The smart money is certainly on relatively late model used examples.
There have been two 06 E55s for sale lately in my area, one listed at 36K, the other is still for sale at 35K. Both cars are not low mileage, but not too extreme, around 40K miles. The pricer one was loaded and would have stickered for around 100K new, and the lesser one was probably in the low 90s. That's a lot of money, and a big difference for cars that shouldn't be worn out, and are still under warranty. I have seen nicely equipped 07 S-class that can be had for around 50K, original sticker would have been around 100K. Money evaporated. The loaded Designo 04 I mentioned would have stickered over 100K, and at 30K miles shouldn't go much over 30K now. Expensive miles.
I suspect now an 06 C-class doesn't cost much more than an 06 Accord, maybe a couple grand difference. The used market determines just that, utility, which is why the AMG/M etc premiums really vanish over time. It's not bad if the car itself can be reliable - but the buyer of any of these cars has to be prepared for it not to have a Civic maintenance schedule nor frequency of glitches.
"I suspect now an 06 C-class doesn't cost much more than an 06 Accord, maybe a couple grand difference."
Yup, my point exactly. For that difference, I'd prefer a C-Class and live with the additional maintenance and repair costs over the Accord, because the C-Class drives as well as ages better.
I couldn't justify dumping my 02 for something like this. It's worth less than half this asking price on the private market, and it is pretty sorted out now. I also averaged a sound 24mpg on highway portions of my little weekend road trip - the supercharged cars can't pull that off.
One thing that is irking me about the car is paint quality. The paint shine and finish is excellent, but it is very prone to small chips, especially on the front bumper. I almost want to think that's been repainted, but I can't imagine. It drives me nuts sometimes...about a month ago I had a chip repair guy come and touch it up. It looked fine afterwards, but I fear that is temporary. I know MB has had some inconsistent quality in this regard, especially in 00-02. I recently saw an 07 SL that was kinda chipped up too.
Four years ago I bought a very well maintained '87 3-Series with 102,000 miles for $2,900. The price was reasonable enough, but it's been high maintenance. I've had to replace several major components, including brakes, exhaust, clutch slave cylinder, radiator, the A/C evaporator, and now the power window on the passenger side (it's a 2-door) doesn't work because it needs a regulator. All this in only 21,000 miles. The powertrain is solid. Although I like the car, it certainly hasn't been a bargain.
The issue is what to do now. Although the car is fully depreciated, from a financial standpoint is it time to cut my losses? I'm weighing whether it would it be cheaper, over the next four years, to buy something like a new Civic, or a three year old 3-Series or C-Class. I should mention that although this is an extra car I'd probably replace it rather than just reitre it.
I have close to 190,000 mile on my '87 325. I bought it back in 1999 for $2500 when it had 125K miles on it. So it was cheaper than yours given that is was 6 years newer at the time. I have put around $5300 in it for repairs and maintenance in the 10 years I've had it, which works out to around $0.082/mile.
Main expenses have been suspension components (both control arms, tie rod ends) for around $1000, timing belt & water pump (~600), exhaust system including the cat (~750 over the 10 years), steering rack, rear shocks, brake pads & rotors. I have done most of the work on it myself, so expenses would have been higher had I taken it to a mechanic or dealer for everything.
My A/C has never really worked, but I can live with that. And, I'm still on the original clutch.
I bought the car for my son when he was a sophomore in college, and really had no intention of keeping it this long. So we put off a lot of work in those early years figuring the car was only going to be around for several years at most. I probably would have kept up on things more (re - more expenses) had I known I was going to re-inherit the car and would still be driving it at the 22 year old mark.
So yeah, older BMWs are probably going to be expensive to maintain and keep running. Even more so if you have to use the dealer for all of you repair and maintenance work. Being able to turn a wrench is a definite plus.
I've had to replace several major components, including brakes, exhaust, clutch slave cylinder, radiator, the A/C evaporator, and now the power window on the passenger side (it's a 2-door) doesn't work because it needs a regulator. All this in only 21,000 miles. The powertrain is solid. Although I like the car, it certainly hasn't been a bargain.
Considering the age of the car, that actually doesn't sound too bad, IMO. A lot of that stuff is probably more related to old age than the car automatically being high-maintenance. Although being a BMW, I imagine a lot of those components are more expensive to replace than if something equivalent fails on one of My New Yorkers.
I guess the important thing is, do you still like the car, and enjoy having it? Or are you getting tired of it and just in the mood for something different? If I have a car that I really like, I'm more willing to throw money into it than if I'm just getting bored with it and in the mood for something different. Other than the power window, does the car have any other issues that could be a concern in the near future?
I'm weighing whether it would it be cheaper, over the next four years, to buy something like a new Civic
I know this is so not my style, but I've actually thought about a new(er) Civic, myself! My reasoning is partly because I find the car easy on the eye, and partly because it's one of the few small cars I actually feel somewhat comfortable in. I think its wheelbase is around 106" though, so I guess that's not exactly "small" these days! My first car, a 1980 Malibu, only had a 108.1" wheelbase! And it had plenty of room inside. I'd probably have to drive a Civic long-term though, to find out if I really could live with it, day in and day out. I wonder if rental fleets still stock Civics? Maybe I could rent one for a couple days and drive it around and really get a feel for it.
My Intrepid is going to the mechanic today, so he can check the oil pressure. The idiot light comes on every once in awhile, glowing very faintly. But the oil level is full, and the engine has never made any nasty sounds. Plus, I've driven it to Baltimore and back, twice. My mechanic said that if there really was a problem, that would have most likely killed it! So I'm hoping it's just a sensor or wire or something.
Anyway, depending on how it plays out there may be a new(er) car in my future...and sooner than I had hoped!
Sounds like many of these repairs are typical old BMW weaknesses. I think if you look at it statistically, once a car reaches 80,000 miles, that's about the threshold for the beginning of replacement of expensive parts.
The 80s 3 series 325s are the best of the bunch, so you made a good choice in that sense, but really for the amount of money one pays for these cars (very little), you can't expect trouble-free service.
If you need a dead reliable daily driver, a 25 year old German car is not going to cut it. It will be "okay", and certainly better than a 50s classic, but still, you have to be realistic. Do you want a daily driver or a hobby car? You can't really have both in one automobile.
Yes, I have nursed old cars across deserts and mountains, and driven them as daily drivers with a high degree of reliability (many times I've gotten away with this), but the level of attention and maintenance to accomplish that pretty much exhausted me. It takes too much effort. It's like owning a large powerboat. The work never stops.
Interesting, Andre, that you'd consider a Civic. They are nice small cars. I'm a Honda devotee, so biased, but what little research I've done has brought me to believe that the engineers at Honda have a bit more decision making power than at some other car companies.
But, for just a bit more, perhaps you could consider an Accord, which is really a major step up. If you get the base LX (maybe even with the manual? The manual on the new Accords is the best I've ever driven.) it's really a lot more car for not much more money.
Unfortunately I can't drive a manual transmission to save my life! I do like the Accord, though. One of my office mates briefly had an '08 LX sedan, and even though it was bottom-of-the-barrel for the Accord, it still seemed like a decent car. He wanted something nicer though, and after a few months traded it for an '09 EX V-6 that was probably just about fully loaded.
At this point though, I'm just toying with the idea of a new car, and my potential choices are probably going to be all over the map!
To fit with the topic of this thread, what used luxury cars would you idly consider? And by the way, have you gotten the news on the Intrepid? And do you remember the old Star Trek episode that has a Vulcan ship called the Intrepid?
Had just about this exact model as a rental car about 5 years ago. *Huge* trunk, and lots of room. Nice stereo. Good power. Nice mpg. This could have a lot of good life in it for someone like Andre....
Most "real" luxury car owners would probably groan at that 2004 Park Ave, especially the interior. But I don't mind it. The Park Ave is one car I've always liked, mainly because it's roomy, comfy, and I like the styling of it. Those alloy wheels, with their little triangular openings, remind me a bit of the hubcaps on a 2008 Grand Marquis that's for sale near me, but they look SOOO much better as a true wheel, rather than a cheap plastic hubcap dipped in shiny chrome wanna-be slop that you know is probably going to peel off after a couple years!
That champagne/gold color isn't my first choice, but I think that car wears it well.
Exactly...that is probably a nice comfortable car and it might even hold up well, but it's not a real luxury car, especially not with that cut-rate parts-bin dash and switchgear. Same radio that was in every GM product then from a Cadavalier to a Yukon, too.
Also telling that it doesn't cost much more than a similar year Camcord.
but it's not a real luxury car, especially not with that cut-rate parts-bin dash and switchgear. Same radio that was in every GM product then from a Cadavalier to a Yukon, too.
It's a shame that GM doesn't let good parts trickle down to the cheaper cars, rather than let the cheap parts "trickle up" to the more expensive ones.
I remember years ago, some plastic clip that held the power window switches in place broke on my grandmother's '85 LeSabre, causing all four of them to fall into the armrest. I found a '69 or '70 Cadillac Sedan DeVille in the junkyard, and it was the same part! Well, except that it was metal on the old Caddy!
Now that I think about it, that LeSabre had the same radio as my buddy's '85 Cavalier, although at the time, I thought it was a nice looking unit, and actually dressed up the Cav.
I remember the radio and switchgear on the Ciera we had when I was a kid were used in virtually everything, too. People notice these things.
I will say GM is good for finally moving on from plastic-chrome. A co-worker of mine inherited a lowish miles 94 LeSabre, always garaged/covered, paint and upholstery held up very well, but the plastic chrome slathered around the interior has faded away irregularly in many places. Doesn't give a quality impression (along with the playskool plastics).
"... but it's not a real luxury car, especially not with that cut-rate parts-bin dash and switchgear..."
Couldn't the same be said of a Cadillac, then? I really don't know the answer to this question, but If it's yes, is the Cadillac also not a luxury car?
The point I'm trying to make is that maybe we're being a little hard on GM. The Park Avenue is entirely another class of car from, say, the Cavalier or G6, even though it may share some switchgear.
"Also telling that it doesn't cost much more than a similar year Camcord."
True, but we recently agreed that there isn't much price difference between a late model used Accord and C-Class.
I think the old DTS/Deville used a lot of parts bin stuff, but IMO it was aimed more at fleets than actual consumers or having any genuine intention of improving brand equity. I like to think, or hope, that the modern cars (CTS, STS) have at least tried to hide the recycle bin materials. Perhaps such cars make a distinction between lux and comfort...IMO lux requires a quality of materials not seen on most period GM cars.
I suspect MSRP on a nicely equipped 04 Park Avenue was significantly more than MSRP on a normal 04 C230, and of course was much more than a Camcord. It has actually fallen harder than a Euro with the high running costs well known.
I think the old DTS/Deville used a lot of parts bin stuff, but IMO it was aimed more at fleets than actual consumers or having any genuine intention of improving brand equity.
I can't remember now what the interior of the older style DeVille/DTS used, but I've seen Lemko's '07 model a few times...plus the ones at the auto shows. They've definitely come a long way with the latest restyle.
As for the old Park Ave, I think a fully-loaded 2004 Ultra, with the supercharged engine, could top out around $40,000. I remember Edmund's doing a review on one. They said that the car should be de-contented a bit, have the price reduced to about $25,000, and re-badge it as a Chevy Caprice. I think they started around $30K back then.
I remember a couple of your previous messages, and what you say resonates with me.
I don't know where you live, but while one can live without A/C in the DC area, it's mighty nice to have, and really unpleasant without it for four months a year.
Yes, turning a wrench definitely helps control expenses, but I know my limitations.
I've kept my 325 because I like the car and how it drives, and the fact that you don't see an E30 at every intersection anymore. These are emotional reasons that are hard to assign a dollar value to, Why have you kept yours?
The previous Deville/DTS dash had that droopy unhappy early 2000s GM corporate look, with bargain basement materials too. I agree, the current style really cleaned it up inside and out. Shame that GM was a day late once again.
I wonder what the ebay linked car from a few posts back would have cost...mid 30s anyway.
Yes, it's tough to say that the Park Ave is a true luxury car. I remember that rental car pretty well, and my 2008 Accord EX-L with Navi puts it to shame in terms of the quality of the interior, the handling, etc., etc. And probably no one thinks an Accord EXL is a luxury car...Although I have to say if you put it head to head against some luxury cars from a dozen years ago or so, it might equal them in some areas, but would certainly fall behind in others.
"...being a BMW, I imagine a lot of those components are more expensive to replace than if something equivalent fails on one of My New Yorkers."
Maybe they're more expensive, but not by as much as one might think. Although I can't cite any empirical evidence, I think what's happened is that parts in general have become more expensive relative to the price of new cars. Maybe, in an effort to keep new car prices low, manufacturers, including the domestic ones, and suppliers have increased their margins on parts.
"I guess the important thing is, do you still like the car, and enjoy having it?..."
Excellent question, and it's the reason I've hung on to it.
"Other than the power window, does the car have any other issues that could be a concern in the near future?"
No issues that I currently know of, but, then, I had little advance notice on the past issues I mentioned in my original message on this matter. I guess when a car gets over a certain age you can expect a host of things to go wrong. Actually, the six cylinder E30 may be the lowest maintenance BMW one can buy, but BMWs tend to be high maintenance. I guess one way to keep maintenance low would be to drive it no more than 3,000 miles per year, but I'd just as soon get rid of it than drive it that little. I only drive it about 5,000 miles per year, but that's because I have a couple of other cars to drive, and we drive a total of about 18,000 miles per year.
Regarding your Intrepid, I'd be surprised if it were something other than a bad oil pressure reading, for the very reason your mechanic mentioned. You may as well keep the Intrepid, since it's in good condition, you like it, it's pretty fully depreciated and you fully appreciate it (sorry for the bad play on words),
In this day and age I always regard the term "luxury car" as an over the top, dominating, awesome piece of work. A BMW 3 series is not in this class, nor a Buick of any kind, nor an Acura. They are splendid cars, but far too ordinary and hardly "over the top".
If it doesn't DRIP wealth, it can't really be luxury.
The Escalade probably is the only real over the top super poofy, gadget-ridden, money-eating model to fit my personal standards of 2009 'luxury'.
Cadillac doesn't quite have a car to compete with Lexus' 460. They are duelling more with the Lexus 350.
Part of the problem could be overcome here if Cadillac would custom-build, like Porsche does. That way, if you wanted to upgrade materials and paint you could do it.
Don't get me wrong, I'd be perfectly happy with a CTS-V but I'd match it more to a BMW 5 series.
I think the 1970's might have helped muddle up what defined a luxury car, at least on the domestic front. Cadillac had some incredible sales in some of those years. I think 1974 was their worst year in the '70's, yet they still managed to move about 240,000 units. In 1977 I think they moved around 350,000 units, and by 1979 they churned out around 375,000 or more, actually ahead of Plymouth, and just barely behind Dodge.
For all the whining about how bad times were back then, there must have been an awful lot of disposable income getting thrown around, if Cadillac managed to move that many cars. My 1979 5th Ave, which is about as expensive as a Chrysler could get that year, stickered for around $12,000. And that's with the frivolous $1500 5th Ave designer package. Yet the cheapest Cadillac that year was the Sedan DeVille, at around $11,700. And even though Cadillacs tend to be well-equipped, a lot of stuff was still optional in those days, such as a split seat, cruise control, etc.
And I'd consider $11,000-12000, in those days, to definitely be in luxury car territory, although maybe it really wasn't.?
Also, in the 1970's, you had a lot of smaller cars getting fluffed up to levels never before seen. I think the Granada is probably considered the poster child for this, but I always thought they were kinda tacky. But one car I'm thinking of is the overlooked Dodge Dart S/E, which came out a year before the Granada, along with its sibling Valiant Brougham. These cars had enough velour, shag, and over-stuffed vinyl that any Cadillac, Lincoln, or Imperial would be proud to wear. All of a sudden that faux luxury was everywhere, and I guess it diluted the real thing.
Ironically enough, the cars we think of as luxury cars today, like BMW and Mercedes, were comparatively stark in those days. I'd imagine a lot of people accustomed to the domestic idea of luxury equated that starkness with cheap.
Escalade? Yuck. I see your point, but maybe that would be an example of what's wrong with the American idea of luxury...
So other cars-- like Acuras and the rest of the Caddys, etc.-- are in the category below, which is called "near luxury," or something like that? There are still relatively few people who can go in to a car dealership today and walk out with a brand new Acura TL, Lexus 350, BMW 5 series, CTS, or whatever. To me, and maybe I'm just off base, those are all luxury cars. But I guess I'm just lost in the categories.
I'd say "super luxury," if such a thing exists, would be Rolls Royce, Lamborghini, etc.
On Andre's point, it's interesting that the Seville was so expensive compared to the Chrysler. I was a 12 year old subscriber to Motor Trend when the Seville was brand new, and I remember when it was on the cover of MT a few months before it came out, in c. 1975. They were touting it, if I recall correctly, as a new almost European style caddy, with a more rational size and better handling. That was true up to a point, I guess.
We had family friends who had BMWs and MBs in the early 70s. Even though, as you say, those cars were rather stark, the owners brimmed with pride at the quality engineering they had. I remember one guy telling me that the Mercedes was the best engineered car in the world, back in c. 1974, or something. I got the dream then, never to be fulfilled, of having a car with vanity plates that said "BENS BNZ." Those owners felt that American cars were gaudy junk in comparison. But as you say, someone moving from a 75 Caddy to a 75 BMW would probably feel that it was a very somber and sober and rather tough on the bum experience in comparison.
I think Cadillac sold a lot of cars in the 70s because there wasn't too much competition. Mercedes was not big-time then, and BMW only had the funky Bavaria, and Audi only the puny 100LS, and of course Lexus wasn't born yet.
The turning point was when the Germans started calling their cars "machines". That put the twinkle in everyone's eye. You couldn't call a 1980 Cadillac a machine without getting a few giggles.
Luxury in other words became associated with something 'fine', precise, high quality. It wasn't about rolling sofas anymore.
I understand your point, but mainstream luxury can still be pretty darn nice... Used to be, a family car never had leather seats. Now, it's quite common to have heated leather seats and possibly an integrated nav system. Of course, the average price of a new car has gone up accordingly.
I understand your point, but mainstream luxury can still be pretty darn nice... Used to be, a family car never had leather seats. Now, it's quite common to have heated leather seats and possibly an integrated nav system. Of course, the average price of a new car has gone up accordingly.
I don't know...the '93 Accord EX transaction price was 16.5k...the 2007 Accord EX transaction price was 19k. I wonder what inflation was over that 15 year period.
Hi Everybody, I'm a new user of this forum. I enter many forum but they burn to me... I dont know why ??? Our company selling used car from singapore for exporting.....
Hi and welcome. I'm sorry but we don't permit any business dealings in these forums, You might try www.craigslist.org or othe internet forums that allow advertising. This is a place to talk about cars for fun and information. We are a moderated forum so any advertising will be deleted immediately. thank you,
I don't know...the '93 Accord EX transaction price was 16.5k...the 2007 Accord EX transaction price was 19k. I wonder what inflation was over that 15 year period.
If anything, I'd say cars are more affordable these days, once you factor in all the standard equipment, improvements in technology, etc. For instance, I plugged the $12,000 that my '79 5th Ave stickered for, and in 2008 numbers, it comes out to about $35,000. Yet nowadays, I think a Chrysler 300C stickers for around $37K. And comes with a 345 CID Hemi and 5-speed automatic, versus the 360 CID wedge and 3-speed automatic in my '79. Plus ABS, air bags, a better sound system (but no 8-track!), better wheels and tires, a power seat that most likely has more adjustments, power mirrors (my '79 has remote mirrors but they aren't power), and probably a whole slew of other goodies that I'm forgetting right now.
Now at that $37K, a sunroof would still be optional, at about $950. However, I can't remember if you could even get a sunroof in a 1979 New Yorker! And if you could, it was probably around $1000, even back then. Also, Nav would still be optional at $37K, but Nav back in 1979 was supplied by Rand McNally or a back seat driver!
Also, a $37K 300C is not the top of the line. There's the SRT8, which has the monstrous 6.1 Hemi. And there's an extended wheelbase model that gives you a limousine-like back seat, along with extremely awkward proportions. It's available with the 3.5 or the Hemi. And there's an AWD model. If you wanted an extended wheelbase 1979 New Yorker, you had to have one custom built...although Chrysler did build a few prototypes that ended up being used by swanky hotels.
In theory at least, cars are a bargain today. The only problem though, is that I think our disposable income has also gone down! Either that, or we just find too many other things to blow money on, so cars still just seem expensive!
No, you're right. Adjusted for inflation, the average's persons income has gone down but their debt has gone up---so what seems like prosperity is more like the spending habits of drunken sailors. :P Leasing has also put people into cars they really couldn't afford otherwise. People's appetite for luxury options these days often exceeds their actual ability to pay for them.
True. There are a lot of late-model BMWs, Mercedes, and Lexi parked in lots adjacent to run-down apartment buildings in marginal Lower NE Philly neighborhoods. Just the other day, I saw a dude in a newish BMW 7-Series who looked like he'd be grubbing through the sofa cushions for change to pay for his lunch. Sad thing is, a lot of these fine cars start looking like worn-out junk as their owners defer maintenance and repairs until the cars look like forlorn relics. It's one thing to buy a luxury car. It's quite another to keep up with it.
" There are a lot of late-model BMWs, Mercedes, and Lexi parked in lots adjacent to run-down apartment buildings in marginal Lower NE Philly neighborhoods"
Not so many years ago those would have been Cadillacs. When they stopped being the car of choice for the run-down apartment demographic, that's when I knew Caddy was in trouble. When well-used CTS's start showing up there, then Caddy will be on their way back to glory.
I think of Audi A-8, 7 Series, S Series Merc, LS460 Lexus when luxury comes to mind. Acura lost it and Ininiti M could still be called luxury. Just MHO.
Comments
There have been two 06 E55s for sale lately in my area, one listed at 36K, the other is still for sale at 35K. Both cars are not low mileage, but not too extreme, around 40K miles. The pricer one was loaded and would have stickered for around 100K new, and the lesser one was probably in the low 90s. That's a lot of money, and a big difference for cars that shouldn't be worn out, and are still under warranty. I have seen nicely equipped 07 S-class that can be had for around 50K, original sticker would have been around 100K. Money evaporated. The loaded Designo 04 I mentioned would have stickered over 100K, and at 30K miles shouldn't go much over 30K now. Expensive miles.
I suspect now an 06 C-class doesn't cost much more than an 06 Accord, maybe a couple grand difference. The used market determines just that, utility, which is why the AMG/M etc premiums really vanish over time. It's not bad if the car itself can be reliable - but the buyer of any of these cars has to be prepared for it not to have a Civic maintenance schedule nor frequency of glitches.
Yup, my point exactly. For that difference, I'd prefer a C-Class and live with the additional maintenance and repair costs over the Accord, because the C-Class drives as well as ages better.
I couldn't justify dumping my 02 for something like this. It's worth less than half this asking price on the private market, and it is pretty sorted out now. I also averaged a sound 24mpg on highway portions of my little weekend road trip - the supercharged cars can't pull that off.
One thing that is irking me about the car is paint quality. The paint shine and finish is excellent, but it is very prone to small chips, especially on the front bumper. I almost want to think that's been repainted, but I can't imagine. It drives me nuts sometimes...about a month ago I had a chip repair guy come and touch it up. It looked fine afterwards, but I fear that is temporary. I know MB has had some inconsistent quality in this regard, especially in 00-02. I recently saw an 07 SL that was kinda chipped up too.
The issue is what to do now. Although the car is fully depreciated, from a financial standpoint is it time to cut my losses? I'm weighing whether it would it be cheaper, over the next four years, to buy something like a new Civic, or a three year old 3-Series or C-Class. I should mention that although this is an extra car I'd probably replace it rather than just reitre it.
Main expenses have been suspension components (both control arms, tie rod ends) for around $1000, timing belt & water pump (~600), exhaust system including the cat (~750 over the 10 years), steering rack, rear shocks, brake pads & rotors. I have done most of the work on it myself, so expenses would have been higher had I taken it to a mechanic or dealer for everything.
My A/C has never really worked, but I can live with that. And, I'm still on the original clutch.
I bought the car for my son when he was a sophomore in college, and really had no intention of keeping it this long. So we put off a lot of work in those early years figuring the car was only going to be around for several years at most. I probably would have kept up on things more (re - more expenses) had I known I was going to re-inherit the car and would still be driving it at the 22 year old mark.
So yeah, older BMWs are probably going to be expensive to maintain and keep running. Even more so if you have to use the dealer for all of you repair and maintenance work. Being able to turn a wrench is a definite plus.
Regards,
OW
Considering the age of the car, that actually doesn't sound too bad, IMO. A lot of that stuff is probably more related to old age than the car automatically being high-maintenance. Although being a BMW, I imagine a lot of those components are more expensive to replace than if something equivalent fails on one of My New Yorkers.
I guess the important thing is, do you still like the car, and enjoy having it? Or are you getting tired of it and just in the mood for something different? If I have a car that I really like, I'm more willing to throw money into it than if I'm just getting bored with it and in the mood for something different. Other than the power window, does the car have any other issues that could be a concern in the near future?
I'm weighing whether it would it be cheaper, over the next four years, to buy something like a new Civic
I know this is so not my style, but I've actually thought about a new(er) Civic, myself! My reasoning is partly because I find the car easy on the eye, and partly because it's one of the few small cars I actually feel somewhat comfortable in. I think its wheelbase is around 106" though, so I guess that's not exactly "small" these days! My first car, a 1980 Malibu, only had a 108.1" wheelbase! And it had plenty of room inside. I'd probably have to drive a Civic long-term though, to find out if I really could live with it, day in and day out. I wonder if rental fleets still stock Civics? Maybe I could rent one for a couple days and drive it around and really get a feel for it.
My Intrepid is going to the mechanic today, so he can check the oil pressure. The idiot light comes on every once in awhile, glowing very faintly. But the oil level is full, and the engine has never made any nasty sounds. Plus, I've driven it to Baltimore and back, twice.
Anyway, depending on how it plays out there may be a new(er) car in my future...and sooner than I had hoped!
The 80s 3 series 325s are the best of the bunch, so you made a good choice in that sense, but really for the amount of money one pays for these cars (very little), you can't expect trouble-free service.
If you need a dead reliable daily driver, a 25 year old German car is not going to cut it. It will be "okay", and certainly better than a 50s classic, but still, you have to be realistic. Do you want a daily driver or a hobby car? You can't really have both in one automobile.
Yes, I have nursed old cars across deserts and mountains, and driven them as daily drivers with a high degree of reliability (many times I've gotten away with this), but the level of attention and maintenance to accomplish that pretty much exhausted me. It takes too much effort. It's like owning a large powerboat. The work never stops.
But, for just a bit more, perhaps you could consider an Accord, which is really a major step up. If you get the base LX (maybe even with the manual? The manual on the new Accords is the best I've ever driven.) it's really a lot more car for not much more money.
At this point though, I'm just toying with the idea of a new car, and my potential choices are probably going to be all over the map!
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2004-BUICK-PARK-AVENUE-4DR-SDN-LOW-MILES-NON-SMOK- ER_W0QQitemZ400049177689QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUS_Cars_Trucks?hash=item5d24ca0459&_t- rksid=p4506.c0.m245&_trkparms=65%3A-2|39%3A1|240%3A1308
That champagne/gold color isn't my first choice, but I think that car wears it well.
Also telling that it doesn't cost much more than a similar year Camcord.
It's a shame that GM doesn't let good parts trickle down to the cheaper cars, rather than let the cheap parts "trickle up" to the more expensive ones.
I remember years ago, some plastic clip that held the power window switches in place broke on my grandmother's '85 LeSabre, causing all four of them to fall into the armrest. I found a '69 or '70 Cadillac Sedan DeVille in the junkyard, and it was the same part! Well, except that it was metal on the old Caddy!
Now that I think about it, that LeSabre had the same radio as my buddy's '85 Cavalier, although at the time, I thought it was a nice looking unit, and actually dressed up the Cav.
I will say GM is good for finally moving on from plastic-chrome. A co-worker of mine inherited a lowish miles 94 LeSabre, always garaged/covered, paint and upholstery held up very well, but the plastic chrome slathered around the interior has faded away irregularly in many places. Doesn't give a quality impression (along with the playskool plastics).
Couldn't the same be said of a Cadillac, then? I really don't know the answer to this question, but If it's yes, is the Cadillac also not a luxury car?
The point I'm trying to make is that maybe we're being a little hard on GM. The Park Avenue is entirely another class of car from, say, the Cavalier or G6, even though it may share some switchgear.
"Also telling that it doesn't cost much more than a similar year Camcord."
True, but we recently agreed that there isn't much price difference between a late model used Accord and C-Class.
I suspect MSRP on a nicely equipped 04 Park Avenue was significantly more than MSRP on a normal 04 C230, and of course was much more than a Camcord. It has actually fallen harder than a Euro with the high running costs well known.
I can't remember now what the interior of the older style DeVille/DTS used, but I've seen Lemko's '07 model a few times...plus the ones at the auto shows. They've definitely come a long way with the latest restyle.
As for the old Park Ave, I think a fully-loaded 2004 Ultra, with the supercharged engine, could top out around $40,000. I remember Edmund's doing a review on one. They said that the car should be de-contented a bit, have the price reduced to about $25,000, and re-badge it as a Chevy Caprice. I think they started around $30K back then.
I don't know where you live, but while one can live without A/C in the DC area, it's mighty nice to have, and really unpleasant without it for four months a year.
Yes, turning a wrench definitely helps control expenses, but I know my limitations.
I've kept my 325 because I like the car and how it drives, and the fact that you don't see an E30 at every intersection anymore. These are emotional reasons that are hard to assign a dollar value to, Why have you kept yours?
I wonder what the ebay linked car from a few posts back would have cost...mid 30s anyway.
Maybe they're more expensive, but not by as much as one might think. Although I can't cite any empirical evidence, I think what's happened is that parts in general have become more expensive relative to the price of new cars. Maybe, in an effort to keep new car prices low, manufacturers, including the domestic ones, and suppliers have increased their margins on parts.
"I guess the important thing is, do you still like the car, and enjoy having it?..."
Excellent question, and it's the reason I've hung on to it.
"Other than the power window, does the car have any other issues that could be a concern in the near future?"
No issues that I currently know of, but, then, I had little advance notice on the past issues I mentioned in my original message on this matter. I guess when a car gets over a certain age you can expect a host of things to go wrong. Actually, the six cylinder E30 may be the lowest maintenance BMW one can buy, but BMWs tend to be high maintenance. I guess one way to keep maintenance low would be to drive it no more than 3,000 miles per year, but I'd just as soon get rid of it than drive it that little. I only drive it about 5,000 miles per year, but that's because I have a couple of other cars to drive, and we drive a total of about 18,000 miles per year.
Regarding your Intrepid, I'd be surprised if it were something other than a bad oil pressure reading, for the very reason your mechanic mentioned. You may as well keep the Intrepid, since it's in good condition, you like it, it's pretty fully depreciated and you fully appreciate it (sorry for the bad play on words),
I'm certain I could teach you to drive one well in a short time.
If it doesn't DRIP wealth, it can't really be luxury.
Luxury for everyone is luxury for no one.
Cadillac doesn't quite have a car to compete with Lexus' 460. They are duelling more with the Lexus 350.
Part of the problem could be overcome here if Cadillac would custom-build, like Porsche does. That way, if you wanted to upgrade materials and paint you could do it.
Don't get me wrong, I'd be perfectly happy with a CTS-V but I'd match it more to a BMW 5 series.
For all the whining about how bad times were back then, there must have been an awful lot of disposable income getting thrown around, if Cadillac managed to move that many cars. My 1979 5th Ave, which is about as expensive as a Chrysler could get that year, stickered for around $12,000. And that's with the frivolous $1500 5th Ave designer package. Yet the cheapest Cadillac that year was the Sedan DeVille, at around $11,700. And even though Cadillacs tend to be well-equipped, a lot of stuff was still optional in those days, such as a split seat, cruise control, etc.
And I'd consider $11,000-12000, in those days, to definitely be in luxury car territory, although maybe it really wasn't.?
Also, in the 1970's, you had a lot of smaller cars getting fluffed up to levels never before seen. I think the Granada is probably considered the poster child for this, but I always thought they were kinda tacky. But one car I'm thinking of is the overlooked Dodge Dart S/E, which came out a year before the Granada, along with its sibling Valiant Brougham. These cars had enough velour, shag, and over-stuffed vinyl that any Cadillac, Lincoln, or Imperial would be proud to wear. All of a sudden that faux luxury was everywhere, and I guess it diluted the real thing.
Ironically enough, the cars we think of as luxury cars today, like BMW and Mercedes, were comparatively stark in those days. I'd imagine a lot of people accustomed to the domestic idea of luxury equated that starkness with cheap.
So other cars-- like Acuras and the rest of the Caddys, etc.-- are in the category below, which is called "near luxury," or something like that? There are still relatively few people who can go in to a car dealership today and walk out with a brand new Acura TL, Lexus 350, BMW 5 series, CTS, or whatever. To me, and maybe I'm just off base, those are all luxury cars. But I guess I'm just lost in the categories.
I'd say "super luxury," if such a thing exists, would be Rolls Royce, Lamborghini, etc.
On Andre's point, it's interesting that the Seville was so expensive compared to the Chrysler. I was a 12 year old subscriber to Motor Trend when the Seville was brand new, and I remember when it was on the cover of MT a few months before it came out, in c. 1975. They were touting it, if I recall correctly, as a new almost European style caddy, with a more rational size and better handling. That was true up to a point, I guess.
We had family friends who had BMWs and MBs in the early 70s. Even though, as you say, those cars were rather stark, the owners brimmed with pride at the quality engineering they had. I remember one guy telling me that the Mercedes was the best engineered car in the world, back in c. 1974, or something. I got the dream then, never to be fulfilled, of having a car with vanity plates that said "BENS BNZ." Those owners felt that American cars were gaudy junk in comparison. But as you say, someone moving from a 75 Caddy to a 75 BMW would probably feel that it was a very somber and sober and rather tough on the bum experience in comparison.
The turning point was when the Germans started calling their cars "machines". That put the twinkle in everyone's eye. You couldn't call a 1980 Cadillac a machine without getting a few giggles.
Luxury in other words became associated with something 'fine', precise, high quality. It wasn't about rolling sofas anymore.
I understand your point, but mainstream luxury can still be pretty darn nice... Used to be, a family car never had leather seats. Now, it's quite common to have heated leather seats and possibly an integrated nav system. Of course, the average price of a new car has gone up accordingly.
I'm so internet in used car.
How do u think ???? Used car good to buy or not ?????
I don't know...the '93 Accord EX transaction price was 16.5k...the 2007 Accord EX transaction price was 19k. I wonder what inflation was over that 15 year period.
I'm a new user of this forum.
I enter many forum but they burn to me...
I dont know why ???
Our company selling used car from singapore for exporting.....
MrShiftright
Host
If anything, I'd say cars are more affordable these days, once you factor in all the standard equipment, improvements in technology, etc. For instance, I plugged the $12,000 that my '79 5th Ave stickered for, and in 2008 numbers, it comes out to about $35,000. Yet nowadays, I think a Chrysler 300C stickers for around $37K. And comes with a 345 CID Hemi and 5-speed automatic, versus the 360 CID wedge and 3-speed automatic in my '79. Plus ABS, air bags, a better sound system (but no 8-track!), better wheels and tires, a power seat that most likely has more adjustments, power mirrors (my '79 has remote mirrors but they aren't power), and probably a whole slew of other goodies that I'm forgetting right now.
Now at that $37K, a sunroof would still be optional, at about $950. However, I can't remember if you could even get a sunroof in a 1979 New Yorker! And if you could, it was probably around $1000, even back then. Also, Nav would still be optional at $37K, but Nav back in 1979 was supplied by Rand McNally or a back seat driver!
Also, a $37K 300C is not the top of the line. There's the SRT8, which has the monstrous 6.1 Hemi. And there's an extended wheelbase model that gives you a limousine-like back seat, along with extremely awkward proportions. It's available with the 3.5 or the Hemi. And there's an AWD model. If you wanted an extended wheelbase 1979 New Yorker, you had to have one custom built...although Chrysler did build a few prototypes that ended up being used by swanky hotels.
In theory at least, cars are a bargain today. The only problem though, is that I think our disposable income has also gone down! Either that, or we just find too many other things to blow money on, so cars still just seem expensive!
It was very painful for me to push in the clutch to get home from skiing after breaking my Left ankle.
Not so many years ago those would have been Cadillacs. When they stopped being the car of choice for the run-down apartment demographic, that's when I knew Caddy was in trouble. When well-used CTS's start showing up there, then Caddy will be on their way back to glory.
All other Caddies save the V are not luxury.
Regards,
OW
Agree super luxury is now over $150K.
Regards,
OW
Regards,
OW