Whassup with the V8 reliability??
 

Holy smokes, I just logged on to my Consumer Reports online account, and started browsing the Auto section. The E70 V8 is right down in the cellar with the perpetual cellar-dweller Range Rover.:yikes:

I was not expecting stellar ratings, since the E53 V8 also has not done well in the past. But it has never been that far down on the reliability scale. The E70 was really tanking...The 6-cyl. did OK, it was just a tick below average. And the new 3-series sedans were fairly high.

I really hope the relability ratings improve by the time I drive my E53 V8 into the ground and decide to switch to the E70 V8.

Stan,

You should look at it again. The reliability for 2008 E70 6-cyl (they don't have 8-cyl details) is
Engine Major..........Excellent
Engine Cooling........Excellent
Transmission Major..Excellent
Transmission Minor..Excellent
Drive System.........Excellent
Fuel System..........Very Good
Engine Minor..........Excellent
Electrical System....Excellent

Since 2005, it actually looks pretty good with the exception being the Electrical System.

So I definitely wouldn't put it into Range Rover territory :) I agree that it's near the bottom of the SUVs on Predicted Reliability chart. I have to feel that chart (which appears odd in that has the V-8 listed) is biased more towards the BMW SAV early years...

My 15-old month old E70 4.8 definitely falls into the Excellent category on all measurements.

BMW - the ultimate consumer tranportation appliance.

I wonder how many members here, that own V8 engine X5s, responded
to the ol'CU survey?

I am not arguing their data; I just think it might be the Biff&BuffyBrigade
that responds to CU...not that B&B aren't "quality responders". :rolleyes:

Full disclosure: I have an old 3.0 IL 6 and no dog in the fight; I am just,
at best, a disinterested reader of CU's rankings, ratings and general
approach to consumer goods.

CR is written by Communists who feel items such as xenon headlamps and adjustable suspensions are elitist, and that everyone would be better off driving a plebian Toyota Camry. Active safety and striking design are less important than the adjustability of the rear centre head restraint and ease of fitting a child seat.

Honestly though there are more parts to break in higher end cars. BMW has sensors for the gearbox, interior temperature, steering, wheel rotation, brakes, accelerator, dashboard lighting, door locks, battery..........yeah it goes on. The probability of one of these going silghtly wrong is not nil. However, you will rarely find a late model BMW on the side of the road in a cloud of steam. That only happens to Alfa Romeos.

I have a 2008 4.8 (17K miles) & have had zero problems related to the engine (I have had an EDC sensor replaced twice, but that has nothing to do with the engine.)

Great engine from my perspective, lots of reserve power, very responsive. Gas milage is not so good (but I expected that.)

I have seen few engine related complaints in any forums (most are with the clogged/frozen drainage valve thing on the six.....but there are lots more of those out there & that engine otherwise gets good reviews by most.)

My only significant gripe is the lousy back-up camera (shared by all BMW owners as best I can determine......)

06 4.8is with 26k miles - no mechanical issues. 0. I would say that while I maintain it well I like to flog it and run it to redline on occasion.

> CR is written by Communists who feel items such as xenon headlamps and adjustable suspensions are elitist, and that everyone would be better off driving a plebian Toyota Camry.


CR certainly has its faults and limitations, but that's a rather unfair and untrue characterization.

It would be rather difficult to see CR giving its check rating to the Porsche Boxster and 911, or saying that the BMW 5-Series was the highest rated car they had ever tested (as they did a few years back), if your comments were correct.

Their reliability data is based purely upon the responses that the owners provide them, and unlike their tests, are not subjective in the least, at least as far as the input from CR.

This is what CR says in it's current summary about the BMW 3-series:

"The 3 series has agile handling, a supple ride, and smooth six cylinder engines. The interior is comfortable and luxurious. Handling is taunt and agile. Crash test results are impressive, but the convertible didn't do well in the IIHS rear crash test." (also Check rated by CR)

This is what CR says in it's current summary about the Camry:

"The Camry is quiet, comfortable, and refined. The 3.5 liter V6 returns 23 mpg overall, the four cylinder returned 24 mpg, and the hybrid got 34 mpg overall. The interior is spacious. ESC is optional." (also check rated by CR).

Does that sound like they think "everyone would be better off driving a plebian Toyota Camry?"


Oh, and here's an except from their review of the new 1 series:

"It is spectacular to drive. Although snug, the interior features high levels of fit and finish."


Seriously, you should read the CR reviews before crticizing them.


P.S.

In CR's "Best of the Best" list they include one BMW model.... The BMW M3. There are no BMWs in their "Worst of the Worst" list, but there are a couple of Nissans... the Armada and the Titan.

Some folks on this forum can't take any exaggeration or sarcasm. I have ruder things to say about many things.

> Some folks on this forum can't take any exaggeration or sarcasm.


Sarcasm is difficult to convey in a written medium, unless one has the skills of a Mark Twain or similar.

I must admit that I did not take this statement:

"CR is written by Communists who feel items such as xenon headlamps and adjustable suspensions are elitist, and that everyone would be better off driving a plebian Toyota Camry. Active safety and striking design are less important than the adjustability of the rear centre head restraint and ease of fitting a child seat"

as being sarcastic, and therefore meaning that the writer thought CR's opinions and reports were, in real life, actually accurate and excellent.

I have to admit that that particular sarcasm went right over my feeble-minded head.

My mistake, apparently.

As someone who looks at driving as an experience to be enjoyed rather than a necessity, I do not look to CR before buying a car. The matters that they consider are more relevant to mundane purchases such as washing machines. If I felt the same way about cars and washing machines I would probably drive a Hyundai (higher initial quality than Toyota). But since I actually like to drive, I drive a BMW or two. I also have the good fortune to travel a lot and to rent a variety of cars. Recently I have driven a Jaguar X-type, Lincoln Mark S, VW CC and an Alfa 159. None compares to a BMW.

> As someone who looks at driving as an experience to be enjoyed rather than a necessity, I do not look to CR before buying a car.


From the CR series one summary:

""It is spectacular to drive."


This is what CR says in it's current summary about the BMW 3-series:

"The 3 series has agile handling, a supple ride, and smooth six cylinder engines"


They also rated the Porsche 911 as tops in its class. So I guess they thought the 911 was a very good "washing machine."



Seriously, do you critics of CR auto reviews actually read them?

While I don't make CR my first stop for car reviews, I do read them and find that they cater to the intended audience well. The reliability data is just that, data that is compiled from thousands of responses. I as accurately as possible fill out the survey every year.