I’d be willing to bet they never have pulled out the owners manual either.
I think MOST people in this forum look at the BMW not having a dipstick a really dumb idea. Most of us here are car people. But there are a VAST number of people who think this is a GREAT idea. Many just want to get in their car and drive and NOTHING ELSE. They get annoyed when they have to do maintenance or actually check tire pressure or how much oil is in the engine. The less they have to do the better.
I know some of these people. I don’t understand them…but they do exist.
well, Ultimately I think we all want to spend the majority of the time turning the key and driving where we need to go, BUT, when I need to check the oil after a change, why put an electric sensor that has to report to a computer to a screen to me, when I can have a metal stick I pull out? Unnecessary.
Agree! cars without dipsticks and without spare tires are a dumb idea.
Majority of the people I know out there would rather not do anything to their cars. They know they drive a Lexus or a BMW but not even sure about the number of cylinders. They take it in for “service” to the dealer, pay the tab and leave. When some major issue comes up they call me and usually they can not answer the most basic questions (does it crank or no? Is the CEL on?).
My Lincoln has a Message Center that tracks everything and I consider it invaluable. The chime lets me know everything from low washer fluid, engine oil, or coolant to any of the lighting going out and whether or not the trunk lid is closed. (Granted, I could probably detect the trunk lid being up without a chime…)
However, I still like gauges and religiously monitor the ones I do have.
No dipsticks = stupid.
“I think MOST people in this forum look at the BMW not having a dipstick a really dumb idea”.
I have another reason for wanting to have a dipstick. It is a handy source of lubrication if something needs a drop of oil. I was out at my church today and the secretary was having to cut a lot of paper and the paper cutter arm was making a terrible squeaking noise and was hard for her to operate. I looked around in the janitor’s closet and couldn’t find any household oil. I took the paper cutter out to the car, took out the dipstick and let a couple of drops from the end of the dipstick drip onto the paper cutter arm bearing. There was no more squeak and the arm worked much easier. This isn’t the first time I have lubricated something by letting a few drops of oil drip off the dipstick.
I would be frustrated with a BMW with no dipstick if I needed a few drops of oil to lubricate something and no can of 3 in 1 was handy.
The engine oil “dipstick” is now just electronic instead of mechanical, like so many other things. BMW, Mercedes, maybe others as well. Just sit in the driver’s seat, press a button, and your instrument cluster displays how low or full your engine oil is. What could be easier?
Well, I’ve never found it difficult to open the hood, pull out the dipstick, wipe it off, reinsert the dipstick to get a reading. My one concern is that the sensor may fail and pushing the button for the oil level wouldn’t work. How, then, would one know if there is sufficient oil in the crankcase.
While the hood is open to check the oil, I glance around at the coolant recovery tank, the brake master cylinder reservoir, the windshield washer reservoir and the battery cable connections.
I imagine if a forum like this existed back when they replaced hand cranks with electric starters, there would be people on it bemoaning the change…I don’t trust that new fangled gol-darned fancy pants stuff! What if it breaks down? What’s wrong with hand cranks? Never failed me yet…somehow we not only survived but eventually embraced the change… 
If there’s no oil dipstick to get a few drops of oil maybe one could dip into the power steering reservoir, but those are slowly disappearing too.
That may all be true, ASE & TT, but I’d rather have a dipstick anyway.
Besides, looking around under the hood has prevented countless problems from developing on me over the years. Nothing beats a good look-see. Eliminate dipsticks and nobody will ever open their hoods again for all time. Of course, that will give us here plenty to do!
Well, once the dipsticks are gone and there is lifetime fluids, might as well eliminate the hood latch and hinges too. Don’t need frequent access anymore. Hood held in place by Dzus fasteners…
“Hood held in place by Dzus fasteners…”
Boxster owners can only hope:
Remember the legend that Rolls Royce sealed their hoods, so only their mechanics could work on it?
And they would send them out to fix the car if you got stranded?
"I imagine if a forum like this existed back when they replaced hand cranks with electric starters, there would be people on it bemoaning the change."
I remember cars that had a hand crank in addition to the electric starter. My dad’s 1939 Chevrolet had an emergency hand crank and I saw him start the car with the crank a couple of times when the battery didn’t have enough charge to start the engine. I think the Chevrolet continued providing the emergency crank through 1947 or 1948.
I remember when my dad traded the 1939 Chevrolet for a 1947 Dodge. The Dodge had neither an emergency hand crank nor a hand choke. I wondered how one was supposed to start the engine.
I would suggest that a dipstick be provided in addition to the electronic oil level read out just as Chevrolet provided the emergency hand crank.
TwinTurbo Both of my MGAs had electric starters and a hand crank. Of course for the Brits change can be difficult.
Wow, can’t imagine working on that Boxster. Talk about back strain…
Triedaq, At some point, the new technology isn’t new anymore and has been proven reliable enough to omit the backup provision. Oil level sensors have been around a long time already although not all manufacturers use them. Therein lies the challenge- instilling confidence in the customer base not yet exposed to the technology. The younger generation is always more readily accepting of such changes…
^ But, @TwinTurbo , the issue isn’t whether or not it works–it’s whether it actually is an improvement over a very simple, reliable, cheap and time-tested system. Electric oil monitoring is more expensive, and more complex…and “more complex” implies “more modes of failure/more ways in which it can break” to an engineering-savvy person. That’s two strikes.
In addition, an electronic dipstick provides LESS information to the mechanic/owner. In addition to oil level, a dipstick at least gives a rough idea of oil quality…like if there’s brown mucus-like stuff at the top of the stick, it’s a good bet you have a coolant leak! On every used car I’ve ever test-driven, I checked the oil…and it was NOT to verify the level (or, at least not primarily).
(And, as to hand-crank redundancy…I’ve never owned a car with a crank, but one of the reasons I prefer MTs is starting redundancy: if you have enough juice to run the ignition, and a slight grade, you can drive away. I took a car with starter issues on a 150-mile trip up to Mesa Verde National Park and back. Not only wouldn’t have I even attempted that trip with an AT, I would’ve been truly stuck when the starter quit on me at the park on a Saturday evening! (With the MT, however, just point it downhill and bump-start it.)
My daughter’s 1995 Cavalier and 2004 Grand Prix had oil level sensors which told her she was abut 1 1/2 quarts low. I can’t find a reference to the new Cobalt’s oil level sensor, so I assume it doesn’t have one. This seems to be a step backwards.