# Z4 Styling Hurting Sales... Big Incentives Offered



## WILLIA///M (Apr 15, 2002)

The Z4 is *way* better looking than the Z3 ever was.


----------



## AlexM520 (Sep 27, 2002)

WILLIA///M said:


> The Z4 is *way* better looking than the Z3 ever was.


DITTO ! I wish there would be more lines/definition on Z4 hood, instead of just being wide and plain, but nevertheless, overall (including sides and rear) it looks GOOD.

Of course upcoming 2005 MB SLK looks hot also.

AlexM520


----------



## e46shift (Oct 12, 2002)

is porsche coming out with an updated boxster(next gen)?


----------



## JonM (Jan 28, 2002)

I personally don't think that the styling is hurting sales.

It's the price.

Z4s are very expensive cars IMO.


----------



## Fisch330ciTB (Jan 10, 2002)

same thing with the X3...too much money$$$!

I like the z4, almost bought a 2.5 but would rather have the 3.0...so I passed. Now with these nice incentives, it may be an option again.

THE CAR DEF NEEDS TO HAVE THE M-tech/m-sport whatever bumper that is offered, otherwise the front looks too boring. I like the sides and rear though.


----------



## Jspeed (Dec 23, 2001)

Mr. Bimmer said:


> Kinda strange that the article claims that the Z4's styling is causing the recent hurt in sales, a whole 2 years after its launch. Sounds like someones shifting the blame...................


Perhaps the author felt that the design is flashy and attention-catching but isn't timeless/classy enough.


----------



## MG67 (Aug 19, 2003)

I'm currently looking at a different car for next year... I am considering the Z4 either a new 2.5 or a used 3.0... I think the 3.0 would be the better choice. But new I would be spending about $47,000 for that car and that's a lot of money... Better get a used with 5k or 10k on the clock... still have the warranty and service...:thumbup:


----------



## bmw325 (Dec 19, 2001)

AlexM520 said:


> DITTO ! I wish there would be more lines/definition on Z4 hood, instead of just being wide and plain, but nevertheless, overall (including sides and rear) it looks GOOD.
> 
> Of course upcoming 2005 MB SLK looks hot also.
> 
> AlexM520


Agree:
-if the hood had a bit more definition
-if there were no slash marks on the side
-if there were no hump on the trunk
-if the tail lights were better
-if there interior were better

it would actually be a decent roadster and I bet it would sell well.


----------



## ObD (Dec 29, 2001)

JonM said:


> It's the price.


We have a winner. :thumbup:


----------



## Dave 330i (Jan 4, 2002)

If I have to pay for a fun wkend car, it would the S2000. For image, yea, I'll take the Z4 3.0.


----------



## Patrick330i (Sep 30, 2002)

Believe it or not, I love the looks of that Z4 EXCEPT that front frickin' grill. Awful, just awful and almost ruins the car. In fact, I won't get one because of that damn grill.  Are ya with me people? :angel:


----------



## Fisch330ciTB (Jan 10, 2002)

Patrick330i said:


> Believe it or not, I love the looks of that Z4 EXCEPT that front frickin' grill. Awful, just awful and almost ruins the car. In fact, I won't get one because of that damn grill.  Are ya with me people? :angel:


It needs the factory option sport bumper to help offset how big they are...powdercoat or colermatching them would be what i'd do.


----------



## Ridgeway (Jun 25, 2004)

> it would actually be a decent roadster and I bet it would sell well.


just curious what you/others would change/prefer in the interior, as I've seen a # of complaints on it, especially @ s2ki.com where I've lurked

personally the z4's interior was a selling point for me
my prior dairly driver was a z3 2.8, and compared to the z3 the z4 is a vast improvement
the z3's interior always seemed a little cheap to me, and it was a rattlebox, the z4's interior seems to be of a much higher quality, yes simplistic, but thats better than cluttered with dozens of buttons

as I posted on the z2k board, I test drove all the competing roadsters with the exception of the audi tt, and the z4 had the second best interior next to the slk. the s2k's was just plain cheap from the poor sound system, to the plastic covers, to the general lack of options/functions. the boxster s i drove also seemed cheaper, more plastic and also a horrible sound system. only the slk had a superb interior(but then again it wasn't as fun to drive)

& i agree with the above coment the factory aero kit front spoiler would help to spice up the somewhat bland front end

each roadsters has its qualities/merits, but none seem quite as polarizing as the z4, which i suppose is both good and bad

but in the end, styling exterior & interior aside the z4 is just plain the most fun to drive(and I've never had so many compliments from friends/strangers as compared to my other cars)

(yeah i know my punctuation in this post is poor, sry, in a hurry typing it...)


----------



## MarcusSDCA (Jan 14, 2004)

My .02 on the Z4:

It's ugly.

It looks like it was designed by 4 different people that never "took a meeting" with each other. The tail end is pathetic....the lighted roundels on the side are an over-branding embarrassment....the grill is scary and cat-fish-esque (ala the walrus-wiskered Tacoma).....the diagonal side detail betrays any sense of organic form.....BMW can do MUCH better. I wish it looked half as good as it drives.


----------



## jeffh325 (Mar 15, 2004)

Patrick330i said:


> Believe it or not, I love the looks of that Z4 EXCEPT that front frickin' grill. Awful, just awful and almost ruins the car. In fact, I won't get one because of that damn grill.  Are ya with me people? :angel:


That's strange. I walked around this car and the only angle I could photograph it in was from the front, head on. From this angle, the lines flow very smoothly and seem to follow the flow of air. There don't seem to be the unnecessary protrusions and crease marks that I commonly find in E60, E65, and the recent E90. The placement and size of the grill, headlights, and bumper makes it so that no part looks too bland or too busy.

Unfortunately, I can't say the same for the rest of the car. I don't understand how the doors are just flat and bland but there are random diagonal folds all over the place that don't seem to follow any aerodynamic patterns. Don't even get me started on the interior and that sorry excuse for a steering wheel.

Having said that, Z4s are such fun cars to :drive:


----------



## RSPDiver (Jul 14, 2004)

MARCUS545 said:


> My .02 on the Z4:
> 
> It's ugly.
> 
> It looks like it was designed by 4 different people that never "took a meeting" with each other. The tail end is pathetic....the lighted roundels on the side are an over-branding embarrassment....the grill is scary and cat-fish-esque (ala the walrus-wiskered Tacoma).....the diagonal side detail betrays any sense of organic form.....BMW can do MUCH better. I wish it looked half as good as it drives.


 :stupid: To me it looks like the challenged brother of the S2k. The rear is more reminiscent of the newer Miatas to me, I think. Front is too bulbus, and the lights make it look like a lazy-eyed freak mobile. IMHO, it will never be an instant classic like the neo-retro Z3 was. Of course, I'm biased also.


----------



## Will_325i (Jan 27, 2004)

MARCUS545 said:


> My .02 on the Z4:
> 
> It's ugly.
> 
> It looks like it was designed by 4 different people that never "took a meeting" with each other. The tail end is pathetic....the lighted roundels on the side are an over-branding embarrassment....the grill is scary and cat-fish-esque (ala the walrus-wiskered Tacoma).....the diagonal side detail betrays any sense of organic form.....BMW can do MUCH better. I wish it looked half as good as it drives.


Reminds me of a riddle ....

You know what a camel is?

It's a horse built by commitee.


----------



## bob lindquist (Jul 6, 2002)

*Colors*

FWIW, I think the colors offered are killing the sales.

Most of the colors make the car look rather poor. Black is good.

Too bad some bright "roadster" colors aren't offered. Z3 had so many nice ones.

thats all IMO of course.


----------



## eelnoraa (Oct 13, 2003)

I like Z4 too, but not pratical as a primary car. As for 2nd car where the fun factor is on top and praticality is not, the competition in this segment is strong. The S2000 is a every bit as much fun as Z4, price at $32K, 350Z vert is at $35K. If I were to look for a 2nd car for weekend fun, I would give serious look at the 3 model above.

eel


----------



## Atlantis (Oct 19, 2002)

e46shift said:


> is porsche coming out with an updated boxster(next gen)?


Yep, the new Porsche Boxster (987) will be launched next month at the Paris motor show. Spy shots indicate that it will be a light evolution of the current model. This is the best picture available at present:










There will also be a coupe version available next spring (I already have my order in :thumbup: ).


----------



## Artslinger (Sep 2, 2002)

Atlantis said:


> Yep, the new Porsche Boxster (987) will be launched next month at the Paris motor show. Spy shots indicate that it will be a light evolution of the current model. This is the best picture available at present:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Atlantis, can you upload a picture of that new Porsche Boxster (987). The pict is not showing.


----------



## Atlantis (Oct 19, 2002)

Artslinger said:


> Atlantis, can you upload a picture of that new Porsche Boxster (987). The pict is not showing.


Link above updated. Don't know why it wasn't working before, but I've now uploaded the pic to my own webspace.


----------



## LeucX3 (Dec 26, 2001)

That looks really good. Z4 sales are gonna :flush: even more now.


----------



## RSPDiver (Jul 14, 2004)

Good thing they covered up that dude's eye and cheek bone! LOL

Nice car, but I would hate to ever perform any maintenance on them myself. That engine is a bear to get to, from what mechanics tell me.


----------



## brkf (May 26, 2003)

LeucX3 said:


> That looks really good. Z4 sales are gonna :flush: even more now.


Why? The new Boxster's as bland as the new e90. Well, maybe not that bland.


----------

