2004 Accord to a 2000 e39 540i? would ya?
Discussion
I'm really bored of my nice but dull Honda Accord. I have very find memories of my V8 Audi I owned a few years ago and am tempted by an e39 540i that i've spottrd. It's on an 'S' plate so is a bit older than my Honda.
What do you reckon? Would it be an upgrade or a downgrade?
I'm thinking I'd end up pocketing a grand and have a more satisfying car to own and drive.
My Accord is a 2.4 auto so not exactly economical and the 540i is a six speed manual.
Sorry for clunky post....it's my first
ever using my phone rather than the PC.
What do you reckon? Would it be an upgrade or a downgrade?
I'm thinking I'd end up pocketing a grand and have a more satisfying car to own and drive.
My Accord is a 2.4 auto so not exactly economical and the 540i is a six speed manual.
Sorry for clunky post....it's my first
ever using my phone rather than the PC.
traffman said:
I would def go for that .
The beemer 540 has a lovely engine decent build quality , although not sure if this engine has the nikasil problem??
Anyway heart to heart i would go for it.
Just mind that your fuel bills will rise.
If the engine is fine now then it won't have a nikasil problem in the future.The beemer 540 has a lovely engine decent build quality , although not sure if this engine has the nikasil problem??
Anyway heart to heart i would go for it.
Just mind that your fuel bills will rise.
I think buying a car older than your current car is the cool way to 'upgrade'...
I moved from an 11-year-old 86K car to a 15-year-old 213K car and it's been more reliable, used less fuel and carried more junk-per-tip-trip!!
Newer cars are for people who lack character (or love cupholders).
I moved from an 11-year-old 86K car to a 15-year-old 213K car and it's been more reliable, used less fuel and carried more junk-per-tip-trip!!
Newer cars are for people who lack character (or love cupholders).
S. Gonzales Esq. said:
Definitely don't get an e39 if you love cupholders.
Trip computer economy figures from my 540i/6: Round town - 20mpg, average run 24mpg, absolute maximum (a tedious 56mph on the M'way) 38mpg.
Mine was more like 17/22/28 - auto though.Trip computer economy figures from my 540i/6: Round town - 20mpg, average run 24mpg, absolute maximum (a tedious 56mph on the M'way) 38mpg.
They are a fabulous car but to be honest they don't give you much more pleasure than an equivalent spec 530/528.
I've had a 528 and a 540 btw (tourings) and if I were getting another I'd probably try to fined a nice 530 Sport manual.
Nice work finding the manual, hope it's a good un, they're usually like hen's teeth! Have to say, I find the auto 540s a little bit disappointing, not worlds apart from a 530 or 535.
Anyway give it a good try over broken/pot holed roads, the suspension may be getting a little tired in places. Expect a smattering of rust in the usual E39 places. Lovely car though, will sh*t all over the Accord.
Anyway give it a good try over broken/pot holed roads, the suspension may be getting a little tired in places. Expect a smattering of rust in the usual E39 places. Lovely car though, will sh*t all over the Accord.
dave_s13 said:
HustleRussell said:
This evening I'm swapping my 2003 Mondeo TDCI for a 1996 525i Se Touring (E34). Can relate totally to the idea of 'upgrading' to an older, simpler car.
E34 is a "proper" car though, probably better built than the E39.I think the E34's build quality deserves simular acclaim to that of the W124 mercedes, and the engine range is better, and only in the BMW can you get a manual with a hanbrake lever
T16OLE said:
Are you sure its a year 2000 on an "S" plate?
+1Isn't S plate late 98-early 99?
Not that it makes much difference on a car of that age.
One other thing about the 540. Isn't it a different steering system, allegedly less responsive than the systems fitted to the straight-6 cars?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff



Sound advice; the rear ones will be broken, the front ones (when used) will confuse the climate control.
