(My wife's waffle...) New Volvo V60R/V70R or Used BMW 540i?

[TD]

I was content to get the Volvo, but my wife just tossed this into the mix.

I think we have decided that we should jettison the Saab and sell the convertible. It's just a matter of which of these two options to replace it with.

Assuming a ~$35K price point (what I can get the Volvo for), so the 540 would likely be no newer than a 2002 MY and probably have >30K miles.

Obvious pros/cons:

Volvo:
-New
-Free maintenance
-Leasable
-V70R has child-friendly details like built-in booster seats and available third row jumpseat
-AWD
-Not a BMW

540i:
-Much better driving experience
-V8 power (not a turbo I-5)
-RWD
-Not a Volvo
-Relatively familiar in terms of DIY maintenance and where to go/look to research issues/problems (too many years spent on BMW boards)

So the waffling continues. And everyone's $0.02 is again welcome.

[Plaz]

Well, I'd certainly opt for the E39, even though they're ugly.

[JST]

I was content to get the Volvo, but my wife just tossed this into the mix.

I think we have decided that we should jettison the Saab and sell the convertible. It's just a matter of which of these two options to replace it with.

Assuming a ~$35K price point (what I can get the Volvo for), so the 540 would likely be no newer than a 2002 MY and probably have >30K miles.

Obvious pros/cons:

Volvo:
-New
-Free maintenance
-Leasable
-V70R has child-friendly details like built-in booster seats and available third row jumpseat
-AWD
-Not a BMW

540i:
-Much better driving experience
-V8 power (not a turbo I-5)
-RWD
-Not a Volvo
-Relatively familiar in terms of DIY maintenance and where to go/look to research issues/problems (too many years spent on BMW boards)

So the waffling continues. And everyone's $0.02 is again welcome.

You'd really need a set of dedicated snows for the E39. Also, a 30K mile E39 has some spendy maintenance ahead of it in the not-too-distant future--as you recall from your M3, shocks and brakes will probably need to be done within the first year or two.

Other than the lease/warranty/AWD/space issues, the 540 wins this one going away. *If* you can find the right car, it makes all sorts of sense--at the same time, there is something to be said for having a car that you never really have to worry about fixing/putting snow tires on.

I would probably--no, certainly--get an E39 before a V70R. OTOH, whether I would get an E39 over a Legacy GT (to use as a second car) wagon is a closer call.

Perhaps I will be like Cato from now on, who used to end all of his speeches (no matter what the topic) with an exhortation that Carthage must be destroyed.

TD must drive a Legacy!

[ff]

If you're comfortable with paying for the repairs and maintenance of the BMW, then that would be the obvious choice as far as I'm concerned. I don't care much for wagons because 1) the cargo area is part of the cabin, so luggage/groceries/etc become 70 MPH projectiles in an accident, and 2) I don't feel that they add much (if any) more real, usable room to the car.

And if that weren't enough, the BMW is going to be way more rewarding to drive. Not that I need to convince you of that.

[TD]

Actually, the Volvo comes with summer P Zeros. So you'd still need a second set of wheels/tires to be truly safe in the snow.

The on-the-cusp-of-major-maintenance thing is something I have already metnioned to my wife. And she has always given me a hard time when I've sought to replace worn shocks/bushings/etc (things that aren't explicitly "broken") questioning the actual *need* to do so. So I sort of dread going through all of that again. And I can't stand driving a car where I can feel the wiggle/squish of worn suspension bits.

To me, I also really like the slick interior on the Volvo over the dated, staid interior on the E39 (and, no, the E60 is not an improvement in any way).

The fact that the 540 will be much more rewarding to drive is really the only major point in it's favor. But it's a BIG point.

BTW, my wife saw an E90 in the flesh for the first time last night and commented that it looked a lot like a Tiburon.

[JST]

Actually, the Volvo comes with summer P Zeros. So you'd still need a second set of wheels/tires to be truly safe in the snow.

The on-the-cusp-of-major-maintenance thing is something I have already metnioned to my wife. And she has always given me a hard time when I've sought to replace worn shocks/bushings/etc (things that aren't explicitly "broken") questioning the actual *need* to do so. So I sort of dread going through all of that again. And I can't stand driving a car where I can feel the wiggle/squish of worn suspension bits.

To me, I also really like the slick interior on the Volvo over the dated, staid interior on the E39 (and, no, the E60 is not an improvement in any way).

The fact that the 540 will be much more rewarding to drive is really the only major point in it's favor. But it's a BIG point.

BTW, my wife saw an E90 in the flesh for the first time last night and commented that it looked a lot like a Tiburon.

I'd just take the Volvo straight to Radial Tire...wait, no, I'd take it someplace else, but the point stands--take it straight from the dealer to a tire shop and get some decent all-season touring tires mounted. Throw the PZeros in your garage to swap back on at the end of the lease. You don't need summer rubber on a nose-heavy, AWD family car, and that way you only have to buy tires once.

I dearly love the 540--I think it's a great car. I would not be able to stop myself from obsessing over it, though. I'd have to get new shocks and bushings, put on new (better) brakes, and (most urgently) have to get a new exhaust so I could actually hear the V8 once in a while. I'd also really want an LSD, but don't think I could ever justify it. In short, I could not simply have one as a basic family hauler.

[rumatt]

BTW, my wife saw an E90 in the flesh for the first time last night and commented that it looked a lot like a Tiburon.

I gave an E90 325i a good thrashing last weekend. It's actually a pretty nice car.

I didn't love the looks, inside or out, but it wasn't that bad either. It had the sport package, and I was really impressed with the handling. On/off ramps were a blast. There very little body roll. Shifter was definitely better than my car.

The 325i is probably slower than my 330i, but not by all that much. It is fairly isolated though. Then engine sounded a very different, like a littly tinny motorcycle engine or something. Kinda weird.

But the main impression after the drive was that it really was pretty fun to throw around. I'd love to try a 330.

[TD]

Actually, the Volvo comes with summer P Zeros. So you'd still need a second set of wheels/tires to be truly safe in the snow.

The on-the-cusp-of-major-maintenance thing is something I have already metnioned to my wife. And she has always given me a hard time when I've sought to replace worn shocks/bushings/etc (things that aren't explicitly "broken") questioning the actual *need* to do so. So I sort of dread going through all of that again. And I can't stand driving a car where I can feel the wiggle/squish of worn suspension bits.

To me, I also really like the slick interior on the Volvo over the dated, staid interior on the E39 (and, no, the E60 is not an improvement in any way).

The fact that the 540 will be much more rewarding to drive is really the only major point in it's favor. But it's a BIG point.

BTW, my wife saw an E90 in the flesh for the first time last night and commented that it looked a lot like a Tiburon.

I'd just take the Volvo straight to Radial Tire...wait, no, I'd take it someplace else, but the point stands--take it straight from the dealer to a tire shop and get some decent all-season touring tires mounted. Throw the PZeros in your garage to swap back on at the end of the lease. You don't need summer rubber on a nose-heavy, AWD family car, and that way you only have to buy tires once.

I dearly love the 540--I think it's a great car. I would not be able to stop myself from obsessing over it, though. I'd have to get new shocks and bushings, put on new (better) brakes, and (most urgently) have to get a new exhaust so I could actually hear the V8 once in a while. I'd also really want an LSD, but don't think I could ever justify it. In short, I could not simply have one as a basic family hauler.

As my wife likely wouldn't let me mod a single thing on it, this is not an issue. But I would have to repalce the shocks/bushings. And that would definitely be an early point of contention.

[Melissa]

I've pretty much decided that an E39 is in my future when we move back to the Lower 48. I think you should get one. :P

[JST]

Found your car:

http://www.ebizautos.com/passportbmw/detail.aspx?iid=712981&anchor=/2002/BMW/5-Series/540i-Sedan/

[TD]

Found your car:

http://www.ebizautos.com/passportbmw/detail.aspx?iid=712981&anchor=/2002/BMW/5-Series/540i-Sedan/

ROFL.

I just sent that link to my wife BEFORE seeing your post.

I'm going through the local dealers websites.

So far, that's the only one.

But I haven't hit Sterling, Arlington or Tate's websites yet. Fairfax, VOB, and Tisher had squat.

BTW, Passport also has an '00 M5 for $36K and change.

[FC]

I'd take the 540iT because you do not have severe winters and don't seem troubled by the fuel economy. Those are the only things stopping me from getting one when we need a full-size family vehicle.

[TD]

I'd take the 540iT because you do not have severe winters and don't seem troubled by the fuel economy. Those are the only things stopping me from getting one when we need a full-size family vehicle.

I'd only take a 540iT if I felt no qualms about throwing away an extra $9K on a tranny swap.

No stick, no sale.

And my wife may actually be more adament about this point than I am. She will not consider an automatic. Ask her and the manual tranny is more important than what wheels are applying the power (FWD, RWD or AWD), how much power it has or if it's a sedan or wagon. No stick- forgetaboutit.

We turned down a really, really, really good deal on my dad's '00 528i (more or less free) because it was a slushie. No other reason.

[Rob]

It really depends on what you want. You aren't exactly comparing apples to apples here. The V70 is a big, heavy car with a lot of useful space. I won't waste time disagreeing with ff about the capacity and usefulness of a wagon b/c you already have one and presumably have your own opinion.

The V70 has been a great car for us. We have overloaded it with wood, carried apartments worth of stuff in it, had visiting kids get a kick out of riding backwards, and it has been to the dealer exactly twice after delivery. The first time was for some emission recall I think. The second time was for a failed mass air sensor (which would have stranded the wife if it hadn't happened on her way out of the subdivision). We have no complaints.

But I also don't have any illusions about what the car is. It's a big, heavy, nose heavy car with fwd, no power and a horrible clutch. It doesn't handle, it wallows. The R version will change a lot of that. Certainly, there will be more power. But it will still be a big, heavy, nose heavy, fwd car (I don't know for certain that the awd is biased to the front, but I assume it is - just like all the other fwd car companies that dive into awd).

The 540 is a small (in comparison) car that handles well, has a lot of power, is refined, and will carry maybe 25% of what you can put in the wagon. It will be nowhere close for convenience as a family hauler, but it will be way more fun to drive. If I remember correctly, the 540 is not all that well balanced, either.

If it were me, I would recognize that the wife has to drive it every day and let her decide. After having the wagon (just for the dogs), it would be hard for me to push for making the family car smaller b/c I would enjoy driving it more when I did drive it.

[JST]

It really depends on what you want. You aren't exactly comparing apples to apples here. The V70 is a big, heavy car with a lot of useful space. I won't waste time disagreeing with ff about the capacity and usefulness of a wagon b/c you already have one and presumably have your own opinion.

The V70 has been a great car for us. We have overloaded it with wood, carried apartments worth of stuff in it, had visiting kids get a kick out of riding backwards, and it has been to the dealer exactly twice after delivery. The first time was for some emission recall I think. The second time was for a failed mass air sensor (which would have stranded the wife if it hadn't happened on her way out of the subdivision). We have no complaints.

But I also don't have any illusions about what the car is. It's a big, heavy, nose heavy car with fwd, no power and a horrible clutch. It doesn't handle, it wallows. The R version will change a lot of that. Certainly, there will be more power. But it will still be a big, heavy, nose heavy, fwd car (I don't know for certain that the awd is biased to the front, but I assume it is - just like all the other fwd car companies that dive into awd).

The 540 is a small (in comparison) car that handles well, has a lot of power, is refined, and will carry maybe 25% of what you can put in the wagon. It will be nowhere close for convenience as a family hauler, but it will be way more fun to drive. If I remember correctly, the 540 is not all that well balanced, either.

If it were me, I would recognize that the wife has to drive it every day and let her decide. After having the wagon (just for the dogs), it would be hard for me to push for making the family car smaller b/c I would enjoy driving it more when I did drive it.

Actually, while the V70 is a pretty big car, it's also surprisingly light for its size. The V70R is only 3600 lbs, compared with 3800 plus for the 540.

The 540 isn't badly balanced; the big knock against the 540 is that it has recirc ball steering, which is sluggish and lacks feel compared to BMW's rack and pinion units. Compared to the Volvo, though, the 540 has outstanding steering, esp. with the 2K2+ M steering wheel. The shift throws on the 540 are also a tad long, but it has typical BMW light shift feel.

The more I think about it, the more I think that if a) you don't mind having separate snow tires, and b) you don't mind forgoing the wagon's space, the 540 is the ticket. That car at Passport is even the right color, aside from the ass-looking pinstripes.

Has Mrs. TD driven a V70R? Honestly, having her drive the V70R and the 540 back-to-back may answer the question.

EDIT: Also, the 540 at Passport has folding rear seats, which is nice.

[TD]

We both drove an S60R last Saturday. But neither of us has driven a V70R. We both acknowledge we need to find one to drive to accurately compare. Even if it's a slushie.

BTW, regarding the S60R, unlike our previous impressions (means yours, JST, and mine), my wife said that she could only see taking the suspension out of "Advanced" on those rare occasions that she took our son on a "nap drive" Otherwise, it's fine. No stiffer than my M3 in her opinion.

And I didn't really notice the steering boost at low speeds this time although my wife did. I also didn't really mind the engine note either. Maybe I really just wasn't paying close enough attention.

I ended up really liking the car. Comfortable, capable, fast, firm, aesthetically pleasing and somewhat reasonably priced. It seemed like a go.

But I can't exactly knock the 540i idea either.

And that one at Passport is my leading contender. I had noticed the folding rear seats and that would be a huge plus for the family truckster.

[JST]

We both drove an S60R last Saturday. But neither of us has driven a V70R. We both acknowledge we need to find one to drive to accurately compare. Even if it's a slushie.

BTW, regarding the S60R, unlike our previous impressions (means yours, JST, and mine), my wife said that she could only see taking the suspension out of "Advanced" on those rare occasions that she took our son on a "nap drive" Otherwise, it's fine. No stiffer than my M3 in her opinion.

And I didn't really notice the steering boost at low speeds this time although my wife did. I also didn't really mind the engine note either. Maybe I really just wasn't paying close enough attention.

I ended up really liking the car. Comfortable, capable, fast, firm, aesthetically pleasing and somewhat reasonably priced. It seemed like a go.

But I can't exactly knock the 540i idea either.

And that one at Passport is my leading contender. I had noticed the folding rear seats and that would be a huge plus for the family truckster.

Of course, the thing that occurred to me when we were looking at Focii is that folding seats are essentially useless if you have (in your case) two child seats in the back--you can only use them if the kid(s) aren't with you and you want to go to the trouble of taking the kiddie seats out.

[FC]

I'd take the 540iT because you do not have severe winters and don't seem troubled by the fuel economy. Those are the only things stopping me from getting one when we need a full-size family vehicle.

I'd only take a 540iT if I felt no qualms about throwing away an extra $9K on a tranny swap.

No stick, no sale.

And my wife may actually be more adament about this point than I am. She will not consider an automatic. Ask her and the manual tranny is more important than what wheels are applying the power (FWD, RWD or AWD), how much power it has or if it's a sedan or wagon. No stick- forgetaboutit.

We turned down a really, really, really good deal on my dad's '00 528i (more or less free) because it was a slushie. No other reason.

Doh! I forgot we were talking about a 540i sedan. :banghead: My bad. I should have known (or at least read more carefully).

Well, between a 540i and a V70R, I'd have to go with the Volvo. I'm with rwg on this one. With only two cars, and one of them a 3-series, the cargo space of the V70R could REALLY be nice to have many times a year. Volvo's are GREAT family wagons.

We'd like to go from our Saabaru straight to a diesel ML, but they will be way too expensive (especially as configured) to be able to afford them so soon (if we have kids as soon as we would like to). So as a stop-gap family car we'll look at used Outback 3.0's and used V70R's.

[Rob]

It really depends on what you want. You aren't exactly comparing apples to apples here. The V70 is a big, heavy car with a lot of useful space. I won't waste time disagreeing with ff about the capacity and usefulness of a wagon b/c you already have one and presumably have your own opinion.

The V70 has been a great car for us. We have overloaded it with wood, carried apartments worth of stuff in it, had visiting kids get a kick out of riding backwards, and it has been to the dealer exactly twice after delivery. The first time was for some emission recall I think. The second time was for a failed mass air sensor (which would have stranded the wife if it hadn't happened on her way out of the subdivision). We have no complaints.

But I also don't have any illusions about what the car is. It's a big, heavy, nose heavy car with fwd, no power and a horrible clutch. It doesn't handle, it wallows. The R version will change a lot of that. Certainly, there will be more power. But it will still be a big, heavy, nose heavy, fwd car (I don't know for certain that the awd is biased to the front, but I assume it is - just like all the other fwd car companies that dive into awd).

The 540 is a small (in comparison) car that handles well, has a lot of power, is refined, and will carry maybe 25% of what you can put in the wagon. It will be nowhere close for convenience as a family hauler, but it will be way more fun to drive. If I remember correctly, the 540 is not all that well balanced, either.

If it were me, I would recognize that the wife has to drive it every day and let her decide. After having the wagon (just for the dogs), it would be hard for me to push for making the family car smaller b/c I would enjoy driving it more when I did drive it.

Actually, while the V70 is a pretty big car, it's also surprisingly light for its size. The V70R is only 3600 lbs, compared with 3800 plus for the 540.

The 540 isn't badly balanced; the big knock against the 540 is that it has recirc ball steering, which is sluggish and lacks feel compared to BMW's rack and pinion units. Compared to the Volvo, though, the 540 has outstanding steering, esp. with the 2K2+ M steering wheel. The shift throws on the 540 are also a tad long, but it has typical BMW light shift feel.

The more I think about it, the more I think that if a) you don't mind having separate snow tires, and b) you don't mind forgoing the wagon's space, the 540 is the ticket. That car at Passport is even the right color, aside from the ass-looking pinstripes.

Has Mrs. TD driven a V70R? Honestly, having her drive the V70R and the 540 back-to-back may answer the question.

EDIT: Also, the 540 at Passport has folding rear seats, which is nice.

Some cars disguise their weight. Like my V. Some cars do not. Like my V70. :p It's a heavy car that wallows. The R suspension may be better at disguising it.

I don't remember the weight balance of the 540 for certain, but I remember noticing that it was way off from 50/50. The 530 was close to 50/50 and the 540 wasn't, iirc. I am pulling this from comparisons when my dad was looking at them and that was probably three or four years ago, so I suppose I could not remember correctly. Can't find the balance on the website anymore I bet.

But the number doesn't mean anything. The driving feel does. The 540 will drive better than the station wagon, I am sure. It just won't carry as much stuff.

[TD]

The R does not wallow.

It doesn't feel light. But it sure doesn't wallow.

[kognito]

I might only be saying this cause I'm in the land of 1,29 a liter for regular gas, but with the way prices are going at home, does "feeding" them factor in at all?? The I5 turbo must be less thirsty, right?

[ZBB]

We'd like to go from our Saabaru straight to a diesel ML, but they will be way too expensive (especially as configured) to be able to afford them so soon (if we have kids as soon as we would like to).

Have you test driven the new MLs yet? I went to an MB "Drive the new ML" event in NJ a couple weekends ago. After driving the ML500, I didn't even want to get in the ML350. Before this event, the ML350 was on the potential list to replace the MINI sometime in the next year.

It is now off the list. I was extremely dissapointed in the new ML. I thought the interior quality was well below most of the competition (Taureg, XC90, and even the getting-dated X5, and it was only better than the Infiniti FX but not by much). It was noisy and had rattles left and right (and the one I drove had ~3500 miles on it -- so rattles are inexcusable). It also drove much worse than I thought -- very rough feeling.

I drove the E350 just after driving the ML500... The E350 felt faster and much more refined. Beautiful interior (my favourite of almost any in-production car today). It is still on my list to replace the e39 in a couple years.

[ZBB]

Can't find the balance on the website anymore I bet.


I thought this page might have it...

http://www.bmwworld.com/models/years/2003/540i_sedan.htm

Unfortunately it doesn't. It does have MSRP for the car and avail options -- so I'm still posting the link.

[dan]

TD seems to be ignoring the Legacy :flame:

[rumatt]

TD seems to be ignoring the Legacy :flame:

TD is all over the map with his waffles. Seems like he needs some deep inner soul searching before anyone else can help. :outtaher:

[TD]

TD seems to be ignoring the Legacy :flame:

TD is all over the map with his waffles. Seems like he needs some deep inner soul searching before anyone else can help. :outtaher:

Actually, the replace the wagon and 'vert with a large sedan has been on the radar for a while.

Granted even if we do get either one of these cars, that still leaves me to waffle about replacing my M3.

[Plaz]

TD seems to be ignoring the Legacy :flame:

TD is all over the map with his waffles. Seems like he needs some deep inner soul searching before anyone else can help. :outtaher:

Scoobies would never make it into my sphere of consideration due to their extreme fugliness. Does that make me a poseur? :eeps:

[TD]

TD seems to be ignoring the Legacy :flame:

Yup.

Just like you are ignoring any activity with your Elise that would require a helmet.

[FC]

We'd like to go from our Saabaru straight to a diesel ML, but they will be way too expensive (especially as configured) to be able to afford them so soon (if we have kids as soon as we would like to).

Have you test driven the new MLs yet? I went to an MB "Drive the new ML" event in NJ a couple weekends ago. After driving the ML500, I didn't even want to get in the ML350. Before this event, the ML350 was on the potential list to replace the MINI sometime in the next year.

It is now off the list. I was extremely dissapointed in the new ML. I thought the interior quality was well below most of the competition (Taureg, XC90, and even the getting-dated X5, and it was only better than the Infiniti FX but not by much). It was noisy and had rattles left and right (and the one I drove had ~3500 miles on it -- so rattles are inexcusable). It also drove much worse than I thought -- very rough feeling.

I drove the E350 just after driving the ML500... The E350 felt faster and much more refined. Beautiful interior (my favourite of almost any in-production car today). It is still on my list to replace the e39 in a couple years.

I went to the same event. I drove a stripped ML350. Decent power for such a bulky vehicle. Handled poorly but I have read from reviews the air suspension works beautifully. I didn't find the quality lacking, though the leather is crappy. I'd only get it in Alcantara/MB-Tex combo.

The major attraction to me is that it is beautiful for an SUV, and most importantly it is a given that the 320 CDI V6 will be offered. To be fair, not only have I not driven the CDI version (obviously), I still feel like that stupid event did not allow for a thorough enough test drive. So basically, I like the ML320 CDI on paper a lot.

I much rather get a 4-Matic E320 CDI, but aside from the cost (~60K out the door, or at least a 10K premium over a similar ML) there is no word on whether it will ever be offered. But a used E350 4-matic is still not out of the question. I'd just rather get a diesel MB, that's all.

I've stated ad nauseum here that the E-wagon gorgeous and I'd love to have one over an ML. There are actually a lot of E-wagons around here.

[Rob]

I know you guys are tired of hearing me say I don't "get" why you are all so found of the Subarus, but I wouldn't even consider one. They aren't anywhere close to in the same league as the cars TD is considering for fit and finish, luxury and styling.

[FC]

I know you guys are tired of hearing me say I don't "get" why you are all so found of the Subarus, but I wouldn't even consider one. They aren't anywhere close to in the same league as the cars TD is considering for fit and finish, luxury and styling.

You know, I used to :rolleyes: at your comments, but after driving the Saabaru for a few thousand miles, I'm going to need a LONG test drive of the Outback 3.0R before we get one.

Even with the "Saab" goodies (extra insulation, leather surfaces, premium audio, heated seats, etc) the car is what it is: a japanese compact. Now, I remember the Outback being nicer, but the E39 touring I drove was miles better in feel, quality, etc. Add to that that I constantly miss my 330i's suspension, and I think we'll end up with a CPO V70R before a used Outback 3.0R.

The yuppieness is strong with me, I guess.

[JST]

I know you guys are tired of hearing me say I don't "get" why you are all so found of the Subarus, but I wouldn't even consider one. They aren't anywhere close to in the same league as the cars TD is considering for fit and finish, luxury and styling.

I drove the WRX in today. Luxurious? No. Fit and finish? Decent, but Japanese generic. Engine sound? Volkswagen meets hairdryer.

But the thing with the WRX (and this is true of the Legacy) is that it is such an honest car. It is just very useful and basic, while still being a hoot to drive. Everything about it works well--the ergonomics are good, the clutch feel is good, the AWD system kicks ass, the engine makes great power (as long as you ignore the turbo lag), it's as reliable as a stump, and it's actually quite fun to drive. It's kind of fugly, but it's kind of fugly in a Saabish, unique way.

The Legacy is better than the WRX--it's engine is simply superb, with lots of torque down low and plenty of power. It's interior appointments are a step above, too, and while they aren't Volvo or E39 level, neither is the price. The ride and isolation of the Legacy is better than the WRX, though the handling suffers a bit. And the Legacy may be non-descript, but it's a harmonious, inoffensive design that you really have to stretch to call "fugly," especially in wagon form in the Imolaish red that Subaru has.

Driving the WRX in today, I once again thought that this car really is the modern equivalent of the 2002. It brings a well-rounded driving experience and excellent performance to the masses, and it has the same upright, who cares about style styling. It isn't fleece-lined, but sometimes a good work glove is exactly what you need.

[Rob]

JST, you just proved the point. Let's accepting that the legacy is all the things you say it is, including " . . . and while they [interior appointments] aren't Volvo or E39 level, neither is the price." Well TD isn't looking only at price. He IS looking at Volvo or E39 level appointments for a car that will be the family car.

I was not thinking of the WRX when I made the earlier comments. I would not include it in the "don't get it" list. But I would put it in that list for what TD is looking for with this particular car purchase.

Fernando, it's not the yuppiness, necessarily. It's just that once you move up to the level of car that your 330 is, it's really hard to be happy with basic transportation. Plenty of people here prefer more direct experiences, but we are not necessarily normal. Look at my choice . . . an attempt to cram the best of all worlds in a single car.

[JST]

JST, you just proved the point. Let's accepting that the legacy is all the things you say it is, including " . . . and while they [interior appointments] aren't Volvo or E39 level, neither is the price." Well TD isn't looking only at price. He IS looking at Volvo or E39 level appointments for a car that will be the family car.



Not looking only at price, no, but TD is no fool--money is money, and the Leg GT is everything the V70 is, except it's a lot cheaper and it's more fun to drive. It's only drawback is that it has a bit less interior space and it isn't quite as nice inside, though the difference between the Leg and the V70 is much smaller than, say, the difference between a WRX and a 330.

I understand why he doesn't want one. Car desire is an irrational thing, and sometimes even the most rationally desireable package holds no appeal for us whatsoever, while other times a bland-seeming package inspires lust all out of proportion with anything rational (I am thinking, here, of the R32, which I still would very much like to own).

Still, it's a nice car, and one that I would be happy to drive and own if I were looking for a family-ish wagon.



I was not thinking of the WRX when I made the earlier comments. I would not include it in the "don't get it" list. But I would put it in that list for what TD is looking for with this particular car purchase.



Well, yeah, the WRX doesn't meet any of his criteria.

[FC]

Fernando, it's not the yuppiness, necessarily. It's just that once you move up to the level of car that your 330 is, it's really hard to be happy with basic transportation.

This is true. And as you mentioned, much like in TD's case, the wagon would be mostly the family car, and one that my wife must be happy driving. And to her, vehicle dynamics/performance are important to a point, then comfort/amenities and subjective likes/dislikes take over.

But to JST's point. I (we) love the 9-2X for what it is. A simple, inexpenive to onw and operate car that does what it needs to do very well. We are VERY happy with it for what we use it for (highway cruising nonwithstanding). Come winter, I bet we'll like it more.

But I'll tell you this, when it comes time to let it go, I wont shed a tear over it. OTOH, I can tell you right now, even if I replace it with some awesome sports car, I'll miss my 330i. Just like sometimes I miss my 190E (even though it wasn't all that great).

[Rob]

But I'll tell you this, when it comes time to let it go, I wont shed a tear over it. OTOH, I can tell you right now, even if I replace it with some awesome sports car, I'll miss my 330i. Just like sometimes I miss my 190E (even though it wasn't all that great).

The MINI was a BLAST to drive. But I didn't shed a tear over it and I don't miss it at all, so I know exactly what you mean. Interestingly enough, I occasionally miss the 330, but I never miss the M3. I liked the M3 a lot more, too. I think it's b/c the 330 was my first "good" car and it bridged two very distinct portions of my life. It's a nostalgia thing. Then I get in my current car and everything is good again.

Sorry TD. I am done thread jacking now. I think you should get whichever one Mrs. TD says she wants. You can't really go wrong with either.

[SCA]

You know exactly were my vote will go...540i. 2001 or 2002, 6 spd, with SP. :thumbup: :thumbup:

My first car was a Volvo. Maintenance was a nightmare, more than ANY BMW I have owned. Maybe times have changed. :scratch:

[FC]

You know exactly were my vote will go...540i. 2001 or 2002, 6 spd, with SP. :thumbup: :thumbup:

My first car was a Volvo. Maintenance was a nightmare, more than ANY BMW I have owned. Maybe times have changed. :scratch:

My parents ('03 V70XC) have had two minor unscheduled dealer visits, and one major electrical gremling that landed them a loaner car for over a month. I wouldn't own a modern Volvo out of warranty (but that can be said of most modern cars).

[TD]

(I'm bracing for the beating I will inevitably get for saying this, but...)


I now think we're just going to go the frugal route and keep the Saab for a while. Even repairs out of warranty are cheaper than a payment on a $35K car.

The convertible still goes.

We'll revisit the issue in a year or two and possibly do European delivery on a new V70R.

[rumatt]

(I'm bracing for the beating I will inevitably get for saying this, but...)


I now think we're just going to go the frugal route and keep the Saab for a while.

Why would you get a beating for saying something that we all already knew? :twisted: :P

[JST]

(I'm bracing for the beating I will inevitably get for saying this, but...)


I now think we're just going to go the frugal route and keep the Saab for a while. Even repairs out of warranty are cheaper than a payment on a $35K car.

The convertible still goes.

We'll revisit the issue in a year or two and possibly do European delivery on a new V70R.

Dude, you're killing me.

How much is that Saab going to be worth in another year?

[TD]

(I'm bracing for the beating I will inevitably get for saying this, but...)


I now think we're just going to go the frugal route and keep the Saab for a while. Even repairs out of warranty are cheaper than a payment on a $35K car.

The convertible still goes.

We'll revisit the issue in a year or two and possibly do European delivery on a new V70R.

Dude, you're killing me.

How much is that Saab going to be worth in another year?

Point taken.

Okay, so we really are waffling.

[FC]

(I'm bracing for the beating I will inevitably get for saying this, but...)


I now think we're just going to go the frugal route and keep the Saab for a while. Even repairs out of warranty are cheaper than a payment on a $35K car.

The convertible still goes.

We'll revisit the issue in a year or two and possibly do European delivery on a new V70R.

:lol:

Honestly, if you are uneasy about spending the cash it is a perfectly good move. I mean, you seem to LIKE the Saab, you don't mind the FWD that much, and it certainly is a roomy, good-looking wagon.

I say keep it until you no longer want it, or reparis/reliability become a real rather than perceived issue. To ditch it and take a significant bath on it simply to avoid potential repairs is not reason enough in my book.

[TD]

(I'm bracing for the beating I will inevitably get for saying this, but...)


I now think we're just going to go the frugal route and keep the Saab for a while. Even repairs out of warranty are cheaper than a payment on a $35K car.

The convertible still goes.

We'll revisit the issue in a year or two and possibly do European delivery on a new V70R.

:lol:

Honestly, if you are uneasy about spending the cash it is a perfectly good move. I mean, you seem to LIKE the Saab, you don't mind the FWD that much, and it certainly is a roomy, good-looking wagon.

I say keep it until you no longer want it, or repairs/reliability become a real rather than perceived issue. To ditch it and take a significant bath on it simply to avoid potential repairs is not reason enough in my book.

Well, JST does throw in a point that we omitted from our semi-brief discussion on the subject this morning - the cost of holding on to it for another year.

This idea started out having nothing to do with buying. The idea was to see what new (read "leasable") cars are out there that appeal to us that we could replace an owned car with to reduce our net investment in cars and free up cash until my wife returns to work in a few years. Buying anything doesn't do that.

If the Saab loses another $6K in the coming year, that's $500/mo. Which is more than the lease rate on the Volvo.

And I did omit this cost from my mental gyrations this morning. I'll blame tiredness but who knows.

[FC]

If the Saab loses another $6K in the coming year, that's $500/mo. Which is more than the lease rate on the Volvo.

Damn! :shock: You honestly think it's value could tank an extra 6K for one more year?

I figured its depreciation curve was starting to flatten out (does it ever for sweedish cars? :lol: ).

If it is that much (or even 4-5K) then it certainly changes things... a lot.

[ZBB]

If the Saab loses another $6K in the coming year, that's $500/mo. Which is more than the lease rate on the Volvo.


Wasn't the quote from Carmax ~$12k and Sarafil's check ~$10k? It would have to be only worth 4-6k next year for you to lose $6k... It may be possible, but might be unlikely.

By the way -- that was exactly the calculation I did when I replaced the e46 with the e39, except I was looking at keeping it for 2 more years (with BMW's extended warranty). Then I realized that a 4 year old car was worth a lot more than a 6 year old car, did some math (using '99 e36s in Edmunds to get an approx value of my e46 2 years from then). After doing the math, I figured out I was better off by dumping the e46 sometime this year. Ended up finding the e39 and did it a little earlier than I thought, but no qualms now.

[clyde]

If the Saab loses another $6K in the coming year, that's $500/mo.

I may be completely wrong about this, but $6k of depreciation on the Saab over the next 12 months seems awful high to me. I know it's a Saab and they depreciate like rocks, but the car is already a few years old and should be down pretty far already.

I can't remember what year your car is or how many miles you have on it (or expect to put on in the next year), but these are the spreads at KBB for trade in to private party

2001 45k miles $15-$18k
2002 35k miles $17-$20k
2003 25k miles $21-$24k

Regardless of how accurate or inaccurate those figures are, they can be used as a guide for the amount of depreciation you should expect in the coming year from whatever today's values might be.

just food for thought...

[TD]

If the Saab loses another $6K in the coming year, that's $500/mo.

I may be completely wrong about this, but $6k of depreciation on the Saab over the next 12 months seems awful high to me. I know it's a Saab and they depreciate like rocks, but the car is already a few years old and should be down pretty far already.

I can't remember what year your car is or how many miles you have on it (or expect to put on in the next year), but these are the spreads at KBB for trade in to private party

2001 45k miles $15-$18k
2002 35k miles $17-$20k
2003 25k miles $21-$24k

Regardless of how accurate or inaccurate those figures are, they can be used as a guide for the amount of depreciation you should expect in the coming year from whatever today's values might be.

just food for thought...

Well, it's a 2000 with 42K miles. And KBB and Edmunds list trade-in values around $11K.

Realistically, from this point, it will probably only depreciate another $3-4K this next year. At $3K, that's $250/mo.

[JST]

If the Saab loses another $6K in the coming year, that's $500/mo.

I may be completely wrong about this, but $6k of depreciation on the Saab over the next 12 months seems awful high to me. I know it's a Saab and they depreciate like rocks, but the car is already a few years old and should be down pretty far already.

I can't remember what year your car is or how many miles you have on it (or expect to put on in the next year), but these are the spreads at KBB for trade in to private party

2001 45k miles $15-$18k
2002 35k miles $17-$20k
2003 25k miles $21-$24k

Regardless of how accurate or inaccurate those figures are, they can be used as a guide for the amount of depreciation you should expect in the coming year from whatever today's values might be.

just food for thought...

Well, it's a 2000 with 42K miles. And KBB and Edmunds list trade-in values around $11K.

Realistically, from this point, it will probably only depreciate another $3-4K this next year. At $3K, that's $250/mo.

Yeah, but the offer you've got from Carmax is a strong one--will they be willing to make an equally strong offer next year? The "real" depreciation from a 5 year old car to a 6 year old car might be higher.* And, of course, if it gets hit in the intervening 12 months, the value will drop essentially to zero.

I had forgotten that one of your objectives was to reduce the amount of money tied up in rolling stock. In that case, leasing the Volvo is the obvious choice. Buying any car, especially an E39, is going to require a stiff downpayment--probably all or most of whatever you get from the Saab.

At this point, if I were you, my choice would be between a) selling the Saab now while there is actually a market for it and leasing an S60 or V70, or b) keeping the Saab until it dies in another 10 years or so. The latter is probably financially the most sensible course.


*EDIT--FWIW, my credit union will write a 4 year loan on a 5 year old car, but they won't on a six year old car. I remember the guy at Passport telling me that they wouldn't be able to write a 4 year loan on my M3 when I traded it, which meant they planned to auction it immediately. Don't know whether these or other imponderables have any bearing on your situation, but they may.

[lip277]

I get such a kick out of being a bystandard in these discussions. Most of the opinions are totally alien to my thoughts (although I understand the 'logic' in what you are trying to do).

Being a "drive it into the ground" sort of guy as far as how I approach getting cars... I had to cross a major mental barrier when it came to purchasing the Yukon in 2000 (now with 100,000 miles). Up until then, I have only considered used cars and trucks. The Yukon was an exception based on a unique opportunity.

I bought it with the presumption I'd have it for 15 years and (maybe) 250,000 miles in total. I presume there will be some (possibly) substantial maintenance issues in the middle of that time but the lower insurance and ownership costs far outweigh that upfront cost in my mind. Granted - I have a peculiar mindset with the ages of my cars being what they are (5, 10, 18, 32 and 38). I don't even want to get to the total miles they have on them....

But - Hey! More power to you all. Someone has to buy my next 'new' car for me and take the hit in value driving it off the lot. ;)

[TD]

Actually, 2 of our 3 cars were bought used.

As for the buy-and-hold mindset versus the trade-every-few-years mindset, I look at it this way- We have, at best, 60 years of driving in our lives. If I were to keep every car for 10 years, assuming two cars at a time for that entire span (for simplicity's sake), that's only 12 cars in a lifetime. To me, that's just not enough variety.

[rumatt]

that's only 12 cars in a lifetime. To me, that's just not enough variety.

If you want variety, then buying all your cars used makes even more sense.

[clyde]

If I were to keep every car for 10 years, assuming two cars at a time for that entire span (for simplicity's sake), that's only 12 cars in a lifetime. To me, that's just not enough variety.

I've said it before...needs to fuck more women...

:devcool:

[JST]

that's only 12 cars in a lifetime. To me, that's just not enough variety.

If you want variety, then buying all your cars used makes even more sense.

No, it makes far less sense than leasing. The kinds of cars TD (and the rest of us) enjoy are a bitch to sell quickly or to trade in--the manual tranny Saab wagon is a good example. With leasing, the residual is set in a pool of other, much more desireable-to-the-masses cars, and the dealer has to cope with trying to resell it at the end of the lease.

For someone like myself, who gets bored after 6 months with a car, constantly buying and reselling cars is just too big a PITA.

[rumatt]

The kinds of cars TD (and the rest of us) enjoy are a bitch to sell quickly

Agreed that they may be hard to find, and take more time to sell. But your argument that they are undesirable cars means you should be able to buy at a discount as well. That $24.9K 2003 330 is a good example. You can't convince owning that car for 3 years would cost me more than a 3 year lease on a new 330i.

If you're looking for simplicity, then yeah, you can't beat leasing.

[SCA]

I've had trouble selling every BMW I have owned with a manual tranny, especially if it had 4 doors. The E30 M3 on the other hand would be the quickest sale if I decided to let it go (thought is always on my mind).

[TD]

that's only 12 cars in a lifetime. To me, that's just not enough variety.

If you want variety, then buying all your cars used makes even more sense.

No, it makes far less sense than leasing. The kinds of cars TD (and the rest of us) enjoy are a bitch to sell quickly or to trade in--the manual tranny Saab wagon is a good example. With leasing, the residual is set in a pool of other, much more desireable-to-the-masses cars, and the dealer has to cope with trying to resell it at the end of the lease.

For someone like myself, who gets bored after 6 months with a car, constantly buying and reselling cars is just too big a PITA.

My wife is a buy-and-hold person regarding cars. Once we get something I like enough in that role (like, possibly, a V70R 6-spd or 540i 6-spd), I'll be content to just let her drive it until the wheels fall off.

As for me, once I finally find something I feel strongly enough about that I'd be willing to bag the M3, it'll be leased. I want to know up front what the experience is going to cost me and I want to be able to lob the keys at the dealer after 2 or 3 years and walk away. Buying these oddities means dealing with unpredictable depreciation, a small resale market, and the inability to promptly unload one without taking a massive financial bath.

There is nothing new (leasable) out there right now that could tempt me into parting with my M3. But I sure hope something comes along soon as I really do want to move on. I've had the car for nearly 4 years. That's too damn long. Hell, JST has had 3 cars in this same span. (And I'm scared to think how many Steve Noe has had - remember him?)

[FC]

(And I'm scared to think how many Steve Noe has had - remember him?)

I don't think I know of that guy, but our own 'mudgeon lemming has to have him beat.

[rumatt]

inability to promptly unload one without taking a massive financial bath.

Instead you're ensuring that you take a financial shower.

Leasing an E46 330i new (when it was available) cost what, $500/month? Buying that used 330, 3 years from now you'd only need to sell it for $7000 to break even with leasing a new one.

Leasing is convenient though, and locking in depreciation is nice. But it's not cheaper than buying used if you limit your purchases to "good" deals.

[TD]

inability to promptly unload one without taking a massive financial bath.

Instead you're ensuring that you take a financial shower.

Leasing an E46 330i new (when it was available) cost what, $500/month? Buying that used 330, 3 years from now you'd only need to sell it for $7000 to break even with leasing a new one.

Leasing is convenient though, and locking in depreciation is nice. But it's not cheaper than buying used if you limit your purchases to "good" deals.

Your math looks quite distorted. Maybe more details would make it make more sense. But as it is... :loco:

I'll play along, but with my own numbers...

A 3 year old 330i goes for about $27K (based on current listings at Autoadvantage.net) and has around 40K miles on it. Assume you pay cash for it (eliminating us having to factor in finance charges), lets assume you'll be writing a check for $28,500 after taxes and tags.

Now assume it's worth about $18,500 (private party sale) after another 3 years (look up the cost of a typical 6 year old 328i or a 5 year old 330i - ignore the crack smokers asking $30K for an '01). However, to trade that same car in or dump it off to Carmax, you're looking at no more than $14K (KBB lists $13,700 as a trade in for an '00 328i, 5-spd, SP, PP w/76K miles). That's $14,500 over 36 months or $402/mo. If you had to finance the purchase, that number only goes up.

And that's on a BMW that holds it value relatively well and that is a relatively common model. Shift over to a low-volume "enthusiast" model from some other make (like a Saab 9-5 Aero, Volve S60/V70R, or VW R32) and the depreciation would be MUCH steeper.

Throw in that the (NEW) leased car gets maintenance included and a full warranty that hasn't expired yet and that you can order it exactly as you want it (including without sunroof or leather) and don't have to bother with trying to sell it down the road, and the advantages of leasing in this scenario become HUGE.

Not having to deal with the hassle of selling a car myself is worth at least $2K to me. You may be cheaper, but you can't discount the hassle of selling yourself.

[rumatt]

Your math looks quite distorted. Maybe more details would make it make more sense. But as it is... :loco:


I was referring to this 330i (http://forums.carmudgeons.com/viewtopic.php?t=5406&highlight=)

$500/month lease over 3 years = $18,000

The 330i above: $25,000

You'd have to sell for $7,000 after 3 years to break even. Yeah, I'm ignoring tax on the purchase, so add in $1K and assume you could have negotiated him down some.

Saab 9-5 Aero, Volve S60/V70R, or VW R32) and the depreciation would be MUCH steeper.

Which means they're cheaper when you buy them. This is an advantage to buying used, not a disadvantage. Unless the depreciation curve starts out slowly, then gets steeper. :dunno:




I'll play along, but with my own numbers...

A 3 year old 330i goes for about $27K


My 2 year old 330i has 23K miles and is worth less than that. Yes it's an "undesirable" vehicle, but it's the kind of car you might consider buying.



[...]you'll be writing a check for $28,500 after taxes and tags.

Now assume it's worth about $18,500 (private party sale)

That's $277 per month. About half of your lease payment. :dunno:

[TD]

Your math looks quite distorted. Maybe more details would make it make more sense. But as it is... :loco:


I was referring to this 330i (http://forums.carmudgeons.com/viewtopic.php?t=5406&highlight=)

$500/month lease over 3 years = $18,000

The 330i above: $25,000

You'd have to sell for $7,000 and you break even.

Saab 9-5 Aero, Volve S60/V70R, or VW R32) and the depreciation would be MUCH steeper.

Which means they're cheaper when you buy them. This is an advantage to buying used, not a disadvantage. Unless the depreciation curve starts out slowly, then gets steeper. :dunno:




I'll play along, but with my own numbers...

[...]you'll be writing a check for $28,500 after taxes and tags.

Now assume it's worth about $18,500 (private party sale)

That's $277 per month. About half of your lease payment. :dunno:

You can't equate a private party sale with a lease turn-in. That private party sale, by being a HUGE PITA, has an inherent cost over just tossing the dealer the keys and walking away (as you do with a lease). Which is why I used trade-in value not private party retail.

Also, that 330i in your ad may be listed at $25K, but you still have to pay taxes and tags. And you'll be paying for repairs and maintenance by next year. And you'll have the hassle of selling a moonroof-less 330i in three years. That particular car I could see going for $10K in trade in 3 years. At $26,500 after tax and tags, that comes to $458/mo in depreciation.

[rumatt]

private party sale, by being a HUGE PITA, has an inherent cost over just tossing the dealer the keys and walking away


I didn't dispute that leasing or carmax isn't a big convenience. If that convenience is worth the cost to you, than you should pay for it. But it's not inhernet in buying/selling used. It's an independent choice to pay for the convenience.


That particular car I could see going for $10K in trade in 3 years.

The penalty of a sunroof doesn't increase over the life of the car. :? If it's that undesirable, then you should be able to buy it for a steal. Yes it will be worth less later, but since you paid less up front, it just means that you had less money tied up in cars (and depreciating) during that time.