Ideal non-pork 2nd car?

[Neil Haughey]

Cheers, all good stuff guys. Pretty much what I am thinking. Running costs don't worry me much, if I have to spend on average 2K a year to maintain it then thats OK. Petrol costs really aren't much of an issue for low milage use because you still have to maintain the thing. As an example I reckon I spent about a grand last year on the S2 but only did maybe 1K or 2K miles hence maybe 200 quid on fuel (some of that expenditure wasn't crucial, I bought a set of wheels of TK and a leather interior of another forum member).

Maybe I am in the minority but I just don't trust modern cars. They are great when in warranty but what about when they have 100K+ on the clock and the integrated electronics start to play up. As an example we have had several electrical and other gremlins on the GF's golf, a 55 plate car, none of which seem to be fixable by VW or rather they say there is nothing wrong with the car (A/C that is utterly useless for example on many days). The car starts and goes fine but it has lots of odd issues that make me think that in 10 years that car will be unsupportable and will end up scrapped. Cars built in the early to mid 90's IMHO seem to be the pinnacle in automotive history when it comes to quality of materials components and basic robustness. From what I can see an E34 if maintained and rust proofed should last for ever.

Lastly I think a car with that iconic engine has to be on every petrolheads experience list.

 

[sawood12]

Well cars have gradually been becoming more electric since the early '90's and though they were unreliable probably through the '90's the technology is now pretty mature and i'm sure that modern cars are now pretty reliable and are probably more reliable than ever before as electrical systems are generally more reliable than mechanical ones. By going for an early/mid '90's M5 you are prbably putting yourself right into the bracet of the most unreliable models made.

 

[Neil Haughey]

Mature technology as in cheap technology, yes. There is a direct relationship between the amount of electronics in a system and the reliability of a system i.e. more = less reliable. This is the fundamental reason why one often sees a very reliable system engineered as a single system rather then dual redundant because perversely dual redundancy means lower reliability but more availability ( you might not notice the failure though which is the trick with dual redundant and fault tolerant systems).

Personally I don't see any evidence at all that modern german cars have less electrical problems then german cars of 20 years ago. I think if you talk to MB owners you will get a different opinion to your view Scott.

 

[appletonn]

Neil they might be simpler and thus ostensibly more reliable due to there being less to go wrong, but you cannot ignore the fact that they are now old cars, no matter how good the original build quality - components wear out and electrical joints dry out etc.

Best of luck though, great choice of car

 

[dlknight]

ORIGINAL: James_G

There's an S8 in Ronin too, with nitrous if I remember but the infamous home cinema demonstration car chase scene is between an E34 M5 3.6 (although in a few scenes it's actually a 530i, tch!) and a Peugeot 406. There's also a big old Merc S class too, confusingly a 450SEL 6.9. No 944s though[]

That scene is amazing - used that to audition my DVD player many moons ago [].

I ran a Peugeot 306 XSI a few years ago, pretty good on petrol and had no problems with it apart from it eating front tyres and front brake pads [].

And even further back an old Mk2 VW Polo Saloon, very comfortable and pretty quick for a 1.3, had toyed with the idea of dropping the G40 or the Mk3 1.6 GTi engine in but moved on to my first Porsche instead (944 lux).

Dave K.

 

[Neil Haughey]

ORIGINAL: appletonn

Neil they might be simpler and thus ostensibly more reliable due to there being less to go wrong, but you cannot ignore the fact that they are now old cars, no matter how good the original build quality - components wear out and electrical joints dry out etc.

Best of luck though, great choice of car

True but a modern car as in one less than 5 years old will be better in those respects but will loose thousands in depreciation. My Saab was 6 yrs old when I bought it but has had more electrical components replaced then my now 18yr old S2, the Bosch MAF for example was replaced at 3 or 4 yrs old, the clever electronic throttle, the clever direct ignition module all go pop after a few years typically and these things cost hundreds each.

The alarm system is tied into the ECU to make the car more secure but yes you guest it my alarm has played up and only main dealers can fix it, again many hundreds of pounds.

My worry wrt electronics is the printed circuit boards failing due to age, typically this seems to be about 20 years or so but this will effect all cars eventually.

 

[appletonn]

Neil, no dissenting voice from me - it would be the electrics (dry solder joints etc) that would worry me most, but superb cars and the next iconic classic BMW after the E30 M3 imho.

Deeply jealous[8|][]

 

[mik_ok]

Another alternative - on sale by one of the guys on the evo magazine forum. Quite heavily modified but nicely done. I'm finding this quite attractive at the moment for the £5.5k asking price.... he did have black-centre-silver-rim D90's on it at one point, which I thought looked superb (but I seemed to be in a minority).

==============

E30 Touring.

Engine and Driveline

M52b28
E28 M5 engine mounts
'Alpina527' M50b25 inlet manifold
Bored M50b25 throttle body
255lph fuel pump
E34 M50 sump and oil pick-up pipe
Viscous fan removed
S50B30 oil filter housing with custom Vanos takeoff
S50B30 powersteering pump
Turner Motorsport Aluminium thermostat housing
Turner Motorsport AN10 Oil Line adapter
Chromeline Design underdrive pulley kit
E36 328i radiator with integrated expansion tank
Pacet electric fan
ITG filter
Bespoke BTB stainless steel manifold and full twin-box exhaust system
ZF S5D-320Z 328i/M3 5 speed gearbox
M20b25 flywheel and clutch
M20b25 starter
Z3 2.8 shortshift conversion
E30 M3 propshaft
E30 M3 (3.25) LSD

Chassis and Brakes

FK Highsport Coilovers
K-Mac adjustable camber and castor front top mounts
Powerflex e30 M3 eccentric control arm bushes
Poly subframe bushes
Rogue Engineering rear top mounts
Sparco E30 M3 front upper strut brace
E36 M3 3.0 steering rack with custom E3024V coupling joint and custom power steering pipes
8jx16" ET25 TH Monos. Powdercoated black with diamond cut face
5mm front, 3mm rear spacers
Continental Contisport 215/40/16 tyres
WMS 4 pot callipers
280mm Corrado G60 discs
EBC Red Stuff Ceramic pads
Earls braided brake lines
Mk1 Golf GTI brake servo
E32 750i 25mm Mastercylinder

Exterior

Diamond Schwartz Metallic
Hella smoked headlights and driving lights
Satin black kidney grille
Smoked front indicators
Smoked side repeaters
Silvatech bulbs
318is lip
Rear wiper removed
Audi TT aero front wipers


Interior

Border SP1 Carbon Fibre race shells trimmed in black leather
'Uwe' custom seat mounts
Black leather interior, rear headrests
Momo Corse steering wheel
Removable wheel column spacer
Hartge leather gearnob
Black leather handbrake gaitor
Black leather gearstick gaitor
4x electric windows
Dual load cover/dog guard

So, all details of the car are here: http://www.e3024v.com/project.htm

Everything is practically new, all genuine parts used, receipts from BMW for thousands of pounds, I have fully documented history with all receipts etc, literally for thousands more than the price that will buy it.

This is essentially a modern, quick, reliable efficient car in an E30 touring bodyshell.

It runs low 14s, is happy to commute to the shops and is an able track car, everything in one package basically.

£5.5k
N.B. Diamond-cut wheels are being refurbed to be less bling silver powdercoat finish.

 

[sawood12]

ORIGINAL: Neil Haughey

Mature technology as in cheap technology, yes. There is a direct relationship between the amount of electronics in a system and the reliability of a system i.e. more = less reliable. This is the fundamental reason why one often sees a very reliable system engineered as a single system rather then dual redundant because perversely dual redundancy means lower reliability but more availability ( you might not notice the failure though which is the trick with dual redundant and fault tolerant systems).

Personally I don't see any evidence at all that modern german cars have less electrical problems then german cars of 20 years ago. I think if you talk to MB owners you will get a different opinion to your view Scott.

Modern cars are thousands of times more reliable than cars of the '80's/early 90's. Thats just a simple fact. You rarely see cars broken down on the side of the road these days and i'm not too young to remember when it was commonplace. One of the biggest improvements in automotive reliability was the electronic ignition systems that made points redundant. In actual fact the reliability of a system is proportional to the number of moving parts in that system, therefore introducing electric/electronic systems reduces the number of moving parts and improves reliability. When I say mature technology I mean developed and reliable technology - not cheap and nasty. That was the problem with cars of the late '80's when more electrics were going into them - the technology wasn't mature and reliable therefore they were unreliable as a result. That was 20yrs ago and things have moved on and modern cars are in a different league in terms of reliability compared with cars from the late '80's/early '90's. So with that in mind I'm suggesting an early M5 is likely to be more unreliable than a later one where more mature technology has been incorporated.

If you truly believe that more-electric systems are less reliable then I wouldn't step foot on another aeroplane if I were you. The posh-talking chap (or even chapess) at the front isn't flying the plane - he's just along for the ride like you.

That 3 series is lush. Would hate to insure it though - probably why it is going so cheap.

 

[mik_ok]

ORIGINAL: sawood12

That 3 series is lush. Would hate to insure it though - probably why it is going so cheap.

Quoting the owner (and I'm not sure who he's with)....

..and for anyone curious, insurance is circa £500/annum all mods declared and with a £6.5k agreed valuation.

 

[Neil Haughey]

Scott where are the facts? Not talking about BL rot boxes here but german cars from the early 90's compared to those now, and I never said that the modern cars are less reliable just that I don't fancy supporting all the electrotrickery in 10 years time. My old made in 1984 Saab 900 had made in germany Bosch electronic ignition so what are you on about with this talk about points etc. and cars that break down all the time. The 900 with its Bosch electronics went from 120K to 190K in my hands and only broke down once (alternator packed up). My S2 has gone from 100K to 170K and has only broken down when my own fault (once), it was my only car for 4 years racking up on average 15K miles pa. My mothers 97 vw polo, again 60K miles no break downs.

Go and research the facts about MB and the problems they had with the E series! When I looked it up a few years ago it was as bad as Citroen.

As for the aeroplance jibe I design aircraft avionics for a living. If you can't say something of value don't say something trying to look clever that has no relevance, especially when it is on a subject that is my profession, clearly a subject you don't understand.

 

[peanut]

Nice choice John. What happened to the nice chrome wheel caps?
I drove one of these into a garage once and the front kingpin/ ball joint collapsed !Not much you can do about that with a hammer and screwdriver lol

Not sure I would want to stick a B series in though. I used to get well over the `ton' in my MGB and I'd want much better brakes and suspension .Besides it defeats the point of having one of these classics imho

ORIGINAL: morris944s2john

Non Pork 2nd car. My practical solution for this is to go completely the opposite in terms of performance, costs, everything really apart from also being a classic (both Pork and non portk feature in Practical classics price guides).

 

[ubertub]

That Touring rules, except for the seats.
This probably won't work but... here's a moggie I could be seen in:

 

[appletonn]

ORIGINAL: ubertub

That Touring rules, except for the seats.
This probably won't work but... here's a moggie I could be seen in:

Love it - major respect at the traffic lights from the Saxo boys!![][]

 

[sawood12]

ORIGINAL: Neil Haughey

Scott where are the facts? Not talking about BL rot boxes here but german cars from the early 90's compared to those now, and I never said that the modern cars are less reliable just that I don't fancy supporting all the electrotrickery in 10 years time. My old made in 1984 Saab 900 had made in germany Bosch electronic ignition so what are you on about with this talk about points etc. and cars that break down all the time. The 900 with its Bosch electronics went from 120K to 190K in my hands and only broke down once (alternator packed up). My S2 has gone from 100K to 170K and has only broken down when my own fault (once), it was my only car for 4 years racking up on average 15K miles pa. My mothers 97 vw polo, again 60K miles no break downs.

Go and research the facts about MB and the problems they had with the E series! When I looked it up a few years ago it was as bad as Citroen.

As for the aeroplance jibe I design aircraft avionics for a living. If you can't say something of value don't say something trying to look clever that has no relevance, especially when it is on a subject that is my profession, clearly a subject you don't understand.

Neil, you misunderstand me, I wasn't intending to be sarcastic (though it does come across that way after re-reading) and I certainly wasn't intending any offence. Please re-read my previous notes, I think we are actually agreeing on some points. Let me explain the relevance of my points. They are in reference to your comment that you dont trust modern cars due to the increase in electrical systems in them implying that, specifically German cars of the late '80's /early '90's were more reliable. The point i'm trying to make is that apart from a period where more electrics were being introduced in the late '80's and cars of all makes suffered electrical niggles which has given electrics a bad name, the electrics in modern cars these days are very reliable and are responsible for the increased reliability of modern cars in general. My comparison to aircraft is in reference to the fact that electrical systems fly planes these days, so if you don't trust the reliability of electical systems then flying is not for you.

Though the case of MB is a bit of a red herring as their problems were due to meddling american accountants from Chrystler rather than any fundamental engineering problem - like you said in an earlier note, cheap and nasty. They seem to be turning things around now i'm glad to say.

Pretty much every buyers guide i've ever read about late '80's cars always say be wary of the electrics as they are dodgy and expensive to fix - especially against large German saloons as they tended to have more electrics stuffed into them. And in the Porsche stable the 964 has a reputation for electrical gremlins, which is backed up by almost every buyers guide you read, the 928 also has a similar reputation. All i'm trying to say is that an M5 from the late '80's, though cheap to buy, is more likely to be unreliable and therefore more costly and problematic to run.

So I am not trying to be clever, and I intend no slurr on your proffession which, actually, I do understand - in fact i've been working in the aviation industry all my proffessional life since the age of 16 from the tools on the shop floor, in the design offices and now on the front line dealing directly with airlines as an OEM service provider managing their fleet maintenance programmes.

Anyway, hopefully, after 3 attempts i've made a better job of saying what I intended to say! Apologies for any offence - none intended.

 

[morris944s2john]

LOL at the souped up Minor travellers []

Actually, I also praise Porsches on the Morris Minor forums.

Peanut, the chrome rims were off because before that pic was taken I was preparing the traveller for its 1st MOT in 3 years.

As for the discussion on points etc, with a mechanical points system you can keep an eye on it, adjust it and its reliable, and if it breaks down, a few mins with a screwdriver and its going again. Try that with a fried ECU or problems you hear about on modern electricaL systems.

I have learnt welding, paintwork and mechanical worj from running Moggies that has all come in very useful in maintianing my S2.

 

[dlknight]

ORIGINAL: morris944s2john

As for the discussion on points etc, with a mechanical points system you can keep an eye on it, adjust it and its reliable, and if it breaks down, a few mins with a screwdriver and its going again. Try that with a fried ECU or problems you hear about on modern electricaL systems.

I agree with you John,

Had an intermittent problem with my ABS warning light a couple of months ago, in the end replacing the ABS ECU resolved the issue, luckily I managed to find one on ebay for peanuts. However I hate to think what a brand new one would of cost from Porsche [:-].

I used to run a 1972 VW Type 2 (Campervan) and it was so much more reliable than any modern car I have owned, as John said a couple of minutes with a screwdriver is all you needed if the points needed adjusting or maybe a little carbarettor adjustment. Very simple mechanics and extremely reliable, thats why you still see so many old VW's on the road. Wonder if the same can be said in 20 years time of the current VW models ?

Dave K.

 

[John Sims]

There are good and bad in most cars, and of most eras. You wouldn't believe how difficult it is to get a Rover V8 running properly or how many variations they managed to develop with different carbs and distributors.[]

Any road up IMHO the only point of having a 2nd car to a 944 is to have a vehicle that can do something you can't in a 944:-

If you want to go off road, tow, get down & dirty, go anywhere, park anywhere, carry rubbish, tools, dirty dogs etc, and not care, a Land Rover/Range Rover/Legacy has to be a consideration.

Any Estate has to be worth looking at as is (if you move more than 2+2 people) a 4 door saloon. There are shed loads of newish 2nd hand cars out there to choose from. The is little or no point getting and alternative car similar to a 944.

If the other car is similar to a 944 you will always be comparing the two and, one day, the 944 will loose. Then what's the point in having a 944?

With regard to electronics in modern cars - AFAIA BMW dealers consider the new M5 a licence to print money. They do go wrong and are spectacularly expensive to fix.

Electronic components on anything can go wrong. Seldom can they be repaired and replacements aren't often cheap or readily available (50% of the 1st Audi TTs were rendered useless for weeks by a distributor fault because dealers couldn't get replacements) As noted previously the electronics of many modern cars are so inter twined with the anti theft systems that you can't even replace a radio without visiting a main dealer.

There is a lot to be said for KISS.

My recommendation for a 2nd/1st car with a 944 is:-

a) Land Rover
b) Another 944 []

 

[Neil Haughey]

This is why I love you guys, in a roundabout sort of way we all end up agreeing eventually.

What John says is highlighting exactly the sort of point I was getting at. My 9-5 is a good example. I can fix the mechanical parts myself but now that there is a problem in the alarm system it is main dealer only because if you could unwire the sensors then the car could be nicked, so Saab tied the alarm system into the engine ECU. I would imagine that most modern high end cars have similar anti-theft systems.

I think Scott got the wrong end of what I was saying. Modern electronics with surface mount technology, decreased components and more powerful microprocessors are with out doubt more reliable then a circuit board from 20 years ago designed to do the same job. However in recent years the amount of electronics in vehicles has increased at a fantastic rate, and TBH I am doubtful that the improved reliability of individual circuit boards is big enough to offset the increased amount of electronics. Anyways the sorts of failures I have seen are in new components such as the MAF or the Direct Ignition casette in my wagon, I believe these components are less reliable then a distributor and a AFM like those found in our old school 944.

However this is academic because right at the start I made the point which I feel is killer, which is to do with what do you in 10 or 20 years time with vehicles like John says are a PITA to support now let alone in 10 to 20 years when age effects start coming into play.

I don't doubt for one second that a new car is more reliable then a 10 year old one, this isn't the point is it?

As for avionics, well that is a different kettle of fish entirely. I don't think I have ever seen a dual redundant system in a car for example.

 

[Neil Haughey]

Maybe of interest to some folks, these wiki pages read pretty good;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_flight_control_systems

whilst modern cars use CAN bus, the data bus I have seen a lot of is this;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIL-STD-1553

Like I said before many ppl get confused by dual/triple/quadruple redundant systems. The MTBF may actually be lower, therefore technically less reliable. However the point of redundant systems is to take an action (such as switching over to the backup) quickly enough that the local system failure doesn't propagate into a catastrophic failure. Hence the availability is higher rather then the reliability if being pedantic.

Anyways in all this talk nobody has mentioned software! The question is; which ultimately is more reliable? A complicated analog circuit board or a digital processor with a load of software on it? The thing that has annoyed me no end over the years is the implicit assumption that if you build a system using digital components with like 1 million hour MTBF you will get mega reliability. Then some "person" comes along and puts 2 million lines worth of dodgy code on it hacked together in 4 weeks using Visual studio. You can guess what happens to the overall reliability. These days pp understand more and more the fact that in modern systems it is the software that fails, hence in Avionics there are nosebleed inducing safety accreditation hoops to jump through for the software.