4 years between oil change... would you buy it???

[cooots]

[
the price of these things is going to plummet in the next 6 months, so I think I'm going to sit tight till then.

What makes you think that? Because the economy is taking a turn for the worse?
On the other hand, there are very few of them about ... esp low km versions.

I say this because people are trying to sell them for way more than market value, and (in my opinion) the economy is about to sh*t itself.

Some dealers are currently asking $60,000.00 (~40,000.00GBP) for an '07 3.0si. I don't care how many kms they have on them, they're just not worth this. These cars have, and will be, on the market for years without a buyer - and this has been happening for a while now, so until they start asking for decent prices, they're not going to sell their cars.

I also feel that, given their age, we'll now start to see more of them come onto the used car market.

To me, anything between 0km - 60,000km is fair game.

 

[Jembo]

Prices have already fallen as I picked up a late 05, one previous owner with 47k on the clock after negotiating hard for just over £8.5k in a private sale (plus a full tank from the money I had just paid). A year ago these were much more, but as people will always want all the toys on a Z4, Xenons, M Sport Seats, upgraded stereo, SatNav etc... provided you can show it has been regularly looked after by at least a specialist independent & sell at the beginning of the summer, you shouldn't loose too much as there's still a heavy demand for them... though not quite £40k, can buy a new one for that in the UK


Well, it's not the facelift but... for £8.5k I don't care...

 

[Six_Fix]

Dudes! Greetings!

Newbie here but I thought I'd add my 2p worth as it's an interesting discussion. I am an engineer (i.e. a proper one!) at a major vehicle manufacturer but more on the ECU/controls side rather than base engine. My opinion (and that's all it is) is that if the car otherwise ticks the boxes then buy it. Oils and fluids do deteriorate over time but it's not like a switch whereby it's good one minute and bad the next. The 3.0ltr is a staple BMW engine that goes into pretty much everything, and as such should be designed for at least 10yrs/150,000 miles of pretty hard use without any major failures. So I would say that doing a handful of miles (if it's only done 12500 in total) on slightly old oil is no issue at all. Similarly with the brakes - the deterioration comes in performance (the fluid starts to become compressible) and any water content that's in there will be negligible and it needs to be in contact with air before it can even start to corrode anything.

My only concern would be market reaction/paranoia when you come to sell it (as on here) and then general issues that you might have that come with low use (none of which I would expect to be particularly major). But if the price is good compared to the others that you can get then happy days!

Oh, and referring to an earlier post ref changing all the fluids e.g. diffs, coolant, transmission fluids then I wouldn't bother. The coolant, transmission etc. are completely independent of the engine fluids so the missed service makes no difference at all in this respect. Most of this stuff tends to be sealed for life (or at least for a very long time) and I expect the Z to be no different in this respect.

Change oil. Change brake fluid. Do whatever inspection is due at this age. Then get out and drive! :driving:

 

[sars]

Dudes! Greetings!

Newbie here but I thought I'd add my 2p worth as it's an interesting discussion. I am an engineer (i.e. a proper one!) at a major vehicle manufacturer but more on the ECU/controls side rather than base engine. My opinion (and that's all it is) is that if the car otherwise ticks the boxes then buy it. Oils and fluids do deteriorate over time but it's not like a switch whereby it's good one minute and bad the next. The 3.0ltr is a staple BMW engine that goes into pretty much everything, and as such should be designed for at least 10yrs/150,000 miles of pretty hard use without any major failures. So I would say that doing a handful of miles (if it's only done 12500 in total) on slightly old oil is no issue at all. Similarly with the brakes - the deterioration comes in performance (the fluid starts to become compressible) and any water content that's in there will be negligible and it needs to be in contact with air before it can even start to corrode anything.

My only concern would be market reaction/paranoia when you come to sell it (as on here) and then general issues that you might have that come with low use (none of which I would expect to be particularly major). But if the price is good compared to the others that you can get then happy days!

Oh, and referring to an earlier post ref changing all the fluids e.g. diffs, coolant, transmission fluids then I wouldn't bother. The coolant, transmission etc. are completely independent of the engine fluids so the missed service makes no difference at all in this respect. Most of this stuff tends to be sealed for life (or at least for a very long time) and I expect the Z to be no different in this respect.

Change oil. Change brake fluid. Do whatever inspection is due at this age. Then get out and drive! :driving:

Welcome to a fellow engineer, assuming that as you work on the controls side you're a sparky and not a spanner and if so I may take umbrage on the proper part as it's electrickery and not science

 

[Six_Fix]

Well, believe it or not I am actually a spanner! (formerly aero)

A lot of it is about understanding exactly what the metal stuff is doing, then using the electrickery to make the right stuff happen. :fuelfire:

Downsizing and boosting with the wrong number of cylinders :? is my current area of expertise.

 

[sars]

Downsizing and boosting, so would you buy the new 28i Z4 if you had the choice.... How long do modern turbochargers last these days?

Thinking about my next car, as I drive about 450 motorway miles a week, stuck at 70ish mph means that on a 28i the turbo could well be spinning for long periods of time!

 

[no fit state]

Dudes! Greetings!

Newbie here but I thought I'd add my 2p worth as it's an interesting discussion. I am an engineer (i.e. a proper one!) at a major vehicle manufacturer but more on the ECU/controls side rather than base engine. My opinion (and that's all it is) is that if the car otherwise ticks the boxes then buy it. Oils and fluids do deteriorate over time but it's not like a switch whereby it's good one minute and bad the next. The 3.0ltr is a staple BMW engine that goes into pretty much everything, and as such should be designed for at least 10yrs/150,000 miles of pretty hard use without any major failures. So I would say that doing a handful of miles (if it's only done 12500 in total) on slightly old oil is no issue at all. Similarly with the brakes - the deterioration comes in performance (the fluid starts to become compressible) and any water content that's in there will be negligible and it needs to be in contact with air before it can even start to corrode anything.

My only concern would be market reaction/paranoia when you come to sell it (as on here) and then general issues that you might have that come with low use (none of which I would expect to be particularly major). But if the price is good compared to the others that you can get then happy days!

Oh, and referring to an earlier post ref changing all the fluids e.g. diffs, coolant, transmission fluids then I wouldn't bother. The coolant, transmission etc. are completely independent of the engine fluids so the missed service makes no difference at all in this respect. Most of this stuff tends to be sealed for life (or at least for a very long time) and I expect the Z to be no different in this respect.

Change oil. Change brake fluid. Do whatever inspection is due at this age. Then get out and drive! :driving:

Hello from another (mechanical) engineer. X2 on everything you have said

 

[Six_Fix]

@sars

To answer your first question, no I wouldn't. The rationale behind the move to 4 cyl is a) CO2 emissions and b) cost and complexity reduction (500cc/cylinder modular concept). Downsized turbos are all well and good for getting higher specific power/torque outputs from small engines or the same as from a large engine but with lower CO2. If it's all about the stuff you can measure then that's fine in a Focus or a Golf but not in what is supposed to be a 'proper sports car' (already a dying breed).

I'll have my cylinder firing events in thirds thank you very much (or as an exception, at precisely 144 degree intervals 8)) with all the smooth, multi-layered, characterful creaminess that brings. A four is just plain wrong. The firing frequency is wrong. The only thing that you can do to improve the sound of a four is to make it go away, and I'm sure BMW will do a decent enough job (throw some balancer shafts at it, expensive engine mounts, lots of sound deadening and a bit of exhaust and intake manifold tuning). But ask yourself this - How would you fancy an Audi TT 2.0T, but with a BMW badge on the front?

I'd say keep what you've got - The last of the great half-sensible, every day BMW sixes. Economy wise you'll probably find that in the real world there's not a lot in it anyway (10% maybe), and it will be very difficult for BMW to resist crippling the 28 with loooooong, near diesel style gearing. The shift points on the NEDC emissions cycle are fixed, so longer gearing effectively means earlier up-shifts and there's quite a bit of CO2 improvement to be had there for free... except that it feels like crap. Still, everybody's doin' it. :headbang: :headbang:

To answer your second question turbos are completely durable, provided that there haven't been any late hardware changes sneaked in at the last minute that haven't been properly validated. In reality if it fails then it will probably fail early (ish) on and it will be a warranty job.

@no fit state hello. Rational thinking rules!

 

[krusty]

You take a risk with any used car. There is no way of really knowing how something has been treated unless you buy it new - and even then you don't know if the guy who drove it off the transporter ragged the arse off it when it had 5 miles on the clock, bouncing it off the rev limiter. Or the mechanics at the garage have done similar. Or you have sent it to BMW for a major service but the person doing it 'forgot' to change the brake fluid as they were short on time and 'forgets' to tell anyone else.

Buy it used and there is a high chance it is hiding some sort of bodywork repair. How do you know when the tyres were last changed? If it has had punctures plugged, someone's mate has changed the brakes, the nice middle aged woman you bought it off has been lending it to her son who thinks he is Lewis Hamilton. The stamps in the book are fake and so on...

It is only a couple of services. By the time most cars get to 5 years old they are usually on the path to sketchy servicing anyway with either no maintenance or cheap 'specialist' maintenance.

Servicing on the whole is a big revenue stream for manufacturers - does anyone here actually think a modern engine from a major manufacturer that has been developed and stress tested over many years, running on synthetic oil and hardly used is going to be ruined because it has missed two services?

An excellent post. Anyway ... following BMW recommendations (Owner's Handbook p.74: special operating instructions), ... how do you know the owner did not exceed 4500 RPM for the first 2000km?? That's like giving a child a yummy lolly, and telling them not to eat it.

 

[EdButler]

@sars

To answer your first question, no I wouldn't. The rationale behind the move to 4 cyl is a) CO2 emissions and b) cost and complexity reduction (500cc/cylinder modular concept). Downsized turbos are all well and good for getting higher specific power/torque outputs from small engines or the same as from a large engine but with lower CO2. If it's all about the stuff you can measure then that's fine in a Focus or a Golf but not in what is supposed to be a 'proper sports car' (already a dying breed).

I'll have my cylinder firing events in thirds thank you very much (or as an exception, at precisely 144 degree intervals 8)) with all the smooth, multi-layered, characterful creaminess that brings. A four is just plain wrong. The firing frequency is wrong. The only thing that you can do to improve the sound of a four is to make it go away, and I'm sure BMW will do a decent enough job (throw some balancer shafts at it, expensive engine mounts, lots of sound deadening and a bit of exhaust and intake manifold tuning). But ask yourself this - How would you fancy an Audi TT 2.0T, but with a BMW badge on the front?

I'd say keep what you've got - The last of the great half-sensible, every day BMW sixes. Economy wise you'll probably find that in the real world there's not a lot in it anyway (10% maybe), and it will be very difficult for BMW to resist crippling the 28 with loooooong, near diesel style gearing. The shift points on the NEDC emissions cycle are fixed, so longer gearing effectively means earlier up-shifts and there's quite a bit of CO2 improvement to be had there for free... except that it feels like crap. Still, everybody's doin' it. :headbang: :headbang:

To answer your second question turbos are completely durable, provided that there haven't been any late hardware changes sneaked in at the last minute that haven't been properly validated. In reality if it fails then it will probably fail early (ish) on and it will be a warranty job.

@no fit state hello. Rational thinking rules!

Good post, this forum needs more techies!

 

[sars]

@sars

To answer your first question, no I wouldn't. The rationale behind the move to 4 cyl is a) CO2 emissions and b) cost and complexity reduction (500cc/cylinder modular concept). Downsized turbos are all well and good for getting higher specific power/torque outputs from small engines or the same as from a large engine but with lower CO2. If it's all about the stuff you can measure then that's fine in a Focus or a Golf but not in what is supposed to be a 'proper sports car' (already a dying breed).

I'll have my cylinder firing events in thirds thank you very much (or as an exception, at precisely 144 degree intervals 8)) with all the smooth, multi-layered, characterful creaminess that brings. A four is just plain wrong. The firing frequency is wrong. The only thing that you can do to improve the sound of a four is to make it go away, and I'm sure BMW will do a decent enough job (throw some balancer shafts at it, expensive engine mounts, lots of sound deadening and a bit of exhaust and intake manifold tuning). But ask yourself this - How would you fancy an Audi TT 2.0T, but with a BMW badge on the front?

I'd say keep what you've got - The last of the great half-sensible, every day BMW sixes. Economy wise you'll probably find that in the real world there's not a lot in it anyway (10% maybe), and it will be very difficult for BMW to resist crippling the 28 with loooooong, near diesel style gearing. The shift points on the NEDC emissions cycle are fixed, so longer gearing effectively means earlier up-shifts and there's quite a bit of CO2 improvement to be had there for free... except that it feels like crap. Still, everybody's doin' it. :headbang: :headbang:

To answer your second question turbos are completely durable, provided that there haven't been any late hardware changes sneaked in at the last minute that haven't been properly validated. In reality if it fails then it will probably fail early (ish) on and it will be a warranty job.

Yes you are exactly right, my next car will probably not be a Z4, not because it is a four pot turbo, rather that if I was going to buy a four pot turbo then it would be the TT. Without doubt the best thing about my car is the engine, the handling is pretty good but the steering feel isn't that great as is the build quality. For similar money I can get a 2.0TSFI Quattro with s-tronic, where the mechanical grip is immense, I have never driven a car that gives the driver as much confidence on everyday roads and in all conditions, the build quality is superior, the double clutch box superb, the seats more supportive and of course no RFT's,

I mean now that I have written it out why would you, apart from the Zed looks better, why would you?