Ok boyos time to decide.
It seems im stuck between those 3 options.
If anyone has owned any of those 3 cars or at least tried them, comment on it. If you are going to shit on whatever car you hate the most for the sake of it or based on baseless meme-opinions, just get the fuck out aspie.
>>14884491
god dammit you worthless fuck stop posting this shit every day.
but hey, congrats on getting over your soft top fears. now buy a z4 and piss off.
>>14884491
>small rims
are you under 20?
>>14884556
He's buying a 10k europoor dollars car and this is at least the seventh time this indecisive shit has spammed this here.
Of course he is under 20.
>>14884491
Had a 2001 Z3 for 5 or 6 years. Mine had the 3 liter tho, so bear that in mind. Great car, never had any major issues with it. Good power, not so fast hair would catch on fire but faster than the other commuter mobiles on the road. Solid choice, but as with any BMWs of this vintage, the water pump is a weakness. I had to replace mine at 55k miles. My wife liked it better (based soley on looks) than the Boxster which is something we were considering too. These are getting pretty old now, so whichever one you get, make sure you get documentation from previous owner about maintenance. Also, I'm 6 feet and 180 lbs, wouldn't consider that a manlet. Never felt cramped in it. One final thing: I kept it bone fucking stock and maintained it religiously, which is prolly why it never gave me any problems. As long as you don't start screwing with the drivetrain and doing stance bullshit with it, should be alright.
>>14884515
The SLK looks the best due the hardtop with the top on tho. It looks like a "real car" but it's also a convertible.
>>14884575
Tell me what piece of shit are you driving.
>>14884556
Are you balding?
>>14884604
Thanksman. Got any pics?
>>14884608
I drive a Z4M because I'm not a poor european.
For real, stop spamming this shit.
The SLK is slow with no trunk space, the boxster has a shitty interior with a defective engine design with early models having a plastic rear window. The z3 has a plastic rear window sadly but it is plenty large inside.
Never driven the SLK but I would take the Z3 before the boxster anyday. That said a Z4 is far better than any of the cars you listed.
>>14884608
>Tell me what piece of shit are you driving.
Why does that matter. You're coming here asking for help and then get aggressive when people question your age.
>>14884620
Nope, sorry. Sold it back in 06 I think, but even if I did have pics wouldn't know where they are now. Like I said it was completely stock so do a google search for a blue 2001 z3. That's what it looked like.
>>14884635
>trunk space
lmao who cares about that in a convertible desu, it's enough.
I have driven the SLK230k and it was good. The kompressor kicks in and you feel it, it actually beats the SLK320
The car feels big inside, and "luxurious" compared to your average car
Soft tops are just... gay. The car doesn't look good with the top on, soft tops vibrate when you go fast, they leak water. You can't beat the comfy feeling of a hard top.
>>14884664
Only dadcels unironically like small rims
(asuming you aren't making fun of my grammar since im not native english)
You are passive agressive and I was agressive
Im near 27.
>>14884491
Buy the Z3, Cobra-fy it with an LS swap, side pipe, and polished metal finish.
>>14885354
>soft tops vibrate when you go fast
gone 155mph, no wind noise, no vibration. maybe dont buy shitty old cars?
>they leak water
see above. try not to be poor man.
>>14884635
trunk space is bigger in slk and no fucking way z3 beats slk230k at least in a straight line
Boxster because mid engine.... lots of parts for it... porsche... best drivers car of the three.
>>14885392
slk is heaviest with a redline under 6k. the z3 3.0 will eat it alive in a straight line.
and the slk trunk is tiny man. that roof has to go in there. it is so short it is near useless.
>>14885445
The steel roof adds some weight, but the SLK weighs about the same as a comparable BMW Z3 ragtop.
On a straight line, the Kompressor would make the difference. I would like to see a race tho.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDk2OwlTSuo
>and the slk trunk is tiny man. that roof has to go in there. it is so short it is near useless.
The SLK’s luggage space offers 348 liters with the roof closed and 145 when open, compared to the BMW Z3’s 165 liters (roof open or closed), or the Mazda MX5/Miata’s 150 liters (open/closed) or the Fiat Barchetta’s 165 liters (open/closed). So, even with the top down, the SLK offers about the same luggage space as a BMW Z3, Mazda MX5 or Fiat Barchetta, with the advantage of having more than double the available space with the roof closed.
>>14885584
z3 3.0 is still faster, a simple search of quartee mile times shows this. and there is more to a trunk than volume. with the roof retraced (which is the only value that matters otherwise why bother with a vert) the slk trunk is unusuable. yeah, its deep and wide, only to fit that huge roof, but you get about a foot height. it is useless for most luggage that any other softop roadster could carry. volume is a foolish metric in this case as it doesnt account for geometry
>>14884491
SLK
Z3 is slow as shit
Porsche is ugly and has no features
All are girls cars.
>>14885666
z3 3.0 is fastest. this is fact.
>>14884491
>boxter 2.5
>fastest
lol no. really OP? not even remotely true.
>>14885687
no
boxter 2.5 has 218 hp
>>14885625
z3 is shit and a girly car
slk has enough luggage unless you are a cuck
Go with the first one
