JCL you act as if we don't work on these cars. We do. They are not maintenance free and I wouldn't say they are far removed from the old ones(I have a few). Some of those old ones don't necessarily require more maintenance than the modern (I've seen them go beyond 200K). You make a list as if they were total junk. They many times required maintenance, but not way more often than the new ones. PCV valves, never replaced them in 100k miles +, just cleaned them. Do yo work on your BMW's? They are advanced, but you speak as if the engineers of the past were idiots. The auto trans hasn't come too far from the original in the 40's Olds. Now I would say they burn far cleaner, thus the ultra low emissions from the early 3.0i. That's why we have moved to the CCV etc.

the "/end rant" message poked fun at my own post :stickpoke

We work on these cars, but really, do you see how many posts there are here on things like wiper blades and different colour headlight bulbs? That is only because there aren't a lot of serious heavy duty mechanical issues to worry about, IMO. The focus has shifted.

Oil changes used to be 3000 miles. Now they are 15,000, and that results in engines that last longer, not less. So, we have advanced by a factor of five. Spark plugs and air filters are the same, we used to do annual 12,000 mile tuneups, and now plugs are good for eight times that, air filters for about five times.

The older vehicles (with their more involved maintenance practices) I mentioned were not junk by any stretch of the imagination, they were simply not as advanced in terms of how little maintenance they required. I certainly don't think the engineers were idiots.

We used to replace PCV valves, or clean them, true. The OSV is an example of where no more scheduled maintenance should be required, but if there is a problem, it is a lot harder to fix than simply replacing a PCV valve. It is simply a trade-off, we have to deal with the OSV, but it keeps the intake system cleaner so that we don't have to clean out throttle bodies that get gummed up. Yes, it helps create an ultra-low emissions vehicle, but it also reduces downstream maintenance. One of the reasons the oil is good for 15,000 miles is because the engine burns so cleanly.

I think the auto trans has come a fair ways, actually. Older automatics overheated the fluid, and burnt it. Thus, they required changing the fluid regularly. If we wanted to modify an auto trans for performance, we put a shift kit in it, to firm up the shifts, and maybe added a cooler. Now, an X5 comes with the same concept of an automatic transmission, but with a thermostatically controlled cooler; with far tighter tolerances; with integration to the ECM so that the engine power is backed off when the shift happens, allowing firmer shifts; with a lockup torque converter to reduce heat; with electric over hydraulic controls and self-diagnostics, and so on. While the basic mechanism of planetary gear sets is the same, not much else is.

Yes, I have worked on my BMWs. There isn't much to do to them these days, brakes and so on, but perhaps that is because I have started trading them in every four years. I used to get paid for working on cars and trucks (dating from the teens through the eighties); these days it is a hobby.

I think you are a great writer, and by no means do I suggest these cars are not better, they are.

I see many large mechanical issues on these boards. The front page has a transfer case problem posted. You may have moved on to newer BMW's but this board(E53) supports what I would now call "old" ones (many now over 10 years). In that they will just get older and problems bigger. I would consider many of the repairs noted here in the heavy duty mechanical area. Transmissions are regularly a problem, Guibos, driveline issues/leaks, Secondary air. All expensive repairs at a pre-mature rate. Regular repairs on these are all but the motor itself and if the lousy cooling system(s) is not keep in check you will toast that too.

Oil changes have not changed. The 3 thousand mile number was a scam, you even know that. Well built older engines didn't need oil that often. Every Blackstone labs report I have seen suggest to change it at 7500 miles (or so). So let's see, about twice the oil(7-8.5 qts) at a 7500 mile interval. Not a huge advantage over lets say an old Honda (4 qts) or Ford (5 qts). I will not run any of them to the 15k mark because data beyond BMW suggest otherwise. I do agree and understand they burn cleaner.

Thanks for the schooling on Automatics (theory doesn't always help here), it's quite amazing that these advanced transmissions last about just as long a thousands of turbo 400's for the 70's that hit the 200K mark.

I changed oil on my own vehicles at 5000 km (3000 miles) so I wouldn't say it was a scam. It was promoted by the oil change industry, for sure. I have no trouble going with 20000 km now, so I have adjusted my change cycles by a factor of four, personally. There is more oil in the sump, true, but there is still just one filter, and it goes four times as long. And I have to schedule maintenance four times less frequently.

I hear you on the transmissions. I do think, though, that it is worth making the distinction between something that wears out, and something that experiences a random failure. IMO, broken is not the same as worn out. A turbo 350 or turbo 400 tended to wear out at those higher mileages. And, they needed fluid replenishments along the way to get those mileages. With ZF and GM transmissions in these BMWs, we aren't generally seeing them wear out. What we are seeing are unpredictable failures of electronic sensors, wiring harnesses, snap rings, and so on, which disable the transmission. It may be small consolation to someone facing a transmission repair, but the biggest problem we have now is complexity, not mechanical wear. That is also why BMW won't fix the transmissions, they are too complex for them to trust their dealer network to do so. In the end, though, the maintenance has gone way down on these components, the components function at a much higher level, but they end up at the side of the road waiting for a flatdeck at about the same mileage.

I agree that as the E53 platform ages, we will see more repairs required. That tends to be related to it being a ten year old vehicle, however, as you say.

I think my summary is that these vehicles provide higher levels of performance during their life cycle, and that they require less maintenance, but when something breaks, it tends to be harder to fix it, due to the complexity built into the vehicle. Because I tend to have newer BMWs, I personally see them as being very low maintenance. Someone owning a ten year old version of the same vehicle will be paying the price for the complexity, and I think that is what you are seeing.