smoker/mileage car needed

[TW]Fox;17677871 said:
I think that age is far less kind to a car than mileage and that in reality, it's age that kills a car rather than mileage.

Did you talk to any of the locals on your jaunts reviewing cars in the Australia and the states? I asked a Canadian how their plate system works, and how you know from the plate how how old the car is. He looked at me like I was quite insane, just couldn't understand why anyone would care how old a car was...

Thats a question only you can answer but it's definately an issue. The better car you buy and the older it gets the more money you'll end up needing to spend to replace it properly. You are then stuck in a difficult situation whereby you have 3 real choices:

a) Keep your car for ever
b) Replace it with something of a lower calibre
c) Spend a lot of money replacing it

I was thinking of option D, which is where I wait until mine lets me down or costs me big bucks, or just until the cars that represent an upgrade have taken a further depreciation hit. I'd have to wait a couple of years, but I'd get exactly the same car, for a significantly smaller outlay. I appreciate this is a fine balance to avoid option A, but the sort of stuff I want is significantly more money right now.

Not really a fair point - unless your Z4 is a Cat C with 300k on the clock you dont need to spend 5 figures to move to an Si model.

Mine has 101k on the clock, and I'm not convinced I'd get £7k for it, particularly as convertibles tend to do lower mileage, so I could either risk waiting an eternity to find someone like-minded re mileage, or just entertain the dodgy types that call themselves car dealers (;)), and trade it in...

There's 1 3.0Si with nav at £15k on Autotrader, while £16-£17k gives more choice...

a) The older it gets the more of a risk it represents. It's thrown several £500 bills at me this year alone. Whilst this isn't a problem and I've budgeted for this, there has to come a point where you wonder if its worth the bother. I find myself beginning to begrudge paying £600 for a set of tyres, £500 for this random bill and £500 for that random bill for... a 9 year old BMW. It's starting to feel like wasted money. I just don't feel as happy to pay these bills for a 9 year old car as I did when it was a reasonably new car. It's part of the cost of owning a BMW but doesnt feel like it's worth the bother on.. an old car.

I see your point, but personally I don't mind paying for things like suspension bushes (forgot to metion those earlier) because it's costing me so much less in depreciation. I don't care that it's 7 years old. The Nav and bluetooth help bridge the gap, although obviously it's not a patch on I-Drive/TomTom... That said, the moment it starts to cost me a days pay by letting me down, or the bills start to add up to a point where the extra depreciation over a newer model is reduced, then that's the point I think I'd get rid and upgrade...

And remember the cost of owning a car is not the amount you paid for it but the depreciation over the period you owned it.

Completely agree, and this only furthers my point in my situation with a 30k commute. I'd like a 3.0Si, or a Z4M, or a 987 3.4, or an E92 M3, or a 997 C2S (all with plenty of option boxes ticked). But the TCO costs of such metal with my commute are just epic. I've finally scratched my way into a position where I could afford it, but should I afford it? Is such a car slightly silly if you haven't got the home you'd like?
 
**** me if i had that brain id be a billionair :)

If this car selling thing doesn't work out, hire Fox to do statistical data analysis on which forests you should burn to maximise return on effort... :cool:

No Will, you can't have your thread back... *raspberry* :p

:o
 
Did you talk to any of the locals on your jaunts reviewing cars in the Australia and the states? I asked a Canadian how their plate system works, and how you know from the plate how how old the car is. He looked at me like I was quite insane, just couldn't understand why anyone would care how old a car was...

Absolutely - but I'm not interested in plate. My next car will have exactly the same registration number as my current car after all.

It's not about having the latest thing - a guy at work today asked me if my car was newer than his 55 plate - the general public have no idea - it's about how it feels to ME. I like how newer cars feel to me. I like the newer interface on the dials, I like iDrive, blah blah etc etc :)

I see your point, but personally I don't mind paying for things like suspension bushes (forgot to metion those earlier) because it's costing me so much less in depreciation. I don't care that it's 7 years old. The Nav and bluetooth help bridge the gap, although obviously it's not a patch on I-Drive/TomTom... That said, the moment it starts to cost me a days pay by letting me down, or the bills start to add up to a point where the extra depreciation over a newer model is reduced, then that's the point I think I'd get rid and upgrade...

So you DO see where I'm coming from, then?

Completely agree, and this only furthers my point in my situation with a 30k commute. I'd like a 3.0Si, or a Z4M, or a 987 3.4, or an E92 M3, or a 997 C2S (all with plenty of option boxes ticked). But the TCO costs of such metal with my commute are just epic. I've finally scratched my way into a position where I could afford it, but should I afford it? Is such a car slightly silly if you haven't got the home you'd like?

For the same or less than an E92 I could by any number of cars I dream about more often than a 335i - an E55 AMG, an SL500. Perhaps a mint E39 M5, etc etc. But these cars, whilst they would suit me perfectly in my current circumstances, are not future proof. They are high maintenance, big running cost cars.

The 335i is a normal 3 Series. It's an everyday, normal, non exotic non supercar. It's just a 3 Series. It just also happens to have attributes that excite the car enthusiast in me as well. Remember - cars are my passion. Some people play Golf, others have a season ticket for the local football club. I love cars.

And once I've got it, it'll be very little hassle to keep for the next 4-5 years. And thats worth a lot to me. The longer you keep a car the lower impact that cars cost actually has on you. Remember - it's the price of a new Focus, a car most people wouldnt call extravagent or OTT.

It might even be a 330i yet, who knows. Even more 'sensible'.
 
Last edited:
You need an LCI E92 though. Spunking the wrong side of £20k on a pre-LCI E92 is just not worth it IMHO.
At the very least, one with the HD iDrive.

And I don't care how much LCI E92s cost, that's just my 2p. > £20k is a lot of money on something which, again IMHO, is an inferior product to what you currently have.
 
Didn't they only just facelift the coupe recently though, a while after they had done the saloon which means a LCI e92 335i is likely to cost far more than £20k?
 
The E92 LCI was only 6 months ago. They are all more than £30,000. The LCI was not particularly significant - the changes are cosmetic, and on the M Sport pretty much amount to new front and back lights which are retrofittable if thats your bag. The other big change is that the LCI version has huge elephant-style mirrors to comply with ridiculous legislation, pre LCI does not have this.

The LCI also looses the N54 twin turbo engine and gains the 'improved' N55 single turbo engine. The fact they kept the N54 in production for the higher power 335iS and Z4 SDrive 35iS models tells you all you need to know about that particular change.

In the interior the only change to an M Sport was the reconfiguration of the gearshift paddles.

HD iDrive, however, is very much worth having. It's on 58 plate and later cars, and I'll be watching the prices of these very carefully.

I'm also not stupid, so wont be spending > £20k on a 3 Series :)
 
Didn't they only just facelift the coupe recently though, a while after they had done the saloon which means a LCI e92 335i is likely to cost far more than £20k?
Yes. In fact, I don't think I've even seen an LCI E92 :p

But the 3 Series in an inferior product to the 5, even one which is 10 years old.

IMO Fox should either wait another 12-18 months and find another £10k.
This will then buy an F10 535i :cool:
 
[TW]Fox;17678339 said:
Absolutely - but I'm not interested in plate. My next car will have exactly the same registration number as my current car after all.

It's not about having the latest thing - a guy at work today asked me if my car was newer than his 55 plate - the general public have no idea - it's about how it feels to ME. I like how newer cars feel to me. I like the newer interface on the dials, I like iDrive, blah blah etc etc :)

My point was that over here, number plate and age of car are inexplicably linked. I know that the number plate is irellevant to you, but the age thing obviously eats at you. I don't get why a bill is more annoying on a 2001 E39 than it would be on a last of the line 2003 E39?

So you DO see where I'm coming from, then?

I completely see the logic in upgrading to something better if your current steed is throwing so many bills at you that the TCO figure is in the same ball park as the better car, as the better car would cost less in repairs/maintenance to balance the greater depreciation.

For the same or less than an E92 I could by any number of cars I dream about more often than a 335i - an E55 AMG, an SL500. Perhaps a mint E39 M5, etc etc. But these cars, whilst they would suit me perfectly in my current circumstances, are not future proof. They are high maintenance, big running cost cars.

The 335i is a normal 3 Series. It's an everyday, normal, non exotic non supercar. It's just a 3 Series.

Which you'd be spending SL500 money on, simply because the SL was 3 years older? Seriously, as lovely as the right E92 is, its no SL...

I don't doubt that the SL will cost more to run than the E92, but theres a bigger gap between an M5/AMG Merc, and the non AMG SL. The E92 poses more of a depreciation risk than the SL surely? Does that not balance out the TCO? IF it does, who cares that the SL is 3 years older? Its the SL, and its all kinds of uber and epic and stuff...

And once I've got it, it'll be very little hassle to keep for the next 4-5 years. And thats worth a lot to me. The longer you keep a car the lower impact that cars cost actually has on you. .

Completely agree, cost to change has a big impact on TCO, which is why it's so important to buy the right car in the right spec.

If you wanted the E92 over the SL because the former is a sharper drivers tool with its manual box and lower weight etc, I'd get it. Or if you suddenly 'got' practicality and thought that folding flat rear seats would be really rather useful for lugging radiators home from B&Q or wardrobes from Ikea. But why is the SL a less suitable 4-5 year car simply because its 3 years older? You don't strike me as a dog person, so just wear a condom and the SL suddenly becomes future proof :D

Remember - it's the price of a new Focus, a car most people wouldnt call extravagent or OTT

Completely agree, a 3 year older E92 is a better buy than a focus for ~£20k, I just think that logic stretches further, in that a 3 year older SL is a better buy than the E92.

All 3 are good cars, but the Focus makes more sense at £6k, and the E92 makes more sense at £12k. The SL is already at its vfm peak because its done the majority of its depreciation, because its older, and thats a good thing imo...

Biggest problem you've then got is what do you upgrade to once you've owned the SL... :D

Plus you'd be less likely to have kerbed wheels on the SL due to the greater visibility when SWMBO is driving it. Plus, women in an SL are, as a rule, hot. :cool:
 
You dont bother with upgrading after a while you just sort of fill the gaps in that you fancied over the years.
 
My point was that over here, number plate and age of car are inexplicably linked. I know that the number plate is irellevant to you, but the age thing obviously eats at you. I don't get why a bill is more annoying on a 2001 E39 than it would be on a last of the line 2003 E39?

It isnt really - I wouldnt want to do it on a 2003 E39 either. The E39 is a two generation old car which came out in 1996. It's brilliant, I love it, but.. surely you can see my point at least a bit? :p


Which you'd be spending SL500 money on, simply because the SL was 3 years older? Seriously, as lovely as the right E92 is, its no SL...

I don't doubt that the SL will cost more to run than the E92, but theres a bigger gap between an M5/AMG Merc, and the non AMG SL. The E92 poses more of a depreciation risk than the SL surely? Does that not balance out the TCO? IF it does, who cares that the SL is 3 years older? Its the SL, and its all kinds of uber and epic and stuff...

If you wanted the E92 over the SL because the former is a sharper drivers tool with its manual box and lower weight etc, I'd get it. Or if you suddenly 'got' practicality and thought that folding flat rear seats would be really rather useful for lugging radiators home from B&Q or wardrobes from Ikea. But why is the SL a less suitable 4-5 year car simply because its 3 years older?

I'll group these together as I feel they are a similar point.

A decent SL is not going to be 3 years older, its going to be much older. Most of the cheaper ones are 2002-2003. Thats barely any newer than mine. They are therefore going to be too old for a decent comprehensive warranty, meaning exposure to some serious bills - Jez spends the GDP of a small South African country repairing his S Class, and the SL is of the same era with much of the same componentry. All the V8's have the more advanced ABC air suspension as well.

It will just be an enormous black hole into which all my money gets sucked. I'm being realistic - to own an SL500 properly you need to be wealthy. I am not. There is a reason why SL's are mostly found parked on the drive of the over 50. They are the ones most likely to afford them!

I think you are making the mistake, possibly due to the pessemistic way I've worded my posts in this thread, in thinking that the E92 is a 'that'll do' choice. It's not. It's one of the few decent modern cars that isnt bonkers that I genuinelly look at and think DO WANT!!! every time I see one. I love the way it looks from the outside, I love the interior of the iDrive equipped versions, I love the way it fits the ethos I've always loved about cars which do everything 'really well' instead of a few things 'absolutely amazingly' and a few things 'pretty rubbish' as you get with more focused metal.

*and* it isnt that old, and can be run with a comprehensive zero hassle warranty as well. Heck even the tyres are cheaper than the E39 (Not that I'm hugely fussed about that).

Completely agree, a 3 year older E92 is a better buy than a focus for ~£20k, I just think that logic stretches further, in that a 3 year older SL is a better buy than the E92.

The E92 is at a point though where the good ones are not £12k and will not be £12k for some time. If you want a high spec M Sport version the cheapest are rather more than that.

If I could rush out and spend £12k on something that would tick all my boxes then I would - absolutely. If LCI E60's were £12k I'd probably end up in one of those. But they are not - I hate the pre LCI, possibily for irrational reasons but as such I couldnt own one - and by the time you are spending E60 LCI M Sport money I may as well have the E92 as I prefer it to the E60.
 
Whats this 520 rubbish, if you think im getting in that biatch you can think again!
 
Back
Top Bottom