gmartin

Thanks for the link Rudy.
I think if you look at things in context they are not quite so bad. They did the survey in Spring 2004 when sotware bugs were more prevalent. It is the model launch data thus small samle size.The only luxury cars that were above average were the Lexus and Infinity. The E and S class MB were much worse with significantly more data. I go to CR to look up washing machines not autos. Have you seen the picture of that female publisher? Do you think she would drive a 5er? I have it on inside information that they talked to SueBMW 4 or 5 times.

firewired

Interesting thing is that looking at both documents that penetta and rudy were kind enough to make available. In the first when looking at the breakdown of the 5 series by year. The 2004 model got mostly red circles.

pennetta

pennetta, that's an old article.

I think the one that everyone is talking about today is this one:
Attachment 3242
[/quote]

Thanks Rudy- But if you see the "*", up top it say based on one years data. I think most cars, sporting the E60's new technology, would have some bugs the first year. I have had some problems but am still very satisfied with my choice. I also had a 1997 E39, which was the last first years body change, and had problems. Even then I was satified with my choice.
Obviously it would be more satisfying if they never had a problem. I think the extended service intervals which makes your scheduled service a once a year event, helps offset the inconvenience of bringing the car in for something else.

John W

Notwithstanding the software issues with the car, my history with BMWs would tend to support the theory that they're less reliable.

My Maxima went to the dealer one time in 5 years for a service issue - a failed washer pump. That's it - never saw the dealer again.

With the BMW, every little squeak, rattle, burp, noise, whatever the car makes, and I'm off to the dealer. It's probably no worse than the Maxima, but it bothers me more because I paid so much for it, and when it's flawless, it's the best car I've ever driven.

So, I (and I think others here) make issues that really aren't "reliability" issues into reasons to have the car in for service.

If I count up every time I saw the dealer for "cosmetic" issues, not software issues, this car would look VERY unreliable. But I still love it. Everyone thinks we're all obsessed, and frankly, I've never met a BMW owner who hasn't had their car serviced for squeaks, rattles, etc, etc, etc on multiple occasions until they're satisfied. I can tell you my wife's SUV has never seen the dealer for the 42 squeaks and rattles it has.

When the car starts out dead silent, a squeak is a trip to the dealer and a trip to the dealer is a black mark in reliability ratings. Simple as that.

Now, as far as software goes, I can't say I have any other experience with this much technology in a car, so I don't know if it's worse or not. What does surprise me is how many changes to functionality that are not based on bugs that they're willing to make in this software. I'd have to say that auto mfrs will reach a point in the road in the near future where they reassess the idea of enchancements to software for cars already delivered.

Bugs should be fixed, but I can't imagine these guys can all afford to have developers tweaking settings endlessly, no matter how much we all appreciate it. Look at consumer electronics - the vast majority of A/V equipment is non-upgradeable. With the advent of PCs, that are upgraded and upgraded and new OSs are introduced, we've gotten into this cycle of rev after rev after rev.

Here's the point of all this:

If an auto mfr believed that they had one chance to get the software load for a car right, like in the old days, they'd get it right. The fact that they know that they can get it wrong over and over, as long as they can push new revs out there is what's causing the "acceptability" of buggy releases. And the fact that we've all lived through the Windows legacy proves that we'll allow it.

So, it CR right or wrong? I personally believe that my 2 BMWs and my VW were WAY less reliable than my Toyota and my 2 Nissan. Those cars simply ran and ran and ran. Not much fun to drive, but everything in life is a trade-off.

gdavis

pharding, I totally agree with your knowledge on the way Consumer Reports sees the world. In my business I've seen them fall way short on their knowledge of the products that they assess (I've met them on occasion, and they admit they have limitations on addressing certain aspects.)

While the 5 series may be less reliable than a honda accord, owning a car for many is not purely about reliability. If that were the only decision factor, we'd all be owning only hondas and toyotas based on the Consumer Reports view of the world.

I like to own a masterpiece based on state-of-the-art ideas, and that comes at a price that I'm willing to deal with, both in money and hassle. I have no interest in driving a car that doesn't push the envelope. And I'm willing to deal with its challenges.

jobah

Two Experiences:

I had a 1982 Rabbit diesel which consumer reports bashed for reliability. It had but a handful of shop visits (other than for routine fluids) over a 6 year 88k time period.

I have a 1984 (first year 354th one made) 190D Mercedes. Again CR bashed the 190's and especially the early ones. It now has just shy of 397,000 miles and I still drive it 80 miles a day (my Euro delivery 530 will not be here until early december). It has been amazing the engine is original and consumes almost no oil.

Guest

pennetta, that's an old article.

I think the one that everyone is talking about today is this one:
Attachment 3242
[/quote]

As an ealier Guest has pointed out, the CR survey was conducted in "Spring 2004," where it is difficult to tell how many months the e60 had been on the US market (could have been as few as 3-5 months, not even an entire model year). It is somewhat ridiculous for CR to predict poor reliability based on such a small sample size of responses from a portion of all e60 owners, the majority of whom purchased the car later in the 2004 model year (a clear anti-European/BMW auto bias in my view) -- someone else can check the monthly sales figures for the e60 to find out just how many were sold prior to "Spring 2004".

The article provided by Pennetta is more informative (as these reliability history ratings appear in the CR used auto buyer's guides) and it shows the 2004 e60 reliability is better than the historical reliability of both the 2001 and 2002 5-Series, each of which CR gave its "recommended" reliability verdict. It is a little puzzling why CR predicts poor reliability for the 2004 e60, whose worst reliability rating is "Good" for "Power equipment" and all other ratings are "Excellent" or "Very Good."

If the CR 2004 e60 reliability ratings stay the same as in the article provided by Pennetta, then it will hold its resale value quite well.

Guest_John_*

The Wall Street Journal article on CR's latest data included an interview with the owner of one model only -- a 2004 5-series:

BMW's overall U.S. sales are up 8%, thanks to the arrival of a new SUV, the X3. But U.S. sales of the 5 Series are down 5%; 7 Series sales have dropped 19%. In contrast, sales at Lexus, which is owned by Toyota Motor Corp., are up 12%.

. . .

BMW AG's poor rating doesn't come as a surprise to Gerard Rabadeau, a 58-year-old financial adviser in Westfield, N.J. He bought a 2004 5 Series sedan earlier this year, and the trouble started the day he picked up the car. He ordered a 5 Series primarily because it was supposed to have "Bluetooth" wireless technology that would automatically connect his cellphone to the car's communications system. That would allow him to jump in the car and talk hands-free with clients while driving.

But when he picked up the vehicle, the salesman explained the Bluetooth technology wasn't working yet, and he didn't know if BMW would ever get it to work. Within a week or so, the "key in ignition" warning started going off -- even after he left the car with the key in his pocket. Later, the security alarm started blaring whenever he used his key-fob remote to pop the trunk.

He has taken the car back to the dealership several times, but the problems continue to occur, and he is resigned to only opening the trunk manually. "I haven't had problems with the traditional engine, the transmission, but the electronics are a real pain," Mr. Rabadeau said. "It's frustrating. It's a $60,000 car."

From: A Bad Report Card For European Cars: BMW, VW, Mercedes Fare Poorly in Influential Listing, But Japanese Models Shine
By NEAL E. BOUDETTE
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
November 9, 2004; Page D1

While I have owned three BMWs, I won't even consider a new 5-series unless or until reliability improves. I simply don't have the time or patience to deal with recurring problems that the dealers can't fix. Japanese cars are boring, but they work.

firewired

I am glad you enjoy your Japanese car. I look forward to driving the 545 in a way I never felt about my previous Lexus or Acuras.

It is good they didn't interview suebmw, these problems seem minor in comparison. The bluetooth issue is now a non-issue from at least 2005 on. I was amazed at how well it works. I hope the retrofit is available for all you MY04 owners who want it, because the implementation is much better than I expected. The trunk thing is still an issue for MY05.

Rudy

Here's a link to the WSJ article.

It's pretty funny that the problems the guy had are all well known, minor issues...