I can't keep up with all these X5M and 3.5D threads
 

I'm only 38 but do I sound old when I say "Whatever happened to the good ole' days when there was just the 3.0 and 4.4 ?" ? :dunno:

I would say you have Alzheimer's cause there was also a 4.8is...

What happened to the good ol' days when BMW didn't make trucks and just focused on the core: sedans, tourings, coupés, and cabriolets.

I'm only 20 going on 79.

We owned, and loved, our 2001 X5 4.4i for 8.5 years BUT...

Although we have owned at least one BMW since the late 70's, the only reason we considered ANY BMW as it's replacement, was because of the X5 35d. We didn't even test drive a gasoline engine X5. They simply don't meet our expectations for both performance and mileage.

Funf Dreisig

But even that took a few years to be released. I'm talking about the "originals" though--you know kickin' it Old School.

I'm on 8.5 years on mine as well. Waiting to see what I want to do as far as getting the current e70 V8 (or TT if it comes out) but it's hard to part with it when I get stopped in the parking lot at a concert last Sat (Incubus) and a girl thought it was only 4 years old--then my dad came in from Chicago this week and said it looked like new. :pullhair:

I know the feeling. We looked at the E70's when they first came out and decided to keep our 4.4i for at least another 5 years. After all we were still getting compliments on our 'new' X5. But a kid in a pickup ended that plan in a heart beat by rear ending it at 60mph (ouch) :yikes:

Luckily by that time BMW had added the 35d to the line up and we were able to get past the fact that the E70 is both too big and way too computerized for our taste.

FWIW we regularly keep vehicles for decades. But I figure the E70 is a 5-7 year vehicle at best. Too much plastic and way too much electronics to maintain after the original and extended warranties expire. :(

Funf Dreisig

Well here's my old baby, 7 years old with 165,000km on it and it mint condition without a scratch! People didn't believe me when I told them it was that old and had that kind of mileage...Sold to a good friend who will take good care of it! :wavey:

yawn!

even bigger yawn!

:)

Don't make me cry. I don't want the day to come when they tell me this and that electronic part will cost hundreds to replace, and then another few hundred in labor because it needs to be reprogrammed.

Are E53 owners coming across such problems yet? Not exactly identical but I need a measuring stick.

Looks good for that mileage. Here's my '01.

Our E53 was always under warranty (or extended warranties - plural). They always paid for themselves and then some :) :(

The heart of an E70 is not the engine & drive train -- its the electronics that control the entire vehicle down to things as simple as the parking brake -- which requires a special tool to release when the battery is dead - DUH.

FWIW I really enjoy restoring / maintaining cars, but... Unless this E70 is astonishingly trouble free during the initial warranty period, I expect to keep it under some form of extended warranty as long a possible. The threads about needing to be "reprogrammed" after practically every maintenance/repair, can make even normally simple repairs/maintenance, like replacing the battery, a big deal :(

Funf Dreisig

I'm pretty sure BMW doesn't make cars that last 10, or even 7 years anymore without some major overhaul. Sure, one can keep it running but by year 8 or 9, you'll have replaced at least 30-40% of the parts on the vehicle.

BMW touts that 85% of the vehicle can be recycled, and 15% of the plastics used in a vehicle are recycled material (like the trunk liner in my mother's 325i). Tell you something about BMW's direction.

Gone... But not forgotten.

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b1...S/IMG_6293.jpg

:rofl:, So far my 53 has hasn't behaved badly, only thing i had to repair was the front left outer CV boot which the extended warranty took care of. I even drive my 53 more often than my 70. Long live the 53;).

:yikes: ... I hope not, Matt! I'm coming up on birthday 8 for our X;
our replaced parts are minimal thus far, and really all maintenance
items like brake pads, etc.

But, I get your broader point, and don't disagree...though it is the
direction all the car mfg'rs are going: lease it to someone for 3 yrs,
take it and "CPO" for the next buyer/leaser and, after that it's off
to the auction or, a 3rd world country.
BR,mD

My biggest concern for the long-term cost the the X5 is the transmission -- BMW has far too many automatic transmissions that die and go to rebuild heaven before 100,000 miles is reached. Is it common? No. But it is far from rare, and that's a concern to me. This X5 may be the first vehicle for which I buy an extended warranty, and if I do, it will be mainly because of the real possibility of a total transmission failure.

Penguin, but our '01 is a 5 spd manual, so I don't have the KaBoomAutoTransParanoia Blues. Of course I could have a clutch,
throw out bearing/pressure plate prob., but I haven't fried/lost a clutch since my drag racing days in the '60s. Knock on wood.

I still love the car, and even though the WD ext warr. expires in a couple weeks, I do plan on keeping it for awhile. New car prices
are a bite in the butt for us retired bums, and even a $grand or two a year for a few years, in the future, is better for me than a new
$80G car. I hear you on the auto trans concern, though.
BR,mD

> Penguin, but our '01 is a 5 spd manual,

Then for that reason alone, it's a keeper in my opinion!

BMW manual transmissions have the opposite reputation of their Automatic transmissions.

That number is way high. I'm on 8.5 years with not that many issues (and you can't count wear and tear items). On the e53 board there are plenty that are running strong at 8+ years. And the e53 is a complex vehicle--it's not as "simple" of a design, electronics, etc of 3's and 5's. Maybe you are thinking of a Pontiac Sunbird.

Well, define "wear and tear" items. And its also nice to look at the average/bell-curve.

If I had a V8 E39 or E53, I'd expect to replace and overhaul the cooling system around 70k miles. Sure, some vehicles may go beyond that but it seems like the coolant tank and hoses are more likely to fail than not at that point. That's not wear-and-tear in my book.

Same goes for the automatic transmission. I don't expect any BMW vehicle to go more than 100-120k miles without the need for a new automatic gearbox. Some folks go 160k and are still on their first one, but most folks need to go for a new one in the 100k range. Not "wear and tear", and I don't expect my X3 to be the exception.

Ditto for things like window regulators, wheel bearings, and stuff like that. Not wear and tear in my book, but I don't expect them to last forever either. We plan to keep the X3 for a long while (it's at 5 years and 132 tkm and runs great) but I expect major parts to need replacement. On the other hand, we don't intend to keep the '06 325i beyond CPO warranty.

AzNMPower: no argument here, as I think the gizmos/doodads and ever increasing "electronics" provides for more
Achilles heels, and also forces the mfg'r to spend less time/dough on some of the more "basic" components...
thus, many of us see early failures on parts that most of us feel should last the life of the car, or nearly so.

The latest, probably not fully life cycle tested, whiz bang electronics, come at a
cost paring that precludes the other more basic "stuff" from being improved/upgraded, imo.

But, reviewing/re-posting, the list of parts fixed/replaced on our 8 yr old X is minimal, imo:
CD Biz Radio software fix, fan recall, oil & filter changes, new water pump, pulley dampener,
front turn signal relay, front & rear pads/rotors (one time so far), man trans/transfer case/diff fluid change,
wiper blades. Most was covered under oe warr/ext warr. Not bad for 73,000 miles/8 years. It could all go
Kaboom tomorrow, but I feel most modern cars are suffering from the same general situ.

Anecdotally, there are a million stories ranging from "my 92 Honda has 400k mile
with only oil changes" to "my E70 broke down yesterday". It is what it is, in
the "features/gizmo laden" one-upmanship the car cos. are engaged in, imo.

You can't really use early model X5s (those are the ones that are over 100K miles now) as the a-typical issues people have. Like I said the X5 was a first for BMW--and it will get perfected as time goes on like BMW's other models. As far as a transmission, if there were auto transmissions failing at 100K miles it would be a widespread problem and a huge issue for BMW. I'm not saying there aren't any that need to be replaced--- but again it's not a majority by a long shot. You can't use a message board to figure the amount of issues as most are on here only when they have a problem--especially those that have bought theirs used at higher miles.

:iagree:

So there is something like a 2-3% failure rate, which is higher than many other vehicles, at the 100k mark. That is, however, a very long way from "most transmissions need to be replaced at 100k".

I always buy the most basic model that is reasonable. The less the bullshit, the less that can go wrong. And here's another tip: standard suspension and higher profile tyres help isolate your vehicle from road shock and can work in your favour in terms of long-term reliability. I'm hoping that my E53 3.0d is still going strong in ten years time...

If you want a standard set-up and higher profile tires then stop by your local Lexus dealer. I think most of us bought a BMW with the sports package for the handling and driving experience. :thumbup:

I'm with Fraser. I didn't install tires with a higher profile than the stock 17", but that size definitely lasts the longest, results in the longest life for the suspension, and thus leads to the lowest cost of ownership. I drove 75,000 km on the OE tires, never needed an alignment or camber adjusters, and never needed to have the wheels balanced. The tires had plenty of life on them when I sold the vehicle, and were worn very evenly. That MXV4 tire is what the X5 was designed for (with input from Michelin); all the wider wheels and low profile tires look good but are a compromise in many other respects.

I like the handling and driving experience of BMWs, and having the sports package is not a prerequisite for that. On the right vehicle, sports packages make a lot of sense to me (Z4, 535). It is just that if you want to go around corners faster, you probably shouldn't start with an X5.

Well I got 60K miles on my MXV4s with the Sport Package so there's not much difference in wear versus non-Sport.

But that's the thing--going around corners in a 5,000 lb X5 that some cars can't even handle is what separates it from others and is the uniqueness of it--passengers say "wow" when you hit a corner and it just sticks to the road--it's pretty impressive.

I agree, but it also depends on your driving locations. I have a Z4 and specifically did not want the sport package, as the lower suspension and lower profile tires simply are not that wise if you spend most of your driving on the "blue highways" where the road surface often is not that good, and many of the driveways in small towns are not "low clearance" friendly.

And frankly, an excellent driver in a non-sport BMW can go much faster than a mediocre driver with the sport package, Now, a lot of drivers think they are up there with the Mario in driving skills, but frankly anyone who hasn't had a lot of track time could probably do better spending their money on a driving course, than on the sport package.

So, nothing against people who prefer the sport packages, but I think it is perhaps a bit shallow of some them to believe their choice is the superior, or only, choice for everyone else.

:iagree:

In my neck of the woods where unsealed gravel/dirt roads are part of the everyday driving experience and even the sealed roads are crap, sports suspension and big wheels with low-profile rubber are more a negative than a positive.

Correct, a sports package is obviously no good when you don't have normal paved surfaces--it's not designed for that.

But just what is a "normal" paved surface? I suspect that the standard suspension and tyre/wheel package works better than the sports option on more road surfaces than not. And what you do gain on very smooth roads is nothing compared to what you lose on crook roads.

.... one that's not unsealed gravel/dirt

That's not the question. Obviously a gravel or dirt road isn't paved, but paved surfaces still come in all flavours. You live in Oz, I'm sure you understand. The motorway from Brisbane to the Gold Coast is 'paved', so is the back road from Beaudesert to Kyogle, but they are entirely different surfaces...

Yeah I've travelled all over oz, but I do it in my nissan patrol when I know it's a long trip over roads that aren't suitable for my slightly sporty X5 with 21" rims and run flats. And absolutely, what I gain on normal roads is definitely everything compared to what I might lose if I went out in the sticks somewhere once in a blue moon and had to drive on a bumpy bitumen road. And lot more people live close to the city than out there and/or shed their vehicle in less than 10 year, surely?

That's my exact question. What is a "normal" road.

the most commonly used by most people I suppose

ones where changing down an inch of two in rim diameter so your car lasts longer, is the last thing in your mind I guess. this would be the grade of road the vast majority of bmws spend the vast majority of their life on

even the route from my place on the south side of brisbane to the city to/from work each day is a bit of a mess from ongoing roadworks over the past couple of years. yet there's way on earth I would consider running higher profile tyres or buying a base model with no options 'so it has less bullshit and lasts longer' :) for me that's yawnworthy, life's too short

Are you saying that you use your X only for commuting, and the Patrol everywhere else? I would think that driving a Patrol anywhere but seriously off-road is more than "yawnworthy". I prefer to have my X set up so that I can drive it 90% of the places I want to go. And where it doesn't like to go I'll take my Range Rover.

hehe range rover

No I use the patrol the relatively tiny amount of places conditions aren't suitable for a road vehicle, and the road vehicle everywhere else

A "tiny amount of places" doesn't add up to "Yeah I've travelled all over oz, but I do it in my nissan patrol".

I said 'relatively tiny' in anticipation of just that kind of answer! What that means, is that in relation to the amount of time in the year I spend driving on normal roads, the time spent driving on roads that are unsuitable for sports suspension, low profile tyres and extra electronic gadgetry is tiny.

The X5 has even driven back and forth between brisbane and sydney, brisbane and wagga, and brisbane and singleton in the 18 months I've had it (41,000 on the clock), each time on 21" wheels and fully optioned up with gadgets. Not once did it even enter my mind that I wished I had 18" rims or less electronics. I mean seriously, if you're that concerned about stuff going wrong, why do you have a range rover instead of an 80 series or patrol or something? I can't think of too many more '4wds' on the australian market that are more laden with gadgets and things that can go wrong.

Look, so someone trolled you with the lexus comment - fair enough, but don't try and sell the idea that most people who own X5's should be better off buying the most gadget-free version they can and running 18" rubber cos it'll make their vehicle last longer. heh!

One minute you're driving all over Oz in your Patrol, next you're driving everywhere in your X. No matter what way you look at it Oz is not "tiny".

strawman argument :(

No strawman argument. You simply contradict yourself.

nah
the holiday travelling is tiny compared to the rest of the driving. it makes up less than a quarter of the k's I've put on both vehicles.

I agree with Frazer.

I've owned an X5 since the fall of 2000. During that time the things that required the most repair(s) were the computer controlled gadgets and suspension bits. So as a consequence, our new X5 35d WORK TRUCK has (OMG) no comfort access, (shock & horrors) no tech package, (gasp) no sports package, etc. And here's why....
* comfort access is just too expensive/complicated/flaky for the minimal convenience (to owners who rarely need to lock their X5) -- read the threads about unintended locking/unlocking in the presence of water.
* the current BMW NAV system is already quaint and soon will be obsolete -- think iPhone w/ Google Earth/Maps & areal images style NAV.
* we drive over 150mi a year on unpaved roads -- just on our driveway. That doesn't count the trips to the quarry for a couple of tons of gravel, road base, etc., Or the thousands of miles of unpaved or poorly surfaced country roads we will drive over the next 3-5 yrs.

BTW any X5 owner with the Sports Package & 21in wheels is welcome to drop by and let me do an extended test drive of their X5. Say a couple of hundred miles on our 'ranch roads' and 'jeep trails', to see just how well their wheels, tires, and active suspension bits handle a bit of rough :rolleyes:

Funf Dreisig

and conversely, my twin turbo diesel which doesn't get driven past mulga bills banjo porch every day, hasn't had anything go wrong with it other than a power steering pump sensor, a part which is common across the range regardless of your options

penguin already summed it up way back in post #29

Just to throw this out there, why do people buy a BMW if not for the epic handling? Driver's vehicle right? Surely other factors you can get elsewhere at more reasonable pricing.

Lots of people get it for the overall package, but the key pkg is missing which goes back to the why. I'm not one to judge anyone, but if you're going to make points for & against, you can't skip that one as if it's just another option.

People buy cars for all sorts of reasons. If handling was the only reason, BMW would have sold Zero Z4's, and everyone would have bought Boxsters instead.

The plain fact is that there are a lot of factors that comprise a vehicle's profile, and everyone has a different weighting of those factors. Because of this it is just silly for anyone to make generalized statements about what OTHER people should, or should not, choose as options on THEIR BMW.

You said, " Surely other factors you can get elsewhere at more reasonable pricing." Well, perhaps some people like the high quality interiors and ergonomics of BMWs. Which "more reasonable" make do you think has interior quality equal to, or superior to, BMW?

I'll mention my own case once again. When I ordered my Z4, a lot of people said "you MUST get the Sports Package... it's foolish to buy a car like a Z4 and not get the Sports Package... why buy a Z4 if not for SPORTS use?"

Well, I like driving secondary paved highways and roads, getting out in the country and stopping in small towns. These roads often are not in the best shape, and small towns and their businesses and restaurants are not low-clearance vehicle friendly. Getting a Sports package which allows me to go maybe 2-3 MPH faster through the corners, but significantly increases the odds of bent wheels and scraped plastic, just doesn't match MY weighing of the factors. If I wanted to go 3 mph faster through the corners, I suspect I could achieve this more easily by going to a 2-day track course.

My apologies for perhaps being too preachy, but over the years I have gotten weary of people who think everyone else should have the same values as they do, or that their particular set of values are superior to others. I personally do not understand why people want to put these giant wheels on BMWs that, in my opinion, make them look like giant "Hot Wheels" toy cars or cartoon vehicles and reduce the vehicle performance, but obviously the people who do this like them and think they look good. And obviously they have a different set of values than I do, so I would not criticize their choice.

I don't buy a BMW for the handling per se, I buy it for the driving experience, of which handling is one part. To me, a BMW is more engaging that many other vehicles. I want tactile feedback, and that just isn't about cornering but also about the switchgear, the weight of the steering, and so on. I want balanced performance, and value, not just acceleration. I buy it for the total package, not one component. BMW's design brief matches up pretty well to what I want in a vehicle.

My base model X5 (3.0, premium, no sport) handled better than my two Explorers, for similar use. I go over mountain passes, in the snow, and am not interested in wide wheels just for looks on my SUV, with all the compromises those wide wheels bring. On the other hand, my Z4 was a sunny-day vehicle, and the sport package made sense to me. My current 535i (with two sets of wheels, one shod with Dunlop Wintersport M3s) is the best compromise I have found yet for a daily driver, as it is sporty, engaging to drive, and yet goes in the snow better than my X5 did on all seasons.

:iagree:

I presume your 535i is AWD? If you want an AWD BMW here in Oz, then it's X3, X5, or X6 or nothing. BMW has never sold any AWD 3 or 5 Series variant here, ever, which is disappointing, to say the least.

I thought only those ones you listed were awd and all other bmw's were rear wheel drive

In some markets you can buy AWD 3 and 5 Series. They may be all wagons, or 'Touring' in BMW-speak, rather than sedans, but either way AWD definitely extends beyond X3, X5 and X6.

cool

No, mine is RWD. While AWD is available, the steering feel isn't the same (less precise) and the handling isn't as good, since the vehicle is lifted slightly (which means that the MSport suspension isn't available for the AWD 5). The AWD variant is also heavier, which results in it being slightly slower to accelerate, and consuming more fuel.

I'm surprised that your RWD 535i would be better than an X5 in snow regardless of tyres, but then again my snow driving experience is limited down here in sunny Oz.

I have a near 20 year-old Range Rover that has no gadgets, is tough as nails and goes anywhere. And when I bang it against a rock or a tree, or three, I don't care.

ah yeah I know the ones
towed a few of them out of creekbeds before they were refitted with maxidrives :D

a man after my own heart!

YouTube - Ormeau's Tower of Terror

No maxidrive here. I don't need it. My RR is the last model before swaybars. If there's any towing to be done, I do the towing.

comp guys would love to know your secret, would save them a few grand on maxidrives
well, the 2 or 3 that still bother trying to run rangies in comps :P

Mine is far from a comp vehicle. Mild lift, slightly bigger tyres. Without the sway bars it has good axle articulation. I still drive it on the road on a regular basis so I want a vehicle who's on-road stability/handling/safety isn't compromised, but is still pretty handy in the bush, which it is.