12k to Spend - Which would you choose?

slumped

I have a budget of 12k for a second car. First car is a 97 Toyota so want something newer. What would you pick from this selection (all good condition):

BMW 523i - Saloon- 1998 - Silver - 62,000 on clock

Alfa Romeo - Saloon - 156 1.6 TS 16V - 2002 - 31,000 on clock

Rover 25 - Hatchback - 2003 - 4,300 on clock

Personal preference is BMW. What you think??

Slumped

Wolverine_1999

Judging on reliability and performance wise, the BMW is the clear choice. The Alfa Romeo is supposedly very unreliable, and they don't even make Rovers anymore!

xabi

It has to be the BMW.

maidhc

Just make sure the miles are geniune on the BMW, and that you can afford the running costs!

Shrimp

Rover 25 - Hatchback - 2003 - 4,300 on clock ??

probably been in the garage so often it doesn't get a chance to clock up any more.

but BMW wins out-right..

C_Breeze

cocaine and hookers! ...oh wait thats not a choice.

Go for the Beemer then !- dont be tempted by the low mileage of the others.
-defo stay away from the rover .

kluivert

You have two nice cars and a crap Rover why did you throw the Rover in?

Personally i would go with the a Set Leon Tdi if you can find one.
Second to that would be the Alfa.

Good luck searching.

Eoin

Wolverine_1999 wrote:

Judging on reliability and performance wise, the BMW is the clear choice. The Alfa Romeo is supposedly very unreliable, and they don't even make Rovers anymore!

On the performance thing, definitely the beamer, but only because of the difference in engine sizes. You have picked a rather large range of cars there: an executive saloon, a small saloon and a hatchback - what are the criteria for your car?

I wouldn't bother with the Alfa - only because you will lose a lot of money very quickly on a 156 of that year - not because of knee-jerk and generally uninformed reactions such as the one above.

The 1.6 156 came out in 2000, and the 1.8 and 2.0 came out in mid to late 98. If you are looking at a 2.3 litre BMW, then you may as well look at the larger engine 156s. A 02 model may have a slightly nicer dash, but the depreciation would not be worth it.

Search this forum for 156 opinions and you will get a LOT of results, there was a thread very recently in which there is a lot of information.

toffeapple

you will get a 98 523i cheaper than 12 grand..especially at this time of year

Mr Magnolia

BMW, that's a nice 5-series

leeroybrown

I'd pick the BMW unless the cost of tax, fuel and insurance were a worry. I also think that a 1.6 156 would be a tad underpowered (especially when compared to the 523).

Eoin

leeroybrown wrote:

I'd pick the BMW unless the cost of tax, fuel and insurance were a worry. I also think that a 1.6 156 would be a tad underpowered (especially when compared to the 523).

For a 1.6 it is quite nippy (about 120 BHP), but compared to the 1.8 and 2.0 litre versions, it is a little underpowered alright.

OP, check out the BMW 323 or 325 (can't remember which) for sale in the FS:Motors forum - looks excellent value for money, but it is 14K though.

fletch

The 523 is a 2.5ltr

JohnCleary

Personally, id go for the Rover. They're a great car as long as you actually know how an engine works. Don't believe what everyone says "They're cr4p" .. They are going on what they've heard, not experienced. Check the oil & coolant once a week, and bobs yer uncle. I have 93,000 miles on my one and not a bother since the day I bought it! (Apart from a track rod end for the NCT, oh and a tiny hole in the exhaust which cost 20 quid to fix)

Anyways, without going into a rant...

I'd choose the Rover for running costs. BMW's are great but can you afford to run/tax/insure/maintain it? Think about it!

The Rover is a 1.4, easy to tax/insure. Not much maintenance, just check yer oil and coolant at least once a week. 103BHP from a 1.4 .... Can't really go wrong with that can ya?

Anyways.. just my opinion...

Eoin

fletch wrote:

The 523 is a 2.5ltr

Oops, my bad. Why don't they just call it a 525 then?

leeroybrown

eoin_s wrote:

Oops, my bad. Why don't they just call it a 525 then?

BMW model numbers do not always directly correlate with the engine sizes. I think the 1998 525 would have been a 525 TDS.

In any event the difference in taxation between a 2.3 and 2.5 is minimal and shouldn't be a major factor once you can afford go there in the first place.

bazz26

eoin_s wrote:

Oops, my bad. Why don't they just call it a 525 then?

That's the Germans for you. From the late 1990s a 520i is a 2.2, a 318i is a 2.0 and a 318D is a 2.0.

Dead

buy a old twin cam 86 ae86 corrlla - a older m3 bmw or import a 10 k dodge charger [ yes it can be done ]