In Reply to: 1.9 vs 2.8 posted by Phillip on February 09, 2000 at 12:24:32:
Now for my two cents :-) I would like to echo peoples call for you to decide for yourself; however you submitted to the group for our opinion...
I tested the 1.9 first, then the 2.8. Granted, it's the same body type, so the looks are the same either way; however, when I stepped into the 2.8, it was a much more thrilling ride. I even kept it for a couple days until, when I came back to the dealer, saw that they had an M. As they say, the rest is history. I tested that, and loved it! Once again, this is personal preference. As one review of the M states as a "con" for the car, that it requires more "driver interaction". For me, that's fine. I like every drive being a challenge. Definitely removes the boredom from my daily commute.
Once again, it's your money, you decide.
: The price on used Z3's has finally reached a level that they are realistically within my reach. My dilemma is do I buy a 1.9 or a 2.8. I owned a 1984 318I and was terribly unhappy with it's 100 hp power plant. I understand that the 1.9's 138 hp is a considerable increase in power. I just don't want to buy my dream car and be disappointed. I am not interested in competition driving or racing, but I want to enjoy the car. I can buy a 1998 1.9 w/ 26K miles for $21K. It would take a least another four or five thousand dollars to find a 1997 2.8 and I'm willing to spend that if it's worth it. I see a lot of you guys (and gals) selling your 1.9's and with the exception of the few with new babies requiring you to trade into a minivan most are trading up to a larger engine. I've read Robert Leidy's article "A Tale of Three Roadsters", which is probably one of the most informative I've found. I would love to hear some feed back, both pro and con on the two models. Any help in reaching an informed decision is greatly appreciated.