You're *really* hung up on the snob value of the original sticker price of the car, aren't you?
You need to understand that cars like 7 series BMWs depreciate in value nearly as fast as 1990s dotcom stocks. I don't think many here are going to be impressed by its original sticker price, in fact, those of us who spend that kind of money on buying and running a new car expect to lose substantially. The only cars in that class that I have owned that retain a reasonable value long term have been NSXs. I'm sure (?) there are others, but that has been my only positive experience. A decent early 90s NSX still fetches £25K. A 5 year old
7 *might* possibly fetch that much. If you can't afford to pay the price, then don't play.
I thought that. I'm not sure why he feels the need to keep saying "my car cost 78,000 you know". Some might suggest it's a deep seated insecurity and a missing sense of self-worth.
Therein lies part of your problem. The fact that you spent $78K on your car is, well alot of money. However, servicing "in accordance with requirements" will result in trouble down the road, especially if you expect your car to last 200,000 miles.
For example, your car supposedly comes with "lifetime" transmission and differential fluids. Yet, its common knowledge that the "lifetime" fluids are exactly the same as those used when BMW recommended changes every 30,000 miles. Do you really think your transmission and differential fluid will last 200,000 miles, without changing? I wouldn't. The fact is BMW doesn't care. As stated, they are in the business of selling cars.
Basicially, if you can afford, to spend the big bucks on a 2002 7 Series, why are you so concern about the car lasting 200,000 miles? You obvious can afford to replace your car more frequently than most, so I say do it!
Otherwise, despite BMW claim of "lifetime" fluids, I think its crap and would follow the old service schedule:
- Coolant - every 2 years (with only BMW coolant/Zerex G-48)
- Brake fluid - flush every 2 years; unless you track your car, then every year
- Transmission and Differential - every 30,000 miles (use synthetic like Redline)
- Engine oil - since all new BMWs now come with synthetic, I would look
to change engine oil and filter every 7K+ miles depending on driving conditions.
Add in replace your radiator/waterpump/thermostat every 60,000-80,000 miles too Further, with BMW V8s, you need to keep an eye on:
- valve cover gaskets replaced between 75,000-90,000 mile mark;
- intake manifold gaskets need replacing at about 100,000 miles and I think you need to keep an eye out on the power steering pump lines too.
All in all, keep it maintained religiously and it just might last to
My mistake. I was under the impression that you were the original owner. So then you actually bought the car used, which was when they gave you this story about the extended warranty? If this is the case, then that makes the whole idea of getting anything out of BMW in terms of goodwill warranty coverage even more remote, *unless* (and here's the key) coverage was agreed to at the time of purchase.
Here is the US it is very common to buy used (certified) BMWs from BMW new car dealers with an included extended warranty. But even those generally only go to 6 years or 100k miles.
I'm sorry that it seems demeaning to you, but I'm sure a lot of that has to do with your particular perspective. Since I'm not telling you what you want to hear you think I'm being mean. OTOH those that agree with your opine that BMW should cover your car to an unprecedentedly high mileage, gratis, just because it was originally an expensive car are offering "constructive" comments.
My "tone" has nothing to do with why I am not riding in a 745Li. I'm sure they are very nice cars if you like them, but to be perfectly honest with you I don't really like the 7 series cars (even the old ones) and the latest crop seem like bloated, over-gimmicked-up land barges to me. The 7's seem to be aimed more at the traditional Mercedes market market to me. In my opinion, the essence of BMW is in its sporting heritage, and somehow the 7 series just do not fit in with that. But I respect your opinion may be different and, as I said, I'm sure it is a nice car.
I also choose not to spend my hard earned money on an automobile that will lose half (or more) of its value in a matter of a few years. You see, I too buy used cars. But I pick them up when they have already experienced the majority of their depreciation. Of course, I fully expect that my BMWs will run to 200k miles or more. I just don't expect anyone to guarantee that.
Furthermore, Paul, your personal comment about what I'm "riding around in" smacks of snobbery. I'm sure that was not your intention, now was it?
Careful Fred, the thank you for "constructive" comments was in reply to my post where I clearly stated that "...ideally, life span of engine/transmission and any other component would be directly related to the price you pay..." I also stated that it's fair to expect a higher priced car to last longer than a cheaper one, but "...the reality is that you're not paying more for a BMW than a Ford solely because of the expectation that it will have a longer life."
I also said that I suspected if the car failed outside of warranty that you'd get little goodwill, which was actually the original question being posed.
At no point did I agree that BMW should cover the OPs car for free, to "...unprecedentedly high mileage...".
That does not matter. What matters is that it has been tested to last for a certain period.
Such long-term test programmes can be an expensive hassle so are perhaps they are not carried out as often as we would like. Much easier to just say "it's good for 30 000 miles" than test for 100 000. The latter costs the car manufacturer far more...
DAS
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
I didn't read his reply that way. I believe the thank you was more of a comment about the relative level of politeness from respondents including yourself, even before he came back and fanned your flames by accusing you of being demeaning. ;-Þ
Did I disagree? Either way it doesn't matter. You buy a BMW knowing full well that the warranty isn't as long as another manufacturer, but still go ahead with the purchase because of the trade-offs I mentioned in my original reply.
I think the OP was actually more POd that the price of the extended warranty had increased since the original quote. I'd certainly be kicking myself too for missing the boat.
Many cars will do this sort of mileage on the original power train if well maintained and driven sympathetically. But then many drivers don't give a toss about their cars and cane them from cold. Because they change them long before this mileage. As do most who buy a *new* 78,000 quid car. And in the UK such a car will invariably not belong directly to the first driver - it will be company owned or leased.
I'd guess you haven't bought the car from new, but expect BMW to be generous with a warranty even although you don't know how the car was treated in its earlier life.
They're more likely to on a one owner car with full main dealer service history.
Reality doesn't agree with what you believe. A Bentley Arnage and a Rolls-Royce Phantom cost 2-3 times as much as a 745Li, and they have a
3-year warranty. A Ferrari 612 and a Lamborghini Murcielago also costs 2-3 times as much and have only a 2-year warranty. A Hyundai costs a fraction of what a 745Li costs, and the warranty of a Hyundai is 5 years. So, if you want to assume anything (and I don't think you can), one can assume that cars that cost more have shorter warranties, not the other way around.
And if you think about it, it makes some sense. First, the more a car costs, the less price sensitive the buyer is. The less sensitive the buyer is, the less likely the person is to be driving an old car, so longer warranties make less sense on a $100K car than on a $20K one. Second, warranty is a marketing tool more than anything else. Less expensive brands lengthen their warranties compared to the competition to try to get more buyers, and prominently display their warranties on commercials. Buyers of more expensive cars care much less about that. A buyer of a $100K car should have no problem paying for a non-warranty repair, and the repair would be more an annoyance than a financial setback. A buyer of a $20K car, on the other hand, could be financially strained if having to pay for a major repair.
Over here, Hyundai is offering 10 year warranties now. Does that mean their engineering is that much superior to what it was 3 years ago? Of course not. It's a marketing tool, that is more important in the lower end, as you point out.
If customer satisfaction can be used as part-measurement of improved engineering, then we can say that Hyundai has improved in this area. I say part-measurement because clearly there are other factors to consider when measuring 'engineering superiority', which I believe you use to mean longevity, as opposed to power-to-weight ratios, front/rear balance, tolerances between body panels, or even MPG, for example. While it's true that a warranty is in-part a marketing tool, I think it's safe to assume they [Hyundai] are also now more confident in the longevity of their product, than they were during the days of the Excel. If not, then what a gamble to play with the risk of having to honour warranties when they fail before the 10/100 limit is reached.
It's amusing to me that Hyundai has taken the place more recently of Skoda as the poster boy for poor quality. Does anyone even make Skoda jokes any more? ;-)
Is the warranty transferrable? And has the car got to be serviced by dealers?
The likelihood of many buying a new Hyundai and keeping it for 10 years is small, as is it being dealer serviced. So it's good publicity for a rare occurrence in practice.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.