e39 2002, should I keep it?

On Jul 2, 1:43*am, "Floyd Rogers" > wrote:
> > wrote
>
> > > I have a question regarding reliability. I've learned from experience
> > > that certain parts in BMW cars just aren't as reliable as japanese or
> > > even some american cars.
>
> > I like to stick to facts.
> >http://www.jdpower.com/autos/ratings...tings-by-brand
> >http://www.consumerreports.org- I'm a member here so I can see the
> >reports, I can't paste here since they use graphics. *But if you look
> >at luxury cars, 8 of the top 10 most reliable luxury cars are
> >Japanese! *Audi and Lincoln are the other 2. *Mercedes and BMW are in
> >the poor catagory!
> >These FACTS along with my experience with the e39 is how I'm coming up
> >with the items I'm discussing. *I'm not being emotional and zealous.
>
> There are a couple of things wrong with these statements.
> First, you say: *"I've learned from experience..." *That's not a FACT,
> nor is it valid to draw any conclusions from it. *It is anecdotal evidence
> and immediately suspect (as are all the anecdotes related by we
> other posters.) *You can't have it both ways: *you say you believe
> in facts, but then try to elevate non-evidence to that status. *Can't do it.
>
> The other problems are your citations. *Let's take the jdpower first.
> The study in that citation is for problems AT THE END OF THREE
> YEARS. *Because correlation and causation aren't the same things,
> you *CANNOT* say that BMWs are worse *OVER THE LIFE OF
> THE CAR* than the other manufacturers'. *It's probably true that
> the cars with fewer defects over three years may be better built, but
> that says almost *NOTHING* about what will happen in the future.
>
> There have been many discussions about consumer reports and
> their rankings. *I'm not going to repeat them other to say: *Google
> for them, and to note that the major argument about their validity
> is that they don't *COMPLETELY* report *ALL* problems, since
> CR doesn't actually go out and poll *ALL* owners, only the owners
> that subscribe to CR. *Because of that singular fact, their statistics
> are immediately suspect.
>
> FloydR


Hi Floyd,
Please correct me if I'm wrong but your logic is as follows:
car has poor reliability for 1st 3 years of ownership, this DOESN'T
mean that car will continue to be unreliable.
Is this correct?
That makes absolutely no sense!!
Who in their right mind buys anything that gets all sorts of problems
in the 1st 3 years of ownership and then tells themself, it's only the
1st 3 years of ownership - the future will be better!

Older bmw's were built better, newer ones are the problem. Also, FYI
the consumer reports reliability reports go back 10 years!! Is 10
years of data enough to draw a conclusion on whether or not the model
car you're looking at is reliable?
This is where bmw's and most german cars show their ugly side - lots
of problems.

Also, JD Powers reports go back about 12 years. Lexus is #1 for 12
years in a row if I recall correctly.

Oskar

> wrote in message
...
On Jul 2, 1:43 am, "Floyd Rogers" > wrote:
> > wrote
>
> > > I have a question regarding reliability. I've learned from experience
> > > that certain parts in BMW cars just aren't as reliable as japanese or
> > > even some american cars.
>
> > I like to stick to facts.
> >http://www.jdpower.com/autos/ratings...tings-by-brand
> >http://www.consumerreports.org- I'm a member here so I can see the
> >reports, I can't paste here since they use graphics. But if you look
> >at luxury cars, 8 of the top 10 most reliable luxury cars are
> >Japanese! Audi and Lincoln are the other 2. Mercedes and BMW are in
> >the poor catagory!
> >These FACTS along with my experience with the e39 is how I'm coming up
> >with the items I'm discussing. I'm not being emotional and zealous.
>
> There are a couple of things wrong with these statements.
> First, you say: "I've learned from experience..." That's not a FACT,
> nor is it valid to draw any conclusions from it. It is anecdotal evidence
> and immediately suspect (as are all the anecdotes related by we
> other posters.) You can't have it both ways: you say you believe
> in facts, but then try to elevate non-evidence to that status. Can't do
it.
>
> The other problems are your citations. Let's take the jdpower first.
> The study in that citation is for problems AT THE END OF THREE
> YEARS. Because correlation and causation aren't the same things,
> you *CANNOT* say that BMWs are worse *OVER THE LIFE OF
> THE CAR* than the other manufacturers'. It's probably true that
> the cars with fewer defects over three years may be better built, but
> that says almost *NOTHING* about what will happen in the future.
>
> There have been many discussions about consumer reports and
> their rankings. I'm not going to repeat them other to say: Google
> for them, and to note that the major argument about their validity
> is that they don't *COMPLETELY* report *ALL* problems, since
> CR doesn't actually go out and poll *ALL* owners, only the owners
> that subscribe to CR. Because of that singular fact, their statistics
> are immediately suspect.
>
> FloydR


Hi Floyd,
Please correct me if I'm wrong but your logic is as follows:
car has poor reliability for 1st 3 years of ownership, this DOESN'T
mean that car will continue to be unreliable.
Is this correct?
That makes absolutely no sense!!
Who in their right mind buys anything that gets all sorts of problems
in the 1st 3 years of ownership and then tells themself, it's only the
1st 3 years of ownership - the future will be better!

Older bmw's were built better, newer ones are the problem. Also, FYI
the consumer reports reliability reports go back 10 years!! Is 10
years of data enough to draw a conclusion on whether or not the model
car you're looking at is reliable?
This is where bmw's and most german cars show their ugly side - lots
of problems.

Also, JD Powers reports go back about 12 years. Lexus is #1 for 12
years in a row if I recall correctly.

Oskar

Sorry for being off topic. I noticed that some call their cars "E39", etc.
In the US, I haven't seen this. Is there some info or a chart that shows how
the European and US model names/numbers relate? Many thanks in advance.

"Florida NRA SW" wrote
> Sorry for being off topic. I noticed that some call their cars "E39",
> etc.
> In the US, I haven't seen this. Is there some info or a chart that
> shows how
> the European and US model names/numbers relate? Many thanks in
> advance.

The nomenclature is used in the US as well Here's your chart:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bmw

Go to the bottom of the page and expand the "BMW road car timelines"
(click on [show] on the right).

Cheers,
Pete

"John Carrier" wrote
> Radiator failure in the 60-90K range is not uncommon on the V-8's.
> Much less so on the I-6's. The water pump is a weakness and probably
> should be replaced as a preventive measure prior to 90K (Mike Miller
> would say 60).

The radiator is also a weakness as it is plastic. You can buy an
aftermarket radiator that is not plastic though that should last you a
bit longer.

Pete

"Florida NRA SW" > wrote in message
ng.com...
>

> Sorry for being off topic. I noticed that some call their cars
> "E39", etc.
> In the US, I haven't seen this. Is there some info or a chart
> that shows how
> the European and US model names/numbers relate? Many thanks in
> advance.

AFAIK the E number is the same for both US and european cars.
Basically it's BMW's model designation for different body designs
and series. The numbers following also usually refer to the
series and engine size.
Ie, all E39's are 5 series, and if followed by 5xx, the 5 is the
series and the xx refers to the size of it's engine, which may
not be it's actual size. The 523i actually has a 2.5 litre
engine.
Mike. (UK)

> wrote
On Jul 2, 1:43 am, "Floyd Rogers" > wrote:
> > wrote
>
> > > I have a question regarding reliability. I've learned from experience
> > > that certain parts in BMW cars just aren't as reliable as japanese or
> > > even some american cars.
>
> > I like to stick to facts.
> >http://www.jdpower.com/autos/ratings...tings-by-brand
> >http://www.consumerreports.org- I'm a member here so I can see the
> >reports, I can't paste here since they use graphics. But if you look
> >at luxury cars, 8 of the top 10 most reliable luxury cars are
> >Japanese! Audi and Lincoln are the other 2. Mercedes and BMW are in
> >the poor catagory!
> >These FACTS along with my experience with the e39 is how I'm coming up
> >with the items I'm discussing. I'm not being emotional and zealous.
>
> There are a couple of things wrong with these statements.
> First, you say: "I've learned from experience..." That's not a FACT,
> nor is it valid to draw any conclusions from it. It is anecdotal evidence
> and immediately suspect (as are all the anecdotes related by we
> other posters.) You can't have it both ways: you say you believe
> in facts, but then try to elevate non-evidence to that status. Can't do
> it.
>
> The other problems are your citations. Let's take the jdpower first.
> The study in that citation is for problems AT THE END OF THREE
> YEARS. Because correlation and causation aren't the same things,
> you *CANNOT* say that BMWs are worse *OVER THE LIFE OF
> THE CAR* than the other manufacturers'. It's probably true that
> the cars with fewer defects over three years may be better built, but
> that says almost *NOTHING* about what will happen in the future.
>
> There have been many discussions about consumer reports and
> their rankings. I'm not going to repeat them other to say: Google
> for them, and to note that the major argument about their validity
> is that they don't *COMPLETELY* report *ALL* problems, since
> CR doesn't actually go out and poll *ALL* owners, only the owners
> that subscribe to CR. Because of that singular fact, their statistics
> are immediately suspect.
>
> FloydR


Hi Floyd,
Please correct me if I'm wrong but your logic is as follows:
car has poor reliability for 1st 3 years of ownership, this DOESN'T
mean that car will continue to be unreliable.
Is this correct?
That makes absolutely no sense!!
---------------
Actually, if you understood statistics, particularly the terms causality
and correlation, you would see that it makes sense. Now, I'm not
saying there is *no* correlation, but that jdpower study is of little
or no value for long-term reliability.
----------------
Who in their right mind buys anything that gets all sorts of problems
in the 1st 3 years of ownership and then tells themself, it's only the
1st 3 years of ownership - the future will be better!

Older bmw's were built better, newer ones are the problem.
----------------
I've owned BMWs for 30 years. The old ones had many more
engine problems than current ones. All current cars have more
electrical problems than older cars, because there are more electronics.
----------------
Also, FYI
the consumer reports reliability reports go back 10 years!! Is 10
years of data enough to draw a conclusion on whether or not the model
car you're looking at is reliable?
------------------
No, because BMW changes cars every 7 years, and engines
typically every 3-4 years, which totally blows any long term
trend.
------------------
This is where bmw's and most german cars show their ugly side - lots
of problems.

Also, JD Powers reports go back about 12 years. Lexus is #1 for 12
years in a row if I recall correctly.

Oskar

In article om>,
Florida NRA SW > wrote:
> Sorry for being off topic. I noticed that some call their cars "E39",
> etc. In the US, I haven't seen this. Is there some info or a chart that
> shows how the European and US model names/numbers relate? Many thanks in
> advance.

The 'E' numbers aren't country specific. Here's where to find out what
cars they refer to :-

http://www.unixnerd.demon.co.uk/bmw.html

--
*I started out with nothing... and I still have most of it.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article
>,
> wrote:
> Since you seem to be the only one who didn't get all emotional with a
> knee-jerk response saying bmw is the best I think you're the most
> reasonable person here!

Err, when you post a one sided view expect to get replied to like for like.

If you'd done the most basic research before buying you'd have found BMW
in general aren't the most reliable brand. They are bought by those who
have different priorities. So your post gives the impression of being
somewhat of a troll.

--
*If you think this van is dirty, you should try having sex with the driver*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Pete" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> "John Carrier" wrote
>> Radiator failure in the 60-90K range is not uncommon on the V-8's. Much
>> less so on the I-6's. The water pump is a weakness and probably should
>> be replaced as a preventive measure prior to 90K (Mike Miller would say
>> 60).
>
> The radiator is also a weakness as it is plastic. You can buy an
> aftermarket radiator that is not plastic though that should last you a bit
> longer.

I thought I made that clear in my post. Much of the cooling system is
plastic: Radiator upper and lower sections, some water pump impellers (now
fixed IIRC), thermostat housing, etc. Zionsville makes a slick all-aluminum
radiator and overflow tank ... it ain't cheap ... and you can also get it
with an electric fan and shroud to replace the OEM ... quite expensive.
There are some reports of the fan disintergrating as well. The plastic
parts tend to get brittle over time and heat cycles and then cracks.

That said, the E39 is a very satisfying car on the road. But I do wish the
folks in Munich would learn from the folks in Japan about designing
longevity into the secondary systems in their vehicles.

R / John

Florida NRA SW > wrote:
>
>Older bmw's were built better, newer ones are the problem. Also, FYI
>the consumer reports reliability reports go back 10 years!! Is 10
>years of data enough to draw a conclusion on whether or not the model
>car you're looking at is reliable?
>This is where bmw's and most german cars show their ugly side - lots
>of problems.

If you look at the actual breakdown of problems, you'll find that most
of the reported problems with the newer cars are relatively minor, and the
vast majority of them have to do with insufficiently-debugged electronic
systems.

While I am personally very annoyed at BMW for throwing all kinds of useless
electronic gewgaws into every model now, and making it impossible to order
them (in the US) without all this stuff, I don't think that should necessarily
be the most important think you look at when you buy a car.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."