|
|
Post by racingteatray on Jun 13, 2017 14:46:01 GMT
For the avoidance of doubt, I am not personally interested. I just happened to spot it and thought it worthy of comment.
Does £35k of expenditure offset a mileage of 180k? Is the price fair? Would you?
www.4starclassics.com/BMW-E39-M5-For-Sale-8/ |
|
|
|
Post by LandieMark on Jun 13, 2017 14:50:11 GMT
If the history is OK and the car looked fresh, then I would. It sounds like it has been maintained without regard to expense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Jun 13, 2017 15:37:11 GMT
If its as good as it looks then yes.
Although if you check on Autotrader that money will buy you a good one with half the miles.
I suppose the £35k spent cancels out the mileage, the cars on AT might not have had anything like that money spent.
Obviously it depends what the money was spent on too.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Jun 13, 2017 16:02:22 GMT
4* are not noted for their deals!
The £35k of expense is not worth the words written in the advert. It's 18 years old so that's under £2k per annum, 50% of which might just be tyres.
|
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on Jun 13, 2017 16:24:38 GMT
It states: "The previous owner, who also purchased the car from us, spent in excess of £35k bringing the car up to as new condition." So that suggests it was a restoration, not just lifetime running costs.
That said, they say they previously sold it twice, the last time three years ago, and when I look through their "Sold" section, I can see:
An advert presumably from some time in 2014 where it had 152k on the clock; and
An advert presumably from some time in 2012 (judging by the tax expiry date) where it had 128k on the clock.
So the work was presumably done latest 2012 and it has covered at least 50k miles since then (10k pa), so your point is taken.
It does look extremely tidy though from the pictures and £14k doesn't seem an outrageous price.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnc on Jun 13, 2017 16:51:51 GMT
I would expect the bottom end to need some attention after that number of miles, particularly if someone has enjoyed the full performance .................... and then there's the gearbox!
I reckon it could be a good one to buy but equally you would need to be prepared from some fairly large unexpected bills. |
|
|
|
Post by LandieMark on Jun 13, 2017 20:08:53 GMT
It states: "The previous owner, who also purchased the car from us, spent in excess of £35k bringing the car up to as new condition." So that suggests it was a restoration, not just lifetime running costs. That said, they say they previously sold it twice, the last time three years ago, and when I look through their "Sold" section, I can see: An advert presumably from some time in 2014 where it had 152k on the clock; and An advert presumably from some time in 2012 (judging by the tax expiry date) where it had 128k on the clock. So the work was presumably done latest 2012 and it has covered at least 50k miles since then (10k pa), so your point is taken. It does look extremely tidy though from the pictures and £14k doesn't seem an outrageous price. That's the way I read the advert. |
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Jun 13, 2017 21:34:24 GMT
I'm standing by my statement. The advert says:
Whilst it says there has been a refurbishment it days the £35k is in the history file but that does not indicate that the bulk of it was spent on said refurb. I'm being defensive of course but either way it's an E39 M5; there are loads of them so the risk is probably not worth it.
|
|
|
|
Post by michael on Jun 13, 2017 21:57:36 GMT
I'm with BB, the maintenance figure over the lifetime of a car that age and of that type is bound to be high.
Personally I wouldn't touch it.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Jun 14, 2017 7:18:28 GMT
What puzzles me with cars like this is that, having brought them back to "as new" condition, would you want to pay wel over the odds to then regularly use it, and see its condition deteriorate?
I'm curious to know what happens to cars like this after they get sold, do they tend to go to collectors and remain in an unused time-warp, to rich enthusisats who use them occasionally and/or take them to shows, or do some actually use them as daily drivers (even at 18 years old), and if so, how do they stand up to regular use?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Jun 14, 2017 9:06:12 GMT
I'm with BB, the maintenance figure over the lifetime of a car that age and of that type is bound to be high. Personally I wouldn't touch it.
At the severe risk of tempting fate here the cars aren't that expensive to run. Unless you took it to BMW for servicing of course. Tyres will last 20k miles unless you're a driftmeister.
The big costs would come from bodywork, something I'm looking at over the next couple of years.
Chris, if you were to buy that car there is no benefit in not using it. It's done 180k miles so putting miles on isn't going to be the thing that ruins the value. You'd simply enjoy it, keep it maintained and ensure it was kept indoors when not being used.
|
|
|
|
Post by chipbutty on Jun 14, 2017 17:04:21 GMT
I've conducted some detective work (i.e - read the fucking advert) and deduced the following :
Full re-paint + new wings + new trims and rubbers + facelift lights + badges and a windscreen at a main dealer
Interior re-trimmed/parts replaced where required + retrimmed headliner
Engine fully rebuilt in 2013 at Sytner at a cost of 10 grand +
All this work was done between 2013 and 2014 at a total cost of £35k
No mention of the suspension - but assuming it's been done, the engine was rebuilt and run in properly and there isn't a trace of rust anywhere, I would say it's worth the money
|
|
|
|
Post by Stuntman on Jun 14, 2017 20:09:02 GMT
If I was looking for an E39 M5, this one would absolutely definitely be worthy of serious consideration.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blarno on Jun 15, 2017 12:01:53 GMT
Maybe it's my cynical mind, but why were both front wings replaced and an upgrade to late-spec lights? Sounds to me like it's had a light front ender. With a colour like Carbon Black, a full repaint would likely be necessary to blend the new paint with the old.
Or I could be wrong.
Either way, it looks mega and would, as Frank says, be a far better choice than an RS6 of that era in terms of ownership prospects - IE, not emptying your wallet and entering you dry at every opportunity.
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on Jun 15, 2017 12:28:02 GMT
Maybe it's my cynical mind, but why were both front wings replaced and an upgrade to late-spec lights? Sounds to me like it's had a light front ender. According to the "wheeler dealer" philosophy, fitting later-spec headlights to "desirable" cars enhances their value. If the car had to have new front wings due to corrosion or light damage, maybe the owner thought that he/she might just as well update the lights at the same time |
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Jun 15, 2017 12:45:18 GMT
Simple, the E39 suffers from the same issue, although to a lesser extent, as the E46.
The wings will need attention on mine, which is a slightly later one.
The headlight upgrade is almost standard if you're doing anything to the car and is, I think, very straightforward.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sav on Jun 17, 2017 11:52:31 GMT
The owner has tried to make it as LCI as posible - headlights, tail lights and the widescreen sat nav screen. The only real giveaway is the pre-LCI steering wheel. I do love E39's.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Jun 19, 2017 11:13:20 GMT
I'll post up some photos of rust if you want to be put off? 
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on Jun 23, 2017 11:39:03 GMT
What I miss the most is the chuckability compared to the F11. Not rusty:  |
|
