Gbp

Just a general comment about how this thread has progressed....

One example: When someone feels like they have to defend their reason for not changing the engine out themselves by posting X-Rays of damage to their legs, it's time to take a step back and consider what this forum is about. Some posts in this thread have IMO needlessly criticized OP without putting his wrecked engine into context with the other maintenance issues he's had.

An earlier comment sticks in my mind as a great summarization of OP's experiences. It was something like: "These cars are supposed to be bullet-proof, but it seems you caught a silver bullet." No matter how rational the possible explanations are for OP's problems, he certainly has had more than his share of them!

So why not cut OP a little slack as many posts here have done? Overall reliability means little if you've a car that seems to have been a magnet for every major problem these cars have been subject to. Of course this is an exaggeration, but you get my drift.

I agree that when purchasing a used luxury car, you need to budget realistically for repairs, including looking beyond having the work done at the dealer and having them source the parts for you. I think, though, OP is the best judge or whether his car is the right one for him. Having had all the repairs done and if he can get his insurance to cover most of his engine replacement costs, perhaps the car will now be what he was expecting. Only the OP can determine that.

/off soapbox

DiggerJim

Far more were than were not. Mine started its decline within a month of delivery. The thing saw so much dealer garage time it could have been insured there The problems with the 7 series are very well documented going back to the original models (which preceded Internet forums btw). As I recall Microsoft was responsible for the I-Drive system and spawned a bunch of jokes about the BMW manifestation of the Blue Screen of Death which was funny until it wasn't.

rudyH

My business partner and I both had 7 Series. They were the worst cars either of us have ever owned.

Doublebase

On the subject of reliability, anyone who says a car from the 80's is more reliable than the LS460 is most likely not thinking clearly, and that's ok, it happens. The cars from the 80's weren't even fuel injected. Try starting a car from the 80's on a cold morning...good luck. The engines were big, underpowered, had little efficiency and weren't reliable.Today's cars are so advanced that you can unplug a coil pack, tear off a couple of vacuum lines and the computer will still be able to compensate and keep the thing running. Do that on a car from the 80's and its game over. A car from the 80's wasn't expected to last much more than 100,000 miles, but today that's just breaking a car in...even the worst ones.

My LS is approaching the 100k mile mark, so far no issues. From what I've read on most other threads, that type of reliability is what I can expect going forward. That's what I'm hoping for, not the stuff I've read on this thread.

Devh

Yep. People often get nostalgic about cars from the past being reliable which is not the case at all. The cars from the 80s were some of the worst. Since computerized cars hit the market in the 90s they have increased reliability tremendously and the mechanical parts they have now like ball joints are not only maintenance free, they can last well over 100k miles.
The cars we often hear about going over 300k from the 90s are more of the exception then the norm.

In other news some of the quality and engine drive train reports has come out for the newer S class and Mercedes didn't disappoint as they have not changed despite all of the hype surrounding the car.
I'm beginning to see a pattern where there is hype in the media about the latest German makes spreading the propaganda they have changed but they end up being the same crappy car. The S class did get the JD performance award but that means nothing as I would trade that for a well made car like the Lexus.

Pamperme

Your first sentence mentions reliability, yet the rest of your post compares technology. Not trying to nitpick, but it's apples and oranges.

Doublebase

The whole premise of my post was reasoning why it is ridiculous to compare a car from the 80's, to a car from now. Technology does factor into the equation of reliability, that is my point.

Pamperme

It's worth nothing that the most reliable car according to many sources, is also one of the most advanced and technological laden pieces of machinery in the automotive world —the Lexus LS. Many used ones have a better reliability record than newer less technology induced makes. Reliability is a matter of commitment, not necessarily technology.

Pamperme

I wasn't comparing a civic to a LS460 specifically. And as I've said before: reliability is about commitment, not necessarily technology.

Pamperme

YESSSSSSS!!!!!! I couldn't agree more!!!

Doublebase

I'd call reliability excellent engineering, design and quality control, along with commitment.

Every car company could make an outstanding reliable vehicle, but most are not committed to it, like you say. It's not their goal, their goal is to make as much profit as possible while maintaining some acceptable level of reliability. Other companies have a different formula for making money...some rely on reliability...that's their selling point. I think Lexus/Toyota, Honda/Acura fall into that category.

You're absolutely right about technology, it does not directly lead to reliability in the sense you're talking about. Some companies just use technology as a selling point...they have to be the first ones to sell it, yet it doesn't work. GM is famous for that. And Chrysler cares more about appearance and gadgets than mechanical reliability. It makes me sick. I'd throw Kia/Hyundai into that mix as well, although their cars look nice and have come a long way, they are cheaply made and don't hold up well in the long run.

roadfrog

Bwahahahahaha!!!! Ohhhhh man! Just when I thought it couldn't get funnier....

When the BMW Regional Rep at the Vancouver International Car Show tells you that the 7 series was "meant to be leased or purchased CPO after a lease", that should tell you something. When you spend 2.5 years on the #1 BMW Forum (Bimmerfest) and share the misery with hundreds of other 7 series owners bemoaning the car, that is not a "lemon". When Time Magazine lists it as one of the "50 Worst Cars in History", that is not a one-off. When there are scads of videos about limousine companies losing their businesses because of mechanical and computer issues and companies in Los Angeles patenting techniques and tools to make 7 series ownership less of a hardship....etc. Trust me, I could go on. But as I typed this, I wondered if you were just trolling. I hope not.

Just go to the 7 series forum of Bimmerfest and feast your eyes on the misery there.

Nospinzone

Wow, I've never been to that forum, and I just went over there. I clicked on the forum for 7 Series 2002-2008. When I bought my 2007 LS I considered a 750 (along with an S550, and A8), so that would have been the model I would have bought. Of 40 threads on the first page, 21 of them were titled stating a problem. Some others may have also been about a problem, but they were too many to read.

Earlier in this thread someone mentioned that part of Lexus' problem was a fast ramp up in production and also an increase in the number of models. Just the other day I was discussing with a friend how many different models BMW now makes. One has to wonder how adversely this will affect their already questionable reliability.

I would also say the same thing about Maserati. Two years ago they made 15,000 cars per year. They are now on course to produce 50,000. I just don't see how they can ramp up that much more production and maintain any sense of quality (not that they were that reliable when they were only building 15,000 vehicles).

Pamperme

Once again, the video:
BMW 7 Problems-YouTube
For some odd reason the video won't embed. The link is all that will post.

DiggerJim

It's the Chevy Vega of the super-luxe world