| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
John Carrier
Guest
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 4:55 pm Post subject: Re: e39 2002, should I keep it? |
 |
|
<pheonix1t@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:eb39b451-0111-4186-8319-66212c53508b@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 3, 8:09 pm, dizzy <di...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
| Quote: |
pheoni...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Floyd,
I appreciate you posting this info. However it seems to show only
parts costs and no labor costs.
Try reading again while brain is engaged.
|
Nice try, but most people don't fix their own cars!
For proper cost analysis parts AND labor should be included, not just
parts. So the 'I do my own labor' story is fine but the final cost is
misleading - it includes no labor.
Actually, a fair number of BMW owners do fix their own cars. I suspect
several times more so than, say, Cadillac owners.
R / John |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Pete
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 5:27 am Post subject: Re: e39 2002, should I keep it? |
|
|
"John Carrier" wrote
| Quote: |
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.
|
You just wrote that radiator failure in 60-90k range is not uncommon on
the V8. What I was trying to get across is that it is also not uncommon
on the I6 as that radiator is plastic.
Cheers,
Pete |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
John Carrier
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 7:40 am Post subject: Re: e39 2002, should I keep it? |
|
|
"Pete" <noname@nodomain.com> wrote in message
news:g4p3iv$8r0$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
| Quote: |
"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.
You just wrote that radiator failure in 60-90k range is not uncommon on
the V8. What I was trying to get across is that it is also not uncommon
on the I6 as that radiator is plastic.
|
Fair enough, but the I-6 evidently doesn't put as much stress on the cooling
system. Failures (cracks in the upper neck on the drivers side typically)
are much more common on the V-8's.
R / John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Dave Plowman (News)
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 11:00 am Post subject: Re: e39 2002, should I keep it? |
|
|
In article <g4p3iv$8r0$1@inews.gazeta.pl>,
Pete <noname@nodomain.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
You just wrote that radiator failure in 60-90k range is not uncommon on
the V8. What I was trying to get across is that it is also not uncommon
on the I6 as that radiator is plastic.
|
The rad isn't plastic - just some parts of it, like the header tank. And
for some reason the ones on the six cylinder cars don't fail anything like
as often. I'd guess the under bonnet heat is lower on average. Or perhaps
the vibration where the hoses meet the rad is lower. Who knows.
--
*You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers
Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
colin.leake@gmail.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 12:44 pm Post subject: Re: e39 2002, should I keep it? |
|
|
Thanks Floyd for a great post,
I'm just about to buy a 2001 540 and was curious about some of the
costs that d come up. I might keep records of work done rather than
fuel used!
Colin
soon to loose my BMW cherry to e39 540 
Melbourne Aus.
On Jul 4, 2:51 am, "Floyd Rogers" <fbloogy...@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Let's try that paste again
|
<big snip>
| Quote: |
(This doesn't include oil changes every 3-5K miles that I did myself.)
As you can see, your conjecture based upon your "facts", that you will
have to spend $5,000-$6,000 per year has no basis in real facts.
FloydR |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Floyd Rogers
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 6:28 pm Post subject: Re: e39 2002, should I keep it? |
|
|
<colin.leake@gmail.com> wrote
| Quote: |
Thanks Floyd for a great post,
On Jul 4, 2:51 am, "Floyd Rogers" <fbloogy...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Let's try that paste again
big snip
(This doesn't include oil changes every 3-5K miles that I did myself.)
As you can see, your conjecture based upon your "facts", that you will
have to spend $5,000-$6,000 per year has no basis in real facts.
|
No problem! I would like to point out that, because the OP believed that
brakes and tires are similar (to other cars), that I didn't include those
costs.
Tires generally lasted me 35-45K miles. I always did my own brake
replacements; pads and rotors at around $100-$10 per corner plus
around 1/2 hour of my labor per corner.
I could post my figures for my '01, they show similar numbers.
FloydR |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
daytripper
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 8:05 pm Post subject: Re: e39 2002, should I keep it? |
|
|
On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 05:44:42 -0700 (PDT), "colin.leake@gmail.com"
<colin.leake@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Thanks Floyd for a great post,
I'm just about to buy a 2001 540 and was curious about some of the
costs that d come up. I might keep records of work done rather than
fuel used!
Colin
soon to loose my BMW cherry to e39 540
|
ahahahahahahaha! Great imagery, that - and probably true ;-) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
John Carrier
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 3:27 am Post subject: Re: e39 2002, should I keep it? |
|
|
<colin.leake@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fddc6247-b68e-4f98-8976-8c34fabe071b@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Thanks Floyd for a great post,
I'm just about to buy a 2001 540 and was curious about some of the
costs that d come up. I might keep records of work done rather than
fuel used!
Colin
soon to loose my BMW cherry to e39 540
Melbourne Aus.
Before you pop it, you might consider the 530i. Granted, it lacks the grunt
of the V-8 (about 1 second slower to 60 and similarly 1 second slower
through a quarter mile), but it's less expensive to maintain and feed. So,
do you need the extra performance? While I looked long and hard at a 2003
540i Sport Pckg, I weighed the (only occasional) gain versus the
(continuing) expense and came out on the side of the smaller engine.
The bonus is the lighter 530i has slightly better balance, crisper steering
(rack versus recirc ball) and is as much fun (or more so) to drive than the
540i except when you have the opportunity to put the hammer down.
R / John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
62 Attacks blocked
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
