Transmission Reliability

[JCL]

Originally Posted by willgabriel

Do tell me how/why BMW would have built the X5 believing the transmission would've lasted less than 150k miles under normal conditions? Now THAT would be grounds for investing in the conspiracy theory you outline that I was not implying.

BMW never said the transmission would last 150,000 miles. If they wanted to make the transmission last longer, they would simply put a larger and heavier transmission in, add some redundant systems to monitor it, buy sensors and actuators with a lower failure rate, essentially taking a NASA approach to MTBF. The problem with that is that the vehicle would be heavier, slower, less sporting, and more expensive. All of those are going against the philosophy of what they are selling, which is good performance at a certain price point.

I buy new BMWs, and replace them every few years. Others buy 100,000 mile BMWs and worry about transmission failures. Here's the problem: Every policy settlement and gift that BMW gives to those owners well out of warranty makes my next BMW more expensive. If the next vehicle BMW designs is heavier and slower, that is a negative for me. If the price goes up to improve the reliability (and reliability usually costs money....) then the purchase price goes up. I accept the reliability that I paid for. It isn't perfect. I could get much better reliability by trading off other factors, but I choose not to.

I vote against all of the above so-called improvements, and will continue to vote with my wallet. I shouldn't have to pay for other's unrealistic expectations. I don't wish a transmission failure on anybody, but I don't see why I should have to pay for a failure that someone else experiences out of warranty, simply because they feel wronged. If it is under warranty, and hasn't been abused, BMW must fix it. If it isn't, buy an extended warranty and don't expect future BMW purchasers to pay for your loss.

[willgabriel]

Originally Posted by JCL

BMW never said the transmission would last 150,000 miles. If they wanted to make the transmission last longer, they would simply put a larger and heavier transmission in, add some redundant systems to monitor it, buy sensors and actuators with a lower failure rate, essentially taking a NASA approach to MTBF. The problem with that is that the vehicle would be heavier, slower, less sporting, and more expensive. All of those are going against the philosophy of what they are selling, which is good performance at a certain price point.

I buy new BMWs, and replace them every few years. Others buy 100,000 mile BMWs and worry about transmission failures. Here's the problem: Every policy settlement and gift that BMW gives to those owners well out of warranty makes my next BMW more expensive. If the next vehicle BMW designs is heavier and slower, that is a negative for me. If the price goes up to improve the reliability (and reliability usually costs money....) then the purchase price goes up. I accept the reliability that I paid for. It isn't perfect. I could get much better reliability by trading off other factors, but I choose not to.

I vote against all of the above so-called improvements, and will continue to vote with my wallet. I shouldn't have to pay for other's unrealistic expectations. I don't wish a transmission failure on anybody, but I don't see why I should have to pay for a failure that someone else experiences out of warranty, simply because they feel wronged. If it is under warranty, and hasn't been abused, BMW must fix it. If it isn't, buy an extended warranty and don't expect future BMW purchasers to pay for your loss.

I am openly laughing at the naivety/willful ignorance that has you believing a "performance" SAV can't have a transmission that SHOULD last at least 150k miles, AND that BMW didn't expect their transmission to last that long from the beginning at the $60k+ price point. BMW transmission are not put under that much stress when compared to other similarly-priced SUV/SAV's that they need to be built more cheaply or lighter to preserve price and/or performance. You go on drinking that Kool-aide if it makes you feel better though ... you and Quicksilver can share a gallon of it as you both have been duped.

[Quicksilver]

Call it like you see it but IMO I'm not stress about my so called naivety/willful ignorance as you describe it. I believe in reality and reality says that you have no substitive evidence regarding your claims.

What you continue to promote is wrong and your naivety/willful ignorance
regarding reality is preventing you from realizing facts you have already been given regarding the matter. You continue to repeat the same refrain after being given expert information regarding your position go back and review JCL's threads. He's right on point.

As I said I agree with your concerns now go and sue somebody.

Originally Posted by willgabriel

I am openly laughing at the naivety/willful ignorance that has you believing a "performance" SAV can't have a transmission that SHOULD last at least 150k miles, AND that BMW didn't expect their transmission to last that long from the beginning at the $60k+ price point. BMW transmission are not put under that much stress when compared to other similarly-priced SUV/SAV's that they need to be built more cheaply or lighter to preserve price and/or performance. You go on drinking that Kool-aide if it makes you feel better though ... you and Quicksilver can share a gallon of it as you both have been duped.

[willgabriel]

Originally Posted by Quicksilver

Call it like you see it but IMO I'm not stress about my so called naivety/willful ignorance as you describe it. I believe in reality and reality says that you have no substitive evidence regarding your claims.

What you continue to promote is wrong and your naivety/willful ignorance
regarding reality is preventing you from realizing facts you have already been given regarding the matter. You continue to repeat the same refrain after being given expert information regarding your position go back and review JCL's threads. He's right on point.

As I said I agree with your concerns now go and sue somebody.

Simply put: Just because we can offer logical explanations for the failures / build quality, etc after the fact (my Master BMW Mechanic has offered the same reasons), in no way excuses BMW for their choices in handling the failures in the way they have ... so, "willful ignorance" in this case is not refusing to understand good explanations as to "why" there are problems (I agree with both of you there), but in washing one's hands of any concern for the fact that BMW as a company is failing its costumers in the way they are handling the problems to the point that they seem to be in a disturbingly arrogant denial mode.

[JCL]

Originally Posted by willgabriel

I am openly laughing at the naivety/willful ignorance that has you believing a "performance" SAV can't have a transmission that SHOULD last at least 150k miles, AND that BMW didn't expect their transmission to last that long from the beginning at the $60k+ price point. BMW transmission are not put under that much stress when compared to other similarly-priced SUV/SAV's that they need to be built more cheaply or lighter to preserve price and/or performance. You go on drinking that Kool-aide if it makes you feel better though ... you and Quicksilver can share a gallon of it as you both have been duped.

I am very glad you are laughing, because I am rolling on the floor. It is very entertaining here.

I never said that a performance SUV can't have a transmission that WILL last at least 150,000 miles. I said that you didn't buy one that was guaranteed to that point, so I don't want to pay for your error.

My current performance SUV has a transmission that will last 500,000 km without trouble. I won't keep it that long, but that is besides the point.

I noted in a post above (purely opinion) that the transmission probably will last 150,000 miles, or more, on average. They won't all last that long due to the nature of the failure. It won't be worn out when it fails, it will have a random failure involving consequential damage from a minor subcomponent, IMO. I knew that going in though, so I won't be joining any class action suits to make BMW pay for my naivete.

[willgabriel]

Originally Posted by JCL

I am very glad you are laughing, because I am rolling on the floor. It is very entertaining here.

I never said that a performance SUV can't have a transmission that WILL last at least 150,000 miles. I said that you didn't buy one that was guaranteed to that point, so I don't want to pay for your error.

My current performance SUV has a transmission that will last 500,000 km without trouble. I won't keep it that long, but that is besides the point.

I noted in a post above (purely opinion) that the transmission probably will last 150,000 miles, or more, on average. They won't all last that long due to the nature of the failure. It won't be worn out when it fails, it will have a random failure involving consequential damage from a minor subcomponent, IMO. I knew that going in though, so I won't be joining any class action suits to make BMW pay for my naivete.

Well, that's your choice. So, fine. As already stated, the main issue isn't NECESSARILY that the transmissions seem to fail too soon, but that BMW is not backing their product that even you admit should be able to go at least 150k miles without failing. NO "reasonable consumer" would expect a BMW transmission to need replacing (at a $7k clip) before 150k miles based on the quality they seem to represent and the price of the vehicles (and that's the standard here - not what you would do with your more advanced knowledge of BMW's weaknesses that undermine what BMW claims by explicit and implicit representations). Again, if they do fail, that's a problem, but the fact BMW has all but denied any responsibility for any issues with the transmission thus leaving many consumers hanging out to dry or at least wrestling with BMW over fixing what is under warranty - THAT is the MAIN issue that must be addressed.