Last post on Nov 23, 2013 at 6:17 AM
You are in the BMW 3-Series
What is this discussion about?
BMW M3, BMW 3 Series, Motorsports, Engine, Suspension, Car Buying, Coupe
#734 of 762 Re: What is a better buy: 1999 BMW M3 or 2001 330ci (same mileage each) [Mr_Shiftright]
Oct 03, 2011 (8:46 am)
To underscore your point...
My son has been looking for a used car and had settled on a mid to late 1990s Audi 90/A4 2.8 Quattro 5-Speed; the first car we drove was a late production Audi 90 with only 90,000 miles on it and in very nice shape. A few dogs with fleas later we drove a nearly cherry looking A4 a year or three newer than the 90 and with 140,000 miles on the clock.
On the surface the Audi 90 was a better deal because the only obvious flaw was a crack in one headlight lens; on the other hand, the A4 was desperately in need of rear struts and brakes and had a few other cosmetic flaws (and also had a complete service history from its one and only owner). Which one did we buy? The A4 with 140,000 miles on it. Why? Because after a good long test drive in the Audi 90 I stopped by a Dunkin Donuts, grabbed a few napkins and swabbed out the tail pipe tips. When I pulled the napkins out they were saturated with a considerable amount of oil; the same test (which was one of many) on the A4 revealed some nice grey dust.
#735 of 762 Re: What is a better buy: 1999 BMW M3 or 2001 330ci (same mileage each) [shipo]
Oct 03, 2011 (9:32 am)
The old napkin in the tailpipe trick!
#736 of 762 Re: What is a better buy: 1999 BMW M3 or 2001 330ci (same mileage each) [fedlawman]
Oct 03, 2011 (9:58 am)
Funny thing, in all of the years I've been looking at old cars for friends and such, this is the first time I've ever actually seen a tail pipe with any significant oil in it.
#737 of 762 Re: What is a better buy: 1999 BMW M3 or 2001 330ci (same mileage each) [shipo]
Oct 03, 2011 (10:10 am)
heh...I would have thought you'd start a fire
#738 of 762 Re: What is a better buy: 1999 BMW M3 or 2001 330ci (same mileage each) [shipo]
Oct 03, 2011 (4:14 pm)
I'm actually surprised you found any. I wouldn't think any oil could make it that far back through the chain. Whatever the headers don't crisp, I would think the heat all the way down the chain (and the cats and muffler) would catch/vaporize anything left.
#739 of 762 Re: What is a better buy: 1999 BMW M3 or 2001 330ci (same mileage each) [fedlawman]
Oct 03, 2011 (5:34 pm)
I'm thinking plenty of oil can make its way through the system before everything gets all hotted up; I checked maybe ten minutes into the drive, long enough to allow anything heading downstream to make it to the end, but not long enough for everything in the system to burn off.
#740 of 762 Re: What is a better buy: 1999 BMW M3 or 2001 330ci (same mileage each) [shipo]
Oct 03, 2011 (8:12 pm)
That makes sense.
#741 of 762 Certified but in Accident
Oct 06, 2011 (8:53 am)
I am considering purchasing a certified 3 Series. The Car Fax report indicates that the car has been in accident, but comes up negative for airbag deployment. Since it is certified and no airbag deployment, I assume that the accident was minor (probably a fender-bender that someone reported for insurance and liability reasons). However, I am skeptical about purchasing a car that has been in a reported accident and don't know if I can completely trust the fact that the car is okay based upon the fact that its certified and looks good to me.
I looked over the care carefully and cannot find anything wrong but I am not an expert. Should I pass on this vehicle, take it to a mechanic or trust the certification process and go with it? The asking price seems reasonable (perhaps a bit low) and probably accounts for the fact that the car was in an accident. What do you think?
#742 of 762 Re: Certified but in Accident [foxyesq]
by MrShift@Edmunds HOST
Oct 06, 2011 (9:11 am)
The BMW Standards state that a car cannot have a "disqualifying" CARFAX report. So the question you need to ask is what is a "disqualifying" CARFAX criteria? My impression is that some minor damage doesn't disqualify a car but the CPO standards are, I believe, pretty specific on what constitutes minor damage. If entire panels have been replaced that's a different story than a dent and some paintwork IMO.
You should ask to read the manual of their CPO standards that covers this, just in case.
#743 of 762 Re: Certified but in Accident [Mr_Shiftright]
Oct 07, 2011 (6:15 am)
I was able to find a brochure with BMW's CPO standards on the web. Very interesting for anyone who is looking for a CPO --even with a clean Carfax (body standards are on page 8).
The link to the brochure is: http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=200512
My belief is that it is up to the dealer to certify that the car complies with BMW's standards. There are some unscrupulous dealers out there. However, my feeling is that if it is certified and shouldn't have been, there is a warranty and recourse against the dealer and BMW. Anyone agree or disagree?">link title