BMW 'Goodwill'

On Tue, 24 May 2005 19:51:42 GMT, "Paul Aspinall" >
wrote:

>It seems there are too many 'smart as**s' in the NG, who have probably never
>been in the position of having a £78000 car on their hands, and therefore
>are unsympathetic to those that do.

You're *really* hung up on the snob value of the original sticker
price of the car, aren't you?

You need to understand that cars like 7 series BMWs depreciate in
value nearly as fast as 1990s dotcom stocks. I don't think many here
are going to be impressed by its original sticker price, in fact,
those of us who spend that kind of money on buying and running a new
car expect to lose substantially. The only cars in that class that I
have owned that retain a reasonable value long term have been NSXs.
I'm sure (?) there are others, but that has been my only positive
experience. A decent early 90s NSX still fetches £25K. A 5 year old
7 *might* possibly fetch that much. If you can't afford to pay the
price, then don't play.

HTH. HAND.
--
Dan.

"Dean Dark" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 24 May 2005 19:51:42 GMT, "Paul Aspinall" >
> wrote:
>
> >It seems there are too many 'smart as**s' in the NG, who have probably
never
> >been in the position of having a £78000 car on their hands, and therefore
> >are unsympathetic to those that do.

I'm looking around to find somebody that's sympathetic. Surely he's around
here someplace.

Too bad the dealer hid the warranty from you when you bought the car.

-Russ.

"Paul Aspinall" > wrote in message
. ..
>>
>> As for whether a car should "last at least 200,000 miles", well that
>> all depends on your driving style and the conditions you drive in. Why
>> should BMW or any other mfr, warranty or guarantee your car? Who is to
>> say you don't "abuse" your car, e.g., shift each and every gear at 7000
>> rpm? Alternatively, if someone did "abuse" their car, should BMW
>> "guarantee" it?
>
> The car is automatic, so its impossible to over-rev it.

Um no, an automatic can be overreved, all it would take is a faulty rev
limiter.

>
> Because I paid £78000 for a car, and I believe it should have a better
> warranty than 3 years. In addition, I was told at the time of sale, that
> the BMW extended warranty would be £1553 for 3 extra years.... now its
> £1536 for 1 year!!!!
>>
>

In the USA it had a 4 year warranty. Just be glad you're not in the rest of
Europe where it's only a 1 year warranty.

Paul Aspinall wrote:
> "bfd" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >I think the engine/gearbox on your car are going to be the *least* of
> > your worries. You bought the first year of the E65/66 body style. Can
> > you spell - p-r-o-t-o-t-y-p-e?
> >
> I think so.
>
> > Electronics will be more of a concern. Of course, you could be lucky,
> > but most first year owners complained about the electronics.
>
> I've had a few electronics problems already. Had things reset twice in 18
> months.
>
> >
> > As for whether a car should "last at least 200,000 miles", well that
> > all depends on your driving style and the conditions you drive in. Why
> > should BMW or any other mfr, warranty or guarantee your car? Who is to
> > say you don't "abuse" your car, e.g., shift each and every gear at 7000
> > rpm? Alternatively, if someone did "abuse" their car, should BMW
> > "guarantee" it?
>
> The car is automatic, so its impossible to over-rev it. Also, the E65/E66
> has Condition Based Servicing (CBS), which monitors how you drive, and
> adjusts accordingly.
> My cars are always fully serviced by BMW, when required.
>
>
> >
> > Further, ask yourself how do you maintain your car? How often do you
> > change your brake fluid? coolant? transmission or differential oil? (Oh
> > yeah, you're suppose to a a "lifetime" tranny fluid -hahahahah) What
> > about things like water pump or radiator (you know its plastic right?)
>
> All my cars are fully BMW serviced in accordance with requirements.
>
> >
Therein lies part of your problem. The fact that you spent $78K on your
car is, well alot of money. However, servicing "in accordance with
requirements" will result in trouble down the road, especially if you
expect your car to last 200,000 miles.

For example, your car supposedly comes with "lifetime" transmission and
differential fluids. Yet, its common knowledge that the "lifetime"
fluids are exactly the same as those used when BMW recommended changes
every 30,000 miles. Do you really think your transmission and
differential fluid will last 200,000 miles, without changing? I
wouldn't. The fact is BMW doesn't care. As stated, they are in the
business of selling cars.

Basicially, if you can afford, to spend the big bucks on a 2002 7
Series, why are you so concern about the car lasting 200,000 miles? You
obvious can afford to replace your car more frequently than most, so I
say do it!

Otherwise, despite BMW claim of "lifetime" fluids, I think its crap and
would
follow the old service schedule:

- Coolant - every 2 years (with only BMW coolant/Zerex G-48)
- Brake fluid - flush every 2 years; unless you track your car, then
every year
- Transmission and Differential - every 30,000 miles (use synthetic
like
Redline)
- Engine oil - since all new BMWs now come with synthetic, I would look

to change engine oil and filter every 7K+ miles depending on driving
conditions.

Add in replace your radiator/waterpump/thermostat every 60,000-80,000
miles too
Further, with BMW V8s, you need to keep an eye on:
- valve cover gaskets replaced between 75,000-90,000 mile mark;
- intake manifold gaskets need replacing at about 100,000 miles
and I think you need to keep an eye out on the power steering pump
lines too.

All in all, keep it maintained religiously and it just might last to
200K. Now about those electrical gremlins.....

Paul Aspinall wrote:
> "Malt_Hound" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Paul Aspinall wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Because I paid £78000 for a car, and I believe it should have a better
>>>warranty than 3 years.
>>
>>Now you know the difference between perception and reality. You may exist
>>in either one, your choice...
>>
>>
>>>In addition, I was told at the time of sale, that the BMW extended
>>>warranty would be £1553 for 3 extra years.... now its £1536 for 1
>>>year!!!!
>>
>>You were *told*? Hah. Well then, you should have purchased the warranty
>>at that time, then you would have known what the cost would be.
>>
>>How on earth could you (or anyone) receive a quote for this (or anything)
>>and expect it to remain the same three years later?
>>
>>Are you really this naive?
>
>
> No, because I only bought the car 12 months ago.... not three years ago.

My mistake. I was under the impression that you were the original
owner. So then you actually bought the car used, which was when they
gave you this story about the extended warranty? If this is the case,
then that makes the whole idea of getting anything out of BMW in terms
of goodwill warranty coverage even more remote, *unless* (and here's the
key) coverage was agreed to at the time of purchase.

Here is the US it is very common to buy used (certified) BMWs from BMW
new car dealers with an included extended warranty. But even those
generally only go to 6 years or 100k miles.

>
> Your tone is very demeaning... which is probably indicative of why you are
> not riding round in a 745Li.

I'm sorry that it seems demeaning to you, but I'm sure a lot of that has
to do with your particular perspective. Since I'm not telling you what
you want to hear you think I'm being mean. OTOH those that agree with
your opine that BMW should cover your car to an unprecedentedly high
mileage, gratis, just because it was originally an expensive car are
offering "constructive" comments.

My "tone" has nothing to do with why I am not riding in a 745Li. I'm
sure they are very nice cars if you like them, but to be perfectly
honest with you I don't really like the 7 series cars (even the old
ones) and the latest crop seem like bloated, over-gimmicked-up land
barges to me. The 7's seem to be aimed more at the traditional Mercedes
market market to me. In my opinion, the essence of BMW is in its
sporting heritage, and somehow the 7 series just do not fit in with
that. But I respect your opinion may be different and, as I said, I'm
sure it is a nice car.

I also choose not to spend my hard earned money on an automobile that
will lose half (or more) of its value in a matter of a few years. You
see, I too buy used cars. But I pick them up when they have already
experienced the majority of their depreciation. Of course, I fully
expect that my BMWs will run to 200k miles or more. I just don't expect
anyone to guarantee that.

Furthermore, Paul, your personal comment about what I'm "riding around
in" smacks of snobbery. I'm sure that was not your intention, now was it?

-Fred W

"Malt_Hound" > wrote in message
...

> I'm sorry that it seems demeaning to you, but I'm sure a lot of that has
> to do with your particular perspective. Since I'm not telling you what
> you want to hear you think I'm being mean. OTOH those that agree with
> your opine that BMW should cover your car to an unprecedentedly high
> mileage, gratis, just because it was originally an expensive car are
> offering "constructive" comments.
>

Careful Fred, the thank you for "constructive" comments was in reply to my
post where I clearly stated that "...ideally, life span of
engine/transmission and any other component would be directly related to the
price you pay..." I also stated that it's fair to expect a higher priced
car to last longer than a cheaper one, but "...the reality is that you're
not paying more for a BMW
than a Ford solely because of the expectation that it will have a longer
life."

I also said that I suspected if the car failed outside of warranty that
you'd get little goodwill, which was actually the original question being
posed.

At no point did I agree that BMW should cover the OPs car for free, to
"...unprecedentedly high mileage...".

Neil wrote:
> "Malt_Hound" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
>>I'm sorry that it seems demeaning to you, but I'm sure a lot of that has
>>to do with your particular perspective. Since I'm not telling you what
>>you want to hear you think I'm being mean. OTOH those that agree with
>>your opine that BMW should cover your car to an unprecedentedly high
>>mileage, gratis, just because it was originally an expensive car are
>>offering "constructive" comments.
>>
>
>
> Careful Fred, the thank you for "constructive" comments was in reply to my
> post where I clearly stated that "...ideally, life span of
> engine/transmission and any other component would be directly related to the
> price you pay..." I also stated that it's fair to expect a higher priced
> car to last longer than a cheaper one, but "...the reality is that you're
> not paying more for a BMW
> than a Ford solely because of the expectation that it will have a longer
> life."
>
> I also said that I suspected if the car failed outside of warranty that
> you'd get little goodwill, which was actually the original question being
> posed.
>
> At no point did I agree that BMW should cover the OPs car for free, to
> "...unprecedentedly high mileage...".
>
>

Yeah, I know. I thought your response was on point and constructive too.

But if you read his "thank-you" note it does not seem to have registered
that you were disagreeing with him. ;-)

-Fred W

That does not matter. What matters is that it has been tested to last for a
certain period.

Such long-term test programmes can be an expensive hassle so are perhaps
they are not carried out as often as we would like. Much easier to just say
"it's good for 30 000 miles" than test for 100 000. The latter costs the
car manufacturer far more...

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

"bfd" > wrote in message
oups.com...
[...]
>
> For example, your car supposedly comes with "lifetime" transmission and
> differential fluids. Yet, its common knowledge that the "lifetime"
> fluids are exactly the same as those used when BMW recommended changes
> every 30,000 miles.
[...]

"Malt_Hound" > wrote in message
...

<snip>
> >
> > At no point did I agree that BMW should cover the OPs car for free, to
> > "...unprecedentedly high mileage...".
> >
> >
>
> Yeah, I know. I thought your response was on point and constructive too.
>
> But if you read his "thank-you" note it does not seem to have registered
> that you were disagreeing with him. ;-)
>

I didn't read his reply that way. I believe the thank you was more of a
comment about the relative level of politeness from respondents including
yourself, even before he came back and fanned your flames by accusing you of
being demeaning. ;-Þ

Did I disagree? Either way it doesn't matter. You buy a BMW knowing full
well that the warranty isn't as long as another manufacturer, but still go
ahead with the purchase because of the trade-offs I mentioned in my original
reply.

I think the OP was actually more POd that the price of the extended warranty
had increased since the original quote. I'd certainly be kicking myself too
for missing the boat.

Thanks again.

Just to clarify. I thank everyone for their opinions, regardless of their
agreement, as long as they're constructive and well put.

Neil - you understood my response well, and as intended.

Cheers

"Neil" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Malt_Hound" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> <snip>
>> >
>> > At no point did I agree that BMW should cover the OPs car for free, to
>> > "...unprecedentedly high mileage...".
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Yeah, I know. I thought your response was on point and constructive too.
>>
>> But if you read his "thank-you" note it does not seem to have registered
>> that you were disagreeing with him. ;-)
>>
>
> I didn't read his reply that way. I believe the thank you was more of a
> comment about the relative level of politeness from respondents including
> yourself, even before he came back and fanned your flames by accusing you
> of
> being demeaning. ;-Þ
>
> Did I disagree? Either way it doesn't matter. You buy a BMW knowing full
> well that the warranty isn't as long as another manufacturer, but still go
> ahead with the purchase because of the trade-offs I mentioned in my
> original
> reply.
>
> I think the OP was actually more POd that the price of the extended
> warranty
> had increased since the original quote. I'd certainly be kicking myself
> too
> for missing the boat.
>