Got off the train earlier today to collect my BMW. Once I'd met the 
seller, I dutifully followed him, to get a ride to his premises, I 
thought, but no - the shiny green paint at the back of the car park 
alerted me to the fact that he'd brought the merchandise with him and was 
intending to complete the handover there and then.

'Very well,' I thought, 'I'll get him to come for a spin with me before I 
part with my hard-earned.' However, as I came within reach of the green 
monster, it became apparent that the proceedings may not get that far. 
There was a bad scrape on the lower rear bumper to accompany the couple 
of light scratches he'd told me about. This rang alarm bells, so I 
hustled round to scrutinize front end. On my way round, I passed the 
'small scratch' above the filler cap. It was small in length, but big in 
area, like a big ugly S shape, and had been badly touched up to make it 
even worse. There was also a bloody long straight scratch on the rear 
door, which I knew nothing of. Or at least if I had been told about it, 
it certainly wasn't described as it was.

But the real sinking feeling came as I completed my walk round and 
confronted the mutilated remains of the BMW's front end paintwork. These 
weren't "light chips, with just a couple of larger ones." The bonnet 
looked like it had been subjected to a meteor shower. Large depressions 
of missing paint were dotted right across the whole length of the big 
hood in abundance. A lot of these had made it all the way to the 
windscreen, as the lower half of that had quite a few chips, too. It is 
probably the worst case of stonechipping I have ever known on any vehicle 
I have paid attention to. The car had obviously spent endless hours 
travelling at highly illegal speeds.

By now I was getting a stomach churning feeling of dread. I simply could 
not take this car. I opened the driver's door and turned to the interior 
to look for further signs of bad description. There were holes in the 
centre console from a previously fitted mobile phone harness. The inside 
of the drivers door had been scraped along it's bottom egde and was 
beginning to rust. Generally the interior was otherwise OK, but I'd had 
enough. I puffed out my chest and gave him the unwanted opinion of the 
car, my interpretation of it's condition, and how that differed from his.

He cringed and began to point out that it *had* done 160,000 miles and 
even offered to drop 100 off the price. I declined and stuck to the 
opinion that it did not fit the description of 'very clean and tidy 
throughtout'. Clean it was, tidy it most certainly wasn't. So we both 
parted with our tails between our legs, him to get back in his unsold BMW 
and me to buy a far more expensive train ticket and begin a nightmare 5 
hour journey home.

There may be repercussions via Ebay, but I don't care. The car wasn't up 
to scratch and I could not part with my cash. The trains were expensive 
and I've had to cancel the insurance, which I'd pre-arranged so that it 
would be insured and legal for the drive home. But I learned a valuable 
lesson: I will NEVER ever again enter any contract to buy a vehicle 
without having viewed it first, for as long as I live.

Once I've recovered from my experience, I'll begin the hunt again, but 
it'll be strictly the old fashioned way from now on :-(

-- 
Stuart Sharp

> There may be repercussions via Ebay, but I don't care. The car wasn't up 
> to scratch and I could not part with my cash.


Shame you had to go through so much aggro to find it was a pile of dung 
- pity you weren`t able to take some photos while you were there as 
proof that the car was not as described to fend off "no paying bidder" 
accusations.

Colin Wilson  wrote in
news:MPG.1d5dd0dd6b2b514a98b2ce@news.individual.net: 


>> There may be repercussions via Ebay, but I don't care. The car wasn't
>> up to scratch and I could not part with my cash.
> 
> Shame you had to go through so much aggro to find it was a pile of
> dung - pity you weren`t able to take some photos while you were there
> as proof that the car was not as described to fend off "no paying
> bidder" accusations.
> 


Well, bugger it, AFAIK the condition of the car was not worthy of it's 
description and that's what I'm sticking to. If the seller wants to sling 
and mud, let him and I'll take it on the chin. It won't happen again as 
I've learnt my lesson.

Anyway, back to business - found another E39 that may be stretching it a 
bit, but would be worth a punt if it turns out to be a tidy example 
(decided my 1st choice would be an E39, anyway):

http://tinyurl.com/dbpna

Like I said, a bit steep for me, but we're talking about a fully loaded 
E39 with a 3.5l V8 here! High miles again, but if I find proper evidence 
of good care & maintenance (with some paint left on the bonnet), I ain't 
too bothered. I've decided to go for anything from 2.5l upwards and 
bollocks to the mpg. I want some entertainment, as well as supreme 
comfort. And with approaching double the Primera's torque, this car 
should progress rather like a speeding bullet wedged between the buttocks 
of a bat out of hell! If today's episode is anything to go by, finding 
one in the right cosmetic condition will be the biggest challenge!

-- 
Stuart Sharp

> Anyway, back to business - found another E39 that may be stretching it a 
> bit, but would be worth a punt if it turns out to be a tidy example 
> (decided my 1st choice would be an E39, anyway):
> http://tinyurl.com/dbpna


Looks nice (says he who drives a lowly Hyundai Accent and almost 
certainly couldn`t afford the insurance !)

oh well, at least you only got on a train
I would have said to the guy first off about bringing the car to the station
you always need to see the ca at the address on the log book and do the deal 
inside said address
otherwise it could all be a scam

"Stu"  wrote in message 
news:Xns96A9CBAA8150Anobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> Got off the train earlier today to collect my BMW. Once I'd met the
> seller, I dutifully followed him, to get a ride to his premises, I
> thought, but no - the shiny green paint at the back of the car park
> alerted me to the fact that he'd brought the merchandise with him and was
> intending to complete the handover there and then.
>
> 'Very well,' I thought, 'I'll get him to come for a spin with me before I
> part with my hard-earned.' However, as I came within reach of the green
> monster, it became apparent that the proceedings may not get that far.
> There was a bad scrape on the lower rear bumper to accompany the couple
> of light scratches he'd told me about. This rang alarm bells, so I
> hustled round to scrutinize front end. On my way round, I passed the
> 'small scratch' above the filler cap. It was small in length, but big in
> area, like a big ugly S shape, and had been badly touched up to make it
> even worse. There was also a bloody long straight scratch on the rear
> door, which I knew nothing of. Or at least if I had been told about it,
> it certainly wasn't described as it was.
>
> But the real sinking feeling came as I completed my walk round and
> confronted the mutilated remains of the BMW's front end paintwork. These
> weren't "light chips, with just a couple of larger ones." The bonnet
> looked like it had been subjected to a meteor shower. Large depressions
> of missing paint were dotted right across the whole length of the big
> hood in abundance. A lot of these had made it all the way to the
> windscreen, as the lower half of that had quite a few chips, too. It is
> probably the worst case of stonechipping I have ever known on any vehicle
> I have paid attention to. The car had obviously spent endless hours
> travelling at highly illegal speeds.
>
> By now I was getting a stomach churning feeling of dread. I simply could
> not take this car. I opened the driver's door and turned to the interior
> to look for further signs of bad description. There were holes in the
> centre console from a previously fitted mobile phone harness. The inside
> of the drivers door had been scraped along it's bottom egde and was
> beginning to rust. Generally the interior was otherwise OK, but I'd had
> enough. I puffed out my chest and gave him the unwanted opinion of the
> car, my interpretation of it's condition, and how that differed from his.
>
> He cringed and began to point out that it *had* done 160,000 miles and
> even offered to drop 100 off the price. I declined and stuck to the
> opinion that it did not fit the description of 'very clean and tidy
> throughtout'. Clean it was, tidy it most certainly wasn't. So we both
> parted with our tails between our legs, him to get back in his unsold BMW
> and me to buy a far more expensive train ticket and begin a nightmare 5
> hour journey home.
>
> There may be repercussions via Ebay, but I don't care. The car wasn't up
> to scratch and I could not part with my cash. The trains were expensive
> and I've had to cancel the insurance, which I'd pre-arranged so that it
> would be insured and legal for the drive home. But I learned a valuable
> lesson: I will NEVER ever again enter any contract to buy a vehicle
> without having viewed it first, for as long as I live.
>
> Once I've recovered from my experience, I'll begin the hunt again, but
> it'll be strictly the old fashioned way from now on :-(
>
> -- 
> Stuart Sharp 

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96A9D77DC4E55nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> Colin Wilson  wrote in
> news:MPG.1d5dd0dd6b2b514a98b2ce@news.individual.net:
>
> >> There may be repercussions via Ebay, but I don't care. The car wasn't
> >> up to scratch and I could not part with my cash.


What a bugger. He made it sound so good.
I'd get my negative feedback in first if I were you, in case he slags you
off and puts you on the defensive.


> > Shame you had to go through so much aggro to find it was a pile of
> > dung - pity you weren`t able to take some photos while you were there
> > as proof that the car was not as described to fend off "no paying
> > bidder" accusations.
> >
>
> Well, bugger it, AFAIK the condition of the car was not worthy of it's
> description and that's what I'm sticking to. If the seller wants to sling
> and mud, let him and I'll take it on the chin. It won't happen again as
> I've learnt my lesson.


I don't blame you, but as I said, I baught mine from an eBay listing.
You've been very unlucky in getting a less than honest seller IMO.


> Anyway, back to business - found another E39 that may be stretching it a
> bit, but would be worth a punt if it turns out to be a tidy example
> (decided my 1st choice would be an E39, anyway):
>
> http://tinyurl.com/dbpna
>
> Like I said, a bit steep for me, but we're talking about a fully loaded
> E39 with a 3.5l V8 here! High miles again, but if I find proper evidence
> of good care & maintenance (with some paint left on the bonnet), I ain't
> too bothered. I've decided to go for anything from 2.5l upwards and
> bollocks to the mpg. I want some entertainment, as well as supreme
> comfort. And with approaching double the Primera's torque, this car
> should progress rather like a speeding bullet wedged between the buttocks
> of a bat out of hell! If today's episode is anything to go by, finding
> one in the right cosmetic condition will be the biggest challenge!


Looks and sounds like nice E39.
As for a car in good condition, from the sound of it the E34 was
exceptionally rough. Most I've seen on the road, '90 onwards have been
reasonably tidy looking cars.
Good luck with your quest.
Mike.

"Mike G"  wrote in
news:42f3d440$0$91528$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net: 


> 
> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96A9D77DC4E55nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
>> Colin Wilson  wrote in
>> news:MPG.1d5dd0dd6b2b514a98b2ce@news.individual.net:
>>
>> >> There may be repercussions via Ebay, but I don't care. The car
>> >> wasn't up to scratch and I could not part with my cash.
> 
> What a bugger. He made it sound so good.
> I'd get my negative feedback in first if I were you, in case he slags
> you off and puts you on the defensive.
> 

I'm quite happy to defend myself but I don't want to be the one to start 
a slanging match. He's had all day to leave bad feedback and hasn't, so 
I'll do the same if it means I can keep my good reputation. Let sleeping 
dogs lie, so to speak.


>> > Shame you had to go through so much aggro to find it was a pile of
>> > dung - pity you weren`t able to take some photos while you were
>> > there as proof that the car was not as described to fend off "no
>> > paying bidder" accusations.
>> >
>>
>> Well, bugger it, AFAIK the condition of the car was not worthy of
>> it's description and that's what I'm sticking to. If the seller wants
>> to sling and mud, let him and I'll take it on the chin. It won't
>> happen again as I've learnt my lesson.
> 
> I don't blame you, but as I said, I baught mine from an eBay listing.
> You've been very unlucky in getting a less than honest seller IMO.
> 

Hope you're right. He wasn't so much dishonest as economical with the 
truth, IYSWIM. The faults he picked out on the phone made it sound quite 
rosy, but this wasn't the case. The official listing description failed 
to elaborate on any cosmetic faults at all - just said 'clean & tidy,' 
which was a half truth.


>> Anyway, back to business - found another E39 that may be stretching
>> it a bit, but would be worth a punt if it turns out to be a tidy
>> example (decided my 1st choice would be an E39, anyway):
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/dbpna
>>
>> Like I said, a bit steep for me, but we're talking about a fully
>> loaded E39 with a 3.5l V8 here! High miles again, but if I find
>> proper evidence of good care & maintenance (with some paint left on
>> the bonnet), I ain't too bothered. I've decided to go for anything
>> from 2.5l upwards and bollocks to the mpg. I want some entertainment,
>> as well as supreme comfort. And with approaching double the Primera's
>> torque, this car should progress rather like a speeding bullet wedged
>> between the buttocks of a bat out of hell! If today's episode is
>> anything to go by, finding one in the right cosmetic condition will
>> be the biggest challenge! 
> 
> Looks and sounds like nice E39.
> As for a car in good condition, from the sound of it the E34 was
> exceptionally rough. Most I've seen on the road, '90 onwards have been
> reasonably tidy looking cars.
> Good luck with your quest.
> Mike.
> 

Cheers, Mike. This one is only 11 miles down the road, so I've picked it 
as one to start re-building my confidence, even if it isn't *the* one. No 
more train journeys for me unless I know they're for a genuine purpose. 
It reminded me just how much I detest public transport - inefficient, 
uncomfortable, overcrowded, having to put up with drunks etc :-(


-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96A9E4DC7160Enobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> "Mike G"  wrote in
> news:42f3d440$0$91528$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net:

> > What a bugger. He made it sound so good.
> > I'd get my negative feedback in first if I were you, in case he slags
> > you off and puts you on the defensive.
> >
> I'm quite happy to defend myself but I don't want to be the one to start
> a slanging match. He's had all day to leave bad feedback and hasn't, so
> I'll do the same if it means I can keep my good reputation. Let sleeping
> dogs lie, so to speak.


That's a view I can understand, especially on top of the hassle you've
already had, but it rather defeats the object of feedbacks.
You never know, it could save someone else going through the same experience
if it makes him rethink his descriptions.
Mike.

Stu wrote:

> Colin Wilson  wrote in 
> news:MPG.1d5dd0dd6b2b514a98b2ce@news.individual.net:
> 
>>> There may be repercussions via Ebay, but I don't care. The car 
>>> wasn't up to scratch and I could not part with my cash.

Bummer :(

>> Shame you had to go through so much aggro to find it was a pile of
>>  dung - pity you weren`t able to take some photos while you were 
>> there as proof that the car was not as described to fend off "no 
>> paying bidder" accusations.


I think pointing Ebay at this group will show your good intent...


> Well, bugger it, AFAIK the condition of the car was not worthy of 
> it's description and that's what I'm sticking to.


....as will the vendors mails assuring you of its condition.


> If the seller wants to sling and mud, let him and I'll take it on the
> chin. It won't happen again as I've learnt my lesson.


I wouldn't worry too much.


> Anyway, back to business - found another E39 that may be stretching 
> it a bit, but would be worth a punt if it turns out to be a tidy 
> example (decided my 1st choice would be an E39, anyway):
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/dbpna


Not my first choice of colour or wheels...

The E38 Sport Pack upped the wheels from 16" -> 18" with wider tyres on
the back so I'm unconvinced by the "SPORT" in the ad.


> Like I said, a bit steep for me, but we're talking about a fully 
> loaded E39 with a 3.5l V8 here! High miles again, but if I find 
> proper evidence of good care & maintenance (with some paint left on 
> the bonnet), I ain't too bothered.


Only extras are the leather and the CD changer, all the rest is fairly
standard.

There are very many permutations of seat options, you *do* want
adjustable lumbar support...

There are various audio options but they're all ok unless big sub-bass
is important.


> I've decided to go for anything from 2.5l upwards and bollocks to the
> mpg. I want some entertainment, as well as supreme comfort.


Thataboy! :)

The I6s have R&P steering, recirculating ball on the V8s...

...Never noticed the alleged soggier handling.

The bigger motors only use more fuel when you use them.  =8)


> And with approaching double the Primera's torque, this car should
> progress rather like a speeding bullet wedged between the buttocks of
> a bat out of hell! 


That sounds about right.


> If today's episode is anything to go by, finding
> one in the right cosmetic condition will be the biggest challenge!


It shouldn't be.  They are strong cars, well made of good materials - it
takes a lot to make them scruffy.


A

> >>> There may be repercussions via Ebay, but I don't care. The car
> >>> wasn't up to scratch and I could not part with my cash.


Such is life, but at least you went to see the car in the metal - I recently
sold a boat on ebay that the winning bidder rejected afterwards on the
grounds of he saw more details in the photos after the auction had ended!
(That, and the cost of the ferry to get his new purchase home would have
been about 400!)  He now has another negative feedback on his account.


> >> Shame you had to go through so much aggro to find it was a pile of
> >>  dung - pity you weren`t able to take some photos while you were
> >> there as proof that the car was not as described to fend off "no
> >> paying bidder" accusations.

> > If the seller wants to sling and mud, let him and I'll take it on the
> > chin. It won't happen again as I've learnt my lesson.


I did exactly the same thing with a Toyota Corolla that wasn't as
described - a trip to the midlands and it was cr*p - I walked away but I was
no timewaster and I didn't get any negative feedback, although didn't give
any.


> > Anyway, back to business - found another E39 that may be stretching
> > it a bit, but would be worth a punt if it turns out to be a tidy
> > example (decided my 1st choice would be an E39, anyway):
> >
> > http://tinyurl.com/dbpna


Nice car, monster mileage - I'm surprised you are considering it!


> > Like I said, a bit steep for me, but we're talking about a fully
> > loaded E39 with a 3.5l V8 here! High miles again, but if I find
> > proper evidence of good care & maintenance (with some paint left on
> > the bonnet), I ain't too bothered.


Think I'll stick with my Peugeot for now....

"Arturo Ui"  wrote in
news:LsZIe.1879$jq6.1569@newsfe2-win.ntli.net: 



>> > Anyway, back to business - found another E39 that may be stretching
>> > it a bit, but would be worth a punt if it turns out to be a tidy
>> > example (decided my 1st choice would be an E39, anyway):
>> >
>> > http://tinyurl.com/dbpna
> 
> Nice car, monster mileage - I'm surprised you are considering it!
> 

In the right condition, mileage isn't a problem to me, as I don't intend to 
add too many miles too it. It's sold, anyway :-(


-- 
Stuart Sharp

"  dojj"  wrote in
news:dd0jhd$b9r$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk: 


> oh well, at least you only got on a train
> I would have said to the guy first off about bringing the car to the
> station you always need to see the ca at the address on the log book
> and do the deal inside said address
> otherwise it could all be a scam
> 

I see it's back on eBay again...identical description, except for the 
addition of 'minor stonchhips on bonnet'. Good grief! Like I said - meteor 
shower, not to mention the numerous other battle scars.

No feedback received, anyway. He currently has a score of just (5), so a 
negative from me would drop his percentage right down - not good for a 
trader! I suspect we have a stalemate situation here.
-- 
Stuart Sharp

Stu wrote:

> "  dojj"  wrote in
> news:dd0jhd$b9r$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk: 
> 
> 
>>oh well, at least you only got on a train
>>I would have said to the guy first off about bringing the car to the
>>station you always need to see the ca at the address on the log book
>>and do the deal inside said address
>>otherwise it could all be a scam
>>
> 
> I see it's back on eBay again...identical description, except for the 
> addition of 'minor stonchhips on bonnet'. Good grief! Like I said - meteor 
> shower, not to mention the numerous other battle scars.
> 
> No feedback received, anyway. He currently has a score of just (5), so a 
> negative from me would drop his percentage right down - not good for a 
> trader! I suspect we have a stalemate situation here.


whats the item number   im dieing to see it
been reading about it all along but dont know the car :(

aussie bongo  wrote in
news:42F47821.8060200@hotmail.co.uk: 


> Stu wrote:
>> "  dojj"  wrote in
>> news:dd0jhd$b9r$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk: 
>> 
>> 
>>>oh well, at least you only got on a train
>>>I would have said to the guy first off about bringing the car to the
>>>station you always need to see the ca at the address on the log book
>>>and do the deal inside said address
>>>otherwise it could all be a scam
>>>
>> 
>> I see it's back on eBay again...identical description, except for the
>> addition of 'minor stonchhips on bonnet'. Good grief! Like I said -
>> meteor shower, not to mention the numerous other battle scars.
>> 
>> No feedback received, anyway. He currently has a score of just (5),
>> so a negative from me would drop his percentage right down - not good
>> for a trader! I suspect we have a stalemate situation here.
> 
> whats the item number   im dieing to see it
> been reading about it all along but dont know the car :(
> 


http://tinyurl.com/97a2m

It's a terrific example.....of how deceptive photos can be! You wouldn't 
believe the difference when viewed with the naked eye, but that's photos 
for you. When I first saw it listed, I thought it was blue until I read 
the description!

Quite an eye opener ;-)

-- 
Stuart Sharp

aussie bongo  wrote in
news:42F47821.8060200@hotmail.co.uk: 


> Stu wrote:
>> "  dojj"  wrote in
>> news:dd0jhd$b9r$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk: 
>> 
>> 
>>>oh well, at least you only got on a train
>>>I would have said to the guy first off about bringing the car to the
>>>station you always need to see the ca at the address on the log book
>>>and do the deal inside said address
>>>otherwise it could all be a scam
>>>
>> 
>> I see it's back on eBay again...identical description, except for the
>> addition of 'minor stonchhips on bonnet'. Good grief! Like I said -
>> meteor shower, not to mention the numerous other battle scars.
>> 
>> No feedback received, anyway. He currently has a score of just (5),
>> so a negative from me would drop his percentage right down - not good
>> for a trader! I suspect we have a stalemate situation here.
> 
> whats the item number   im dieing to see it
> been reading about it all along but dont know the car :(
> 


http://tinyurl.com/97a2m

It's a terrific example.....of how deceptive photos can be! You wouldn't 
believe the difference when viewed with the naked eye, but that's photos 
for you. When I first saw it listed, I thought it was blue until I read 
the description!

Quite an eye opener ;-)

-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96AA684786466nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> aussie bongo  wrote in
> news:42F47821.8060200@hotmail.co.uk:
>
> > Stu wrote:
> >> "  dojj"  wrote in
> >> news:dd0jhd$b9r$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk:
> >>
> >>
> >>>oh well, at least you only got on a train
> >>>I would have said to the guy first off about bringing the car to the
> >>>station you always need to see the ca at the address on the log book
> >>>and do the deal inside said address
> >>>otherwise it could all be a scam
> >>>
> >>
> >> I see it's back on eBay again...identical description, except for the
> >> addition of 'minor stonchhips on bonnet'. Good grief! Like I said -
> >> meteor shower, not to mention the numerous other battle scars.
> >>
> >> No feedback received, anyway. He currently has a score of just (5),
> >> so a negative from me would drop his percentage right down - not good
> >> for a trader! I suspect we have a stalemate situation here.
> >
> > whats the item number   im dieing to see it
> > been reading about it all along but dont know the car :(
> >
>
> http://tinyurl.com/97a2m
>
> It's a terrific example.....of how deceptive photos can be! You wouldn't
> believe the difference when viewed with the naked eye, but that's photos
> for you. When I first saw it listed, I thought it was blue until I read
> the description!
>
> Quite an eye opener ;-)
>
> -- 
> Stuart Sharp


thank stu
yes i do look very nice in the pictures
i use a digital cam myself for all things.
and most time things look better than they realy are

In article ,
   Stu  wrote:

> Like I said, a bit steep for me, but we're talking about a fully loaded 
> E39 with a 3.5l V8 here! High miles again, but if I find proper evidence 
> of good care & maintenance (with some paint left on the bonnet), I ain't 
> too bothered.


I'd not go for a V-8. For some reason they are far more trouble than the
sixes, and not actually engine related.

-- 
*You sound reasonable......time to up my medication 

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article <fi6ds2-45b.ln1@florin.fluffy>,
   Alistair J Murray  wrote:

> The bigger motors only use more fuel when you use them.  =8)


As in starting the engine? ;-)

True the steady speed consumption at say 70 might not be that much worse,
but the overall including town will. By quite a bit.

-- 
*El nino made me do it

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

>> whats the item number   im dieing to see it
>> been reading about it all along but dont know the car :(
>>
>
> http://tinyurl.com/97a2m
>
> It's a terrific example.....of how deceptive photos can be! You wouldn't
> believe the difference when viewed with the naked eye, but that's photos
> for you. When I first saw it listed, I thought it was blue until I read
> the description!
>
> Quite an eye opener ;-)
>

it says it's automatci green
funny colour :)


> -- 
> Stuart Sharp 

"Dave Plowman (News)"  wrote in
news:4d961b5782dave@davenoise.co.uk: 


> In article ,
>    Stu  wrote:
>> Like I said, a bit steep for me, but we're talking about a fully
>> loaded E39 with a 3.5l V8 here! High miles again, but if I find
>> proper evidence of good care & maintenance (with some paint left on
>> the bonnet), I ain't too bothered.
> 
> I'd not go for a V-8. For some reason they are far more trouble than
> the sixes, and not actually engine related.
> 

Do you mean more suspension & drivetrain problems due to the extra weight? 
I must admit, a slightly lighter model with ideal balance and R&P steering 
would by my first choice - a 528.

-- 
Stuart Sharp

Stu wrote:

> 
[...]
> 
> http://tinyurl.com/97a2m
> 
> It's a terrific example.....of how deceptive photos can be! You wouldn't
> believe the difference when viewed with the naked eye, but that's photos
> for you. When I first saw it listed, I thought it was blue until I read
> the description!
> 
> Quite an eye opener ;-)


You should complain to eBay. They're quite keen to clean up their image;
at least they say they're. E.g. the Live 8 ticket controversy and other.

Stu (nobody@home.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying 
:


> http://tinyurl.com/97a2m
> 
> It's a terrific example.....of how deceptive photos can be! You wouldn't 
> believe the difference when viewed with the naked eye


If you look at the front/interior shot, you can see the holes for the phone 
kit, on the side of the centre console about level with the gear lever.

OSR photo seems to show what could well be the lower bumper scratch, too. 
Side of the bumper, from the wheel to corner?

With those visible - once you know what to look for - the guy starts to 
look a smidge less dodgy - they'd not be difficult to photoshop out, so it 
does seem as if he's just an optimist rather than seriously bent.

If you look at his username - a1valets - you'd *expect* the car to be shone 
up *damn* well...

"Arturo Ui"  wrote in message
news:LsZIe.1879$jq6.1569@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...

> > >>> There may be repercussions via Ebay, but I don't care. The car
> > >>> wasn't up to scratch and I could not part with my cash.


If the item is not as described , then the seller will have difficulty
selling the item at the same price on ebay.

Adrian  wrote in
news:Xns96AA8766E7486adrianachapmanfreeis@204.153.244.170: 


> Stu (nobody@home.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
> saying 
>:
> 
>> http://tinyurl.com/97a2m
>> 
>> It's a terrific example.....of how deceptive photos can be! You
>> wouldn't believe the difference when viewed with the naked eye
> 
> If you look at the front/interior shot, you can see the holes for the
> phone kit, on the side of the centre console about level with the gear
> lever. 
> 
That's 'em

> OSR photo seems to show what could well be the lower bumper scratch,
> too. Side of the bumper, from the wheel to corner?
> 

Yup. Quite a nasty scrape it is,too. Never spotted it when I didn't know 
to look for it, though.


> With those visible - once you know what to look for - the guy starts
> to look a smidge less dodgy - they'd not be difficult to photoshop
> out, so it does seem as if he's just an optimist rather than seriously
> bent. 


Perhaps, but I find the photos a bit cagey. He says the alloys are 
immaculate and gives a photo of the rear wheel with a good tyre. The 
front wheels, however, are dirty in between the spokes, with scuffed tyre 
walls.

> 
> If you look at his username - a1valets - you'd *expect* the car to be
> shone up *damn* well...
> 

It was.....but to use a cliche, all that glitters is not gold.



-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Avanti"  wrote in news:h22Je.10585$ia4.2902
@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk:


> 
> "Arturo Ui"  wrote in message
> news:LsZIe.1879$jq6.1569@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
>> > >>> There may be repercussions via Ebay, but I don't care. The car
>> > >>> wasn't up to scratch and I could not part with my cash.
> 
> If the item is not as described , then the seller will have difficulty
> selling the item at the same price on ebay.
> 
> 

It isn't. None of the scuffs or scratches have been declared and one would 
not expect to find these on a car described as 'clean and tidy'. Nor would 
one expect to find screw holes in an 'immaculate' interior (even though the 
interior was decent).



-- 
Stuart Sharp

In article ,
   Stu  wrote:

> I see it's back on eBay again...identical description, except for the
> addition of 'minor stonchhips on bonnet'. Good grief! Like I said -
> meteor shower, not to mention the numerous other battle scars.


Mine was like that too. If it were the only paint problems you could
factor in the cost of a partial respray, as I doubt you'll find a perfect
one easily.

Was the windscreen badly stone marked too?

-- 
*Growing old is inevitable, growing up is optional *

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
   Stu  wrote:

> > I'd not go for a V-8. For some reason they are far more trouble than
> > the sixes, and not actually engine related.
> > 
> Do you mean more suspension & drivetrain problems due to the extra
> weight?


Mainly suspension, but cooling system and expensive to fix oil leaks too. 


> I must admit, a slightly lighter model with ideal balance and
> R&P steering would by my first choice - a 528.


Yup. As well as being the most common it's the pick of the early ones. A
later 530 6 will be outside your budget.

-- 
*All men are idiots, and I married their King.

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96AA6284C63EAnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...


> I see it's back on eBay again...identical description, except for the
> addition of 'minor stonchhips on bonnet'. Good grief! Like I said - meteor
> shower,


Probably similar to the state of the bonnet on my car before the previous
owner had it resprayed. He did say it was badly stone chipped, and the w/s
had been replaced. Whether at the same time, I don't know, but it's not the
original.

Don't take this the wrong way, but it does occur to me that despite his,
shall we say, optimistic description, it could still have been a good buy,
especially at 1400, rather than the 1500 sale price.

I paid 2500 for mine, 18 months ago.It was obviously in much better
condition cosmetically than the one you saw. No dents or scratches, and only
a few minor stone chips on the front bumper and valance. If I were seling
it, I would expect to get near what I paid for it. IMO it is an
exceptionally clean car. It looks as good in the flesh as it does in the
photo's on Yahoo that you saw.

Given that in the same condition the one you saw would command a similar
price, or conservatively say 2000, taking into account the holes in the
centre console, that in effect would have allowed you 600 to spend on it,
before the buying price became unrealistic.More than enough IMO to get the
damaged panels professionally resprayed.

Like you I know what I want, especially when buying a car.
If a car I'm thinking of buying is not in the condition I'd like, I estimate
what it would cost to get it in that condition. If the sale price and
estimated repair price are on the right side, I'd still probably buy it.
Not every one thinks that way, but often the owners of a damaged car or one
that needs some mechanical work, overestimate the cost of fixing it. They're
possibly basing it on the quote they've had from a main dealer, or up market
garage.

The car I sold to the MOT guy, I baught very cheaply. It had a smashed front
wing, and damaged front suspension, but it had recently had a new engine,
which I intended to take out and fit to a similar car my wife owned. It was
the only reason I baught it. The engine in my wifes car was OK but it was a
little tired. I intended to scrap the rest of the car after I'd removed it.
Thing was that, other than the damage, the car was in good condition, so
rather than scrap it, I fitted the old engine, found a sound old wing at the
breakers, resprayed it, and repaired the front suspension. It took time, but
only cost me a few quid.
I finished up with a low mileage engine in my car, and made a handsome
profit on reselling the car.

BTW, I did tell the MOT all this before he baught it, so he paid particular
attention to the suspension repair, and resprayed wing.

The point I'm really making, is that the car would have been a good buy on
it's own. Despite the damage.
Something that might be worth thinking about when looking at a prospective
purchase.
Mike.

> http://tinyurl.com/97a2m
> It's a terrific example.....of how deceptive photos can be! You wouldn't 
> believe the difference when viewed with the naked eye, but that's photos 
> for you


Perhaps if we all email the seller asking for pics of the damaged 
paintwork... (I just have)

Dave Plowman (News) (dave@davenoise.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much 
like they were saying :


>> I see it's back on eBay again...identical description, except for the
>> addition of 'minor stonchhips on bonnet'. Good grief! Like I said -
>> meteor shower, not to mention the numerous other battle scars.

> Mine was like that too.


Is the front of the E39 prone to them?


> If it were the only paint problems you could factor in the cost of a 
> partial respray, as I doubt you'll find a perfect one easily.


The scrapes and scratches *might* be doable by one of these "chip-retouch" 
outfits, but it does sound as if the bonnet would benefit from the tender 
ministrations of the spraybooth.


> Was the windscreen badly stone marked too?


"A lot of these had made it all the way to the windscreen, as the lower 
half of that had quite a few chips, too."

"Mike G"  wrote in
news:42f4b6ee$0$91523$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net: 


> 
> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96AA6284C63EAnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
> 
>> I see it's back on eBay again...identical description, except for the
>> addition of 'minor stonchhips on bonnet'. Good grief! Like I said -
>> meteor shower,
> 
> Probably similar to the state of the bonnet on my car before the
> previous owner had it resprayed. He did say it was badly stone
> chipped, and the w/s had been replaced. Whether at the same time, I
> don't know, but it's not the original.
> 
> Don't take this the wrong way, but it does occur to me that despite
> his, shall we say, optimistic description, it could still have been a
> good buy, especially at 1400, rather than the 1500 sale price.
> 
> I paid 2500 for mine, 18 months ago.It was obviously in much better
> condition cosmetically than the one you saw. No dents or scratches,
> and only a few minor stone chips on the front bumper and valance. If I
> were seling it, I would expect to get near what I paid for it. IMO it
> is an exceptionally clean car. It looks as good in the flesh as it
> does in the photo's on Yahoo that you saw.
> 
> Given that in the same condition the one you saw would command a
> similar price, or conservatively say 2000, taking into account the
> holes in the centre console, that in effect would have allowed you
> 600 to spend on it, before the buying price became unrealistic.More
> than enough IMO to get the damaged panels professionally resprayed.
> 
> Like you I know what I want, especially when buying a car.
> If a car I'm thinking of buying is not in the condition I'd like, I
> estimate what it would cost to get it in that condition. If the sale
> price and estimated repair price are on the right side, I'd still
> probably buy it. Not every one thinks that way, but often the owners
> of a damaged car or one that needs some mechanical work, overestimate
> the cost of fixing it. They're possibly basing it on the quote they've
> had from a main dealer, or up market garage.
> 
> The car I sold to the MOT guy, I baught very cheaply. It had a smashed
> front wing, and damaged front suspension, but it had recently had a
> new engine, which I intended to take out and fit to a similar car my
> wife owned. It was the only reason I baught it. The engine in my wifes
> car was OK but it was a little tired. I intended to scrap the rest of
> the car after I'd removed it. Thing was that, other than the damage,
> the car was in good condition, so rather than scrap it, I fitted the
> old engine, found a sound old wing at the breakers, resprayed it, and
> repaired the front suspension. It took time, but only cost me a few
> quid. I finished up with a low mileage engine in my car, and made a
> handsome profit on reselling the car.
> 
> BTW, I did tell the MOT all this before he baught it, so he paid
> particular attention to the suspension repair, and resprayed wing.
> 
> The point I'm really making, is that the car would have been a good
> buy on it's own. Despite the damage.
> Something that might be worth thinking about when looking at a
> prospective purchase.
> Mike.
> 
> 

I see your point and would have factored a partial respray if that would 
have made it an immaculate car. However, this was not the case, this car 
required a full respray and and a new windscreen. I expect this would 
cost well over a thousand pounds, making it a dear price for a 160k mile 
E34.

Besides, SWMBO has now excersized her authority and the E34 shape has 
been dropped from the equation. With this in mind, I'm still after an E39 
but have turned towards Audis for an alternative powerful German cruiser. 
Undecided about the A6 but I did narrowly miss out on an A4 2.8 Quattro. 
Not quite as big, but still comfy, powerful and a bit lighter, hence a 
better power-weight ratio. 4WD, too. This one was a private sale, fully 
loaded, 97 model with 117k for 3250ono. Thoughts? (here we go again ;-)


-- 
Stuart Sharp

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

> In article <fi6ds2-45b.ln1@florin.fluffy>, Alistair J Murray
>  wrote:
> 
>> The bigger motors only use more fuel when you use them.  =8)
> 
> As in starting the engine? ;-)


That sort of thing...  :)


> True the steady speed consumption at say 70 might not be that much
> worse, but the overall including town will. By quite a bit.


I'd probably avoid a V8 if I was doing lots of town miles.




A

Stu wrote:

> "Dave Plowman (News)"  wrote in 
> news:4d961b5782dave@davenoise.co.uk:

	[...]

>> I'd not go for a V-8. For some reason they are far more trouble
>> than the sixes, and not actually engine related.


I've only had V8s and have had no problems.


> Do you mean more suspension & drivetrain problems due to the extra
> weight? 


The V8 is not significantly if at all heavier, just taller, wider and
shorter...


> I must admit, a slightly lighter model with ideal balance and
> R&P steering would by my first choice - a 528.


The R&P steering is apparently sharper and more communicative but the
V8s steering is still good.



A

Stu (nobody@home.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying : 


> this car required a full respray and and a new windscreen. I expect
> this would cost well over a thousand pounds


New windscreen? Fifty quid...

Stu  wrote:


> Besides, SWMBO has now excersized her authority and the E34 shape has
> been dropped from the equation. With this in mind, I'm still after an E39
> but have turned towards Audis for an alternative powerful German cruiser.
> Undecided about the A6 but I did narrowly miss out on an A4 2.8 Quattro.
> Not quite as big, but still comfy, powerful and a bit lighter, hence a
> better power-weight ratio. 4WD, too. This one was a private sale, fully
> loaded, 97 model with 117k for 3250ono. Thoughts? (here we go again ;-)


If you want a cheap-ish A4, buy a Passat.
-- 
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE -  COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

SteveH wrote:

> Stu  wrote:
>
>> Besides, SWMBO has now excersized her authority and the E34 shape has
>> been dropped from the equation. With this in mind, I'm still after
>> an E39 but have turned towards Audis for an alternative powerful
>> German cruiser. Undecided about the A6 but I did narrowly miss out
>> on an A4 2.8 Quattro. Not quite as big, but still comfy, powerful
>> and a bit lighter, hence a better power-weight ratio. 4WD, too. This
>> one was a private sale, fully loaded, 97 model with 117k for
>> 3250ono. Thoughts? (here we go again ;-)
>
> If you want a cheap-ish A4, buy a Passat.


And if you want a cheaper A4 buy a Superb. Or is that more A6?

New Passat isn't Audi platform anyway...


-- 
stuff for sale: - laptop, memory,graphics card
<http://search.ebay.co.uk/_W0QQsassZtimfromhull>

Tim S Kemp  wrote:


> > If you want a cheap-ish A4, buy a Passat.
> 
> And if you want a cheaper A4 buy a Superb. Or is that more A6?


Superb is more A6, but A4/6, Passat and Superb of that era all share the
B5/B5.5 platform.

Passat sits neatly between the A4 and A6.
 

> New Passat isn't Audi platform anyway...


No, it's a stretched Golf platform. Eurgh!


-- 
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE -  COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

SteveH wrote:

> Tim S Kemp  wrote:
>
>>> If you want a cheap-ish A4, buy a Passat.
>>
>> And if you want a cheaper A4 buy a Superb. Or is that more A6?
>
> Superb is more A6, but A4/6, Passat and Superb of that era all share
> the B5/B5.5 platform.
>
> Passat sits neatly between the A4 and A6.
>
>> New Passat isn't Audi platform anyway...
>
> No, it's a stretched Golf platform. Eurgh!


Of course, if you must have a longitudonal engine at least get a car with 
rear wheel drive!

-- 
stuff for sale: - laptop, memory,graphics card
<http://search.ebay.co.uk/_W0QQsassZtimfromhull>

In article , Stu says...


> There may be repercussions via Ebay, but I don't care. The car wasn't up 
> to scratch and I could not part with my cash. 


GOOD FOR YOU. If you get a neg, get E-Bay to remove it - your argument 
being that the car was nothing like the description. Also neg him 
putting that the car was a wreck.


-- 
Conor

-You wanted an argument? Oh I'm sorry, but this is abuse. You want room 
K5, just along the corridor. Stupid git. (Monty Python)

In article , Stu says...

> "  dojj"  wrote in
> news:dd0jhd$b9r$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk: 
> 
> > oh well, at least you only got on a train
> > I would have said to the guy first off about bringing the car to the
> > station you always need to see the ca at the address on the log book
> > and do the deal inside said address
> > otherwise it could all be a scam
> > 
> I see it's back on eBay again...identical description, except for the 
> addition of 'minor stonchhips on bonnet'. Good grief! Like I said - meteor 
> shower, not to mention the numerous other battle scars.
> 
> No feedback received, anyway. He currently has a score of just (5), so a 
> negative from me would drop his percentage right down - not good for a 
> trader! I suspect we have a stalemate situation here.
> 

No stalemate - NEG HIM.

Feedback Negative

Reason: Car not as described. Alot of paint damage and holes in 
interior.

-- 
Conor

-You wanted an argument? Oh I'm sorry, but this is abuse. You want room 
K5, just along the corridor. Stupid git. (Monty Python)

In article , Stu says...


> http://tinyurl.com/97a2m
> 
> It's a terrific example.....of how deceptive photos can be! You wouldn't 
> believe the difference when viewed with the naked eye, but that's photos 
> for you. When I first saw it listed, I thought it was blue until I read 
> the description!
> 

Absolutely. When I was arranging with a bloke to pick up a Capri I'd 
own on E-Bay he had said there was rust on it in the description but 
was worried I was going to turn up and not want it as it looked damned 
good in the photos. I reassured him that from previous experience I 
expected shot rear arches and shot front wings above the headlight and 
as long as the A posts, sills,rear chassis and strut tops were OK that 
I'd be happy. His only worry was that I'd probably be expecting it to 
look as good as it did in the E-Bay photos. 

Anyway, I got what I was expecting - rusty in the usual places, solid 
in the ones I was mostly worried about. He was extremely relieved. Both 
of us were happy.  

-- 
Conor

-You wanted an argument? Oh I'm sorry, but this is abuse. You want room 
K5, just along the corridor. Stupid git. (Monty Python)

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96AA960EAB40Fnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> > The point I'm really making, is that the car would have been a good
> > buy on it's own. Despite the damage.
> > Something that might be worth thinking about when looking at a
> > prospective purchase.
> > Mike.
> >
> >
> I see your point and would have factored a partial respray if that would
> have made it an immaculate car. However, this was not the case, this car
> required a full respray


Sorry. You didn't make that clear in your OP. You gave the impression that
you were only concerned about the items you mentioned.
As for the w/s, that's simply fixed.
TBH I find it hard to believe the car required a complete respray. What was
wrong with paint on the areas you didn't mention?
No well used car 10 years old is going to have perfect paintwork, but ones
that need a complete respray, would be uncommon indeed.
Mike.

Stu  wrote:


> Got off the train earlier today to collect my BMW. Once I'd met the 
> seller, I dutifully followed him, to get a ride to his premises, I 
> thought, but no - the shiny green paint at the back of the car park 
> alerted me to the fact that he'd brought the merchandise with him and was
> intending to complete the handover there and then.


<snip>

Sorry, but what did you expect from a high mileage, 10 year old 525?

Especially given the price.

Christ, I hate selling used cars, you get so many jokers turning up
expecting 'bangers' to be as good as a shiny new one.
-- 
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE -  COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

In article <1h0vrik.3ddb6f19swpw9N%steve@italiancar.co.uk>, SteveH
 writes


>> New Passat isn't Audi platform anyway...
>
>No, it's a stretched Golf platform. Eurgh!


Memorably described by Clarkson as "sculptured ditchwater".

http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/section/0,,12529,00.html

steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH) wrote in
news:1h0vqhl.mlhogc1jbbwryN%steve@italiancar.co.uk: 


> Stu  wrote:
> 
>> Besides, SWMBO has now excersized her authority and the E34 shape has
>> been dropped from the equation. With this in mind, I'm still after an
>> E39 but have turned towards Audis for an alternative powerful German
>> cruiser. Undecided about the A6 but I did narrowly miss out on an A4
>> 2.8 Quattro. Not quite as big, but still comfy, powerful and a bit
>> lighter, hence a better power-weight ratio. 4WD, too. This one was a
>> private sale, fully loaded, 97 model with 117k for 3250ono.
>> Thoughts? (here we go again ;-) 
> 
> If you want a cheap-ish A4, buy a Passat.


There's no difference at all? I take it the 'synchro' version is the same 
as a Quattro?

-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Tim S Kemp"  wrote in
news:XNWdnYXoNLK5TmnfRVn-rQ@karoo.co.uk: 


> SteveH wrote:
>> Tim S Kemp  wrote:
>>
>>>> If you want a cheap-ish A4, buy a Passat.
>>>
>>> And if you want a cheaper A4 buy a Superb. Or is that more A6?
>>
>> Superb is more A6, but A4/6, Passat and Superb of that era all share
>> the B5/B5.5 platform.
>>
>> Passat sits neatly between the A4 and A6.
>>
>>> New Passat isn't Audi platform anyway...
>>
>> No, it's a stretched Golf platform. Eurgh!
> 
> Of course, if you must have a longitudonal engine at least get a car
> with rear wheel drive!
> 

Take it you don't approve of 4WD, then?


-- 
Stuart Sharp

Stu  wrote:


> steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH) wrote in
> news:1h0vqhl.mlhogc1jbbwryN%steve@italiancar.co.uk: 
> 
> > Stu  wrote:
> > 
> >> Besides, SWMBO has now excersized her authority and the E34 shape has
> >> been dropped from the equation. With this in mind, I'm still after an
> >> E39 but have turned towards Audis for an alternative powerful German
> >> cruiser. Undecided about the A6 but I did narrowly miss out on an A4
> >> 2.8 Quattro. Not quite as big, but still comfy, powerful and a bit
> >> lighter, hence a better power-weight ratio. 4WD, too. This one was a
> >> private sale, fully loaded, 97 model with 117k for 3250ono.
> >> Thoughts? (here we go again ;-) 
> > 
> > If you want a cheap-ish A4, buy a Passat.
> 
> There's no difference at all? I take it the 'synchro' version is the same
> as a Quattro?


It's a stretched A4 platform with broadly the same engines and
transmissions. So, yes, synchro is proper quattro with a different name.
-- 
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE -  COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

In article ,
   Conor  wrote:

> > There may be repercussions via Ebay, but I don't care. The car wasn't
> > up to scratch and I could not part with my cash. 

> GOOD FOR YOU. If you get a neg, get E-Bay to remove it - your argument 
> being that the car was nothing like the description. Also neg him 
> putting that the car was a wreck.


I think you're over reacting. It's an old car with high miles and how many
of these are truly immaculate? And the selling price was for an average
example.

-- 
*I like cats, too.  Let's exchange recipes.

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
   Adrian  wrote:

> >> I see it's back on eBay again...identical description, except for the
> >> addition of 'minor stonchhips on bonnet'. Good grief! Like I said -
> >> meteor shower, not to mention the numerous other battle scars.

> > Mine was like that too.

> Is the front of the E39 prone to them?


No - my last car, an E34.

-- 
*With her marriage she got a new name and a dress.*

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Mike G"  wrote in
news:42f4e151$0$91508$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net: 


> 
> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96AA960EAB40Fnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
>> > The point I'm really making, is that the car would have been a good
>> > buy on it's own. Despite the damage.
>> > Something that might be worth thinking about when looking at a
>> > prospective purchase.
>> > Mike.
>> >
>> >
>> I see your point and would have factored a partial respray if that
>> would have made it an immaculate car. However, this was not the case,
>> this car required a full respray
> 
> Sorry. You didn't make that clear in your OP. You gave the impression
> that you were only concerned about the items you mentioned.
> As for the w/s, that's simply fixed.


It is if you brick it then ring the insurance ;-)


> TBH I find it hard to believe the car required a complete respray.
> What was wrong with paint on the areas you didn't mention?
> No well used car 10 years old is going to have perfect paintwork, but
> ones that need a complete respray, would be uncommon indeed.
> Mike.
> 

Well, being metallic, any sprayed paint would have to be blended into the 
adjoining panels, would it not?. Hence the bonnet would need painting in 
with the front wings, the rear door would need painting in with the front 
door, the rear bumper would need painting in with the bootlid etc. There 
wasn't any undamaged panel without a damaged one next to it, hence a 
complete respray seemed the only sensible course of action.



-- 
Stuart Sharp

Alistair J Murray  wrote in news:c6res2-n3n.ln1
@florin.fluffy:


> Stu wrote:
>> "Dave Plowman (News)"  wrote in 
>> news:4d961b5782dave@davenoise.co.uk:
> 
>      [...]
> 

>> Do you mean more suspension & drivetrain problems due to the extra
>> weight? 
> 
> The V8 is not significantly if at all heavier, just taller, wider and
> shorter...
> 

The reviews I've read say that the V8s make the car slightly heavier at the 
front end. It also shows in the tech. data that the V8s are heavier by 
about 100kg. Where does the extra weight come from, then?
-- 
Stuart Sharp

steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH) wrote in
news:1h0vv0j.1cl8b1r1ftqa4zN%steve@italiancar.co.uk: 


> Stu  wrote:
> 
>> Got off the train earlier today to collect my BMW. Once I'd met the 
>> seller, I dutifully followed him, to get a ride to his premises, I 
>> thought, but no - the shiny green paint at the back of the car park 
>> alerted me to the fact that he'd brought the merchandise with him and
>> was intending to complete the handover there and then.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> Sorry, but what did you expect from a high mileage, 10 year old 525?
> 
> Especially given the price.


I've been told that well cared for examples exist at this age. The chip 
damage alone was proof that the vehicle had spent a massive amount of time 
at ludicrous speeds. I've seen plenty of cars with even higher miles and 
far less damage.

> 
> Christ, I hate selling used cars, you get so many jokers turning up
> expecting 'bangers' to be as good as a shiny new one.


All I expected was what was described. I don't think that's too much to 
expect.


-- 
Stuart Sharp

Stu  wrote:


> steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH) wrote in
> news:1h0vv0j.1cl8b1r1ftqa4zN%steve@italiancar.co.uk: 
> 
> > Stu  wrote:
> > 
> >> Got off the train earlier today to collect my BMW. Once I'd met the
> >> seller, I dutifully followed him, to get a ride to his premises, I
> >> thought, but no - the shiny green paint at the back of the car park
> >> alerted me to the fact that he'd brought the merchandise with him and
> >> was intending to complete the handover there and then.
> > 
> > <snip>
> > 
> > Sorry, but what did you expect from a high mileage, 10 year old 525?
> > 
> > Especially given the price.
> 
> I've been told that well cared for examples exist at this age. The chip
> damage alone was proof that the vehicle had spent a massive amount of time
> at ludicrous speeds. I've seen plenty of cars with even higher miles and
> far less damage.
> > 
> > Christ, I hate selling used cars, you get so many jokers turning up
> > expecting 'bangers' to be as good as a shiny new one.
> 
> All I expected was what was described. I don't think that's too much to
> expect.


You have to take into account the age and mileage of the vehicle as well
as the description. It's all relative - I'd say that although the
description was a bit sketchy, the actual car matched with what you'd
expect at that age / mileage / price.
-- 
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE -  COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

Stu wrote:

> "Mike G"  wrote in
>>
>> Sorry. You didn't make that clear in your OP. You gave the impression
>> that you were only concerned about the items you mentioned.
>> As for the w/s, that's simply fixed.
>
> It is if you brick it then ring the insurance ;-)
>


I just *know* that if I ever tried that the damn brick would bounce off at 
an impossible angle and wreck the bonnet *and* smash a headlight :-(

Stu wrote:

> Take it you don't approve of 4WD, then?


I do, but I don't see the point of n-s engine and front drive. To be fair 
I'm pretty much converted to transverse engine...
-- 
stuff for sale: - laptop, memory,graphics card
<http://search.ebay.co.uk/_W0QQsassZtimfromhull>

Tim S Kemp  wrote:


> Stu wrote:
> > Take it you don't approve of 4WD, then?
> 
> I do, but I don't see the point of n-s engine and front drive. To be fair
> I'm pretty much converted to transverse engine...


It's partially (or even mainly) due to the Audi quattro drivetrain -
effectively all mid and large platform Audis are designed as a quattro,
with the prop and rear diff being ripped off to create the cheaper FWD
versions.

I think there's also a benefit in terms of weight distribution (a
longitudinal engine moves the weight of the lump backwards) and
packaging (there's a perception of more working space in a longitudinal
application.... not sure if this holds water or not, though).
-- 
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE -  COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

Stu wrote:


> I've been told that well cared for examples exist at this age. The
> chip damage alone was proof that the vehicle had spent a massive
> amount of time at ludicrous speeds. I've seen plenty of cars with
> even higher miles and far less damage.


BMW went through a spate of poor, not robust paintwork. Also it's more a 
sign of tailgating than of high speed - and since when was high speed a 
problem for a modern exec saloon?


-- 
stuff for sale: - laptop, memory,graphics card
<http://search.ebay.co.uk/_W0QQsassZtimfromhull>

"Dave Plowman (News)"  wrote in
news:4d9646ed19dave@davenoise.co.uk: 


> In article ,
>    Conor  wrote:
>> > There may be repercussions via Ebay, but I don't care. The car
>> > wasn't up to scratch and I could not part with my cash. 
> 
>> GOOD FOR YOU. If you get a neg, get E-Bay to remove it - your
>> argument being that the car was nothing like the description. Also
>> neg him putting that the car was a wreck.
> 
> I think you're over reacting. It's an old car with high miles and how
> many of these are truly immaculate? And the selling price was for an
> average example.
> 


The price was a reserve, which the other bidders (ISTR 8) obviously thought 
was too much. I can only assume that they went to see the car as I can't 
think of any other reason why it wouldn't make at least that amount. I did 
not see it and was relying on the seller's description, which was foolish 
of me.

-- 
Stuart Sharp

PC Paul wrote:

> Stu wrote:
>> "Mike G"  wrote in
>>>
>>> Sorry. You didn't make that clear in your OP. You gave the
>>> impression that you were only concerned about the items you
>>> mentioned. As for the w/s, that's simply fixed.
>>
>> It is if you brick it then ring the insurance ;-)
>>
>
> I just *know* that if I ever tried that the damn brick would bounce
> off at an impossible angle and wreck the bonnet *and* smash a
> headlight :-(


Lol, just park it down my street with an old mobile phone on the centre 
console - they'll break every window on the way to the phone...

-- 
stuff for sale: - laptop, memory,graphics card
<http://search.ebay.co.uk/_W0QQsassZtimfromhull>

"Tim S Kemp"  wrote in
news:76Gdnewj0drIamnfRVn-pQ@karoo.co.uk: 


> Stu wrote:
>> Take it you don't approve of 4WD, then?
> 
> I do, but I don't see the point of n-s engine and front drive. To be
> fair I'm pretty much converted to transverse engine...


Must admit, I don't know the drivetrain layout of a N-S mounted 4WD (i.e. 
how the drive gets to the front wheels) works. So I've no idea which is 
best.
-- 
Stuart Sharp

Tim S Kemp  wrote:


> > I just *know* that if I ever tried that the damn brick would bounce
> > off at an impossible angle and wreck the bonnet *and* smash a
> > headlight :-(
> 
> Lol, just park it down my street with an old mobile phone on the centre
> console - they'll break every window on the way to the phone...


Have you ever considered moving somewhere less pikey? ;-)
-- 
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE -  COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH) wrote in
news:1h0vyem.1nddutj1q39uvxN%steve@italiancar.co.uk: 


> Stu  wrote:
> 
>> steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH) wrote in
>> news:1h0vv0j.1cl8b1r1ftqa4zN%steve@italiancar.co.uk: 
>> 
>> > Stu  wrote:
>> > 
>> >> Got off the train earlier today to collect my BMW. Once I'd met
>> >> the seller, I dutifully followed him, to get a ride to his
>> >> premises, I thought, but no - the shiny green paint at the back of
>> >> the car park alerted me to the fact that he'd brought the
>> >> merchandise with him and was intending to complete the handover
>> >> there and then. 
>> > 
>> > <snip>
>> > 
>> > Sorry, but what did you expect from a high mileage, 10 year old
>> > 525? 
>> > 
>> > Especially given the price.
>> 
>> I've been told that well cared for examples exist at this age. The
>> chip damage alone was proof that the vehicle had spent a massive
>> amount of time at ludicrous speeds. I've seen plenty of cars with
>> even higher miles and far less damage.
>> > 
>> > Christ, I hate selling used cars, you get so many jokers turning up
>> > expecting 'bangers' to be as good as a shiny new one.
>> 
>> All I expected was what was described. I don't think that's too much
>> to expect.
> 
> You have to take into account the age and mileage of the vehicle as
> well as the description. It's all relative - I'd say that although the
> description was a bit sketchy, the actual car matched with what you'd
> expect at that age / mileage / price.


Yes the condition wouldn't have surprised me had it been one I'd picked 
out of the autotrader, but I hadn't seen it and was relying on 
description, more fool me! Even now, he's relisted it and put 'minor 
stone chips'. That is not true. Whether or not the chipping is normal for 
a car of it's age/mileage is another matter. It probably is, but the fact 
remains that it does not have minor stone chips, they are major and very 
great in number! As the price, I'd expected to lose the bidding and for 
the car to sell for a lot more, based on my (bad) perception of it's 
condition. But it didn't and I think this was because all the other 
serious bidders had seen the car.

Bottom line is I cocked up by bidding for it without going to look at it. 
I have sworn never to do this again, so a lesson learnt, methinks!

-- 
Stuart Sharp

"PC Paul"  wrote in message
news:JD6Je.12039$ia4.10265@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...

> Stu wrote:
> > "Mike G"  wrote in
> >>
> >> Sorry. You didn't make that clear in your OP. You gave the impression
> >> that you were only concerned about the items you mentioned.
> >> As for the w/s, that's simply fixed.
> >
> > It is if you brick it then ring the insurance ;-)
> >
>
> I just *know* that if I ever tried that the damn brick would bounce off at
> an impossible angle and wreck the bonnet *and* smash a headlight :-(


You don't have to crack the window. Just scrape the brick along it.
I got my windscreen changed because it had a tiny stonechip in my line of
sight.
The windscreen people couldn't care less as they are getting their money
anyway.

Steven.

"PC Paul"  wrote in
news:JD6Je.12039$ia4.10265@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk: 


> Stu wrote:
>> "Mike G"  wrote in
>>>
>>> Sorry. You didn't make that clear in your OP. You gave the
>>> impression that you were only concerned about the items you
>>> mentioned. As for the w/s, that's simply fixed.
>>
>> It is if you brick it then ring the insurance ;-)
>>
> 
> I just *know* that if I ever tried that the damn brick would bounce
> off at an impossible angle and wreck the bonnet *and* smash a
> headlight :-( 
> 
> 


Hehe...use a pickaxe, then. Worked for my dad, years ago ;-)

-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96AABBD4915ABnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...


> > As for the w/s, that's simply fixed.
>
> It is if you brick it then ring the insurance ;-)


An automatic centre pop also works well. So I understand. :-)


> > TBH I find it hard to believe the car required a complete respray.
> > What was wrong with paint on the areas you didn't mention?
> > No well used car 10 years old is going to have perfect paintwork, but
> > ones that need a complete respray, would be uncommon indeed.
> > Mike.
> >
> Well, being metallic, any sprayed paint would have to be blended into the
> adjoining panels, would it not?. Hence the bonnet would need painting in
> with the front wings, the rear door would need painting in with the front
> door, the rear bumper would need painting in with the bootlid etc. There
> wasn't any undamaged panel without a damaged one next to it, hence a
> complete respray seemed the only sensible course of action.



No. That's not the case. Any good professional sprayer would have little
trouble in spraying a panel to match the ones adjacent to it.
I did say a good sprayer though. We've all seen examples of bad spraying
where a careful look can see that the resprayed panel doesn't *quite* match
the rest of the car.

Proof if needed, is the resprayed bonnet on my car. Metallic silver. It is a
perfect match in colour and texture to the top of the wings right next to
it.
If I hadn't been told I wouldn't have known. I'd probably still be wondering
how such a high mileage car could have such a stonechip free bonnet. :-)
Even knowing, I can't find any evidence of it being done. No overspray or
masking lines. Nothing to indicate it's been done at all.

I also had the sides of my metallic silver SD1 resprayed some years ago,
when I had a wheel arch repaired. Just the doors and wings. The rest of the
car was OK. Similarly well done. The guy even managed to blend the rear
wings in with the 'C' post that continued to the roof. Even the blend was
invisible, something that's quite difficult to do I understand. Especially
on metallic finishes.
Mike.

SteveH wrote:

> Tim S Kemp  wrote:
>
>>> I just *know* that if I ever tried that the damn brick would bounce
>>> off at an impossible angle and wreck the bonnet *and* smash a
>>> headlight :-(
>>
>> Lol, just park it down my street with an old mobile phone on the
>> centre console - they'll break every window on the way to the
>> phone...
>
> Have you ever considered moving somewhere less pikey? ;-)


what... like.... Wales?


-- 
stuff for sale: - laptop, memory,graphics card
<http://search.ebay.co.uk/_W0QQsassZtimfromhull>

Tim S Kemp  wrote:


> SteveH wrote:
> > Tim S Kemp  wrote:
> >
> >>> I just *know* that if I ever tried that the damn brick would bounce
> >>> off at an impossible angle and wreck the bonnet *and* smash a
> >>> headlight :-(
> >>
> >> Lol, just park it down my street with an old mobile phone on the
> >> centre console - they'll break every window on the way to the
> >> phone...
> >
> > Have you ever considered moving somewhere less pikey? ;-)
> 
> what... like.... Wales?


Around the parts we live, yes.
-- 
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE -  COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

SteveH  wrote:


> > >> Lol, just park it down my street with an old mobile phone on the
> > >> centre console - they'll break every window on the way to the
> > >> phone...
> > >
> > > Have you ever considered moving somewhere less pikey? ;-)
> > 
> > what... like.... Wales?
> 
> Around the parts we live, yes.


Bad form.....

But you Northern Monkeys couldn't afford to ;-)
-- 
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE -  COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

SteveH wrote:

> Tim S Kemp  wrote:
>
>> SteveH wrote:
>>> Tim S Kemp  wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I just *know* that if I ever tried that the damn brick would
>>>>> bounce off at an impossible angle and wreck the bonnet *and*
>>>>> smash a headlight :-(
>>>>
>>>> Lol, just park it down my street with an old mobile phone on the
>>>> centre console - they'll break every window on the way to the
>>>> phone...
>>>
>>> Have you ever considered moving somewhere less pikey? ;-)
>>
>> what... like.... Wales?
>
> Around the parts we live, yes.


Remember - I've been there...

.... whatever happened to a meet up? Can't go thrashing my car until the 
wheel bearing is done but a meet for meat would be great...


-- 
stuff for sale: - laptop, memory,graphics card
<http://search.ebay.co.uk/_W0QQsassZtimfromhull>

In article , Stu
 writes


>I've been told that well cared for examples exist at this age. The chip 
>damage alone was proof that the vehicle had spent a massive amount of time 
>at ludicrous speeds.


It's usually better, when buying an older car (ten years old in this
case) to go for one with a highish mileage as it's likely to have seen
more motorway miles, which is much better for the engine than pootling
around town.

Stu  wrote:


> > Sorry, but what did you expect from a high mileage, 10 year old 525?
> > 
> > Especially given the price.
> 
> I've been told that well cared for examples exist at this age. The chip
> damage alone was proof that the vehicle had spent a massive amount of time
> at ludicrous speeds.


Was there one Tim S Kemp listed as a previous owner, by any chance?


-- 
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300 - Alfa 75 TSpark
Alfa 156 2.0 TSpark Lusso - Passat 1.8 Turbo SE -  COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #

"Mike G"  wrote in
news:42f4fdba$0$91495$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net: 


> 
> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96AABBD4915ABnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
> 
>> > As for the w/s, that's simply fixed.
>>
>> It is if you brick it then ring the insurance ;-)
> 
> An automatic centre pop also works well. So I understand. :-)


Not that you've ever tested this theory yourself, Mike ;-)

> 
>> > TBH I find it hard to believe the car required a complete respray.
>> > What was wrong with paint on the areas you didn't mention?
>> > No well used car 10 years old is going to have perfect paintwork,
>> > but ones that need a complete respray, would be uncommon indeed.
>> > Mike.
>> >
>> Well, being metallic, any sprayed paint would have to be blended into
>> the adjoining panels, would it not?. Hence the bonnet would need
>> painting in with the front wings, the rear door would need painting
>> in with the front door, the rear bumper would need painting in with
>> the bootlid etc. There wasn't any undamaged panel without a damaged
>> one next to it, hence a complete respray seemed the only sensible
>> course of action. 
> 
> 
> No. That's not the case. Any good professional sprayer would have
> little trouble in spraying a panel to match the ones adjacent to it.
> I did say a good sprayer though. We've all seen examples of bad
> spraying where a careful look can see that the resprayed panel doesn't
> *quite* match the rest of the car.
> 
> Proof if needed, is the resprayed bonnet on my car. Metallic silver.
> It is a perfect match in colour and texture to the top of the wings
> right next to it.
> If I hadn't been told I wouldn't have known. I'd probably still be
> wondering how such a high mileage car could have such a stonechip free
> bonnet. :-) Even knowing, I can't find any evidence of it being done.
> No overspray or masking lines. Nothing to indicate it's been done at
> all. 
> 

This I didn't know, because I once asked for a price for a scratched rear 
door respraying and was told it had to be blended with the adjacent 
panels.


> I also had the sides of my metallic silver SD1 resprayed some years
> ago, when I had a wheel arch repaired. Just the doors and wings. The
> rest of the car was OK. Similarly well done. The guy even managed to
> blend the rear wings in with the 'C' post that continued to the roof.
> Even the blend was invisible, something that's quite difficult to do I
> understand. Especially on metallic finishes.
> Mike.
> 

So what's the average cost of having a large bonnet properly resprayed, 
these days? It sounds like something worth taking into account.




-- 
Stuart Sharp

SteveH wrote:

> Stu  wrote:
>
>>> Sorry, but what did you expect from a high mileage, 10 year old 525?
>>>
>>> Especially given the price.
>>
>> I've been told that well cared for examples exist at this age. The
>> chip damage alone was proof that the vehicle had spent a massive
>> amount of time at ludicrous speeds.
>
> Was there one Tim S Kemp listed as a previous owner, by any chance?


ooh - bitch!

At least my cars can get to ludicrous speeds without the need to /fix it 
again tony/


-- 
stuff for sale: - laptop, memory,graphics card
<http://search.ebay.co.uk/_W0QQsassZtimfromhull>

> > > I just *know* that if I ever tried that the damn brick would bounce
> > > off at an impossible angle and wreck the bonnet *and* smash a
> > > headlight :-(
> >
> > Lol, just park it down my street with an old mobile phone on the centre
> > console - they'll break every window on the way to the phone...
>
> Have you ever considered moving somewhere less pikey? ;-)


I think he's tried, but no cunt wants to buy his house!

Peter

In article , Dave Plowman (News) 
says...

> In article ,
>    Conor  wrote:
> > > There may be repercussions via Ebay, but I don't care. The car wasn't
> > > up to scratch and I could not part with my cash. 
> 
> > GOOD FOR YOU. If you get a neg, get E-Bay to remove it - your argument 
> > being that the car was nothing like the description. Also neg him 
> > putting that the car was a wreck.
> 
> I think you're over reacting. It's an old car with high miles and how many
> of these are truly immaculate? And the selling price was for an average
> example.
> 

And? The description didn't match the item. Would Stu have bid on it if 
it was described as it actually was?


-- 
Conor

-You wanted an argument? Oh I'm sorry, but this is abuse. You want room 
K5, just along the corridor. Stupid git. (Monty Python)

In article ,
   Conor  wrote:

> > I think you're over reacting. It's an old car with high miles and how
> > many of these are truly immaculate? And the selling price was for an
> > average example.
> > 
> And? The description didn't match the item. Would Stu have bid on it if
> it was described as it actually was?


A seller often describes something a buyer doesn't agree with. It's called
advertising. Unless you expect to believe everything you see advertised on
TV, etc - and that's controlled.

IMHO, the car was in fair condition for the age, mileage and price. But
then I'd not buy a car unseen off Ebay, or anywhere else. I'd go to a
proper auction, where you can see it before bidding.

But I've bought and sold plenty via Ebay, and not had problems. But not
cars.

-- 
*The only difference between a rut and a grave is the depth.

    Dave Plowman        dave@davenoise.co.uk           London SW
                  To e-mail, change noise into sound.

SteveH wrote:

> Tim S Kemp  wrote:
>
>>> I just *know* that if I ever tried that the damn brick would bounce
>>> off at an impossible angle and wreck the bonnet *and* smash a
>>> headlight :-(
>>
>> Lol, just park it down my street with an old mobile phone on the
>> centre console - they'll break every window on the way to the
>> phone...
>
> Have you ever considered moving somewhere less pikey? ;-)


Worst one I've heard of was in Kidderminster.. they smashed a side window 
but only got about 38p in change and a plastic folding rain hat...

Oh. And a tape of Postman Pat stories.

"PC Paul"  wrote in message
news:rWaJe.13154$ia4.12750@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk...

> SteveH wrote:
> > Tim S Kemp  wrote:
> >
> >>> I just *know* that if I ever tried that the damn brick would bounce
> >>> off at an impossible angle and wreck the bonnet *and* smash a
> >>> headlight :-(
> >>
> >> Lol, just park it down my street with an old mobile phone on the
> >> centre console - they'll break every window on the way to the
> >> phone...
> >
> > Have you ever considered moving somewhere less pikey? ;-)
>
> Worst one I've heard of was in Kidderminster.. they smashed a side window
> but only got about 38p in change and a plastic folding rain hat...
>
> Oh. And a tape of Postman Pat stories.
>
>


well at least the can buy 38p of mixed sweets to eat while the listen to
postman-pat

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96AAD3D1F293Cnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> "Mike G"  wrote in
> news:42f4fdba$0$91495$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net:
>
> >
> > "Stu"  wrote in message
> > news:Xns96AABBD4915ABnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
> >
> >> > As for the w/s, that's simply fixed.
> >>
> >> It is if you brick it then ring the insurance ;-)
> >
> > An automatic centre pop also works well. So I understand. :-)
>
> Not that you've ever tested this theory yourself, Mike ;-)
> >
> >> > TBH I find it hard to believe the car required a complete respray.
> >> > What was wrong with paint on the areas you didn't mention?
> >> > No well used car 10 years old is going to have perfect paintwork,
> >> > but ones that need a complete respray, would be uncommon indeed.
> >> > Mike.
> >> >
> >> Well, being metallic, any sprayed paint would have to be blended into
> >> the adjoining panels, would it not?. Hence the bonnet would need
> >> painting in with the front wings, the rear door would need painting
> >> in with the front door, the rear bumper would need painting in with
> >> the bootlid etc. There wasn't any undamaged panel without a damaged
> >> one next to it, hence a complete respray seemed the only sensible
> >> course of action.
> >
> >
> > No. That's not the case. Any good professional sprayer would have
> > little trouble in spraying a panel to match the ones adjacent to it.
> > I did say a good sprayer though. We've all seen examples of bad
> > spraying where a careful look can see that the resprayed panel doesn't
> > *quite* match the rest of the car.
> >
> > Proof if needed, is the resprayed bonnet on my car. Metallic silver.
> > It is a perfect match in colour and texture to the top of the wings
> > right next to it.
> > If I hadn't been told I wouldn't have known. I'd probably still be
> > wondering how such a high mileage car could have such a stonechip free
> > bonnet. :-) Even knowing, I can't find any evidence of it being done.
> > No overspray or masking lines. Nothing to indicate it's been done at
> > all.
> >
> This I didn't know, because I once asked for a price for a scratched rear
> door respraying and was told it had to be blended with the adjacent
> panels.


That's not true. Blending as I understand the term, is where a panel is only
part sprayed. The new paint has to gradually 'blend' in with the old paint,
without a noticeable change. It's actually easier to spray a complete door,
wing, bonnet whatever. That wasn't possible on my SD1, because the rear
wing, C post and roof were all part of the same panel.
Another thing that makes it easier, is that new paint can never completely
match old paint. The difference could be vitually imperceptible, so a break
between two very slightly different colours is all that's needed to fool the
eye into thinking they are exactly the same.

>
> > I also had the sides of my metallic silver SD1 resprayed some years
> > ago, when I had a wheel arch repaired. Just the doors and wings. The
> > rest of the car was OK. Similarly well done. The guy even managed to
> > blend the rear wings in with the 'C' post that continued to the roof.
> > Even the blend was invisible, something that's quite difficult to do I
> > understand. Especially on metallic finishes.
> > Mike.
> >
> So what's the average cost of having a large bonnet properly resprayed,
> these days? It sounds like something worth taking into account.


I've no doubt there are those that are more qualified than I to answer that
question.
Dave Plowman for one. He's just had his SD1 EFi resprayed.

I would guess that for a bonnet you'd be looking at somewhere between 100
and 200, but ask around, some of the best guys could be tucked away on an
estate, or barn somewhere, like the guy who did my SD1 Vitesse. He had made
up a spray booth in a farmers barn. Alongside tractors and other farm
machinery.
Up to his neck in work, purely on recommendations.
That he charged considerably less than most garages or spray shops might
have had something to do with that of course. :-)

Prices do vary. I had a Celica front wing resprayed about 2 years ago for
80, which would be considered cheap, although they made a good job of it.

Having more than one panel sprayed at the same time is usually cheaper than
having them sprayed at different times.

As far as scratches go. I've never used them, but I've heard good reports
about those mobile professional scratch removal guys who advertise in yellow
pages etc.

No good for heavy stone chipping on a bonnet of course but they might be a
cheaper alternative than spraying for the sort of scratches you described on
the E34.

Assuming a car was mechanically sound, and providing it was reflected in the
price, I wouldn't be too worried about a few scratches or a chipped bonnet.
Even the odd dent or two. They're easily fixed. I'd be more worried about
uneven panel gaps, rust, or signs of obvious neglect.
Mike.

"Mike G"  wrote in
news:42f55399$0$24024$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net: 



> That's not true. Blending as I understand the term, is where a panel
> is only part sprayed. The new paint has to gradually 'blend' in with
> the old paint, without a noticeable change. It's actually easier to
> spray a complete door, wing, bonnet whatever. That wasn't possible on
> my SD1, because the rear wing, C post and roof were all part of the
> same panel. Another thing that makes it easier, is that new paint can
> never completely match old paint. The difference could be vitually
> imperceptible, so a break between two very slightly different colours
> is all that's needed to fool the eye into thinking they are exactly
> the same. 


I see. Good information, will bear it in mind.

>>
>> So what's the average cost of having a large bonnet properly
>> resprayed, these days? It sounds like something worth taking into
>> account. 
> 
> I've no doubt there are those that are more qualified than I to answer
> that question.
> Dave Plowman for one. He's just had his SD1 EFi resprayed.
> 
> I would guess that for a bonnet you'd be looking at somewhere between
> 100 and 200, but ask around, some of the best guys could be tucked
> away on an estate, or barn somewhere, like the guy who did my SD1
> Vitesse. He had made up a spray booth in a farmers barn. Alongside
> tractors and other farm machinery.
> Up to his neck in work, purely on recommendations.
> That he charged considerably less than most garages or spray shops
> might have had something to do with that of course. :-)
> 
> Prices do vary. I had a Celica front wing resprayed about 2 years ago
> for 80, which would be considered cheap, although they made a good
> job of it. 
> 
> Having more than one panel sprayed at the same time is usually cheaper
> than having them sprayed at different times.
> 
> As far as scratches go. I've never used them, but I've heard good
> reports about those mobile professional scratch removal guys who
> advertise in yellow pages etc.
> 
> No good for heavy stone chipping on a bonnet of course but they might
> be a cheaper alternative than spraying for the sort of scratches you
> described on the E34.
> 
> Assuming a car was mechanically sound, and providing it was reflected
> in the price, I wouldn't be too worried about a few scratches or a
> chipped bonnet. Even the odd dent or two. They're easily fixed. I'd be
> more worried about uneven panel gaps, rust, or signs of obvious
> neglect. Mike.
> 

I can see now that it isn't worth dismissing a car for one damaged panel. 
But I do still feel that it required a full respray and thought that it 
would be very expensive. As far as neglect goes, such severe stone 
chipping *is* a sign of neglect, IMHO. As someone mentioned, it's a sign 
of tailgating and this is not the driving method of a conscientious 
owner. It suggests aggression and impatience and is far too a common 
problem on todays roads, IMO.

As far as mechanical condition goes, I'll never know. Difficult to check 
mechanical condition with the car in a parking space. A book full of 
stamps looks good but they are, after all, only stamps. If I was having a 
car professionaly serviced for the history, I'd keep the actual receipts. 
Much better evidence. When my dad had company cars, several different 
dealers were used for servicing. If a service was ever late or missed, 
they'd simply stamp the book and mark it with the appropriate mileage 
(but not the actual mileage). I would never put any faith in a FSH from a 
main dealer, especially if the stamps had been issued by the same place.



-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96AB5D46D8267nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...


> I can see now that it isn't worth dismissing a car for one damaged panel.
> But I do still feel that it required a full respray and thought that it
> would be very expensive. As far as neglect goes, such severe stone
> chipping *is* a sign of neglect, IMHO.


I wouldn't go so far as to say that. There's a difference between someone
who is not too concerned about stone chips on the bonnet, and one who
neglects routine maintenance. I don't think one necessarily equates with the
other.
The former might not realise why the bonnet is chipped, so doesn't modify
his driving to reduce it, so I don't think you can read too much into a
stone chipped bonnet.
Mike.

Stu wrote:

> Alistair J Murray  wrote in news:c6res2-n3n.ln1
>  @florin.fluffy:

	[...]

>> The V8 is not significantly if at all heavier, just taller, wider 
>> and shorter...
>> 
> The reviews I've read say that the V8s make the car slightly heavier 
> at the front end.


I believe they are all within a percent or so of 50/50 weight
distribution.  Being shorter the V8 sits a bit further back...

I have no real experience of any I6 E39 but my 4.6 V8 feels very well
balanced and nimble and has accurate and communicative steering; if the
I6s are an improvement they are starting from a very high baseline.


> It also shows in the tech. data that the V8s are heavier by about 
> 100kg. Where does the extra weight come from, then?


Some must be the motor, but some is down to the gearbox, brakes, diff(?)
and perhaps extra standard equipment...

....I guess.  :)




A

Stu (nobody@home.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying : 


> Must admit, I don't know the drivetrain layout of a N-S mounted 4WD
> (i.e. how the drive gets to the front wheels) works.


Assuming you mean "don't know *how* the layout works"...

If the car's basically FWD (such as a N-S Audi) :-
The normal FWD diff passes the drive out the side to the front wheels. A 
prop shaft takes it out the back to a rear diff.

If the car's basically RWD (such as Sierra 4x4) :-
Off the back of the normal box is a transfer box. One propshaft goes back, 
the other forwards to a diff and driveshafts. It's not often offset to 
clear the engine, and it's not unusual for one driveshaft to pass through 
the sump.

Alistair J Murray wrote:

> Stu wrote:

	[...]

>> It also shows in the tech. data that the V8s are heavier by about 
>> 100kg. Where does the extra weight come from, then?
> 
> Some must be the motor, but some is down to the gearbox, brakes,
> diff(?) and perhaps extra standard equipment...
> 
> ...I guess.  :)


According to BMWworld the M62 V8 is ~40kg heavier than the M52 I6...



A

Alistair J Murray  wrote in news:il1ks2-vok.ln1
@florin.fluffy:


> Alistair J Murray wrote:
>> Stu wrote:
> 
>      [...]
> 
>>> It also shows in the tech. data that the V8s are heavier by about 
>>> 100kg. Where does the extra weight come from, then?
>> 
>> Some must be the motor, but some is down to the gearbox, brakes,
>> diff(?) and perhaps extra standard equipment...
>> 
>> ...I guess.  :)
> 
> According to BMWworld the M62 V8 is ~40kg heavier than the M52 I6...
> 
> 
> 
> A
>

That all? I must have been looking at incorrect data, then. Either a 528 
or a 535 will do nicely, then :-)

TBH, my quest is beginning to look dubious. I'm only allowed to get an 
E39 now, and a good 528 or above for less than 4000 seems pretty rare. 
Also, if I can't get the desired price for my car, then the cost to 
change will be too great.

With this in mind, I've had to start considering cheaper alternatives. 
That means back to the SAABs or an S70 T5. No RWD but plenty of power, 
especially the T5, and excellent torque from the turbo. Trouble is 
finding one - there's a T5 quite nearby with <100k and FSH for 3000, but 
the guy never answers the phone! Emailed him with queries and he 
eventually replyed, saying "which car, I have more than one for sale." 
Hmmmmm......it's advertised as a private sale!



-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96ACAC7C8714Cnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> Alistair J Murray  wrote in news:il1ks2-vok.ln1
> @florin.fluffy:
>
> > Alistair J Murray wrote:
> >> Stu wrote:
> >
> >      [...]
> >
> >>> It also shows in the tech. data that the V8s are heavier by about
> >>> 100kg. Where does the extra weight come from, then?
> >>
> >> Some must be the motor, but some is down to the gearbox, brakes,
> >> diff(?) and perhaps extra standard equipment...
> >>
> >> ...I guess.  :)
> >
> > According to BMWworld the M62 V8 is ~40kg heavier than the M52 I6...
> >
> >
> >
> > A
> >
> That all? I must have been looking at incorrect data, then. Either a 528
> or a 535 will do nicely, then :-)
>
> TBH, my quest is beginning to look dubious. I'm only allowed to get an
> E39 now, and a good 528 or above for less than 4000 seems pretty rare.
> Also, if I can't get the desired price for my car, then the cost to
> change will be too great.


Why not a 525 E39?
Less desirable than a 528 certainly, but that might give you a better chance
of finding an E39 within your budget.
The difference in performance is not that great.
Mike.

"Mike G"  wrote in
news:42f79e8a$0$17502$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net: 


> 
> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96ACAC7C8714Cnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
>> Alistair J Murray  wrote in news:il1ks2-vok.ln1
>> @florin.fluffy:
>>
>> > Alistair J Murray wrote:
>> >> Stu wrote:
>> >
>> >      [...]
>> >
>> >>> It also shows in the tech. data that the V8s are heavier by about
>> >>> 100kg. Where does the extra weight come from, then?
>> >>
>> >> Some must be the motor, but some is down to the gearbox, brakes,
>> >> diff(?) and perhaps extra standard equipment...
>> >>
>> >> ...I guess.  :)
>> >
>> > According to BMWworld the M62 V8 is ~40kg heavier than the M52
>> > I6... 
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > A
>> >
>> That all? I must have been looking at incorrect data, then. Either a
>> 528 or a 535 will do nicely, then :-)
>>
>> TBH, my quest is beginning to look dubious. I'm only allowed to get
>> an E39 now, and a good 528 or above for less than 4000 seems pretty
>> rare. Also, if I can't get the desired price for my car, then the
>> cost to change will be too great.
> 
> Why not a 525 E39?
> Less desirable than a 528 certainly, but that might give you a better
> chance of finding an E39 within your budget.
> The difference in performance is not that great.
> Mike.
> 

Wasn't the E39 525 introduced after 1998? This would put it out of my price 
range. There's the 170bhp 523, but I wouldn't expect a significant 
performance gain over the Primera, unless there's some way to undo the de-
tuning, IYSWIM (it is a de-tuned 2.5l M50 engine, right?).

The main purpose of changing is for increased performance. Comfort and good 
driving characteristics are a joint second priority. I couldn't really 
choose one over the other, but I do want the car to be competent in both 
departments. My Primera has excellent handling, but the ride is rather 
harsh at low speeds and it's quite noisy at higher speeds. Ideally, I'd 
like a more balanced trade off between handling and comfort. But power is 
the main priority, because that's where I'll get the most enjoyment :-) 
With that in mind, I think the T5 is worth considering.



-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96ACC78395CEBnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> "Mike G"  wrote in
> news:42f79e8a$0$17502$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net:
>
> >
> > "Stu"  wrote in message
> > news:Xns96ACAC7C8714Cnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
> >> Alistair J Murray  wrote in news:il1ks2-vok.ln1
> >> @florin.fluffy:
> >>
> >> > Alistair J Murray wrote:
> >> >> Stu wrote:
> >> >
> >> >      [...]
> >> >
> >> >>> It also shows in the tech. data that the V8s are heavier by about
> >> >>> 100kg. Where does the extra weight come from, then?
> >> >>
> >> >> Some must be the motor, but some is down to the gearbox, brakes,
> >> >> diff(?) and perhaps extra standard equipment...
> >> >>
> >> >> ...I guess.  :)
> >> >
> >> > According to BMWworld the M62 V8 is ~40kg heavier than the M52
> >> > I6...
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > A
> >> >
> >> That all? I must have been looking at incorrect data, then. Either a
> >> 528 or a 535 will do nicely, then :-)
> >>
> >> TBH, my quest is beginning to look dubious. I'm only allowed to get
> >> an E39 now, and a good 528 or above for less than 4000 seems pretty
> >> rare. Also, if I can't get the desired price for my car, then the
> >> cost to change will be too great.
> >
> > Why not a 525 E39?
> > Less desirable than a 528 certainly, but that might give you a better
> > chance of finding an E39 within your budget.
> > The difference in performance is not that great.
> > Mike.
> >
> Wasn't the E39 525 introduced after 1998? This would put it out of my
price
> range. There's the 170bhp 523,


Sorry, my mistake. I was forgetting the 2.5 Litre engine in the early E39's
was designated as the 523, with reduced hp.

but I wouldn't expect a significant

> performance gain over the Primera, unless there's some way to undo the de-
> tuning, IYSWIM (it is a de-tuned 2.5l M50 engine, right?).


M52 engine. The 528 has the M52TU engine, double VANOS. I don't know offhand
why the 523 had less power. Torque seems quite good though.
Mike.

"Mike G"  wrote in
news:42f7c0cf$0$1282$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net: 


> 
> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96ACC78395CEBnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
>> "Mike G"  wrote in
>> news:42f79e8a$0$17502$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net:

>> Wasn't the E39 525 introduced after 1998? This would put it out of my
> price
>> range. There's the 170bhp 523,
> 
> Sorry, my mistake. I was forgetting the 2.5 Litre engine in the early
> E39's was designated as the 523, with reduced hp.
> 
> but I wouldn't expect a significant
>> performance gain over the Primera, unless there's some way to undo
>> the de- tuning, IYSWIM (it is a de-tuned 2.5l M50 engine, right?).
> 
> M52 engine. The 528 has the M52TU engine, double VANOS. I don't know
> offhand why the 523 had less power. Torque seems quite good though.
> Mike.
> 
> 

I think double vanos is only post '98 too. Think the 523 was detuned to 
create a niche for the 528. Performance would have been too similar 
otherwise. I've heard that the 528 itself is detuned to comply with a 
lower German insurance category. Cars over 192bhp go into a higher 
category in Germany. Apparently, the engine is capable of quite a bit 
more.


-- 
Stuart Sharp

Stu wrote:

> Alistair J Murray  wrote in news:il1ks2-vok.ln1
>  @florin.fluffy:

	[...]

>> According to BMWworld the M62 V8 is ~40kg heavier than the M52 
>> I6...
>> 
> That all? I must have been looking at incorrect data, then. Either a
>  528 or a 535 will do nicely, then :-)


The whole car may well weigh ~100kg more, it's just not /all/ down to
the motor...


> TBH, my quest is beginning to look dubious. I'm only allowed to get 
> an E39 now, and a good 528 or above for less than 4000 seems pretty
>  rare.


How rigid is the E34 ban?

An E34 540i offers maximum bang for yer buck...  :)

http://snipurl.com/gt4l

286bhp of V8 goodness.


> Also, if I can't get the desired price for my car, then the cost to 
> change will be too great.
> 
> With this in mind, I've had to start considering cheaper 
> alternatives. That means back to the SAABs or an S70 T5. No RWD but 
> plenty of power, especially the T5, and excellent torque from the 
> turbo.


T5s seem to be fairly safe s/h buys and apparently not too bad at
getting the power down...




A

Alistair J Murray  wrote in news:dh0ls2-9s2.ln1
@florin.fluffy:


> Stu wrote:
>> Alistair J Murray  wrote in news:il1ks2-vok.ln1
>>  @florin.fluffy:
> 
>      [...]
> 
>>> According to BMWworld the M62 V8 is ~40kg heavier than the M52 
>>> I6...
>>> 
>> That all? I must have been looking at incorrect data, then. Either a
>>  528 or a 535 will do nicely, then :-)
> 
> The whole car may well weigh ~100kg more, it's just not /all/ down to
> the motor...
> 
>> TBH, my quest is beginning to look dubious. I'm only allowed to get 
>> an E39 now, and a good 528 or above for less than 4000 seems pretty
>>  rare.
> 
> How rigid is the E34 ban?


Pretty rigid, as are most rules where SWMBO is concerned :-)

> 
> An E34 540i offers maximum bang for yer buck...  :)
> 
> http://snipurl.com/gt4l
> 
> 286bhp of V8 goodness.



Mmmmmm.....286bhp V8 :-) Spaceship miles, bet that phots disguises a few 
battle scars. Interior looks in good nick, though.

> 
>> Also, if I can't get the desired price for my car, then the cost to 
>> change will be too great.
>> 
>> With this in mind, I've had to start considering cheaper 
>> alternatives. That means back to the SAABs or an S70 T5. No RWD but 
>> plenty of power, especially the T5, and excellent torque from the 
>> turbo.
> 
> T5s seem to be fairly safe s/h buys and apparently not too bad at
> getting the power down...
> 
> 

Always fancied one, long before you guys got me hankering after a BM. My 
time will come though, this would make a great stop-gap. Crossing 
everything that it's a good 'un. Off to look at it tommorrow evening - York 
is only about 45mins ride away.

Was hoping for some turbo specific advice because it's the one mechanical 
thing I'm a bit worried about. No autobox to keep me awake at night, though 
:-)


-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96ACEB2043020nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...


> > T5s seem to be fairly safe s/h buys and apparently not too bad at
> > getting the power down...

> Was hoping for some turbo specific advice because it's the one mechanical
> thing I'm a bit worried about. No autobox to keep me awake at night,
though
> :-)


Is it a turbo?
Doesn't say in the ad.
I thaught only the 2.3 in the AWD T5 had a turbo.

Turbo's are OK.
As long as you look after them, they're capable of very high mileages
without problems. You can't treat most cars with a turbo, the same as those
without.
They must be allowed to cool down with the engine running to keep the oil
circulating.
Switching off when very hot is the quickest way to knacker the bearings.
Can be inconvenient sometimes if you're in a hurry.
My Celica GT4 turbo has a turbo timer fitted, but I still have to wait,
because it interferes with the CAT1 alarm.
Mike.

Stu wrote:

> Alistair J Murray  wrote in news:dh0ls2-9s2.ln1
>  @florin.fluffy:

	[...]

>> How rigid is the E34 ban?
> 
> Pretty rigid, as are most rules where SWMBO is concerned :-)


Would meeting and driving one change her mind..?


>> An E34 540i offers maximum bang for yer buck...  :)
>> 
>> http://snipurl.com/gt4l
>> 
>> 286bhp of V8 goodness.
> 
> Mmmmmm.....286bhp V8 :-) Spaceship miles, bet that phots disguises a
> few battle scars. Interior looks in good nick, though.


The mileage is not necessarily excessive and it does keep the price down.

That's the same drivetrain as my E38 had and it's full of snorty goodness!

	[...2nd best cars...]


>> T5s seem to be fairly safe s/h buys and apparently not too bad at 
>> getting the power down...
>> 
> Always fancied one, long before you guys got me hankering after a BM.
> My time will come though, this would make a great stop-gap. Crossing
> everything that it's a good 'un. Off to look at it tommorrow evening
> - York is only about 45mins ride away.


Several of my friends have 850s, but not T5s - they seem fairly
bulletproof and really durable and perfectly pleasant to drive...


> Was hoping for some turbo specific advice because it's the one
> mechanical thing I'm a bit worried about. No autobox to keep me awake
> at night, though :-)


The LPTs seem to last forever as does the autobox, in fact nothing seems
particularly prone to breaking except, just maybe, CV joints - two of
the cars I know needed them, but at ~120k there's no real complaint.




A

"Mike G"  wrote in
news:42f7ecfe$0$1218$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net: 


> 
> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96ACEB2043020nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
> 
>> > T5s seem to be fairly safe s/h buys and apparently not too bad at
>> > getting the power down...
> 
>> Was hoping for some turbo specific advice because it's the one
>> mechanical thing I'm a bit worried about. No autobox to keep me awake
>> at night, 
> though
>> :-)
> 
> Is it a turbo?
> Doesn't say in the ad.
> I thaught only the 2.3 in the AWD T5 had a turbo.
> 

Oh yes...240bhp and 330Nm of torque. The same model as used by the 
police. In fact, a lot of the ones for sale are white ex-police ones.


> Turbo's are OK.
> As long as you look after them, they're capable of very high mileages
> without problems. You can't treat most cars with a turbo, the same as
> those without.
> They must be allowed to cool down with the engine running to keep the
> oil circulating.
> Switching off when very hot is the quickest way to knacker the
> bearings. Can be inconvenient sometimes if you're in a hurry.
> My Celica GT4 turbo has a turbo timer fitted, but I still have to
> wait, because it interferes with the CAT1 alarm.
> Mike.
> 

I know about the switching off thing. How about signs of wear? Do I just 
listen for whine and look for smoke on overrun?



-- 
Stuart Sharp

Alistair J Murray  wrote in
news:d29ls2-dt6.ln1@florin.fluffy: 


> Stu wrote:
>> Alistair J Murray  wrote in news:dh0ls2-9s2.ln1
>>  @florin.fluffy:
> 
>      [...]
> 
>>> How rigid is the E34 ban?
>> 
>> Pretty rigid, as are most rules where SWMBO is concerned :-)
> 
> Would meeting and driving one change her mind..?


Very much doubt it. She thinks the shape is outdated :-( I can see where 
she's coming from, but personally I thik the styling of old BMWs is 
timeless.

> 
>> 
>> Mmmmmm.....286bhp V8 :-) Spaceship miles, bet that phots disguises a
>> few battle scars. Interior looks in good nick, though.
> 
> The mileage is not necessarily excessive and it does keep the price
> down. 
> 
> That's the same drivetrain as my E38 had and it's full of snorty
> goodness! 

E38?
> 
>      [...2nd best cars...]


    	[but nice & powerful]

> 
>>> T5s seem to be fairly safe s/h buys and apparently not too bad at 
>>> getting the power down...
>>> 
>> Always fancied one, long before you guys got me hankering after a BM.
>> My time will come though, this would make a great stop-gap. Crossing
>> everything that it's a good 'un. Off to look at it tommorrow evening
>> - York is only about 45mins ride away.
> 
> Several of my friends have 850s, but not T5s - they seem fairly
> bulletproof and really durable and perfectly pleasant to drive...


Good stuff :-)

> 
>> Was hoping for some turbo specific advice because it's the one
>> mechanical thing I'm a bit worried about. No autobox to keep me awake
>> at night, though :-)
> 
> The LPTs seem to last forever as does the autobox, in fact nothing
> seems particularly prone to breaking except, just maybe, CV joints -
> two of the cars I know needed them, but at ~120k there's no real
> complaint. 
> 
> 
> 

A CV joint, I can live with. Would rather not have a blown turbo though. 
I'll just be listening for whine and watching for smoke on overrun. If I 
get it, I'll feed it nothing but fully synthetic, of course :-)



-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96AD47476FDB6nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> "Mike G"  wrote in
> > Is it a turbo?
> > Doesn't say in the ad.
> > I thaught only the 2.3 in the AWD T5 had a turbo.
> >
> Oh yes...240bhp and 330Nm of torque. The same model as used by the
> police. In fact, a lot of the ones for sale are white ex-police ones.


I didn't know that. I would have thaught the ad would have mentioned it, if
2.3 models are available without a turbo.

>
> I know about the switching off thing. How about signs of wear? Do I just
> listen for whine and look for smoke on overrun?


Difficult without dismantling. Smoke on the overrun can also indicate worn
valve guides. As a buyer though, either would be reason enough for me to
walk away.
You could look at the air filter. Oil on that could indicate the turbo
bearings and seals are failing. Noise is not a very good guide IME. A
failing turbo can be as quiet as one in perfect condition.
As well as that, in the early stages of bearing or seal failure, a turbo
could still be functioning reasonably well. That is until the vanes start
start disintegrating. :-)
Mike.

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96AD48383224Fnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> Alistair J Murray  wrote in
> news:d29ls2-dt6.ln1@florin.fluffy:
>
> > Stu wrote:
> >> Alistair J Murray  wrote in news:dh0ls2-9s2.ln1
> >>  @florin.fluffy:
> >
> >      [...]
> >
> >>> How rigid is the E34 ban?
> >>
> >> Pretty rigid, as are most rules where SWMBO is concerned :-)
> >
> > Would meeting and driving one change her mind..?
>
> Very much doubt it. She thinks the shape is outdated :-( I can see where
> she's coming from,


Who will use it most and do most of the driving? :-)
Mike.

Stu wrote:

> Alistair J Murray  wrote in 
> news:d29ls2-dt6.ln1@florin.fluffy:


	[...E34...]


>> Would meeting and driving one change her mind..?
>  
> Very much doubt it. 


If she has any keenness as a driver a wee shottie of a 540 *should*
convince her...


> She thinks the shape is outdated :-( I can see
> where she's coming from, but personally I thik the styling of old
> BMWs is timeless.


....and she can't see the outside sat in the Lux Interior.  :)


>> That's the same drivetrain as my E38 had and it's full of snorty 
>> goodness!
> 
> E38?


740i

Remarkably go-kart like for something so huge, but not as nimble as a 5...

....nor as expensive now.  Stunning looking cars, especially on 18"
multispokes.


>> [...2nd best cars...]
> 
> 
> [but nice & powerful]


True. :)

	[...]


>> Several of my friends have 850s, but not T5s - they seem fairly 
>> bulletproof and really durable and perfectly pleasant to drive...
> 
> Good stuff :-)


None are petrohead owned...

....however Tim S Kemp seems to drive his ovloVs with gusto.




A

>>>> How rigid is the E34 ban?
>>>
>>> Pretty rigid, as are most rules where SWMBO is concerned :-)
>>
>> Would meeting and driving one change her mind..?
>
> Very much doubt it. She thinks the shape is outdated :-( I can see where
> she's coming from, but personally I thik the styling of old BMWs is
> timeless.


Ask her if she'd be happy if you traded her in for a newer model because her 
shape was outdated?

I'm with you on this one - I think the classic twin-headlamp look of BMWs up 
to the E32/34/36 is timeless, and a great look.


>>> Mmmmmm.....286bhp V8 :-) Spaceship miles, bet that phots disguises a
>>> few battle scars. Interior looks in good nick, though.
>>
>> The mileage is not necessarily excessive and it does keep the price
>> down.
>>
>> That's the same drivetrain as my E38 had and it's full of snorty
>> goodness!
>
> E38?


7-series, from about 93/94 right up until it was replaced by the current 
model.

-- 
Peter

"You're not a real UKRCMer until you've had your big end bearings go."

"Mike G"  wrote in
news:42f877b2$0$1286$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader02.plus.net: 


> 
> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96AD47476FDB6nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
>> "Mike G"  wrote in
>> > Is it a turbo?
>> > Doesn't say in the ad.
>> > I thaught only the 2.3 in the AWD T5 had a turbo.
>> >
>> Oh yes...240bhp and 330Nm of torque. The same model as used by the
>> police. In fact, a lot of the ones for sale are white ex-police ones.
> 
> I didn't know that. I would have thaught the ad would have mentioned
> it, if 2.3 models are available without a turbo.


No, the 2.3 engine is exclusive to the high performace T5 model. The 
other engines are of similar design but with different capacities (2.0 
and 2.4) and higher compression ratio. The T5 has 4 valves per cylinder, 
some have only two. It's all alloy but I presume it uses hard liners, 
because I haven't heard a mention of Nikasil or any premature wear issues 
at all. General concensus is that it's tough and long-lasting.


>>
>> I know about the switching off thing. How about signs of wear? Do I
>> just listen for whine and look for smoke on overrun?
> 
> Difficult without dismantling. Smoke on the overrun can also indicate
> worn valve guides. As a buyer though, either would be reason enough
> for me to walk away.
> You could look at the air filter. Oil on that could indicate the turbo
> bearings and seals are failing. Noise is not a very good guide IME. A
> failing turbo can be as quiet as one in perfect condition.
> As well as that, in the early stages of bearing or seal failure, a
> turbo could still be functioning reasonably well. That is until the
> vanes start start disintegrating. :-)
> Mike.
> 

Guess I just watch out for what I can and take my chances, then :-)



-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Mike G"  wrote in news:42f87955$0$1289$ed2619ec@ptn-
nntp-reader02.plus.net:


> 
> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96AD48383224Fnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
>> Alistair J Murray  wrote in
>> news:d29ls2-dt6.ln1@florin.fluffy:
>>
>> > Stu wrote:
>> >> Alistair J Murray  wrote in news:dh0ls2-
9s2.ln1
>> >>  @florin.fluffy:
>> >
>> >      [...]
>> >
>> >>> How rigid is the E34 ban?
>> >>
>> >> Pretty rigid, as are most rules where SWMBO is concerned :-)
>> >
>> > Would meeting and driving one change her mind..?
>>
>> Very much doubt it. She thinks the shape is outdated :-( I can see 
where
>> she's coming from,
> 
> Who will use it most and do most of the driving? :-)
> Mike.
> 


You miss the point, Mike. She's a woman, reason won't prevail here :-)

-- 
Stuart Sharp

Alistair J Murray  wrote in
news:j7bms2-7qm.ln1@florin.fluffy: 


> Stu wrote:
>> Alistair J Murray  wrote in 
>> news:d29ls2-dt6.ln1@florin.fluffy:
> 
>      [...E34...]
> 
>>> Would meeting and driving one change her mind..?
>>  
>> Very much doubt it. 
> 
> If she has any keenness as a driver a wee shottie of a 540 *should*
> convince her...


Actually, she was once a M3 driver (she's divorced), but for the past 6 
years, her car has been a 1.1 Fiat Seicento :-) She likes her cars to be 
relatively new. It's a woman thing and is beyond the scope of rational 
thought.

> 
>> She thinks the shape is outdated :-( I can see
>> where she's coming from, but personally I thik the styling of old
>> BMWs is timeless.
> 
> ...and she can't see the outside sat in the Lux Interior.  :)


Ah, but those who are outside can. If it was me I wouldn't give a toss.

> 
>>> That's the same drivetrain as my E38 had and it's full of snorty 
>>> goodness!
>> 
>> E38?
> 
> 740i
> 
> Remarkably go-kart like for something so huge, but not as nimble as a
> 5... 
> 
> ...nor as expensive now.  Stunning looking cars, especially on 18"
> multispokes.


Oh, yes. I love the 750 from the James Bond film, with the big wheels and 
flared arches. Big and beautiful :-)

> 
>>> [...2nd best cars...]
>> 
>> 
>> [but nice & powerful]
> 
> True. :)
> 
>      [...]
> 
>>> Several of my friends have 850s, but not T5s - they seem fairly 
>>> bulletproof and really durable and perfectly pleasant to drive...
>> 
>> Good stuff :-)
> 
> None are petrohead owned...
> 
> ...however Tim S Kemp seems to drive his ovloVs with gusto.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A
> 




-- 
Stuart Sharp

"AstraVanMan"  wrote in
news:6k0Ke.2026$1F5.1672@newsfe4-win.ntli.net: 


>>>>> How rigid is the E34 ban?
>>>>
>>>> Pretty rigid, as are most rules where SWMBO is concerned :-)
>>>
>>> Would meeting and driving one change her mind..?
>>
>> Very much doubt it. She thinks the shape is outdated :-( I can see
>> where she's coming from, but personally I thik the styling of old
>> BMWs is timeless.
> 
> Ask her if she'd be happy if you traded her in for a newer model
> because her shape was outdated?
> 

She'd tell me to go ahead :-) Besides, some of those newer models have 
enormous maintenance costs, and I'm not sure I'd be up to maintaining the 
service history these days ;-)


-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Stu"  wrote in message
news:Xns96ADA18F5241nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> "Mike G"  wrote in news:42f87955$0$1289

$ed2619ec@ptn-

> nntp-reader02.plus.net:
>
> >
> > "Stu"  wrote in message
> > news:Xns96AD48383224Fnobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
> >> Alistair J Murray  wrote in
> >> news:d29ls2-dt6.ln1@florin.fluffy:

> >> >>> How rigid is the E34 ban?
> >> >>
> >> >> Pretty rigid, as are most rules where SWMBO is concerned :-)
> >> >
> >> > Would meeting and driving one change her mind..?
> >>
> >> Very much doubt it. She thinks the shape is outdated :-( I can see
> where
> >> she's coming from,
> >
> > Who will use it most and do most of the driving? :-)
> > Mike.
> >
>
> You miss the point, Mike. She's a woman, reason won't prevail here :-)


You should have started as you intended to carry on.
It was acknowledged when we got married, that I had the final say as far as
our transport was concerned. She obviously had a say.  
Largely ignored on my part. :-)
Later when we could afford it, she chose her own car At pesent she has a 3
year old Corolla which she's had from new.
My cars, although older, have always been better for longer journeys.
Hers is only suitable for shopping and short local runs IMO. :-)
Mike.

"Mike G"  wrote in
news:42f8ec76$0$17496$ed2e19e4@ptn-nntp-reader04.plus.net: 


> 
> "Stu"  wrote in message
> news:Xns96ADA18F5241nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...
>> "Mike G"  wrote in news:42f87955$0$1289
> $ed2619ec@ptn-
>> nntp-reader02.plus.net:

>> You miss the point, Mike. She's a woman, reason won't prevail here
>> :-) 
> 
> You should have started as you intended to carry on.
> It was acknowledged when we got married, that I had the final say as
> far as our transport was concerned. She obviously had a say.  
> Largely ignored on my part. :-)
> Later when we could afford it, she chose her own car At pesent she has
> a 3 year old Corolla which she's had from new.
> My cars, although older, have always been better for longer journeys.
> Hers is only suitable for shopping and short local runs IMO. :-)
> Mike.
> 


Yeah we have the same arrangements with a small car for round town and 
the bigger one for weekend trips, visits to the caravan etc

Basically, she didn't want me to change cars because I couldn't afford a 
newer one. She's sulking now I've bought the Volvo. But I don't agree 
with her view that the best car is always the newer one. If I was truly 
oppressed, I would never have been able to get a new car, but like you, I 
tend to just go ahead and get what I want anyway. She comes round in the 
end :-)

-- 
Stuart Sharp

"Stu"  wrote in message 
news:Xns96AABDC8E8F72nobodyhomecom@216.196.109.144...

> steve@italiancar.co.uk (SteveH) wrote in
> news:1h0vv0j.1cl8b1r1ftqa4zN%steve@italiancar.co.uk:
>
>> Stu  wrote:
>>
>>> Got off the train earlier today to collect my BMW. Once I'd met the
>>> seller, I dutifully followed him, to get a ride to his premises, I
>>> thought, but no - the shiny green paint at the back of the car park
>>> alerted me to the fact that he'd brought the merchandise with him and
>>> was intending to complete the handover there and then.
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> Sorry, but what did you expect from a high mileage, 10 year old 525?
>>
>> Especially given the price.
>
> I've been told that well cared for examples exist at this age. The chip
> damage alone was proof that the vehicle had spent a massive amount of time
> at ludicrous speeds. I've seen plenty of cars with even higher miles and
> far less damage.
>>
>> Christ, I hate selling used cars, you get so many jokers turning up
>> expecting 'bangers' to be as good as a shiny new one.
>
> All I expected was what was described. I don't think that's too much to
> expect.


should have asked for some decent size close up pics ....