The comparison offered by SLK350ncis63 is very good. There are just a couple of things I'd like to point out about it. First he has an SLK 350, not a 280. I point this out, because we test drove both the SLK 350 and 280 before buying the 280, and chose the 280 because we already had a "guts for leather" sports car much like the 350Z (more on that in a moment). We found the 280 to be much smoother riding than the SLK 350. Not quite as fast, but we were not looking for a sports car -- we were looking for a small GT car. The 350Z leans much more in the "sports car" direction than the SLK 280, which I personally classify as a GT. Actually, the SLK280 and the 350Z are not really comparable, as they are not really for the same use, IMO.
If I thought the 280 and the 350Z WERE the same kind of car, I would not have bought the 280, because I already owned a perfectly good example on one of the 350Z's true competitors -- a Honda S 2000. When the 350Z first came out, my S 2000 still had a very high resale value, and I considered a change to the 350Z -- before I drove one. Without belaboring the point, the S 2000 remained greatly superior as a sports car than the 350Z.
So my point is, if you test drive the SLK 280 and the 350Z, and find yourself leaning toward the performance of the 350Z, do yourself a favor and do not buy one until you test drive an S 2000. |