Luis de Prat

One thing to keep in mind in all these comparos is that the Z3s mentioned were obviously much newer cars, with less miles on them, than their 944 "rivals." <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

I wonder how the Z3 would compare if it was 15+ years old.

Porsche8777

I own both a '98 2.8L Z3 and an 83 na without PS. I have had both on the track and driven both on the highway, and in the mountains. The Z has stock suspension except for sway bars that are upgraded to the equivalent of the 968 MO30 bars that I have on my 944 and both have a strut tower brace. Tth 44 also has new front bushings and ball joints. Both cars are on Yoko AVS Imtermediates, 225 width.

The Z has better performance until you get to a 951 as far as straight line speed. The Z ride is not as harsh as the 944 on the road but is a bit soft on the track. The 44 is definately better balanced for track use since the Z with any engine other than the 4 cyl is too light in the rear. I guess the Z would be faster at auto-x where you can slide it around and hope to recover it but at Road Atlanta it is too unstable to push. On the street where you should leave a little margin the Z is pretty quick.

I like both cars and both have their good points. The 44 imho is a far better track car and the Z is a much better street car.

In summary you obviously need one of each.

Tremelune

Keep in mind the top drops on the Z. That's reeeal nice in the warm weather, as much as I love my biggass sunroof. It maintains it's beautiful lines with it down, too, unlike, say, any other BMW convertible.

Dan in Pasadena

I've driven an M Roadster and it is a monster in straight line acceleration. I had the salesman in the car and didn't take it anywhere other than an few city streets and a short run on the freeway. But that car flats hauls ***. Later I read one of the car mag reviews on the net and they said it was the closest thing to a modern day AC Cobra that exists. That maybe over stating it a bit... but still it was truly impressive. We may speak of the Z3 in the same breath with our 944's but not the M ROadster. Presumably the M Coupe has the same acceleration or better and is certainly stiffer

wjk_glynn

Here's some performance number comparisons for a 2.8L Z3 Coupe -vs- 924/944/968 cars:

<a href="http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/roadtests/1999/June/199906_shorttake_bmw_z3coupe.xml?&Manufacturer=BMW&Name=Z3-Series&class=20&page=2" target="_blank">Z3 performance numbers</a>

<a href="http://www.weissach.net/924-944-968_RoadTestSummary.html" target="_blank">924/944/968 Performance</a>

Karl.

PS - Remember, world of difference in the handling between a Z3 Coupe and a Z3 Convertible.

Porsh-uh

Stjobs is from G'ville... you'll have to excuse him. They breed 'em kind silly in gaytor country.

(stjobs... I'm just playing- it's nice to see someone close on the board, even if you are a Gator.)

ian

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Originally posted by Luis de Prat:
<strong>One thing to keep in mind in all these comparos is that the Z3s mentioned were obviously much newer cars, with less miles on them, than their 944 "rivals." <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

I wonder how the Z3 would compare if it was 15+ years old.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Well here is the kicker, both car have very old suspension lay outs, well at least out back in the Z3, the Z3's suspension comes from the e30 cars and it was one of the "problems" with the Z3 that was addressed with the Z4.

But yes the z3 did have 15 more years of technology to call on.