I am looking to spend $5-7000 on a used car next year and I am considering Mustangs, Volvos, BMW's and Cherokees. My only real loyality is to RWD. I hardly know anything about BMW's, but I own an 86 Volvo 740 Turbo and I am under the impression that BMW's and Volvo's are of about the same build quality. I like the way my Volvo drives, it has lots of power and I surprise lots of fools in Hondas. I just hate the way it looks.
I noticed that BMW's cost a lot more. Are they really that much better? Or are people just willing to pay more because of the looks and image that goes with owning a BMW?
I was thinking of getting a 92-93 325i because I like that body style, or I could get a 95-96 Volvo 960 because they look a little better than mine and still have the RWD. They both cost about the same even though the Volvo is newer and larger.

I do all my own repairs and my Volvo is a pain in the ass to work on because the repair manuals are poorly written and things like the oil filter are hard to access. I wonder if BMW's are any easier to work on because I doubt many of their owners actually work on their own cars. Am I right? My Volvo is having electrical problems with the tail lights and the gauges. I hear BMW's have electrical problems too. What are the common electrical problems on BMW's?

Finally, does anyone have links to performance parts available for the 2.5 liter 6?

Thanks

BMW's are worth the extra $ trust me when you drive a BMW after driving your Volvo it will be like night and day. Also the electrical problems with BMWs are more so the ones from the 80s but my parents had a 533i from 88 I think, and we only fixed one eelectrical problem. My advice to you is just test drive one. As far as if they are hard to work on...that depends on what your used to. Everything now a days is computerized. So other than simple things like oil spark plugs ect you might have to go to a shop.