involved.

I think with a viper motor it's not really the engine but the gearbox in the transmission tunnel that's the problem. Even the e46 m3 gearbox doesn't fit right so the z4m got the 3.0i gearbox (a 370Nm gearbox instead of the 420Nm from the e46 m3)
Also getting a stronger diff that fits the viper gearing might be a problem. the 188k diff is rather weak for all that power and the 215 diff (z4m/m3) has really short gearing that doesn't fit an engine that makes all it's torque already at 1500Nm. You'd effectively loose a complete gear.
I don't know what they all build (effectively you can build anything if you know how), but like I said: building a racecar (or a showcar) is easy, building a car that can still be enjoyed on the road (going on a weekend trip, or into town) is much harder. That is also constantly the thing I'm challenging with my car. Upgrading stuff is easy, making it faster or more hardcore, but is it still enjoyable on the road?
Does your leg get completely numb at the traffic light, or does your car start to rattle like crazy when idling so that everyone looks at you like....dude your car is falling apart....
For a showcar no problem, but for a manufacturer it would make the car completely unsellable.
That makes M cars (and AMG's, Audi RS cars etc) so good. Pretty fast but still very refined.

The Manhart V10 z4 (with the S85) is based on the Hörnisse Z4m V10. That was at a carmeeting/drive once (germany). It couldn't finish the drive due to problems. That is the reality of those kinds of builds. Obviously very dependant on the technical capabilities of the persons who build it, but if you're not capable to do a build like that yourself, chances are you also can't oversee the work that has been done. Buying a car like that is a guaranteed path of continious spending money to barely keep it running. That's why they're very cheap when they go up for sale and stay for sale a long time. And they are impossible to work on. A mechanic will charge you 5-20 times as much if something has to be done than on a stock car, if he accepts the job at all. Don't be surprised when replacing a startermotor or waterpump or something else simple (oil filter?) on such a build is an engine out job and engine out means removing the complete front subframe and a performanceshop qoutes a 5 day job with 2 men, so 8-10k in labour alone.
I mean there's no workshop manual for this and for a shop to quote.. who knows what kind of silly things they'll encounter. They'll be re-inventing the wheel over and over again.