RE: SOTW: BMW 750iL (E32)

RE: SOTW: BMW 750iL (E32)

Author
Discussion

urquattro

755 posts

186 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
Morningside said:
The E38 iL has parking sensors front and back.
So did the S500, elevating poles on rear wing plus panasonic front and rear, unfortunately it didn't make the car any smaller, you got in a slot but couldn't get out of the car.!

Morningside

24,110 posts

229 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
urquattro said:
Morningside said:
The E38 iL has parking sensors front and back.
So did the S500, elevating poles on rear wing plus panasonic front and rear, unfortunately it didn't make the car any smaller, you got in a slot but couldn't get out of the car.!
Opps, sorry! I misread (read too quickly) front/back not the sides banghead

gatesy24

9 posts

163 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
I'm reading "run it til til something breaks then scrap it" but aren't these late 80s BMWs über reliable? Could end up drinking you dry before it gives up the ghost.

monthefish

20,441 posts

231 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
Zwoelf said:
You can have a 728i, 735i, 740i or 750i Sport, it was limited to short wheelbase variants, not by engine choice.

http://www.gmscars.co.uk/bmw_750_sport_greydetails...




http://www.gmscars.co.uk/bmw_750_sport_black-detai...

The LWB looks much better/sleeker IMHO...


http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/3374019.htm

Think is because the glasshouse is shallower as a proportion of the length.

Gizmo!

18,150 posts

209 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
monthefish said:
Zwoelf said:
You can have a 728i, 735i, 740i or 750i Sport, it was limited to short wheelbase variants, not by engine choice.

http://www.gmscars.co.uk/bmw_750_sport_greydetails...




http://www.gmscars.co.uk/bmw_750_sport_black-detai...

I'd have either of the above, with very great pleasure.

The LWB looks much better/sleeker IMHO...


http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/3374019.htm

Think is because the glasshouse is shallower as a proportion of the length.

s m

23,219 posts

203 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
Ozzie Osmond said:
ludicrous speed said:
This one is definitely not for me, potential money pit, not fun to rag around, canes fuel. But if you want to waft about in 22nd hand luxury then it could be a good buy.
Excellent summary IMO.
Big too big for my usage and I think the 540i would be what I'd go for if I were to buy a bigger BM. Seems a bit quicker/sportier than this model V12

urquattro

755 posts

186 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
s m said:
Big too big for my usage and I think the 540i would be what I'd go for if I were to buy a bigger BM. Seems a bit quicker/sportier than this model V12
I bought my first BMW this year, a pre face lift 540i Touring, a 2000 reg. with full service history etc, V8 power is very good and almost economical. After 2.5k miles it is still behaving itself, was properly serviced/checked over after I bought it.
These are excellent cars now for £2k plus but there is history re some BMW electics/electronics issue, but no more than MB of the same period and without their rust, ie E series.

Balmoral Green

40,863 posts

248 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
david_b said:
One of the Bentley guys was demoing this on a running Continental W12 engine at Goodwood last year - my snap below smile


Goodwood Festival of Speed 2010 by david_b, on Flickr
You can do that on most anything though. We used to do it on Lexus when the LS400 was 1st launched, then tried it on a Corrolla, then a HiLux. No problem.

Zwoelf

25,867 posts

206 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
Balmoral Green said:
ou can do that on most anything though. We used to do it on Lexus when the LS400 was 1st launched, then tried it on a Corrolla, then a HiLux. No problem.
At idle yes (thanks to balancer shafts in many cases, which is "cheating" somewhat), but can it be revved fully and not fall off/over?

Edited by Zwoelf on Saturday 5th November 15:26

johnpeat

5,326 posts

265 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
Balmoral Green said:
ou can do that on most anything though. We used to do it on Lexus when the LS400 was 1st launched, then tried it on a Corrolla, then a HiLux. No problem.
I doesn't work on a 405 1.9TD - just tried it smile

urquattro

755 posts

186 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
johnpeat said:
I doesn't work on a 405 1.9TD - just tried it smile
Did you find the 50p piece or did the 405 lob it over the walltongue out

thebrush8

161 posts

181 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
I've run my E32 for a couple years now, they are fantastic! If whoever has bought it wants to part with the interior once it expires, those seats are in better nick than mine biggrin


dome

687 posts

257 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
urquattro said:
Did you find the 50p piece or did the 405 lob it over the walltongue out
Have a rofl

Bogracer

438 posts

207 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
Nors said:
Cheburator mk2 said:
You are not serious, are you?

The BMW can easily do 20mpg at 70...

The Jag - hmm, how about 15mpg at best...
I accept the Beemer should be more efficient being a newer engine, all I'm saying is, I didn't think in real world driving the "economy" of both cars will be that far removed. If it's 5 mpg more in the Beemer, then fair play, didn't think the difference would be that much!

Beemer should be miles more reliable though.
Owned both the Jaguar V12 is a total disaster, mainly electrics. Short runs pre-HE managed 6 MPG!

dbdb

4,324 posts

173 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
Bogracer said:
Owned both the Jaguar V12 is a total disaster, mainly electrics. Short runs pre-HE managed 6 MPG!
Later V12 Jags had much better electrics - the V12 engined XJ40 and X300 cars both have excellent electrics. I'd guess the facelift XJS probably does too. The six litre engine is also significantly more economical than the 5.3.

urquattro

755 posts

186 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
Bogracer said:
Nors said:
Cheburator mk2 said:
You are not serious, are you?

The BMW can easily do 20mpg at 70...

The Jag - hmm, how about 15mpg at best...
I accept the Beemer should be more efficient being a newer engine, all I'm saying is, I didn't think in real world driving the "economy" of both cars will be that far removed. If it's 5 mpg more in the Beemer, then fair play, didn't think the difference would be that much!

Beemer should be miles more reliable though.
Owned both the Jaguar V12 is a total disaster, mainly electrics. Short runs pre-HE managed 6 MPG!
After running a 1983 V12 XJS for fifteen years the only electrical faults/issues was fuel pump relay failure, a bit dangerous as the time for a £2 bit. No amplifier or iginition problems except speed humps could upset the glass fuses sometimes.
This was a business and pleasure car so it had to work for its existence, it is now being restored, see earlier postings on this thread. Car never a disaster for me.
It was parked under a car port at all times and not left in rain, a real issue for Lord Lucas electrics but iginition side was never a problem.

theironduke

6,995 posts

188 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
urquattro said:
Lord Lucas
the Prince of Darkness wink

Zwoelf

25,867 posts

206 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
theironduke said:
urquattro said:
Lord Lucas
the Prince of Darkness wink
biglaugh

LHD

17,000 posts

187 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
Zwoelf said:
theironduke said:
urquattro said:
Lord Lucas
the Prince of Darkness wink
biglaugh

Rosewood Red

857 posts

153 months

Saturday 5th November 2011
quotequote all
LHD said:
Oooh, never knew they sold replacement magic smoke hehe