[tturedraider]

Originally Posted by pruettfan

I think this is a step in the wrong direction but I am sure BMW has studied what the competition is doing and what motivates the sales of their cars. I think it is a mistake, it won't change what brand car I buy but I am not happy. I also think this combined with the lack of transferability of the maintenance is really going to impact resale values which is unfortunate. We will see I guess.

Used buyers are much more interested in having a warranty. Losing one year of maintenance will be a non sequitur.

The new car warranty transfers automatically. Even the CPO warranty is transferable in a private sale.

[Brian_R]

Originally Posted by SayGo

Soooo lets keep complaining about getting free stuff. If you can't afford to maintain your vehicle then....you can't afford to own the vehicle. If you solely base your car buying decision on having all the scheduled maintenance included, BMW is not the car for you.

It has more to do with message about standing behind your product compared to your competitors than anything else. Obviously BMW either thinks a) sales are so good that people will buy anyway or b) overdelivering vs. their perceived main competitors.

Those that follow the brand see all of the price jacking and benefit cutting for a company making record profits as disingenuous, and it's an accurate assumption.

[sycd]

Originally Posted by sygazelle

If the poll is right, many of us will be driving Cadillacs within 3 years. Quick, go buy some of that GM stock.

It would take a lot more for me to buy a Cadillac.

[pimp4cheddar]

Originally Posted by sygazelle

Brakes and clutches are consumables. Your lucky BMW ever did cover them. Is the competition offering free brake and clutch replacement? Given your rate of consumption, you should probably go buy the brand that gives you stuff for free. BMW has decided not to keep doing that.

The non-enthusiast BMW owners will still keep buying BMWs anyway. They are not going through clutches and brakes at your enthusiastic rate anyway.

The entire car is a consumable...lol

I'm far from lucky. It's covered...if I need them...they cover. My usage wasn't excessive and I don't care what the competition covers - I care about what the car that I'm paying $$$ for covers.

Regardless of my brake consumption rate, the fact that they are moving away is concerning and definitely a bad move. Enthusiast, non-enthusiast, fake enthusiast, forum enthusiast, basement enthusiast - at the end of the day, they're all people that purchased the car regardless of what the forum warriors want to classify them as.


Reducing duration + reducing coverage = BAD MOVE

Stand behind the brand and deliver a truly exceptional driving and ownership experience - is exactly what my point is. If you miss that, I can't help you.

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by sygazelle

Since the competition does not offer 4 year free maintenance, what you are really saying is the only reason you are driving BMWs is that they offer a great free maintenance program; otherwise you would have other brands in your stable now. Is that correct? If correct, you are making car choices based on the free maintenance programs, not the attributes of the product itself. If not correct, why would you leave BMW because they lessened their free maintenance to go to a brand that doesn't offer a better program.

Either way, I don't understand your logic.

Indeed you do not.

There are brands that have similar offerings but are more reliable and offer cheaper maintenance. All of these extrinsic factors are part of my decision making process as well as the intrinsic factors such as pure fun. Lexus SUVs almost never break. They are much cheaper to acquire per comparable model and are dull as dishwater.

I hope this simple example helps you.

[Tag]

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by flyga3

Bummer. Wonder what will happen to lease residual values now that those things will need to be replaced by the user. Also what happens if leasing 3yr and 15K miles per year (45K total)?? What will be the minimal pad thickness prior to lease end? Looks like a beefed up revenue stream for dealers.

Oh and strike spark plugs off the list. They aren't going out before 36K. I have yet to have a BMW before 75K need new plugs.

Not quite.

My M6 had plugs at 22K, 37K, 59K and in the new engine at 77K.
$350 a pop if you are paying your own money.

Cheers-mk

[KELVIN7]

I spend money to maintenance my BImmers at outside of dealers all the time, even they are under 4yrs/50k miles. I can't take that low quality oils, fluids from Dealers, and then they bullshit let me replace them thousands miles. I replace them half time they told me, lol....but honestly if BMW's really gonna change their plan to this way, Audi is my next car.

[flyga3]

Originally Posted by tturedraider

Brake pad thickness isn't measured at lease turn-in. Unless the CBS is showing a brake service due when you turn in the car the lessee is not responsible for it.

Well actually when you bring it in for service and the countdown mileage is close they will measure. Just received my thicknesses on the last service all around. It's mileage based so given the mileage remaining and thickness, they will definitely come after a brake change if needed. $1300 for front or back over here.
The countdown mileage thing is really bogus actually. Mine shows 1400 miles to service before my trip and I just traveled 2400 in the last 2 weeks. Know what it says? 1400 miles left. So not until that pad wear sensor gets worn and changes the capacitance of the sensor signal will the computer make a more accurate prediction.

[flyga3]

Originally Posted by MKSixer

Not quite.

My M6 had plugs at 22K, 37K, 59K and in the new engine at 77K.
$350 a pop if you are paying your own money.

Cheers-mk

Well must me an M thing. Of the 7 BMW's in the last 17 years, I have never pulled them prior to 75K. Gotta love the straight 6.
Did you do the work yourself or did you just trust what they said and you paid? ;-)

[dsouth]

Maintenance was one of my reasons for the M4.

[flyga3]

Originally Posted by Tag

:

[mPlasticDesign]

Originally Posted by rjc32000

Sorry, I didn't mean to come off like some high-flying corporate investor; I'm not!

And anyone with an international stock index in their portfolio likely owns BMW shares; I'm willing to bet that applies to many forum members here.

I was just messing with you. I really need to curb my sarcasm. I just don't understand all these people accusing forum members as being "cheap" because they don't like this revised maintenance schedule. Every one of us has paid for this in the price of the car. We will continue to pay because it is doubtful BMW will adjust the price down in 2017. Expecting something for free is one thing but having something you have paid for and is figured into the cost of the cars MSRP taken away is not being cheap at all. It's like people don't understand the principle in this argument. Its not just wipers and remote batteries. Brakes! There is a BIG difference in covering pads, rotors, clutches, belts til 50k miles vs. NOT covering those items at all and limiting everything else that is still covered to only 36k.

[uansari1]

Originally Posted by sygazelle

Since the competition does not offer 4 year free maintenance, what you are really saying is the only reason you are driving BMWs is that they offer a great free maintenance program; otherwise you would have other brands in your stable now. Is that correct? If correct, you are making car choices based on the free maintenance programs, not the attributes of the product itself. If not correct, why would you leave BMW because they lessened their free maintenance to go to a brand that doesn't offer a better program.

Either way, I don't understand your logic.

I'm not sure how you're not getting this...it's not rocket science. There are a few ways to look at this, so I'll give it a shot with an easy explanation of just one perspective. Have you ever done a cost-benefit analysis? Under a basic cost-benefit BMWs were "cheaper" than their Mercedes, Jaguar, etc. competitors, due to the fact that you could discount the price you were paying by a few thousand since maintenance was included. Now, the BMW product is staying the same, but the price of the product is increasing. Any difference that you could come up with by discounting the price has also decreased. So now the competition will be more attractive (or BMW will be less attractive depending on how you look at it).

What BMW would have to do to maintain parity is decrease the retail price of their vehicles commensurate with the difference in the maintenance plans.

[Golfgeek]

The "CBS" mentioned really has me wondering. We just brought the X3 in for the three year scheduled svc. Brakes pads were supposed to be done but they weren't worn enough. What happens at the 48 month mark? Are they planning to replace them or not?

[sygazelle]

Originally Posted by MKSixer

Indeed you do not.

There are brands that have similar offerings but are more reliable and offer cheaper maintenance. All of these extrinsic factors are part of my decision making process as well as the intrinsic factors such as pure fun. Lexus SUVs almost never break. They are much cheaper to acquire per comparable model and are dull as dishwater.

I hope this simple example helps you.

It helps me understand that I don't get your logic.

Are you trying to say that you will buy a dull as dishwater Lexus SUV over an X5 because BMW reduced its free maintenance from 4 to 3 years while Lexus does not have a 4 year free maintenance program? Really? Given your self-proclaimed passion for great car purchases, I call BS. You are not likely to leave BMW over this move. I can hear you now at your next social party in your neighborhood; "I showed those idiots at BMW who dared to reduce their free maintenance coverage. I went and bought a brand new dull as dishwater Lexus SUV." Your audience asks, "oh, is the Lexus maintenance program better?". You say, "No, actually its worse but that's not the point. I've decided to drive dull as dishwater appliance to show BMW that they can't mess with me and take away free stuff." I just don't see this conversation happening. In the end of the day, you will buy what you want. That may be a Lexus, but your logic for making the switch has to be more than a year of free maintenance. Time will tell. Let us know when you actually vote with your feet. Good luck.

[larryn]

I haven't even taken redelivery of my ED M4, and I'm thining, "Hello Porsche" for my next car. Cheap-ass mofos.

[tturedraider]

Originally Posted by Brian_R

It has more to do with message about standing behind your product compared to your competitors than anything else. Obviously BMW either thinks a) sales are so good that people will buy anyway or b) overdelivering vs. their perceived main competitors.

Those that follow the brand see all of the price jacking and benefit cutting for a company making record profits as disingenuous, and it's an accurate assumption.

The fact is when prices are adjusted for inflation BMW has been remarkably good at holding the line on pricing since at least the introduction of the E46. In fact, even with all the additional safety equipment and in-car technology there are times when equivalent prices today are lower than they were in the E46 era.

[sygazelle]

Originally Posted by uansari1

I'm not sure how you're not getting this...it's not rocket science. There are a few ways to look at this, so I'll give it a shot with an easy explanation of just one perspective. Have you ever done a cost-benefit analysis? Under a basic cost-benefit BMWs were "cheaper" than their Mercedes, Jaguar, etc. competitors, due to the fact that you could discount the price you were paying by a few thousand since maintenance was included. Now, the BMW product is staying the same, but the price of the product is increasing. Any difference that you could come up with by discounting the price has also decreased. So now the competition will be more attractive (or BMW will be less attractive depending on how you look at it).

What BMW would have to do to maintain parity is decrease the retail price of their vehicles commensurate with the difference in the maintenance plans.

Thanks for the explanation. I think you have summarized my key point nicely. You are suggesting that without the free 4-year maintenance plan BMW does not have a product as attractive as the competition from a feature/function/price/experience standpoint. I'm saying that's not true. Regardless of the emotion-driven poll that goes with this thread, we are all buying cars based on multiple factors. Cost/benefit isn't even close to the top or we would all be owning Honda or Toyota product. Nothing wrong at all with those brands from a utility standpoint, but that is not what the people on this forum are in it for. Some of the haters are complaining over maybe $1,000 worth of maintenance but have no problem specing their new rides with $15k worth of upgrades and then go modding on top of that. I'm saying after the dust settles, most of us won't switch brands just because off this. We will select our next car purchase on factors that are important to us; money is just one of them. For me, I will simply use this change bargain for a better deal on my next BMW and make a sport out of it. What matters is that we drive the car we want to drive. I'm merely suggesting that we will not let less than $1,000 get in the way of that decision when we can most likely close that gap with good negotiation.

[tturedraider]

Originally Posted by Golfgeek

The "CBS" mentioned really has me wondering. We just brought the X3 in for the three year scheduled svc. Brakes pads were supposed to be done but they weren't worn enough. What happens at the 48 month mark? Are they planning to replace them or not?

Technically only if the CBS indicates they need to be changed. They may measure and opt to change them if they're close to being out of spec, but that's not a given.

[sygazelle]

I've been pretty vocal on this topic because I think some of the posters are pissed now but will come to their senses. I have been this BMW pissed off customer in the past. First time was when I was driving a very nice E39 540 and I could not wait until the next 5er came out. Along with a bunch of people, I hated the E60 design and vowed to never buy one and leave the brand over this styling fiasco. I still hate the E60 look and never did buy one. I kept my amazing E39 6 extra years. But I came back because when I finally did want another car, BMW was the clear winner for me.

Second time I was pissed was when they offered only RFT with no spare. I vowed to never buy a BMW because of that change. Again, on my next purchase I weighted the alterntives and bought BMW anyway.


I'm not you guys, but I know what its like to be upset and make bold statements about what I will and won't do. If someone put a poll in front of me the day BMW announce RFT only with no spare, I would have voted that I would never buy a BMW again. I still hate RFTs, but I bought the brand anyway. So much for bold statements.

[spellbmw]

Originally Posted by HXS

Is BMW losing money on that or something?

Seriously. Disappointing. Will be reconsidering options for next car purchase.