Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the OP, this thread illustrates the fact that vast majority people have little to no actual knowledge of what they talk about. They simply repeat what they've heard, or hold on to notions that are no longer true.

In general, vehicle reliability gap between different brands have narrowed significantly since the 80's and 90's, when there was a sizable gulf between Honda/Toyota and "the rest". With just a handful of notable exceptions, current selection of vehicles fall into a fairly small range of reliability. Note that Consumer Reports places BMW higher on their average reliability rating than Honda. I am sure either a new BMW or Honda would be similarly reliable, and any issues you encounter would be the exception rather than the rule.

That said, the cost of ownership for an older BMW will typically be higher due to more expensive repairs when they do happen. There are fewer budget oriented independent shops that work on BMWs versus those that fix Honda/Toyota.

As for why BMW typically has worse resale value, there are a multitude of reasons. The most significant of which is the incorrect perception that Hondas are such reliable cars. This perception is the reason why a used 2-3 year old Honda are usually sold with just a modest discount from an all-new price. People are so set in their thinking that a used Honda is a great deal that they pay entirely too much for one. Another reason is that BMWs are often purchased as status vehicles and as such people tend to want to drive late models with newer body styles.

100% correct. Finally someone who gets it.
People confuse reliability with cost of repair.
BMW are as reliable as Honda if not more. The issue is cost of repair and ownership.
I have owned both of them. My Honda was even less reliable than my BMW, it broke down much more.
But it was cheap to repair. Honda parts and labor costs are much cheaper compared to BMW’s.
My BMW never let me down, it was the most reliable car I ever owned. But any trip to the dealership was costly.
Luxury brands like BMW charge more because they target luxury buyers that can afford it.
Hondas are for price sensitive buyers.

sooo, what are you repairing if its so reliable

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the OP, this thread illustrates the fact that vast majority people have little to no actual knowledge of what they talk about. They simply repeat what they've heard, or hold on to notions that are no longer true.

In general, vehicle reliability gap between different brands have narrowed significantly since the 80's and 90's, when there was a sizable gulf between Honda/Toyota and "the rest". With just a handful of notable exceptions, current selection of vehicles fall into a fairly small range of reliability. Note that Consumer Reports places BMW higher on their average reliability rating than Honda. I am sure either a new BMW or Honda would be similarly reliable, and any issues you encounter would be the exception rather than the rule.

That said, the cost of ownership for an older BMW will typically be higher due to more expensive repairs when they do happen. There are fewer budget oriented independent shops that work on BMWs versus those that fix Honda/Toyota.

As for why BMW typically has worse resale value, there are a multitude of reasons. The most significant of which is the incorrect perception that Hondas are such reliable cars. This perception is the reason why a used 2-3 year old Honda are usually sold with just a modest discount from an all-new price. People are so set in their thinking that a used Honda is a great deal that they pay entirely too much for one. Another reason is that BMWs are often purchased as status vehicles and as such people tend to want to drive late models with newer body styles.

100% correct. Finally someone who gets it.
People confuse reliability with cost of repair.
BMW are as reliable as Honda if not more. The issue is cost of repair and ownership.
I have owned both of them. My Honda was even less reliable than my BMW, it broke down much more.
But it was cheap to repair. Honda parts and labor costs are much cheaper compared to BMW’s.
My BMW never let me down, it was the most reliable car I ever owned. But any trip to the dealership was costly.
Luxury brands like BMW charge more because they target luxury buyers that can afford it.
Hondas are for price sensitive buyers.

You almost got me convinced. Please provide your BMW dealership's name and your name. I'm sure someone would like to stop by for a test drive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the OP, this thread illustrates the fact that vast majority people have little to no actual knowledge of what they talk about. They simply repeat what they've heard, or hold on to notions that are no longer true.

In general, vehicle reliability gap between different brands have narrowed significantly since the 80's and 90's, when there was a sizable gulf between Honda/Toyota and "the rest". With just a handful of notable exceptions, current selection of vehicles fall into a fairly small range of reliability. Note that Consumer Reports places BMW higher on their average reliability rating than Honda. I am sure either a new BMW or Honda would be similarly reliable, and any issues you encounter would be the exception rather than the rule.

That said, the cost of ownership for an older BMW will typically be higher due to more expensive repairs when they do happen. There are fewer budget oriented independent shops that work on BMWs versus those that fix Honda/Toyota.

As for why BMW typically has worse resale value, there are a multitude of reasons. The most significant of which is the incorrect perception that Hondas are such reliable cars. This perception is the reason why a used 2-3 year old Honda are usually sold with just a modest discount from an all-new price. People are so set in their thinking that a used Honda is a great deal that they pay entirely too much for one. Another reason is that BMWs are often purchased as status vehicles and as such people tend to want to drive late models with newer body styles.

100% correct. Finally someone who gets it.
People confuse reliability with cost of repair.
BMW are as reliable as Honda if not more. The issue is cost of repair and ownership.
I have owned both of them. My Honda was even less reliable than my BMW, it broke down much more.
But it was cheap to repair. Honda parts and labor costs are much cheaper compared to BMW’s.
My BMW never let me down, it was the most reliable car I ever owned. But any trip to the dealership was costly.
Luxury brands like BMW charge more because they target luxury buyers that can afford it.
Hondas are for price sensitive buyers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the OP, this thread illustrates the fact that vast majority people have little to no actual knowledge of what they talk about. They simply repeat what they've heard, or hold on to notions that are no longer true.

In general, vehicle reliability gap between different brands have narrowed significantly since the 80's and 90's, when there was a sizable gulf between Honda/Toyota and "the rest". With just a handful of notable exceptions, current selection of vehicles fall into a fairly small range of reliability. Note that Consumer Reports places BMW higher on their average reliability rating than Honda. I am sure either a new BMW or Honda would be similarly reliable, and any issues you encounter would be the exception rather than the rule.

That said, the cost of ownership for an older BMW will typically be higher due to more expensive repairs when they do happen. There are fewer budget oriented independent shops that work on BMWs versus those that fix Honda/Toyota.

As for why BMW typically has worse resale value, there are a multitude of reasons. The most significant of which is the incorrect perception that Hondas are such reliable cars. This perception is the reason why a used 2-3 year old Honda are usually sold with just a modest discount from an all-new price. People are so set in their thinking that a used Honda is a great deal that they pay entirely too much for one. Another reason is that BMWs are often purchased as status vehicles and as such people tend to want to drive late models with newer body styles.

You almost got me convinced. Please provide your BMW dealership's name and your name. I'm sure someone would like to stop by for a test drive.


100% correct. Finally someone who gets it.
People confuse reliability with cost of repair.
BMW are as reliable as Honda if not more. The issue is cost of repair and ownership.
I have owned both of them. My Honda was even less reliable than my BMW, it broke down much more.
But it was cheap to repair. Honda parts and labor costs are much cheaper compared to BMW’s.
My BMW never let me down, it was the most reliable car I ever owned. But any trip to the dealership was costly.
Luxury brands like BMW charge more because they target luxury buyers that can afford it.
Hondas are for price sensitive buyers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the OP, this thread illustrates the fact that vast majority people have little to no actual knowledge of what they talk about. They simply repeat what they've heard, or hold on to notions that are no longer true.

In general, vehicle reliability gap between different brands have narrowed significantly since the 80's and 90's, when there was a sizable gulf between Honda/Toyota and "the rest". With just a handful of notable exceptions, current selection of vehicles fall into a fairly small range of reliability. Note that Consumer Reports places BMW higher on their average reliability rating than Honda. I am sure either a new BMW or Honda would be similarly reliable, and any issues you encounter would be the exception rather than the rule.

That said, the cost of ownership for an older BMW will typically be higher due to more expensive repairs when they do happen. There are fewer budget oriented independent shops that work on BMWs versus those that fix Honda/Toyota.

As for why BMW typically has worse resale value, there are a multitude of reasons. The most significant of which is the incorrect perception that Hondas are such reliable cars. This perception is the reason why a used 2-3 year old Honda are usually sold with just a modest discount from an all-new price. People are so set in their thinking that a used Honda is a great deal that they pay entirely too much for one. Another reason is that BMWs are often purchased as status vehicles and as such people tend to want to drive late models with newer body styles.

100% correct. Finally someone who gets it.
People confuse reliability with cost of repair.
BMW are as reliable as Honda if not more. The issue is cost of repair and ownership.
I have owned both of them. My Honda was even less reliable than my BMW, it broke down much more.
But it was cheap to repair. Honda parts and labor costs are much cheaper compared to BMW’s.
My BMW never let me down, it was the most reliable car I ever owned. But any trip to the dealership was costly.
Luxury brands like BMW charge more because they target luxury buyers that can afford it.
Hondas are for price sensitive buyers.

Anonymous wrote:To the OP, this thread illustrates the fact that vast majority people have little to no actual knowledge of what they talk about. They simply repeat what they've heard, or hold on to notions that are no longer true.

In general, vehicle reliability gap between different brands have narrowed significantly since the 80's and 90's, when there was a sizable gulf between Honda/Toyota and "the rest". With just a handful of notable exceptions, current selection of vehicles fall into a fairly small range of reliability. Note that Consumer Reports places BMW higher on their average reliability rating than Honda. I am sure either a new BMW or Honda would be similarly reliable, and any issues you encounter would be the exception rather than the rule.

That said, the cost of ownership for an older BMW will typically be higher due to more expensive repairs when they do happen. There are fewer budget oriented independent shops that work on BMWs versus those that fix Honda/Toyota.

As for why BMW typically has worse resale value, there are a multitude of reasons. The most significant of which is the incorrect perception that Hondas are such reliable cars. This perception is the reason why a used 2-3 year old Honda are usually sold with just a modest discount from an all-new price. People are so set in their thinking that a used Honda is a great deal that they pay entirely too much for one. Another reason is that BMWs are often purchased as status vehicles and as such people tend to want to drive late models with newer body styles.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you have to worry about depreciating value, then you can't afford to own a BMW. Stick with the Honda or lease the BMW. I own a German car and know that it's costly to maintain.

I can afford it and I still like to consider value over time. I'm sure the OP can afford it as well. It's not necessary to make these comments.

Anonymous wrote:I have a 2003 Honda Accord with 220k mikes on it that rubs great.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you have to worry about depreciating value, then you can't afford to own a BMW. Stick with the Honda or lease the BMW. I own a German car and know that it's costly to maintain.

I can afford it and I still like to consider value over time. I'm sure the OP can afford it as well. It's not necessary to make these comments.

Anonymous wrote:If you have to worry about depreciating value, then you can't afford to own a BMW. Stick with the Honda or lease the BMW. I own a German car and know that it's costly to maintain.