[TheMidnightNarwhal]

Originally Posted by hassmaschine

I think people are willfully ignorant on the computers/modules. It makes no sense. People are on their smartphones or work PCs, probably doing work on a computer all day long, but do everything in their power to avoid understanding the electronics in their car.. which for a BMW, is widely documented.

What I find especially hilarious is how people say the E46 was "analog" and "simple". Uhh, it's just as full as computers and modules as any BMW has been since the E24 6 series. The best part is the modules on the newer cars are actually *easier* to work with in most cases than the older ones are, because they are more standardized and are used across models, where the E46 was kind of piece-meal and inconsistent. Besides, BMWs haven't been "analog" since the 1970s..

So true hahaha.

I work in IT so naturally the computers and stuff of cars fascinates me so much. I'm more on support/managing side than programming or creation but I would just love to know and reverse engineer this stuff just to see how it's all coded.

[phillycx]

Originally Posted by sorin1987

after owning my E90 I am starting to think that the whole car is a piece of s***. When it's working fine it drives great but it is too damn fragile!!!
I have a good friend with Audi and it doesn't look much better.
Guess I'll have to go back to Japanese after this E90 disappoints me again, probably sometime soon.

I have a 2009 328i and I am at 108k miles with no problems. I have done regular maintenance and preventatively fixed items that I know are likely to go up in smoke. For example, when the thermostat went poop I replaced the water pump. I think a lot of this comes down to how deep is your wallet and how long do you plan to own the car. Mine is paid off so I'm going to drive it until the wheels fall off and enjoy it the whole time. The smile the car brings me is worth the maintenance. You're going to have to fix things...it's a BMW...so those things will cost a couple bucks unless you're doing the wrenching yourself.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by John 070

It's kind of funny when a person owns all of them. And is on all the forums. Tends to be biased too.

I own the Nissan VQ, purchased in March 1998, still have it.

I own a Lexus, purchsed 10/16, first V8 and first car I ever had with a timing belt.

I own a 335i purchased new in 12/06, and also a GM SUV. So German, Japanese, American.

Each forum is biased towards its own, with the GM one being so bad I just left.

At the end of the day, I would have to say the Japanese cars, at least mine, are set it, and forget it. Bought a 2006 Lexus with 80k on it, and nothing has broken in 31k except two corner parking sensors stopped working.

But I like to think that my Japanese cars, enable me to have a German one, meaning, say my ABS/DSC failed (it did 3 years ago this time). I am not disabled from getting to work, I can take 2 months to fix it in my garage, and do it right. It's also astounding how "affordable" some OEM German parts are, and how expensive, OE Japanese parts are, with OEM being almost unavailable or unverifiable. Like a $13 OEM brake sensor wire for a BMW. For lexus? $120 OE, or $9 aftermarket, no OEM.

And let's face it, the German car, is the "ONLY" fun one to drive, in my household.

When people ask me are BMWs expensive to own, I jokingly reply YES because you need to have a second car for times when the BMW is in the shop!

[whyzee125]

It is annoying but it's not like its a surprise to anyone doing his research. If you want trouble free, the entire cooling system needs to be gone through in one fell swoop with OEM parts and you won't have issues for years until its time for another refresh.

[Pladi]

Originally Posted by whyzee125

It is annoying but it's not like its a surprise to anyone doing his research. If you want trouble free, the entire cooling system needs to be gone through in one fell swoop with OEM parts and you won't have issues for years until its time for another refresh.

Or u can just refresh the car..

[de Witt]

Originally Posted by TheMidnightNarwhal

Let's be real though the older BMW are much more reliable than today it seems.

This is not compelling, it is vague and ambiguous. As an owner of older BMWs with a few newer chassis sprinkled in from time to time, my experience is that newer BMWs are actually quite reliable. Sure, each chassis and the versions/spec of each chassis have their innate issues that crop up, but Ive spent less time diagnosing and repairing issues on the newer chassis and the disparity is not due to a lack of experience with the older chassis . . . Ive owned my E28 and E34 for nearly 20 years.

Fewer issues occur with newer chassis as well, but this is my experience. FWIW, not much.

Originally Posted by hassmaschine

I think people are willfully ignorant on the computers/modules. It makes no sense. People are on their smartphones or work PCs, probably doing work on a computer all day long, but do everything in their power to avoid understanding the electronics in their car.. which for a BMW, is widely documented.

What I find especially hilarious is how people say the E46 was "analog" and "simple". Uhh, it's just as full as computers and modules as any BMW has been since the E24 6 series. The best part is the modules on the newer cars are actually *easier* to work with in most cases than the older ones are, because they are more standardized and are used across models, where the E46 was kind of piece-meal and inconsistent. Besides, BMWs haven't been "analog" since the 1970s..

Such people as you describe have never looked at ETMs for the E31, E32, and E34. While my E28 is laden with circuitry, as you mention, it does not come close to the rigors of electrical diagnosis and repair on my E34. Likewise, the E90 is easier to diagnose and repair; there has been considerable effort on BMWs part (and throughout the automotive industry) to reduce the apparent complexity of electrical circuits and the hardware/software of the components thereof. It is helpful to hook up tools/ISTA and get a higher level of feedback from the ECU/etc than was offered on prior chassis.

[Pladi]

Originally Posted by CTinline-six

The Mazda 3 is a FWD under powered but sporty econobox car. The E90 is a RWD based luxury sport sedan. The Mazda 3 is a closer competitor with the VW Jetta.

They are aimed at two totally different markets. Personally, there are a lot of things I like about Hondas, but they certainly are not what they used to be, and the arrogance of their dealerships is horrific. While Japanese cars are generally more reliable, the quality of materials is just not there. It isn't because they are inferior, it is because they are built to a different price point (the economy cars are) and with different customers in mind (reliability and ease of maintenance vs. luxury).

Hear me out here sir

Reliability is not class dependent. The fact that the E90 is a luxary sport sedan is more reason to surpass the Mazda reliability. But it does not come close.

Reliability is a basic building block of a platform. You know like the first step of building the house. Its the base that you build everything else from. Its not a feature that you advertise on a TV commercial. ITs JUST THERE. But with E90 its not.,

So stop saying the E90 is this and mazda is that. We are talking about basic requirements almost like safety.. Because reliability and safety are linked closely. LEss reliable car is a less safe car... automatically. Period.


BMW is getting better but you fan boys have to admit that E90 reliability is FAR from perfect. Because they are making money on parts. Well known at this point..

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Pladi

Hear me out here sir

Reliability is not class dependent. The fact that the E90 is a luxary sport sedan is more reason to surpass the Mazda reliability. But it does not come close.

Reliability is a basic building block of a platform. You know like the first step of building the house. Its the base that you build everything else from. Its not a feature that you advertise on a TV commercial. ITs JUST THERE. But with E90 its not.,

So stop saying the E90 is this and mazda is that. We are talking about basic requirements almost like safety.. Because reliability and safety are linked closely. LEss reliable car is a less safe car... automatically. Period.


BMW is getting better but you fan boys have to admit that E90 reliability is FAR from perfect. Because they are making money on parts. Well known at this point..

I think what point you are missing is that a BMW after 15 years of ownership, if reasonably well kept, will be in far better shape than a Mazda after 15 years. The materials are better. For example, the body metal is thicker and higher in hardness (as told to me by an industry-respected PDR technician). I've owned BMWs for a very long time and have close to 900K combined miles on 4 cars. While the brand needs some care and more repair than some other brands, all in all BMWs last a long time and are worth fixing even with very high mileage on them.

[de Witt]

Originally Posted by Pladi

So stop saying the E90 is this and mazda is that. We are talking about basic requirements almost like safety.. Because reliability and safety are linked closely. LEss reliable car is a less safe car... automatically. Period.


BMW is getting better but you fan boys have to admit that E90 reliability is FAR from perfect.

The link between safety and reliability is not across all dimensions as you want everyone to agree to. There are obvious issues like the Toyota accelerator problem, the Ford Explorers with defective Firestone tires, the Ford Pinto fuel tank, Audi 100 fires, and VAG 1.8T failures, to name a few, but just because your car is unreliable in an aspect or across several aspects does not mean it is unsafe.

Ive yet to have knowledge of a casualty as a result of the S85 bearing failure. Or from a M88/3 simplex timing chain failure or a S38B35 crank hub failure. Or a Duramax LB7/LLY injector failure or cooling fan viscous clutch failing and piercing through the radiator causing a casualty. What about the entire Merkur line? 1980s Maseratis? Lots of safety issues with VW Beetles with no strain studs on the cylinder heads? What about E63s 6ers or E65 7ers . . . are the insurance premium high on these rigs because the actuaries ran the data and determined they were so unreliable as to present a safety risk? A joke, but only presented in consideration of your argument.

Because they are making money on parts. Well known at this point..

Is there a manufacturer that does not want to profit from their parts sales? Mazda or other Japanese mfgs just want to sell you the car for profit but not sell parts for profit? Evidence for your claim regarding BMW's business model of selling less reliable cars relative to the Japanese mfgs for the purpose of parts/service sales? Aka pulling a VW lemon with a massive parts/service network?

[Pladi]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I think what point you are missing is that a BMW after 15 years of ownership, if reasonably well kept, will be in far better shape than a Mazda after 15 years. The materials are better. For example, the body metal is thicker and higher in hardness (as told to me by an industry-respected PDR technician). I've owned BMWs for a very long time and have close to 900K combined miles on 4 cars. While the brand needs some care and more repair than some other brands, all in all BMWs last a long time and are worth fixing even with very high mileage on them.

yeah but at what expense ? You can keep anything well for 15 years if you throw tons of money.. so i mean there are a few ways to look at this. Besides the point is people usually keep cars for 5 years. BMWs are notorious for not being reliable within 5 years

People own 1940's spitfire.. looks amazing too..after a fortune of upkeep

[Pladi]

Originally Posted by de Witt

The link between safety and reliability is not across all dimensions as you want everyone to agree to. There are obvious issues like the Toyota accelerator problem, the Ford Explorers with defective Firestone tires, the Ford Pinto fuel tank, Audi 100 fires, and VAG 1.8T failures, to name a few, but just because your car is unreliable in an aspect or across several aspects does not mean it is unsafe.

I made a reference to safety because my point is reliability is NOT a feature. You missed my point. Obviously there are other makes with safety issues.. no one is disputing that..

Originally Posted by de Witt

Is there a manufacturer that does not want to profit from their parts sales?

They all sell parts and make money of selling part OBVIOUSLY ! BMW does it more. in my opinion. Japanese makes take reliability more seriously as a business model.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Pladi

yeah but at what expense ? You can keep anything well for 15 years if you throw tons of money.. so i mean there are a few ways to look at this. Besides the point is people usually keep cars for 5 years. BMWs are notorious for not being reliable within 5 years

People own 1940's spitfire.. looks amazing too..after a fortune of upkeep

After 363,000 miles, my E90 has left me once riding in the cab of a tow truck and it on the flatbed. I'm going with that is pretty fucking reliable.

That's not fanboyism, just statistics. I just recently posted how much it's cost. And it's far less than 3 new cars.

[CTinline-six]

Originally Posted by Pladi

Hear me out here sir

Reliability is not class dependent. The fact that the E90 is a luxary sport sedan is more reason to surpass the Mazda reliability. But it does not come close.

Reliability is a basic building block of a platform. You know like the first step of building the house. Its the base that you build everything else from. Its not a feature that you advertise on a TV commercial. ITs JUST THERE. But with E90 its not.,

So stop saying the E90 is this and mazda is that. We are talking about basic requirements almost like safety.. Because reliability and safety are linked closely. LEss reliable car is a less safe car... automatically. Period.


BMW is getting better but you fan boys have to admit that E90 reliability is FAR from perfect. Because they are making money on parts. Well known at this point..

I guess I just don't understand your argument.

Many Japanese manufacturers build cars with reliability as a top priority, while German cars tend to put handling and comfort as a priority. They just cater to different buyers, that's all.

I'm almost certain nobody on this forum bought a BMW for reliability reasons, I know I didn't. I bought it because working on cars is a hobby of mine and I enjoy how they drive. If I had no space or ability to DIY I'd probably own something else.

I just don't understand why people come on here to an enthusiast forum and complain about the reliability of BMWs. That is like me going onto Jeepforum and complaining about getting 16 mpg in my 19 year old Cherokee XJ that has the aerodynamics of a barn and has basically a tractor engine. It's just one of the downfalls of the vehicle, which ALL cars have.

If the reliability of the car frustrates you, then maybe you need to sell it and get something that makes you happy. Life is short, drive what you want.

[Jesda]

With BMW you expect more quality for the price of the car. You do get style, luxury, and comfort but the mechanicals are often disappointing.

BMW knows who butters their bread -- people who lease for 3 years and move on. I cant blame them for building pretty piles of junk.


It is what it is. None of us buy these expecting dependability.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by Pladi

yeah but at what expense ? You can keep anything well for 15 years if you throw tons of money.. so i mean there are a few ways to look at this. Besides the point is people usually keep cars for 5 years. BMWs are notorious for not being reliable within 5 years

People own 1940's spitfire.. looks amazing too..after a fortune of upkeep

I actually have such data.. $16,599 for 363,500 miles.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by CTinline-six

I guess I just don't understand your argument.

Many Japanese manufacturers build cars with reliability as a top priority, while German cars tend to put handling and comfort as a priority. They just cater to different buyers, that's all.

I'm almost certain nobody on this forum bought a BMW for reliability reasons, I know I didn't. I bought it because working on cars is a hobby of mine and I enjoy how they drive. If I had no space or ability to DIY I'd probably own something else.

I just don't understand why people come on here to an enthusiast forum and complain about the reliability of BMWs. That is like me going onto Jeepforum and complaining about getting 16 mpg in my 19 year old Cherokee XJ that has the aerodynamics of a barn and has basically a tractor engine. It's just one of the downfalls of the vehicle, which ALL cars have.

If the reliability of the car frustrates you, then maybe you need to sell it and get something that makes you happy. Life is short, drive what you want.

I like this post because it makes sense. But I'd like to elaborate as a long-time BMW owner. I bought my last two BMWs, the E90 and the (used) Z4 not strictly for reliability but for the longevity BMW gives you. They may break a bit more than other brands, but they sure do last along time if even just reasonably cared for.

If you define reliability as not leaving you on the side of the road and getting you home every night, my experience with BMWs has been exemplary IMO.

[CTinline-six]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I like this post because it makes sense. But I'd like to elaborate as a long-time BMW owner. I bought my last two BMWs, the E90 and the (used (Z4) not strictly for reliability but for the longevity BMW gives you. They may break a bit more than other brands, but they sure do last along time if even just reasonably cared for.

If you define reliability as not leaving you on the side of the road and getting you home every night, my experience with BMWs has been exemplary IMO.

Agreed, which gets back to my point about materials quality. Japanese cars simply do not hold up well in the salt belt. The drive train is usually fine, but the body, suspension bits, etc just corrode away. My family has owned Hondas for 20+ years now, and even the American brands are starting to edge ahead of them. My Dad's 2013 Grand Cherokee has 140k miles on it, and the body is spotless underneath even after being through multiple salty winters. My mother's 2011 Fit with under 70k miles has rust forming in certain spots and the cat converter heat shields have all rusted and fallen off. The Fit is garage stored. My '06 325xi has zero rust and sits outside most of it's life at 160k+.


How about Honda transmission failures? Toyota Rav4 stripped head bolts? Honda Civic cracked blocks? Mazda rust issues? Subaru head gaskets?

Just to name a few. Every brand has weak points.

[hassmaschine]

We had our Subaru until 200k miles. God, I hated that car.. I would rather have 100 waterpump failures than another refrigerator on wheels. Floored in 4th gear (we had the MT, impossible to find in a newer wagon), it couldn't break 50mph going up a mountain pass. The E91 did that same pass in 6th gear at 70mph with ease.

[CTinline-six]

Originally Posted by hassmaschine

We had our Subaru until 200k miles. God, I hated that car.. I would rather have 100 waterpump failures than another refrigerator on wheels. Floored in 4th gear (we had the MT, impossible to find in a newer wagon), it couldn't break 50mph going up a mountain pass. The E91 did that same pass in 6th gear at 70mph with ease.

I don't understand why they are so popular to be honest. Every one that I've seen/driven hasn't been anything special. My friend's Forester isn't really all that impressive in the snow unless it has snow tires (even my 328i is good with snow tires), and they have a lot of expensive repairs (head gaskets, transmissions, piston rings/oil consumption, etc) all while returning marginal fuel economy from a 4 cylinder.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by hassmaschine

We had our Subaru until 200k miles. God, I hated that car.. I would rather have 100 waterpump failures than another refrigerator on wheels. Floored in 4th gear (we had the MT, impossible to find in a newer wagon), it couldn't break 50mph going up a mountain pass. The E91 did that same pass in 6th gear at 70mph with ease.

Outside of the Rust Belt, Subies last a long time. One of my staff has one and she'll swear by it. Her last '03 Forester went 305K without major repair until Bambi decided it needed to be recycled. Last year a friend of mine was going to get a new Forester to replace her '06 (leaking sieve that it is). She wanted leather and heated seats. I suggested the CX-5 instead. For the price, a better value than the outgoing Forester. The Mazda has a nice big naturally aspiriated 4-cylinder and a real geared 6-sp automatic. A flat-4 bug motor and CVT in the Subie... ugh!

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by CTinline-six

I don't understand why they are so popular to be honest. Every one that I've seen/driven hasn't been anything special. My friend's Forester isn't really all that impressive in the snow unless it has snow tires (even my 328i is good with snow tires), and they have a lot of expensive repairs (head gaskets, transmissions, piston rings/oil consumption, etc) all while returning marginal fuel economy from a 4 cylinder.

Then there's the valve spring recall...

[tlow98]

I just don’t get the subie craze either. My Saab 9-2x (Subaru wrx) felt like the cheapest car in the world. It wasn’t that reliable (blown shock and axle) wither. Terrible 4 cylinder gas mileage and felt like it was 10 years older than it was.

I have car friends that have owned BMWs and yet they still love the subies.

The newer outback is finally a decent feeling car, but that buzzy four banger couples to the CVT is the epitome of boring.

I’d rather have a Mazda CX-5 anyday.