Thanks srfast, i got similar information. i contacted bmw of north america. They told me that bluetooth technology will be available in cars this fall, and current cars can be retrofitted. (she did not know the cost of that). Currently cpt9000 phones will work , however they don't seem to work with sprint service.
About the sound system, Logic 7 is lexicon technology that is owned by harman kardon, it is able to create surround sound simulation from 2 channel output. Sounds great. I went to the dealer and compared the two. At low listening levels, it is difficult to discern between the two, but as it gets louder, there is a clear difference with reverb and loss of clarity heard in the standard system. Since I like my music on the louder side, I think it may be worth the upgrade.
Pardon me for cross-posting, but there is little activity on the correct board for this question. If anyone has bought/leased a 2004 530 or 525 in Northern NJ/NYC recently, how far over dealer invoice was the selling price/capitalized cost?
I have been in the market for an M5 for a bit. Doing a little research, waiting to sell my 540i. I friend of mind suggested I drive the Audi S4. Comparing it to the M5 is a bit apples and pears, but I would take the S4 in a heart beat over the M3. The S4 has significantly more torque, is only slightly slower, comes in a 4 door, and is better appointed. Against the M5 is a different story. The S4 and the M5 weigh about the same, though the S4 is about the size of the M3 (the all wheel drive system on the S4 increases the weight significantly), but the M5 is a bigger and in some ways more confortable car. Then again the S4 has a more modern design and the all wheel drive handling (notwithstanding a 55-45 weight distribution) was fabulous. I think BMW needs to worry about Audi giving it a run for its money. There is also the Audi RS6, more comparable to the M5 size-wise, but then you are really talking big bucks. BTW, a new S4 costs about the same as a 2001 M5.
"Comparing it to the M5 is a bit apples and pears, but I would take the S4 in a heart beat over the M3."
But isn't that what compromises are all about? The M3 is a hard-edged near-luxury racer that has been called the best GT ever. The mission of the M5 and M3 are completely different, although they both have the same high-end and approx. the same 0-60. Just like the EVO/Sti all these cars go about their business in a unique fashion. It's up the buyer to decide on the qualities and qualifications of their purchase. Not to mention the new M5 Concept, which is out, if one can believe the hoopla is promising to set a new standard. But then so is Audi.
kdshapiro wrote: "But isn't that what compromises are all about? The M3 is a hard-edged near-luxury racer that has been called the best GT ever."
Well it depends what you want. If you do your driving on a race track, the M3 might be the way to go. But in regular driving I would take the torque of the S4 over the M3. Then there are the practical considerations like 4 doors. My sense is that the S4 meets more people's needs than the M3, though there is the issue that Audi tends to be less reliable than BMW.
Diver110 I drove the S4. Really liked it and am a big fan of AWD.
People usually think snow when considering AWD. Of course nothing compares to AWD in snow, not even close. But what I like equally is its ability in rain. I turn into a completely different driver in rain and can't stand that feeling of hydroplaning and the unpredictability of wet roads. AWD drive cars are supremely more confident here.
That said, I'd give up the bad-weather utility of AWD and still take the M5 feels more connected to the road and corners in my opinion (although AWD has much better traction in corners). Then, any sport-driving time lost due to inclement weather would be compensated with the absence-makes-the-heart-grow-fonder deal. Think of how much better that sun feels after two straight weeks of rain. Yep, these southern Cal people just don't KNOW what they're missing with our abstinence-laden NE winters!
Help! I am currently looking to purchase my first BMW and found a smoking deal on the above mentioned car. It runs and looks great. I am however nervous about it becoming a money pit. Anything in particular I should be looking for?
Also, what would a responable offer for this vehicle be?
Ummm, I think that the 240K miles is enough smoke out of that exhaust pipe. ;-) Not that it won't be able to make many more, however, that's a lot of miles and that usually translates to lots of maintenance, on ANY car. Unless the car was something like say, $5,000, I'd be inclined to pass.
I'm with Shipo; that 5er wouldn't be a bad choice if you are a competent DIY guy AND the price is around $5K. I'm sure you could find a nice 1997 528i with <100K miles for under $12K.
I've never driven AWD, but I'm having a hard time understanding how AWD is better in rain, particularly in hydroplaning conditions. Isn't that purely a tire factor and not related to how those tires are driven?
I can't see how it can be purely a tire factor when there are traction dynamics working with an infinite variety of physical conditions.
There are lots of opinions floating around with regard to AWD and hydroplaning. I certainly can't find anything that is definitive and scientific. So I'm left with my own empirical observations. I could go into detail about what I think is happening in a variety of situations but this would go on forever. Bottom line is that I find much more control on wet roads with the Subaru and others report the same with AWD cars.
When testing a car with AWD it is next to impossible to get a real feel for its capabilities in rain. However, what I can suggest for a test drive is this. When it's wet out, find a spot that has a turn into a fairly steep hill. From a stop, take a RWD car and accelerate aggressively, but not overly-aggressively into the turn and hill. Your rear wheels will be spinning and fishtailing. Then take the AWD drive test car to the same spot, do the same and notice the difference. (Ideally, the comparison should be between cars with similar torque, weight, and the same tires.)
By the way, hydroplaning with cars is defined as a tire losing complete contact with the road and riding the water. Let's not forget that on wet roads there are many types of situations that can provide infinite degrees of decreasing contact pressure until a tire or tires hydroplane. I would also qualify this as hydroplaning or at least undergoing the hydroplaning effect, or approaching hydroplaning.
If I remember correctly, the annual price increase of an existing BMW model is typically less than the inflation rate. For example, I think the price increase on my 2002 540i was a few hundred dollars more than the 2001 540i. Anyone remember the base price of the 540i for MY 1997? Curious to see the percentage increase from 1997 - 2003 for the E39.
As a side note...I was next to a 2004 Lincoln Aviator (remember...a midsize SUV) with the sticker still attached and MSRP was a whopping $54K. I was shocked. I am not trying to degrade the Aviator, but $54K+ for a midsize Lincoln?!?!
you need to remember is that BMW's typically go for a price somewhere between invoice and sticker, while many (if not most) Lincolns go for less than invoice, often many thousands less.
I'm not sure why they do it, but they do. Town Cars and LS's that go for $10K off sticker are not all that uncommon. I'm not so sure about the trucks, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were similar. I guess it helps maintain an artificial "exclusive" image to those who don't pay much attention.
I have a 540it now and decided that is too pedestrian, so I plan to upgrade. As I mentioned in prior posts, I have thought about the M5 or even Audi S4, but I might just go with a newer 540i with a sport's package. I am not entirely clear on what the sports package includes, tighter suspension and performance tires? How much of it is in the tires? Would it make more sense to get it without the sports package (harder to find) or do an after market upgrade (possibly better parts?). Thanks.
As an aside, when I bought my 540it I got a good deal on it. One of the reasons I bought is was I thought I could easily get my money out of it. But while I did get a good deal, the combination of going out of warranty and perhaps the new BMW model means the car dropped around 25-30% in value in a year (but only around 10-15% from what I paid, $30,500 for a 2000 with under 30,000 miles on purchase 10 months ago).
stl540... When looking at price changes over time you have to take into account at least three factors:
1. Any changes in standard/optional equipment. Over time, most cars, including E39 5 Series, added standard equipment.
2. Changes in per unit production costs based on amortization/depreciation of plant & equipment and development costs, as well as changes to per unit production over time as they "learn" how to build the car for less and get better deals from suppliers. The per unit production cost of E39 5 Series declined throughout the production run. The initial cars are the most expensive for the company to manufacturer. Per unit costs fall over time.
3. Exchange rate changes: When the E39 was introduced in CY1996 as a MY1997, Germany still used Deutsche Mark (though the EU was going thru an adjustment period prior to the Euro's introduction). During the E39 production run, the DM went away and was replaced by the Euro. The Euro started out at about 1 Euro=$1.17. Euro fell to about $.88. In past 2 years it has risen 50%, so it is now closer to $1.25.
diver110... Are you talking 540i6 or 540ia? The 540i6 essentially came standard with the Sport Pkg. The contents of the Sport Pkg changed over time.
The 540ia Sport added the numerically higher (3.15:1) final drive. This improved acceleration compared to the other automatics (with the 2.82:1 final drive) but also reduced fuel economy. The 540ia Sport suffered from gas guzzler tax like the 540i6.
A big plus for Sport Pkg is the Sport Seats! Sometimes owners opted for the optional Comfort Seats. Sport Pkg cars come with bigger, high performance (summer/3-season) tires and revised suspension components.
Regardless of car, any 5 Series will benefit from the Sport Pkg. Only way to go!
Out of curiosity, everything else being equal, would all-wheel drive handle better than rear wheel? If so, why haven't more companies gone to it? Expense.
I think it's a matter of demand. Yet Audi and Subaru are convinced.
One of these days I expect AWD to get a lot of PR. When this happens it should take off. It's safer and has better performance for every day driving.
The only hit against it is a marginal difference in acceleration and extra weight. I point to the slightly lower acceleration time between the Porsches C2 and C4S. Yet the AWD C4S is very desirable among enthusiasts and has the highest resale value among Porsches and every car on the face of the earth.
I expect to see more AWD sedans in the future. Aside from the all-weather advantages, cornering under power with AWD is unbeatable. I don't think BMW has hitchhiked onto it because it doesn't fit their techie agenda and they have their irons in too many fires as it is. Glad to see MB and others option it.
I respectfully disagree somewhat with designman. I believe a front engine, RWD car will perform (i.e. handle at the extreme) better than AWD on dry, smooth pavement. In wet or worse conditions, AWD has an advantage. And in the rear engine set-up of the 911, AWD helps to balance out the weight distribution.
I seriously doubt the overweight S4 would surpass the RWD M3 in handling on a dry track.
Just my opinion, but formed from discussions with others that have far more engineering expertise than me.
It's all speculative, but my dealer contact who seems to have good information in advance of everyone else has given me an estimate of $75-80k. The M6 would be in the $85-90k. His response to $100k for the M5 is not printable.
For what it's worth, he noted there has never been an "M" model that has sold for more than a $15-20k premium over the non-M version. In the case of the M3, it's more like $10-12k comparably equiped.
He further suggested that if BMW intends to go for the over $100k market, it will be with another "unique" M model like the former M1 or not as well received Z8, NOT with an M5 or M6.
No guarantee of accuracy here, but back a few years ago he had estimated the price of the M3 before it was officially set by BMW within $500 and he more recently estimated the price of the M6 within $1,000 ($69,000) when others were suggesting upwards of $85,000.
Unfortunately, MSRP is not the upper limit on the price a buyer can pay for a rare or hot car! Dealers can charge what they want and get what buyers are willing to pay.
FWIW, I test drove the Audi S4. I thought is was a good car and handled well. I liked it better than the Mercedes 32 AMG or the M3 (latter had too little torque for my tastes), but I would still take my 540i over any of them in terms of handling (on dry pavement). What I don't know is if that is because RWD works better or BMW just makes a higher quality car, and if they made AWD it would be better still.
I just received an E-Mail from BMW North America titled, "Redefine high performance" that starts off with two paragraphs. The first paragraph sings the praises of the V8 that powers the 745i and the 545i, and the second paragraph extols the virtues of the two I6 engines found in the 3-Series and 5-Series cars. So far so good, however, right below the second paragraph is a picture of a 530i at speed. What's wrong with that? It's an E39 vintage 530i not an E60. What's up with that?
The latest R&T has pics of the new 4 series - looks really sharp with no "Bangle Bump" on the trunk. R&T also say that the 7 series re-design with a revised trunk will go into production by year-end.
If all goes according to Hoyle, that would put production of the 5 series re-design around mid '06.
FWIW, my hometown BMW dealer will be happy to take a deposit on an M5 or M6 at MSRP, not a penny more. They have never charged a premium for any car, they only require that the buyer take title and not assign the contract. They are a small dealership, so the wait can be hit or miss, but they did get 6 M5's in 2002, 3 in 2003 and were willing to sell me a new 2003 M3 convertible for $1,500 over invoice this past winter. Eventually they will get my money on something.
Hmmm, to my eye that thing is even uglier than a new E60 5-Series. Ugh, next!
Maybe I'm just too conservative (at least where cars are concerned) but other than the folks that styled the W211 E-Class, it seems to me that ALL of the designers of ALL of the new cars in the Sport/Lux Sedan market are trying way too hard and, as a result, missing the mark by a very wide margin.
Sorryyyyy...... it doesn't grab me at all and make me feel like I have to have it. I am so glad that I have my 530I E39 and that I'll hold on to it for a few more years. There's a neighbor of mine that has had for 3 years a beautiful Audi A6 with a nice dark color. This morning as I drove by I noticed a brand new E60 in black. My first thought was ... shoulda kept the Audi.. a much better looking car !
How is that Black Sapphire Metallic to keep up on? I know you're a busy guy, so if you were to let the car go unwashed for say 2 or 3 weeks, how bad does it look? Is it easier to keep clean than say a Jet Black car?
2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2022 Wrangler Sahara 4Xe, 2023 Toyota Tacoma SR 4WD
The only vehicle uglier than the new 5 is the Pontiac Aztek. Azteks are so ugly that every time I see one I want to shoot it to put it out of it's misery.
If you like BMWs current styling I would assume you are a person that doesn't like dull designs. The CTS has some issues that I feel need refining, but it is a distinctive and attractive car. I especially like the front and profile views. I have a hard time that 5 series fans cant appreciate the CTS' avant-garde styling. The CTS is definitely no worse than the 5 or 7 series.
The STS appears to be an improvement and much better looking than the 545, especially on the inside. It looks like a luxury car on the inside, as opposed to a cockpit. The 21st century ultra modern furniture look of the 5 series doesn't look to inviting in my book. As for the outside of the current 5, I don't think we need to beat that dead horse any further. Without the big rims the new 5 is an odd looking car to say the least.
Whatever the haters may say, Cadillac and BMW are stepping to the forefront of luxury design, for better or worse.
I have read a few postings on the noise the ContiSport Contact tires produce and unfortunately I am now joining those ranks. Please help! I have 25K miles on them (original tires) I drive a 2003 530i w/Sport, PP, CWP and can't believe the noise these things make. Are my tires out of balance (without hitting any real potholes this winter) or am I now just "one in the ranks"???
Just a quick post to provide a little balance to the E60 bashing that goes on in here. I love the E60's design, inside and out. It's sexy, bold, exciting and one hell of a chick magnet (although I will admit to being devastatingly handsome ... so it may be unfair to attribute all of that to the car). I never cared for the E39's "I-wanna-be-a-jet-pilot" cockpit interior...and the exterior was boring at best (can you say "Honda?"). Kudos to Bangle and his bad boyz.
billbrox... Don't think it is tied to any one particular tire make or model. My '98 540i6 did same with Yokohama AVS.
Tire wear issue is tied mainly to design of suspension. Camber/castor issues. BMW has a pretty aggressive suspension set up. Hard on tires.
Always make sure your car is properly aligned. You might do a 4-wheel alignment every 10-15K. But even then the tires, esp. the rears, tend to wear more on the inside.
Actually, I think that BMW disagrees with you. See my post on the new 4 and the 7 re-design. A re-design of the 5 won't be too far behind as it will be the only BMW with a Bangle Bump trunk once the new 7 goes into production.
BTW the only reason you can compare a Honda with a BMW is because Honda copied the BMW cues. The most sincere form of flattery.......
To me, the STS looks unfinished as if the guy with the chisel went out for coffee and forgot to come back.
As far as tires go, I have been pleased enough with the Pilot Primacy (on my 530i with sport) to have ordered a new set for the front. The rears have just 1000 miles. I got some noise from the originals at about 27K, but it was not annoying. With about 30K on all four, it was time for a new set. I figure I got my money's worth.
Comments
Bluetooth cannot coexist with the BMW Assist system on current production cars, but will be supported on 09/2004 and later built cars.
Hope this helps....JL
i got similar information. i contacted bmw of north america. They told me that bluetooth technology will be available in cars this fall, and current cars can be retrofitted. (she did not know the cost of that). Currently cpt9000 phones will work , however they don't seem to work with sprint service.
About the sound system, Logic 7 is lexicon technology that is owned by harman kardon, it is able to create surround sound simulation from 2 channel output. Sounds great. I went to the dealer and compared the two. At low listening levels, it is difficult to discern between the two, but as it gets louder, there is a clear difference with reverb and loss of clarity heard in the standard system. Since I like my music on the louder side, I think it may be worth the upgrade.
thanks again
But isn't that what compromises are all about? The M3 is a hard-edged near-luxury racer that has been called the best GT ever. The mission of the M5 and M3 are completely different, although they both have the same high-end and approx. the same 0-60. Just like the EVO/Sti all these cars go about their business in a unique fashion. It's up the buyer to decide on the qualities and qualifications of their purchase. Not to mention the new M5 Concept, which is out, if one can believe the hoopla is promising to set a new standard. But then so is Audi.
Well it depends what you want. If you do your driving on a race track, the M3 might be the way to go. But in regular driving I would take the torque of the S4 over the M3. Then there are the practical considerations like 4 doors. My sense is that the S4 meets more people's needs than the M3, though there is the issue that Audi tends to be less reliable than BMW.
People usually think snow when considering AWD. Of course nothing compares to AWD in snow, not even close. But what I like equally is its ability in rain. I turn into a completely different driver in rain and can't stand that feeling of hydroplaning and the unpredictability of wet roads. AWD drive cars are supremely more confident here.
That said, I'd give up the bad-weather utility of AWD and still take the M5 feels more connected to the road and corners in my opinion (although AWD has much better traction in corners). Then, any sport-driving time lost due to inclement weather would be compensated with the absence-makes-the-heart-grow-fonder deal. Think of how much better that sun feels after two straight weeks of rain. Yep, these southern Cal people just don't KNOW what they're missing with our abstinence-laden NE winters!
;-)
Also, what would a responable offer for this vehicle be?
Thanks for the feed back.
Best Regards,
Shipo
There are lots of opinions floating around with regard to AWD and hydroplaning. I certainly can't find anything that is definitive and scientific. So I'm left with my own empirical observations. I could go into detail about what I think is happening in a variety of situations but this would go on forever. Bottom line is that I find much more control on wet roads with the Subaru and others report the same with AWD cars.
When testing a car with AWD it is next to impossible to get a real feel for its capabilities in rain. However, what I can suggest for a test drive is this. When it's wet out, find a spot that has a turn into a fairly steep hill. From a stop, take a RWD car and accelerate aggressively, but not overly-aggressively into the turn and hill. Your rear wheels will be spinning and fishtailing. Then take the AWD drive test car to the same spot, do the same and notice the difference. (Ideally, the comparison should be between cars with similar torque, weight, and the same tires.)
By the way, hydroplaning with cars is defined as a tire losing complete contact with the road and riding the water. Let's not forget that on wet roads there are many types of situations that can provide infinite degrees of decreasing contact pressure until a tire or tires hydroplane. I would also qualify this as hydroplaning or at least undergoing the hydroplaning effect, or approaching hydroplaning.
As a side note...I was next to a 2004 Lincoln Aviator (remember...a midsize SUV) with the sticker still attached and MSRP was a whopping $54K. I was shocked. I am not trying to degrade the Aviator, but $54K+ for a midsize Lincoln?!?!
I'm not sure why they do it, but they do. Town Cars and LS's that go for $10K off sticker are not all that uncommon. I'm not so sure about the trucks, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were similar. I guess it helps maintain an artificial "exclusive" image to those who don't pay much attention.
As an aside, when I bought my 540it I got a good deal on it. One of the reasons I bought is was I thought I could easily get my money out of it. But while I did get a good deal, the combination of going out of warranty and perhaps the new BMW model means the car dropped around 25-30% in value in a year (but only around 10-15% from what I paid, $30,500 for a 2000 with under 30,000 miles on purchase 10 months ago).
1. Any changes in standard/optional equipment. Over time, most cars, including E39 5 Series, added standard equipment.
2. Changes in per unit production costs based on amortization/depreciation of plant & equipment and development costs, as well as changes to per unit production over time as they "learn" how to build the car for less and get better deals from suppliers. The per unit production cost of E39 5 Series declined throughout the production run. The initial cars are the most expensive for the company to manufacturer. Per unit costs fall over time.
3. Exchange rate changes: When the E39 was introduced in CY1996 as a MY1997, Germany still used Deutsche Mark (though the EU was going thru an adjustment period prior to the Euro's introduction). During the E39 production run, the DM went away and was replaced by the Euro. The Euro started out at about 1 Euro=$1.17. Euro fell to about $.88. In past 2 years it has risen 50%, so it is now closer to $1.25.
The 540ia Sport added the numerically higher (3.15:1) final drive. This improved acceleration compared to the other automatics (with the 2.82:1 final drive) but also reduced fuel economy. The 540ia Sport suffered from gas guzzler tax like the 540i6.
A big plus for Sport Pkg is the Sport Seats! Sometimes owners opted for the optional Comfort Seats. Sport Pkg cars come with bigger, high performance (summer/3-season) tires and revised suspension components.
Regardless of car, any 5 Series will benefit from the Sport Pkg. Only way to go!
Volvo s60R has 300 HP and great styling, pretty good handling.
May decide to get a used 530 next Jan.
thanks for all of the great posts on the BMW site
One of these days I expect AWD to get a lot of PR. When this happens it should take off. It's safer and has better performance for every day driving.
The only hit against it is a marginal difference in acceleration and extra weight. I point to the slightly lower acceleration time between the Porsches C2 and C4S. Yet the AWD C4S is very desirable among enthusiasts and has the highest resale value among Porsches and every car on the face of the earth.
I expect to see more AWD sedans in the future. Aside from the all-weather advantages, cornering under power with AWD is unbeatable. I don't think BMW has hitchhiked onto it because it doesn't fit their techie agenda and they have their irons in too many fires as it is. Glad to see MB and others option it.
Is that S4 beckoning?
I seriously doubt the overweight S4 would surpass the RWD M3 in handling on a dry track.
Just my opinion, but formed from discussions with others that have far more engineering expertise than me.
For what it's worth, he noted there has never been an "M" model that has sold for more than a $15-20k premium over the non-M version. In the case of the M3, it's more like $10-12k comparably equiped.
He further suggested that if BMW intends to go for the over $100k market, it will be with another "unique" M model like the former M1 or not as well received Z8, NOT with an M5 or M6.
No guarantee of accuracy here, but back a few years ago he had estimated the price of the M3 before it was officially set by BMW within $500 and he more recently estimated the price of the M6 within $1,000 ($69,000) when others were suggesting upwards of $85,000.
M6 - $85-90K, 550HP
Best Regards,
Shipo
If all goes according to Hoyle, that would put production of the 5 series re-design around mid '06.
http://www.bomengen.com/gm/sts/STS_1_web.jpg
http://www.bomengen.com/gm/sts/STS_2_web.jpg
http://www.bomengen.com/gm/sts/STS_4_web.jpg
http://www.bomengen.com/gm/sts/STS_3_web.jpg
http://www.bomengen.com/gm/sts/STS_6_web.jpg
Maybe I'm just too conservative (at least where cars are concerned) but other than the folks that styled the W211 E-Class, it seems to me that ALL of the designers of ALL of the new cars in the Sport/Lux Sedan market are trying way too hard and, as a result, missing the mark by a very wide margin.
Best Regards,
Shipo
glad that I have my 530I E39 and that I'll hold on to it for a few more years. There's a neighbor of mine that has had for 3 years a beautiful Audi A6 with a nice dark color. This morning as I drove by I noticed a brand new E60 in black. My first thought was ... shoulda
kept the Audi.. a much better looking car !
2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2022 Wrangler Sahara 4Xe, 2023 Toyota Tacoma SR 4WD
http://www.essex1.com/people/cates/lincoln2.html
http://www.ami8.com/picturebook/index.php
The STS appears to be an improvement and much better looking than the 545, especially on the inside. It looks like a luxury car on the inside, as opposed to a cockpit. The 21st century ultra modern furniture look of the 5 series doesn't look to inviting in my book. As for the outside of the current 5, I don't think we need to beat that dead horse any further. Without the big rims the new 5 is an odd looking car to say the least.
Whatever the haters may say, Cadillac and BMW are stepping to the forefront of luxury design, for better or worse.
-Humming and bumming
As always,
I am ...
the ATOMICPunk!
Tire wear issue is tied mainly to design of suspension. Camber/castor issues. BMW has a pretty aggressive suspension set up. Hard on tires.
Always make sure your car is properly aligned. You might do a 4-wheel alignment every 10-15K. But even then the tires, esp. the rears, tend to wear more on the inside.
BTW the only reason you can compare a Honda with a BMW is because Honda copied the BMW cues. The most sincere form of flattery.......
As far as tires go, I have been pleased enough with the Pilot Primacy (on my 530i with sport) to have ordered a new set for the front. The rears have just 1000 miles. I got some noise from the originals at about 27K, but it was not annoying. With about 30K on all four, it was time for a new set. I figure I got my money's worth.