tomd

I have a 2009 S5504matic with 6,500 miles. It's basically a garage queen, in new condition, and never had any problems.

The dealer wants to do a complete 3yr service (the car was purchased 8/08) for $600. My last service was "A" at 2,900 miles. I plan on selling the car within a year, and am reluctant to shell out the $600.

Should I do the dealer service, or forgo it? Thanks

kgodfrey

600 bucks seems like a small price to pay. You could be looking at challenges selling the car if you haven't kept it serviced per the MBUSA specs. Not saying you can't sell it, but a lot of private party buyers would look at lack of service as a downcheck.

lboudreau

I'm with kgodfrey on this one. $600 is nothing compared to loosing 1000s when it comes time to sell, just because you didn't keep up on the recommended service intervals. Plus it doesn't really hurt the car does it?

hyperion667

don't want to sound like a shlub, but it's only 600 AND it's for the good of the car and will no doubt look better on paper at selling time......

cheers

steveb9771

The only service it could need is "A" service. Forget about "B" service. All "B" service does beyond "A" service is to replace the cabin air filter, which in you case should still be in pristine condition due to the limited number of miles. In Southern California, "A" service cost can fun between $120 and $150

One additional service that should be done is replacement of brake fluid every couple of years.

phatisfy

I think that's a waste of $$ for paying so much for service B,and all they do mainly is change the oil and do minor inspections. Not only that, but the car has under 10k miles. Which to me is like still brand new. I would just keep up with the major oil changes till you reach higher on the milage. That's when things start to get messy? My SA even told me that the prices on the service B is all an gimmick? I would just worry about the major service requirements. IMO

nyca

A total waste of money. All of the A/B packaged services are a waste of money - they don't do anything except "inspect X", "inspect Y". Always go a la carte for all your services at the dealer. For this car, just get an oil change and a brake fluid change as you get closer to the sale time.

Ferri

How can you have had only 6500 miles since August of 2008? More power to you, for me it would not have been worth the payments or the garage space.

babyman1737

From what I can tell from MBUSA, the 3 year check basically includes oil & filter change, wiper blade change, check all fluid levels, brake pad inspection, ANTIFREEZE replacement.

Tough call, up to you. I'd just go in for a service A and do the blades and antifreeze yourself. Save $450.

Quadcammer

no kidding, given the depreciation on these things, that just seems like a gigantic waste.

skrontz

I love nothing more than people counting someone else's money.

Quadcammer

nobody is counting anything. I just don't understand why someone would buy a car like this and barely drive it.

If you don't mind taking a bath on garage art, thats your business, its just not something I would do.

Simply public pondering...thats all.

skrontz

I've heard this argument before: "Why did you spend $120K on a car when you could buy a Honda that would last a lifetime at a fraction of the price?" I put less than 4,000 miles a year on all of my cars, but it doesn't mean I enjoy driving them any less than someone who drives ten times as much. You don't have to beat a car into the ground to get your money worth, and it certainly pays off to drive a "like new" car. As long as I pay for my cars (or everything else for this matter), I decide what I use them for and how often.

Oh yeah, and the OP clearly started this thread to get everyone's opinion regarding his driving style and spending patterns.

Quadcammer

The argument is not about the initial price of the car. Its about driving a pretty plain jane non-rare automobile 2k miles a year. If you don't drive period, thats fine, but if you are driving a C-class while your s550 sits in the garage its weird.


As to the OP, spending did come into play as he discussed the worth of spending $600 on a service. If a guy is willing to lose $40k to drive an S550 7k miles, one would think he would be ok with the $600 service.

220S

That's not the argument that Oliverk is making. What he's saying is that the car depreciates as it sits. These aren't collector cars. Their value is the use one gets from them. Nobody is saying you have "to beat a car into the ground to get your money['s] worth." But if you get such little use out of it while it depreciates (massively, like all Mercedes do), then it is somewhat of a "waste."

I bought my car new and at first I thought about keeping the mileage down. But then I realized it's like collecting art but with no future value; what he's calling "garage art" (and if you buy right, fine art has much more value potential beside just enjoyment.) The car will be worth less later with miles or without. I might as well get the most use value out of it as possible. These kinds of cars are NOT investments nor are they assets. They're expensive (yet enjoyable) modes of transport.

But if your "value" is looking at it in your garage and keeping the miles down, then that's your prerogative. But an everyday street car Mercedes may not be the best purchase as "art." That's all.

Ferri

Wow!

Ferri

I would not make that argument. My '05 S600 had 9k miles when I took possession of it, and I sold it 11 months and 21k miles later. The '07 SL I got subsequently had just over 12k miles, and two years later I sold it with $53k miles on it. My '11 Elantra (not Honda) has 5k on the clock two months after driving off the showroom. My point is, unless it is a ferrari or comparable, in my book it is meant to haul, it is still a utilitarian purchase, no matter the price.

And, as the preceding poster pointed out, this thread is exactly about counting money.

skrontz

You are comparing apples to oranges. It is one thing to spend money on a great car that you want and can afford (once again, the amount of miles you put on the car is completely irrelevant to the value that you personally get out of it) and another to throw away $600 on an oil change. Just because I can easily afford spending $600 on something I want (even if I will not be using it as much as the guy next door) doesn't mean that I'm giving out $600 tips to bell boys. So, the OP question is quite legitimate.

You're assuming that the OP is keeping the miles down on purpose. What if he just doesn't drive as much? Once again, I enjoy my cars a great deal and never try to save on the miles, but it just so happens that my annual mileage is very low. I can understand that it is prohibitive to some to spend $100K on a car unless they drive it a lot, but others care more about the car that they drive daily and not so much about the $/mile ratio.

So what? Who is saying that it's not a utilitarian purpose? Why should I drive so many miles a year to get a "value?"

lboudreau

2 things:

1. I highly doubt that the OP is getting "just" an Oil change for $600

2. $600 isn't a huge deal. I can think of far worse things to blow $600 bucks on... *cough* Iphone *cough*

bigben320e

+1 Makes perfect sense. Cars are dropping value regardless of sitting up or not.

+1, The SClass is definitely not a garage queen worthy car.

K-A

Maan, see, these comments I don't agree with.

So what dictates a "Garage Queen Worthy Car"?

Does it have to be a small, loud, poorly built-in the sense that it's too uncomfortable or unconventional to drive around every day, Coupe? Does it have to be so old that if stuff breaks, it's almost irreplaceable? Or can it simply be a car that an owner finds beautiful, AND that has all the positive aspects of being an amazing utilitarian-esque appliance as well?

I know people who stuff all kind of cars into garages.

I don't understand the concept of a Ferrari being so poor in reliability/everyday driveability, so costly to keep going, so easy to break, justifying the fact that you should leave it in the garage to simply enjoy its looks (which are debatable as looks are subjective, many many people can find a Benz/S-Class/Etc. more beautiful), and keep miles (i.e costs) down.

Now, about the "how do you enjoy a car more", it really depends. My last E-Class I barely drove when I first got it, and this E-Class, I've had for 2.5 months, and already at over 3,500 miles and counting if I don't get another second car (on pace to go over my Lease big time).

I gotta say, even without using my last E more, I did enjoy it more, as it was always pristine. To me, getting a nice car and mucking it all up and aging it kind of negates spending so much on such a nice car (I'm talking about heavy and/or rigorous use). My new E, I love, but using it so much has me getting tired of it sooner, and starting to wander my eye at other cars (which ends up costing me more money than not using the car so much to begin with).

Some can even say that walking up to an '08 S-Class that's a "Garage Queen" and pristine, with 10K Miles, next to the guy next to you who's walking up to his heavily-used '08 S-Class that's driven too often to be pampered, has 40K Miles, and looks noticeably worse and older than S-Class #1, makes owner of S-Class #1 feel better about where his money has gone as he has a nicer and newer/cleaner car to walk up to and enjoy at the moment (think of it as if his car has retained its original purchase price in terms of aesthetic and feel, while the other car might be worth the same, but looks and feels cheaper).

In the end, I feel that you should use your car as much as you can, but sometimes there are "those drives" or those situations which might be rough on a car, and if it's my primary/nice car, that's when I'd want to leave it at home. If I don't care about the car, then screw it, drive it 'till you're blue and tire of it.

Quadcammer

An S-class, while a nice looking and expensive car, is still utilitarian. It is not fragile, rare, overly attention getting, in any way difficult to drive, difficult to get parts for, etc. Its not really a special car To say many people view an S-class as more beautiful than a ferrari is not something I could agree with.

Then again, I don't see the appeal of a garage art ferrari either. The modern cars are nothing so special that they have to sit in the garage. Use them, get them dirty, get rock chips, and then either sell it and get the next one, or fix it when you can't stand it anymore.

the only things that would qualify as garage queens to me are cars so old, rare, or unique that they are basically useless to drive on the street or are so hard to find/make parts for, that it would rendered inoperable basically forever if something breaks. Aside from that, I get so little value from looking at a car in the garage that I absolutely do not want a garage queen.

Then again, I'm not one of those goofy dudes that goes into their garage with a glass of wine and just stares at their cars.

bigben320e

I think you misunderstood the point, OliverK touched on it above ^^.

No one is saying "drive the car in the ground" but as noted an S Class is not something that should be a garage queen, means (my POV) it is a nice daily driver perhaps even a good weekend car if you have a DD already.

I get your point, and understand you though. Personally, I don't drive my CLS everyday, it gets about 2-3 days use tops out a week but it is not a garage queen.

Quadcammer

I'm not sure what S-classes you've seen, but even high mileage cars that are well maintained and cared for (no one has said to let it go to ****) look almost as good as the low mile garage queens. These cars hold up well. I also don't see how the s550 is a good weekend car. Its not real fun to drive. I don't really look forward to driving my S-class on the weekends, unless I'm taking some huge highway trip.

Furthermore, I"m not sure if seeing my low mile car next to a high mile car is worth the $60k loss I took on it by letting it sit in my garage.

You get bored with cars easily. I say instead of driving your car less, you get a more special car.

K-A

That's a hard statement to back up, considering that if you posted a Thread asking "Is an S-Class more beautiful than a Ferrari" in this very Forum, I'm sure you'll get at least a few people who would say yes. Have you seen the Ferrari FF anyway? Talk about sacrificing beauty in the name of utility.

"Special" is really relative to the person. To me I already have a special car. Hell, my old Mustang GT was so special to me, I actually did make that a bonafide garage queen (until I decided to start driving the heck out of it, where again, I got incredibly bored with it). I guarantee that if I was driving a Ferrari back and forth from CA to NV every other week, I'd be so sick and "over" it I'd have already traded it in.

I agree that staring at a car in the garage (which I like to do, but I always like to stare at cars, especially my car) is a waste of money, since the design is only a fractional portion of the built in price. I'm not saying that I think keeping a car, especially one that gives you no excuse to leave it sitting so often as it is such a good and quality appliance/utility vehicle is in any way a good idea, but I do understand someone who "pampers" a car, i.e drives it more often for enjoyment (and yes, I personally, and I'm sure many others, find a well engineered, quiet, solid "cruise" possibly more enjoyable than a loud filling-rattling, compact sporting ride.... For the record, I want and crave both, but until I have the space and means to have 3 nice cars, I gotta go with pick #1: Luxury).

That's exactly what I'm saying. Even 2-3 times a week is very little IMO. My "nice car", if I want it to stay nice, and want it to keep my interest, needs to have a work-horse Brother, to take the toll of the more rigorous tasks. For example, I always drove my E more than my old Malibu, but my Malibu was driven when I purposefully didn't want the E to get potentially mucked up. Works perfectly.