Mercedes SLK World Forum - View Single Post - Performance: 350 from 280

**Dolebludger** · 03-14-2008

ryan:

We in the US are "feeling your pain" over gas prices, with 91 octane (which our cars require) is selling for about $3.50 per gallon. I have a 280, and get about 23 mpg in the city.

I can't speak to the advantages of the '09 300 hp 350, as I haven't driven one yet. But as to the '08's and earlier, I found the acceleration differences to be slight. The 7 speed auto makes up for much of the reduced hp and torque in the 280. And a weird thing about the 280's -- they are not (IMO) created equal. As I have said before on this board, my 280 is noticeably faster than any of the many 280s I've driven. So test several, and maybe you can find a "fast one."

A few other advantages of the 280 are the 16" higher aspect ratio tires, which give a smoother ride and are much cheaper at replacement time. They are lower speed rating, and therefore last longer. There have been complaints about 350s "rolling on corners and turns" and none about the 280. This makes me SUSPECT that MB softened the 350's suspension a bit to give it a "Mercedes ride" in spite of the low aspect, hard riding tires. The 280 is a little lighter, and handling is more agile.

In the mountains, you need all the hp and torque you can get. Not only does climbing steep grades require more power, but the high altitudes rob ANY car of power. If I lived in the high mountains, I would probably buy something with a turbo or supercharger. But I don't.

For a SLIGHT improvement in performance (and fuel efficiency) in ether model, check out the threads on the "Green" air filters on this board. They work.My 280 does 0 to 60 mph way down in the 5's, and that is good enough for me.

03-14-2008	#6 (permalink)
Dolebludger Elite SLK World Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Yukon, OK Vehicle: '07 SLK 280; '04 C 320, '01 Honda S 2000, '98 Ford Ranger truck. Posts: 576 Country: Thanks: 41 Thanked 82 Times in 55 Posts	ryan: We in the US are "feeling your pain" over gas prices, with 91 octane (which our cars require) is selling for about $3.50 per gallon. I have a 280, and get about 23 mpg in the city. I can't speak to the advantages of the '09 300 hp 350, as I haven't driven one yet. But as to the '08's and earlier, I found the acceleration differences to be slight. The 7 speed auto makes up for much of the reduced hp and torque in the 280. And a weird thing about the 280's -- they are not (IMO) created equal. As I have said before on this board, my 280 is noticeably faster than any of the many 280s I've driven. So test several, and maybe you can find a "fast one." A few other advantages of the 280 are the 16" higher aspect ratio tires, which give a smoother ride and are much cheaper at replacement time. They are lower speed rating, and therefore last longer. There have been complaints about 350s "rolling on corners and turns" and none about the 280. This makes me SUSPECT that MB softened the 350's suspension a bit to give it a "Mercedes ride" in spite of the low aspect, hard riding tires. The 280 is a little lighter, and handling is more agile. In the mountains, you need all the hp and torque you can get. Not only does climbing steep grades require more power, but the high altitudes rob ANY car of power. If I lived in the high mountains, I would probably buy something with a turbo or supercharger. But I don't. For a SLIGHT improvement in performance (and fuel efficiency) in ether model, check out the threads on the "Green" air filters on this board. They work.My 280 does 0 to 60 mph way down in the 5's, and that is good enough for me.