Lot of work a bad sign?

tmcthree

Member
Hi,

I'm a noob (sorry)

So I'm looking at two cars and they look about the same to me (though that doesn;t mean much). One of them though, has had quite a lot of stuff recently replaced (costing about £2500). Is that a good sign or a bad sign? One one had, it means that those parts are new (and under warranty) but on the other, it could mean that theres's something fundamentally wrong with the card (couldn't it?)

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201403012164034
vs
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201403032216046

Any thoughts?

ta
 
Not necessarily

Manifolds are a weakness in the 2.0 so plenty have had them changed.

A £2.5k warranty claim wouldn't bother me at all.

Mine had a new gearbox warranty claim at over £4k
 
2500 isn't that much in bmw terms. Electrical stuff is usually extortionate to fix.

I'd say the fact the works been done means someone was willing to splash out to repair it, therefore took more care of it.

Mine had a receipt for over £700 just to replace the roof motor.
 
I'll always buy the car with work done, these "minters" that have no miles and just basic servicing often have a barrage of faults when they start getting used. Or you get an owner like me who are obsessed with making the car mechanically perfect so changes everything rather than just a single faulty component.
 
It would put me off as non of my cars I have had (or have) (touch wood) have had anything major done, even if I had them for 7 years and 80k miles like my previous X5. To me it is the difference between a Monday car and a good one.

Lots of work = lemon to me.
 
I suppose it depends what work has been done - if it's brakes and service items great- if it's known weaknesses like roof motor then ok - but if there is a succession of items related to say electrical gremlins then I would walk away as it might highlight an on-going issue that is difficult to diagnose and/or fix.

Plenty about - just be patient.

:driving: :thumbsup:
 
PerryGunn said:
pvr said:
Lots of work = lemon to me
PVR, I realise that English isn't your native language, but you really need to put a bit more work into your anagrams...


:P

Is "Perry Off" an expression? :evil:
 
PVR, your response is a little illogical. A fixed mechanical error has no correlation to future problems.

Any car could suffer a mechanical failure at some point in its life. If fixed, there really is no problem. If your M needed something done, would you class it as a lemon? I'm curious....?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The question was "lots of work", not just a one off thing.

Lots of work means to me that a lot has gone wrong, which is what I meant with the lemon bit.

If I compare my old X5 to some other X5s I know, I had a couple of items go wrong in 7 years, whilst others have had "lots" go wrong and eventually would abandon it. So when someone bought my 7 year old car, they had a good one, whilst if they had bought a car that had lots done - they would have bought a lemon as most likely it will continue to have issues.
 
Jonny essex said:
SUUNTOBOB said:
Be careful before you buy a 2.0L or you may end up in Jonny Essex's predicament
I agree, love my car just not the engine top end is a drag for me now :(

Thanks for the input guys.

So Jonny, you regret getting the 2.0? Any positives or would you definitely go for a bigger engine now?
 
Thanks for the input guys.

So Jonny, you regret getting the 2.0? Any positives or would you definitely go for a bigger engine now?[/quote]

I always speak up for the 2.0 litre (yet I've gone on to a 3 now. . .)

The 2.0 litre is a smooth easy revving motor which is under-rated. On the road it has just enough power to be fun and it is also entertaining keeping it on the boil and in the higher revs without killing off your licence. It has issues with exhaust manifolds cracking and engine management lights (which are annoying rather than affect performance). I had my 2 litre for 2 years and I loved it - it was a great car for nipping to the shops, commuting and hooning. It never let us down and came back for more every day without missing a beat but there are some who have had great frustrations from the 2 litre. A further aspect of the 4 pot is the mpg. You do not have to work really hard to get mid 30s and you can do far better with restraint. On a hoon you will dip under 30 mpg.
My 3.0si takes a deliberate driving style and great restraint to get anywhere near 30 mpg - low to mid 20s is the norm if you want to dip into the (fabulous) performance or do any town driving - worth it though for me as our Zed is our weekend fun car which we use through the week as a second car so it might depend what you want to use your Zed for?

You should try and test drive both and read all the views on this forum before you make your decision.

:driving: :thumbsup:
 
Hey thanks for the feedback Paul.

Yeah it's tricky. A lot of people on this forum are proper drivers/petrolheads. Which is great. I'm not though. I want a z4 because I think it's a great looking car (sorry). So how fast it goes/ well it drives is quite secondary to me. Also, I know what I'm like and if I did get a properly fast car I'd lose my license in weeks. Especially off the lights, I'm such a twat off the lights. Plus, I have to confess to being a bit tight, and I'd be using it as my main car so I don't think I'd be able to ignore the fuel consumption, it might just take the fun out of it for me.

Basically I think the z4 is beautiful, so I want it for that reason only, which is what's led me to the 2.0. But being someone who knows nothing about cars, I'm wondering if there's some other advantage to the 3.0 engine. I've heard people on the forum describe it as "bulletproof", which sounds good. But does that mean the 2.0 has problems. Being a BMW I'd assume they were all very good, so I expect they mean that the 3.0 has exceptional reliability per mileage, rather than the 2.0 is poor, relative to other cars...

I don't know. All I know is the z4 is imo the best looking car on the road today, so I want one for the summer.
 
Back
Top Bottom