bmw v accord v mercedes

Mandzhalas

All cars year 2003
bmw 525i e39
accord new shape and any engine
mercedes w211 and either e220cdi or e240

my prioritys as follows
1.luxury/ride quality
2.reliability
3.runing costs
4.gadgets

car will be kept for 3-4 years.there is posibility that if petrol,convert to lpg.
cars is for young family.driving 10000 miles a year

WICH ONE WILL I GET?

Funny that you mention the brands of two cars in the thread title, and the model the other!

Have you test driven any of them yet?

ian87

BMW. E39 is easily one of the most handsome models they made in the last 20 years. Plus a 6 cyl BMW beats the others hands down!

Alanstrainor

The Accord would probably be the most reliable of the lot. Everyone knows I'm a BMW fan, but I'd probably go with a well spec'd and sorted Accord over the others to be honest; given the requirements anyway.

Mandzhalas

Deleted User wrote: »

Funny that you mention the brands of two cars in the thread title, and the model the other!

Have you test driven any of them yet?

didnt test any

shinkansen

Mandzhalas wrote: »

All cars year 2003
bmw 525i e39
accord new shape and any engine
mercedes new shape and either e220cdi or e240

my prioritys as follows
1.luxury/ride quality
2.reliability
3.runing costs
4.gadgets

car will be kept for 3-4 years.there is posibility that if petrol,convert to lpg.
cars is for young family.driving 10000 miles a year

WICH ONE WILL I GET?

all cars year = 2003 and honda accord new shape doesn't add up

there was a face lift accord in 2007/06 and a new one in 2008/09-

have a executive accord myself with the 2.4 engine and its a bomb. very reliable and all the toys. Its fast too and as economical as you can get for a 2.4 litre.

The accord is a beautiful beautiful car, reliable, hold their value reasonably well, more bang for your buck.

But I'd still buy the e39, it just feels nicer, IMO.

Drive them, see what you like the feel of, you'll know quickly.

shinkansen

i would like a well appointed 6 pot BMW myself, but i cant bring myself to believe it would be cheaper to run than the accord. I am talking about msport ones with all the toys. I think for reliability the Honda would win.

and of course the older the car the more likely of problems, if the OP is looking at BMWs from 2003 there would be quite alot of things to look out for as once cars hit 100k miles the bits and pieces all over the car go wrong.

Having said that parts for the Accord are not cheap by a long shot but if they are serviced the petrol engines are bomb proof.

Mandzhalas

shinkansen wrote: »

all cars year = 2003 and honda accord new shape doesn't add up

there was a face lift accord in 2007/06 and a new one in 2008/09-

have a executive accord myself with the 2.4 engine and its a bomb. very reliable and all the toys. Its fast too and as economical as you can get for a 2.4 litre.

ya wrong boy.
honda accord 7th generation 2003-2007.completely different look compared to 2002 model

shinkansen

i read your post wrong.

i assumed you meant the 'new' accord, anyway of course the 6th gen accord is the old shape. the 7th gen is the one you are on about and it had a facelift in 06-07 ish and the brand new 8th gen was in 08-

anyway mine is 7th gen. great car.

George Dalton

The Merc would probably be the least reliable but certainly the most comfortable with the best ride quality.

The Accord would be the least comfortable but by far the most reliable with lowest running costs.

Gadgets will come down to the individual car I suppose.

You will really have to drive them and make up your own mind. I would be choosing Merc or BMW if I were you though. I currently own a W211 and I love it. I spend a lot of time on the motorway and it is ideally suited for that kind of driving. If someone took it away in the morning and left a nice E39 in its place I wouldn't consider it too much of an inconvenience, but I have driven a (very well specced) 2006 Accord on my commute a few times and while it is a fine car in its own right it is no substitute for the Merc.

Quickelles

bmws are very comfortable

shinkansen

most important thing whatever you get is a service history as with a car on over 100k miles you are always in for trouble.

kirving

Compared to a Merc?

George Dalton

shinkansen wrote: »

most important thing whatever you get is a service history as with a car on over 100k miles you are always in for trouble.

I couldn't agree more. Especially on a 10 year old car.

rocoso

you havnt brought any performance issues into your priorities so I would say the accord but be wary of car road tax issues the 2.2 is over 2.2 and as far as I know will be taxed as a 2.5

Alanstrainor

rocoso wrote: »

you havnt brought any performance issues into your priorities so I would say the accord but be wary of car road tax issues the 2.2 is over 2.2 and as far as I know will be taxed as a 2.5

Nah, the tax wont be the same as the 2.5. They go up in increments until the 3.0 and larger mark. 2.0, 2.1, 2.2 etc etc. Still a fair whack of tax all the same.