Are ZCP M3's less desirable than normal ones?

[lastMleft]

The question OP asked if you could go back in time would you purchase a standard M3 or a ZCP, everything else he wrote was his opinion on the two.

[Obioban]

Imo…
DSC module is an upgrade.
steering rack is a neutral (depends on taste)
everything else is a downgrade

I didn’t option it when I bought the car, and that’s still the decision I’d make today. I have retrofitted the DSC module.

[TexaZ3]

everything else is a downgrade

?? Don't see how:
-stock M3 brakes are better than ZCP stock brakes
-stock wheels style 67's are better (or better looking) than ZCP
-stock steering rack is better than ZCP stock rack

Yes, its all subjective, but in the end - market decides, and clearly - market values ZCP cars more than regular M3's, right or wrong - end of story.
And I'm pretty sure 99% of folks on this forum would take a ZCP car if given a choice to get one in their preferred color/gearbox/etc at exactly the same price.
So, once you take the price out of equation - the choice is obvious.

[Toby22]

Yes, its all subjective, but in the end - market decides, and clearly - market values ZCP cars more than regular M3's, right or wrong - end of story.

Pretty much this

Many are posting their personal desired spec. Doesn’t really mean much in the big picture

[maw1124]

Except that the OP was asking what WE thought, not some "market"... parroting back what the market thinks completely misses the point IMO... the point of these forums is the MEMBERS' views not the market's... which can easily be seen on Hagerty or BaT.

maw

[Tbonem3]

So, once you take the price out of equation - the choice is obvious.

well ya, I'll take a 355 over a civic if price is out of the equation.

what's the premium? Is it worth it for the marginally better brakes, better but still not forged wheels, etc.

not sure what the premium was back in 2005, but it seems like it's a good $5k-10 now (hard to say, the IB color is a lot of it) which is def not worth it - can buy much better parts later.

[terra]

It was a $4000 package back in the day. Though the stock 19" wheels by themselves were $1750. And 10 years ago when I bought my car, the premium for a ZCP wasn't as crazy... in hind sight I do wish I tried a little harder to find one.

[Obioban]

?? Don't see how:
-stock M3 brakes are better than ZCP stock brakes
-stock wheels style 67's are better (or better looking) than ZCP
-stock steering rack is better than ZCP stock rack

Yes, its all subjective, but in the end - market decides, and clearly - market values ZCP cars more than regular M3's, right or wrong - end of story.
And I'm pretty sure 99% of folks on this forum would take a ZCP car if given a choice to get one in their preferred color/gearbox/etc at exactly the same price.
So, once you take the price out of equation - the choice is obvious.

Stock brakes are not drilled (so less prone to cracking) and fit under 17s. 17s a great— I use them for track wheels on the M3 coupe and summer and winter wheels on the M3 wagon.

ZCP wheels are cast 19s and don’t clear bbks. OE 19s are forged and clear BBKs. OE 18s are 18”. Cast 19s are not my idea of desirable.

steering racks are always a compromise— turn in response vs high speed stability and precise metering. If a faster rack was only better, it would just be the default rack— it doesn’t cost more to make a faster rack. Personally, I want a rack that’s just fast enough that I never have to move my hands location, and no faster. I have a ZHP rack on the coupe, because it’s the most feelsome. It also happens to be the same speed as the ZCP rack, but I see that as a downgrade/compromise I live with for the extra feel over the M3 racks (as it’s faster than I need to never have to shuffle my hands, and I prefer the more precise metering of steering and high speed stability of the stock rack).

[terra]

The ZCP brakes can fit under some 17s. Not many, but some. For what it's worth, BMW *did* make a faster rack the default on the non-M. The original non-Ms had a pretty similar overall ratio to the M3 (15.5:1) before they switched to the 13.7:1.

Personally I never liked the stock rack. I think the ZHP rack was amongst the first mods I did to my car. To be honest I don't know if I'd say the ratio itself is earth shattering - I can definitely feel the difference (and it did take a little adjustment for me to drive a stock M3 briefly), but it's like a 10% difference we're talking about. The feel was by far the bigger issue. The on center feel of the stock rack just wasn't very good. All that said, I still don't know how the ZHP rack compares to the ZCP rack in the feel department. My car has too many suspension changes to make a 1:1 comparison.

[Toby22]

Except that the OP was asking what WE thought, not some "market"... parroting back what the market thinks completely misses the point IMO... the point of these forums is the MEMBERS' views not the market's... which can easily be seen on Hagerty or BaT.

maw

You’re right. Original post is kind of weird. There’s two questions in there, reason for some confusion.

”Are ZCP M3's less desirable than normal ones?”
”would you buy a ZCP or regular model?”

[Obioban]

The ZCP brakes can fit under some 17s. Not many, but some. For what it's worth, BMW *did* make a faster rack the default on the non-M. The original non-Ms had a pretty similar overall ratio to the M3 (15.5:1) before they switched to the 13.7:1.

Personally I never liked the stock rack. I think the ZHP rack was amongst the first mods I did to my car. To be honest I don't know if I'd say the ratio itself is earth shattering - I can definitely feel the difference (and it did take a little adjustment for me to drive a stock M3 briefly), but it's like a 10% difference we're talking about. The feel was by far the bigger issue. The on center feel of the stock rack just wasn't very good. All that said, I still don't know how the ZHP rack compares to the ZCP rack in the feel department. My car has too many suspension changes to make a 1:1 comparison.

I was running a brembo GT kit under 17s on the coupe. If you get wheels designed around fitting brakes it can happen, but it’s certainly far from the norm.

The M3 probably had a slower rack than the non M to be more stable at speed, since it goes faster.

[terra]

If we’re talking about norms, it’s very much against the norm for anyone to be routinely buying 17s for any e46 m3.

That’s the thing though, when comparing to when both were released, the M3 ratio was about the same as the non-M. Non-M was updated, M3 was not. My guess would be it was a low production number issue rather than trying to keep the supposed stability advantage. Similar to how the M3 didn’t get the MK60 until a few years later, how the M3 never got the face lifted headlights (exterior shape or inner bits) or the third headrest in the back.

[cobra]

... the M3 never got the face lifted headlights (exterior shape or inner bits) ....

THANK GOODNESS!

[Nate047]

which means it will be more desirable to collectors, ultimately more valuable

There are two kinds of car owners. those who buy a car to drive and enjoy it... and the rest.

[02_lsb]

+1 on meh on the ZCP. Remove interlagos and there’s nothing left.