Best smoker barges 1-5 large [Vol 10]

[harrykul]

r129sl said:

CampDavid said:

Get it recovered, hire something and forget about it, time with your family is an undervalued commodity and nothing as tedious as a car should get in the way.

Parts are just that, sort them when you're back and it'll be a better car when repaired.

This is the plan to a Tee.

Everyone is fine, apart from the deer.

Thanks again, all.

Glad to hear that everyone's ok, and hope that you enjoy the remainder of your trip.

Edited by harrykul on Monday 29th August 11:17

[harrykul]

em177 said:

What do you all think of this? I'm now of the opinion I need a '129 and a '126 in my life...

http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C782707

Love the colours, especially navy pinstripe velour.

Shame that it's only a 380 though.

Worth further investigation I think.

[ess]

A bit of Gallic loveliness just to mix it up a little in here.
If only I had space.
s

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Citroen-CX-DTR-Turbo-2-1...

[W00DY]

derin100 said:

All internet myths.
Rust? Not really...only superficial stuff and certainly no more than that that any car driven on wet, salt-laden U.K roads would suffer by now....and hundreds of non-rusty ones available.
Gearbox? We've had six E39s...never had a gearbox problem on any of them.
Electrical issues? Can't think of a single electrical problem we've ever had.

Biggest problems are the weakness of the engine cooling components (shared with other similar engine BMWs of the era so just renew them off the bat) and absolutely appalling headlamps on early cars if non-xenon equipped.

Now, after saying that, I've invited my wife's car to collapse due to structural just rust just after spending a fortune fitting a new gearbox and and chasing umpteen electrical gremlins!

I'm (fairly) confident it won't!

Nice as that E32 appears, I can't see how a 30 year old E32 would simplify your life....?

I had to check my headlights were working correctly on the first night drive in my E39. Is there a bulb which can improve things? No issues to report so far with mine, just the issue of a car being a bit too nice to the point where one finds constant little bits to improve.

[derin100]

Riley Blue said:

No road sense, deer and it's often not the first one you hit but the second, third and/or fourth - ask me how I know... Glad no one hurt.

I looked into this a while back after almost hitting a Roe deer on two occasions on the narrow country road near our place in SW France. On both occasions it was at twilight and the deer appeared "out of nowhere" from the adjacent field, jumping fast right across the road on which we were driving. The height across the road would have probably been at windscreen height had an impact occurred.

I wondered, what would make an animal be so stupid as to move or jump in the most dangerous direction possible when it could go in any other direction than the one it chose to get away from a perceived threat? And why do they seem so vulnerable to being hit by cars? Almost like they're going out of their way to bring this upon themselves. A suicidal death-wish? A display of bravado to impress it's piers? Boredom causing it to play "chicken"? A way of getting one back on humans, for the deer team as a whole, by endangering humans, at the sacrifice of their own lives? Just doesn't make sense.

Well, apparently it's none of those things. Apparently, there are two things that make them especially prone to car strikes:

Firstly, if they are already on the road and approached by headlights (a perceived threat/predator) their first instinct is to freeze absolutely still for a couple of seconds. The rational being that predators perceive movement very well. Thus, by keeping absolutely still a predator might not even see them. Not a very good tactic against a car. Hence, "SPLAT!"

Secondly, which fits with my own experience on both occasions, is that when they do actually go into flee/flight mode their instinct is to run, as much as possible, at right-angles to the line of attack of a predator. In the natural world a predator would have much more difficulty catching it if a deer is close and running at right angles because the running predator can't change to that direction fast enough. Again, a poor tactic on the part of the deer against a car moving at a speed that it couldn't possibly encounter or imagine in a natural predator. Hence, "WHACKO!"

Frightening!

[edo]

st advert. Worth a look possibly...

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2016...

[edo]

S600

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2016...

[derin100]

tenfour said:

derin100 said:

0a said:

I've been put off e39s by a chap who owns a lovely e28 M535i, an e30, an e34 - a big BMW fan - who swears he will never have another e39 after owning 3 and suffering... claims they were the w210 of the BMW world!

Probably bad luck!

Yes, I think maybe bad luck or I've just had pretty good luck?

I'd actually say the E36 is by far the low point of BMW...personally, I wouldn't have another one of them.

The biggest issue with the E39s in particular is the chocolate suspension, in my humble opinion. All the examples I've driven, from 528 to the M5, suffer the dreaded shimmy, which can be nigh-on impossible to localise.

As someone who cannot stand undue vibration, this issue used to drive me absolutely crackers. I believe the E38s are similarly afflicted. Likewise the E53 and its bloated, Brummy L332 cousin.

I've also fallen victim to cooling system maladies (viscous fan exploded), but these were M5 specific, so hardly appropriate to tar the entire line-up with.

Nevertheless, the rest of the car is superbly built, and as a cheap wafter, I'd have no more qualms about smoking an E39, than I would its E34 predecessor ten years prior.

BMW's "W210" was the E85/6 Coupe and Roadster, IMO. They were shockingly put together and very cheaply made. A real shame, as the E86 Z4M could have (should have in fact) been an all time great.

The potential shimmy issue is pretty much common to every single BMW model that I have owned stretching right back to my 2002 days nearly 35 years ago and in no way unique or only common to E39s. You're right in that the causes can be myriad and sometimes difficult to track down (tyre pressures, deformed tyres, unevenly worn tyres, wheel alignment, soft/worn control arm bushes, sticking calipers, glazed discs causing it even when you're not braking...I even had that causing it once so badly that at times it would set up a resonant frequency that it would literally almost shake the steering-wheel out of your hands! ).

I have to say that in my experience the worst culprit for this was (and as evidenced by the reems of internet content on this subject when I used to frequent internet forums, both UK and US, for this model) the E32. A big heavy car with the same front suspension set-up as its lighter siblings and a generally 'blancmange', excessively soft suspension and hence showing those tendency much more easily and sooner. But, I've even had it on my E38 which has/had relatively low mileage but some front suspension bushes had gone soft even though they looked ok. So, it's not an E39 thing.

In terms of build quality, I still think the E36 is the absolute low point. And four different specialist BMW mechanics that I've used over the years have all said the same and all dislike working on them...as I do. The interiors are crap with the cheapest, flimsiest plastics used that I have experienced in a BMW. Additionally, so much was just clipped together with plastic clips during design/construction that now, with the passing of time and ageing of the plastics, so much rather than unclipping when you're trying to work on them either just snaps or doesn't clip back together again accurately.

I actually own an E85 3.0Si. I wouldn't have said it's badly built. It's true that some of it feels a bit "light"...there's no bonnet or boot insulation and I believe in the early, pre-facelift ones there's no door insulation... so it feels a bit 'tinny' but I believe all of this was done as a weight saving. It's supposed to be a sports car. The criticism levelled at the subsequent E89 (production just ended) was that it was too heavy and people want its successor to be simpler, raw-er and lighter like the E85 was.

IMHO, the absolute pinnacle of BMW build quality was the E31 8-Series. But it came with a major weight penalty...I just have to open a door or move a front seatback forwards to remember why my E31 weighs so much more than my E38 7-Series. At the time, although they came with a huge price tag, the production costs were also so high that BMW is unlikely to ever repeat this again.

Ironically, my 'top vote' (E31) and 'bottom vote' (E36), in terms of build quality, were launched roughly around the same time...launched only 11 months apart!

[dbdb]

r129sl said:

The car did a smashing job. It was a big deer and we hit it at 40. It got us to our holiday house without dying, which is pretty important at 10pm on a Sunday night. I'm in Torridon. I'm likely to get the car trucked back to Newcastle and then either to hire something or to go and get the 190. There's a garage at Lochcarron but getting a rad is likely to take all week and let's face it, driving it like that is not ideal.

Thanks all for the concern. I must admit, before the deer hit the ground I was thinking, "what can I get next?"

I am glad you are OK - and that you are planning to repair the car.

I am impressed by the way the car withstood the impact. Hitting a deer at speed is a real life and severe test of car safety - and your Mercedes has handled it well. Safety is important, even in a classic car. Poor safety would not stop me driving a car, but it is reassuring to see our old barges can take quite a hit. The big old barges (Mercedes and Jaguar in particular) were much safer than ordinary cars back then - and are much closer to modern cars in the way they protect you in an accident. Smaller or cheaper old cars are much further adrift.

[Lowtimer]

harrykul said:

em177 said:

What do you all think of this? I'm now of the opinion I need a '129 and a '126 in my life...

http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C782707

Love the colours, especially navy pinstripe velour.

Shame that it's only a 380 though.

Worth further investigation I think.

I would want to hear a very explicit story of how the July 2015 MOT failure for corrosion was addressed, with invoices and ideally photographic evidence:
"Nearside Rear Subframe mounting prescribed area is excessively corroded (2.4.A.3)"

It passed in August 2015 but that test expired three weeks ago and it is currently not showing as having an MOT in the system despite what the advert says. My concern would be that it got a temporary fix involving a lot of underseal last July with the problem possibly now showing itself again. For a low mileage car it is also extremely low priced, which makes one wonder why.

The MOT history suggests that the car has done precisely 985 miles in the nine and a bit years between April 2006 and August 2015, which means one woudl have to inquire very closely into the maintenance history, under what conditions it has been stored, and how (if at all) it has been recommissioned.

[dbdb]

derin100 said:

0a said:

I've been put off e39s by a chap who owns a lovely e28 M535i, an e30, an e34 - a big BMW fan - who swears he will never have another e39 after owning 3 and suffering... claims they were the w210 of the BMW world!

Probably bad luck!

Yes, I think maybe bad luck or I've just had pretty good luck?

I'd actually say the E36 is by far the low point of BMW...personally, I wouldn't have another one of them.

I have been put off the E39 by a 530i owned by a friend on mine. It is an excellent car when it works - short on character admittedly, but very competent indeed. It is just so troublesome. It is almost never fully working and has suffered a long, sad and expensive list of problems - transmission, suspension, cooling - and myriad electrical faults which prove difficult to diagnose. In its defence, the body is still good and the interior shows little signs of wear for its 120,000-odd miles. It has cost him a lot of money. I would have thrown in the towel long ago! He could just have a lemon of course.

[Lowtimer]

W00DY said:

I had to check my headlights were working correctly on the first night drive in my E39. Is there a bulb which can improve things? No issues to report so far with mine, just the issue of a car being a bit too nice to the point where one finds constant little bits to improve.

Is it a post-facelift angel eyes car or a early one?

First things first: what voltage is coming through to the bulb holders, and what sort of state are the reflectors in? If "13v with the engine running" and "good" then put in some Osram Nightbreaker Plus. If not, then clean connections / earths and/or replace bits as necessary.

[dbdb]

Geekman said:

dme123 said:

I'm just waiting for a house sale and a divorce to finalise in the next 2 - 3 weeks, so that seems a good time to take on a decade old and very thirsty Jaguar. Are you selling yet?

I wasn't looking to sell for a few months yet, but it looks like my other car is going to be finished a lot sooner than expected so if you did want something in a month or so, that could probably be arranged. If you want to discuss it, send me an email at mattburke1994 at live dot co dot uk - I don't think PMs work for me here.


Terrible luck re the deer - glad everyone's OK. I had a similar incident myself several years back in rural France - missed it by inches and I remember thinking how lucky I was.

My brother had an X350 Super V8 about ten years ago. He was very happy with it - and found it to be one of the most economical cars he has had. In fairness, he is very much a bargist, but his Super V8 averaged into the early twenties mpg - as did the SuperSport he owned more recently. Both were more economical than his W140 - and especially more frugal on petrol than the E66 BMW 7 Series he owned between the two Jags. That was particularly thirsty, but it was the 740Li; he reckoned it was a bit underpowered (though I thought it was fairly quick!). He has a Bentley Flying Spur at the moment - that only manages 14!

[derin100]

W00DY said:

I had to check my headlights were working correctly on the first night drive in my E39. Is there a bulb which can improve things? No issues to report so far with mine, just the issue of a car being a bit too nice to the point where one finds constant little bits to improve.

Yes...on my first E39 which was an earlier 523i saloon they were so bad that on a couple of occasions in the dark with a bit of rain that I actually just had to stop. I just couldn't see where I was going.

I got some improvement by using the Philips X-treme bulbs. They still weren't brilliant though. Xenon equipped ones that we've had have been good. Both of our current E39s are 2000/1 models with the 'Angel Eyes' type headlamps. They're better than the early ones but still only just adequate I'd say. The lights are probably my biggest gripe about E39s.

[derin100]

dbdb said:

derin100 said:

0a said:

I've been put off e39s by a chap who owns a lovely e28 M535i, an e30, an e34 - a big BMW fan - who swears he will never have another e39 after owning 3 and suffering... claims they were the w210 of the BMW world!

Probably bad luck!

Yes, I think maybe bad luck or I've just had pretty good luck?

I'd actually say the E36 is by far the low point of BMW...personally, I wouldn't have another one of them.

I have been put off the E39 by a 530i owned by a friend on mine. It is an excellent car when it works - short on character admittedly, but very competent indeed. It is just so troublesome. It is almost never fully working and has suffered a long, sad and expensive list of problems - transmission, suspension, cooling - and myriad electrical faults which prove difficult to diagnose. In its defence, the body is still good and the interior shows little signs of wear for its 120,000-odd miles. It has cost him a lot of money. I would have thrown in the towel long ago! He could just have a lemon of course.

I just know that now that I've been relatively lucky so far that all Hell is going to fall down upon me for saying it!

[dbdb]

derin100 said:

dbdb said:

derin100 said:

0a said:

I've been put off e39s by a chap who owns a lovely e28 M535i, an e30, an e34 - a big BMW fan - who swears he will never have another e39 after owning 3 and suffering... claims they were the w210 of the BMW world!

Probably bad luck!

Yes, I think maybe bad luck or I've just had pretty good luck?

I'd actually say the E36 is by far the low point of BMW...personally, I wouldn't have another one of them.

I have been put off the E39 by a 530i owned by a friend on mine. It is an excellent car when it works - short on character admittedly, but very competent indeed. It is just so troublesome. It is almost never fully working and has suffered a long, sad and expensive list of problems - transmission, suspension, cooling - and myriad electrical faults which prove difficult to diagnose. In its defence, the body is still good and the interior shows little signs of wear for its 120,000-odd miles. It has cost him a lot of money. I would have thrown in the towel long ago! He could just have a lemon of course.

I just know that now that I've been relatively lucky so far that all Hell is going to fall down upon me for saying it!

I'm not sure it is luck - I suspect it is down to choosing an excellent example and them maintaining it well.

I wonder if the problem is that they don't handle abuse particularly well and need to be cherished somewhat? - Maybe they are just too complicated and robustness comes from simplicity? They are certainly impressive and very modern feeling cars when they're running well. The E39 feels MUCH more modern than my Jag.

[em177]

Lowtimer said:

harrykul said:

em177 said:

What do you all think of this? I'm now of the opinion I need a '129 and a '126 in my life...

http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C782707

Love the colours, especially navy pinstripe velour.

Shame that it's only a 380 though.

Worth further investigation I think.

I would want to hear a very explicit story of how the July 2015 MOT failure for corrosion was addressed, with invoices and ideally photographic evidence:
"Nearside Rear Subframe mounting prescribed area is excessively corroded (2.4.A.3)"

It passed in August 2015 but that test expired three weeks ago and it is currently not showing as having an MOT in the system despite what the advert says. My concern would be that it got a temporary fix involving a lot of underseal last July with the problem possibly now showing itself again. For a low mileage car it is also extremely low priced, which makes one wonder why.

The MOT history suggests that the car has done precisely 985 miles in the nine and a bit years between April 2006 and August 2015, which means one woudl have to inquire very closely into the maintenance history, under what conditions it has been stored, and how (if at all) it has been recommissioned.

Had a chat with the seller, didn't get as far as the subframe as apparently the boot is full of water. So I'm out.

[derin100]

I think you're right. It's best to start off with a good one even if it costs more to buy initially.

Apart from one (the 525i Touring that we keep out in France...which is a bit ropey now) we've always bought either really low mileage ones or once I had a slightly higher mileage 540i Touring but that came with a massive maintenance folder supporting it.

My wife had an R-reg 528i Touring that we bought with something like 62K miles on the clock. I remember we bought it on Ebay for £4750 (IIRC) which was more than the going rate at the time...but I still firmly believe that mileage does make a difference. She drove it for all daily activities, family holidays to the south of France 3 times, the school runs throughout our 3 kids' entire Primary and most of their Secondary education taking it to 134K miles...and we still got £1600 back for it on Ebay! Despite all of that abuse the biggest wobbler it threw over the years was a head-gasket. Apart from regular servicing (service intervals were still short on those earlier ones) and consumables the only other things it needed were two front shocks and the rear air-suspension bags which are really consumables as well...just tend to go without warning and at the most inopportune time!

Her current one, bought locally from an older chap, had a mileage of something like 52K when we got it. Ok, I paid 2-3x more for it than one can pick up a seemingly half-decent E39 but it was still well within thread budget, there isn't a speck of rust on it, absolutely everything works as it should and the only thing we've had go wrong is the steering rack and replacements come two a penny on Ebay and my mechanic charged £45 to fit it:

http://www.bmwclassics.co.uk/gallery/index.php?spg...

[Lowtimer]

I think that's right. They are complex cars, were expensive when new, and attempts to run them on micro-budgets will always end in tears. Keep them in the style to which they are entited to be accustomed, and carry our regular programmed anticipatory maintenance and they're magnificent. But you can't do that on the cheap.

[BigBen]

Well the C140 went to its new home today. Although I didn't 'bond' with the car and have not owned it long I can't help but feel a slightly sad. The new owner also has a W140 as well as an R129 in the same colour as the C140 so quite a Merc collector. He also told me of his boss selling his S65 for £8k.....

Ah well the upside is I have a barge fund burning a hole in my pocket, avidly watching ebay / autotrader / everywhere for some other big inefficient Merc

Ben