[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by simianspeedster

I also think the Z4 is a terrible car for introducing this engine. You can talk about Miatas and TTs all you want, but the Z4 starts at $48K in the US...

It's a fair point. I was curious so I checked on Edmunds. Here's the current prices:

2011 Audi TT Roadster: $41,300
2011 BMW Z4 Roadster: $47,450

So you are right, the Z4 commands a premum of about $6k vs. the TT. That's not insignificant by any means. However, I would suggest that the we wait to see if BMW charges less for the Z4 28i than they had been for the Z4 30i. I think that although price drops are rare, especially with BMW, in this case there is actually a good chance it will come down especially when you consider that they opted to call it a 28i vs. a 30i. Clearly they are aware that the immediate impression the consumer will have is that this model slots in a little below the old model. A cooresponding price drop would be expected.

Also, remember, the car has more power than the TT does, though performance may be on par (I didn't check performance comparisons against the current 30i for that matter).

And a few other points of reality:

BMW hasn't even suggested the an N20 equipped Z4 will weigh less than an N52 equipped Z4.

Yes, I absolutely agree with you that weight savings will be minimal at best, and perhaps none at all. That part was always a red herring to me. Typically BMW marketing snow job, that one.

NVH and aduio quality will undoubtedly suffer compared with the N52.

My guess is that BMW has determined that those buying the entry level model are not usually the ones who pay a lot of attention to such things. That said, I think we should wait to hear the final product to see what they've come up with.

My wife and I took a road trip in her 328xi Sports Wagon (automatic). Even with some windy weather, lots of hills and a relatively heavy foot, we averaged 25MPG. Do you really think we would get much better mileage with an N20 in the same 3,900 lb. car under the same conditions?

Unfortunately, the EPA numbers are what matters most. EPA test procedures are still woefully inadequate. And the CAFE system is broken at a fundamental level at best, and at worst it actually acts to contradict its claimed goals. It is completely conceivable to engineer a motor that offers better EPA results than another motor and yet offers no better real world results, and I'm sure this happens often. Sure, you also don't want to let customers down by not meeting their observed fuel economy expectations. So, I think that it will be no worse than the N52 in that regard. Maybe no better, no, but no worse either. The win is that they boost their CAFE thereby cutting costs.