SL vs SLK vs SL vs SLK...

Corkscrew · 07-24-2007

For those of us who have (or had) a SL and have (or had) a SLK which one do you prefer?

I have a SLK 200 and a SL55AMG. I really prefer driving my SLK. But, I do miss the extra cockpit space in the SL (behind the seats). I love the Keyless-Go on the SL but I am happier with the CD player's position in the glove box on the SLK.

Obviously the engines of the two machines are about as far apart as you can get. I feel a little guilty about driving the SL with its 10 mpg consumption rate. But, I miss the power to really accelerate in my SLK when passing trucks on Thailand's two lane roads.

My SLK is a right hand drive; my SL is a left hand drive. But, both are best suited to their native roads.

I am happy that I have both.

DansSlk · 07-24-2007

I prefer the SLK in its stock config and with the 55 engine its faster than the SL, more agile than the SL, offers a better ride than the SL because it has proper suspension, it has a better cockpit setup when compared with the SL offering much better seats that can actually hold you in place in a turn at speed unlike its big brother and it turns more heads than the SL

Its not quite as pretty as the SL however because you just cant beat that traditional MB front end.

**-1-** · 07-24-2007

I periodically see a couple of SL's in my area. They're head turners and such classy vehicles. Just not for me. Given the opportunity to choose a SLK or SL for the same price, the SLK is MY choice.

**Zeiser50** · 07-25-2007

Before my SLK, i had to make the choice : either SLK or SL.

At that time, exterior design point of view, i prefer the SL rear and SLK front.
My wife doesn't like SL at all.

My budget was enough for either new SLK 350 or used SL 350. i have discovered that all used SL was in very bad conditions (maybe because the owner has so much money that he doesn't care about his car).
After having seen several used SL, i have seen a used SLK AMG (bah .... why not .... ?) . Perfect condition ... Whaoh ...

And then the engine was started .....

. This sound is incredible .... AMG only !!

4 months after, i'm convinced that this choice was the right one. This car is great, this engine also , and the forum also !!

**Ynot** · 07-25-2007

When the SL first came out, I thought it was the best looking modern car ever, I was still in college and promise myself to study hard and get one. I still think it's a great looking car, with all the new designs that came and go, it's still a head tuner (maybe not if you reside in SoCal and So. Florida).

But time has changed, the previous SLK isn't as fun or good looking IMO. Add the handling characteristics and the F1 styling. Even at the same price, I would pick the SLK. If only the SLK was a little lighter, it would be even better.

**rlbawk** · 07-25-2007

I went to dealer and test drove 2005 SL500 and new SLK55 (about the same price) and the SLK55 was the clear winner for me. The SL is a good driving car for laid back cruising and has more interior space but the SLK55 was just much more fun to drive and a lot more sporty....maybe SL55 might win me over but out of my price range since I didn't want anything older than 2005.

Corkscrew · 07-25-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by rlbawk

I went to dealer and test drove 2005 SL500 and new SLK55 (about the same price) and the SLK55 was the clear winner for me. The SL is a good driving car for laid back cruising and has more interior space but the SLK55 was just much more fun to drive and a lot more sporty....maybe SL55 might win me over but out of my price range since I didn't want anything older than 2005.

I would go for the NEW SLK 55 over the USED SL500 any day.

Corkscrew · 07-25-2007

Obviously, the SL is a much better car for road trips (especially if you have a wife who likes shoes and purses) as there is so much extra room for suitcases. That space behind the seats is very useful....(and Mercedes has a custom suitcase that fits it perfectly).

But, the SLK is much friendlier when changing CDs while on the road.

**Cruzer 8** · 07-27-2007

Well guys you already know which one we chose we really liked the SLK but the comfort factor took over and the SL won the other factors were we didn't give up any performance from the SLK 350 to the SL 550. 0-60 SL = 5.3 seconds with the sport configuration on, the suspension and trans perform great and with the Dynamic multicontoured seats the side bolsters are adjustable to snug you in for all the hard cornering its a little heavier 4300 pounds but it still has predictable understeer and if you hit the apex right it can corner like a stripped a$$ ape.
They are two different cars but both are Merc's and built for performance,fun and pleasure.
The SL 55AMG with the SC engine will do 0-60 in 4.4 seconds and the SL65AMG does 0-60 in 4.2 seconds for this heavy a car thats acceptable numbers - we couldn't justify either of these two for the extra bucks.
We are looking forward to getting Cruzer on the road (San Diego) first and seeing our friends down that way and seeing what we can do running the ridge.

Addicted2Speed · 07-27-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cruzer 8

Well guys you already know which one we chose we really liked the SLK but the comfort factor took over and the SL won the other factors were we didn't give up any performance from the SLK 350 to the SL 550. 0-60 SL = 5.3 seconds with the sport configuration on, the suspension and trans perform great and with the Dynamic multicontoured seats the side bolsters are adjustable to snug you in for all the hard cornering its a little heavier 4300 pounds but it still has predictable understeer and if you hit the apex right it can corner like a stripped a$$ ape.
They are two different cars but both are Merc's and built for performance,fun and pleasure.
The SL 55AMG with the SC engine will do 0-60 in 4.4 seconds and the SL65AMG does 0-60 in 4.2 seconds for this heavy a car thats acceptable numbers - we couldn't justify either of these two for the extra bucks.
We are looking forward to getting Cruzer on the road (San Diego) first and seeing our friends down that way and seeing what we can do running the ridge.

SL550 costs almost as much as SL55 though... it always puzzles me why people don't just buy the 55 since its so much faster. How much did you pay for SL550? There is a 2007 SL55 on ebay right now w/ 6,000 miles for $104,000 and you can get a 06 SL55 for well under $100,000. The SL65, on the other hand, is definitly more expensive but not a whole lot more, you can get an almost new 06 for <120,000$. The depreciation on Mercedes cars is just unbelievable if you ask me....

**Cruzer 8** · 07-27-2007

Price's per MBUSA
SL550 = 96,000
SL55AMG = 130,000
SL600 = !33,000
SL65AMG = 187,000
These are base prices --- and 34,000 for an extra 8 or 9 tenths of a second is not worth it to us

Addicted2Speed · 07-28-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cruzer 8

Price's per MBUSA
SL550 = 96,000
SL55AMG = 130,000
SL600 = !33,000
SL65AMG = 187,000
These are base prices --- and 34,000 for an extra 8 or 9 tenths of a second is not worth it to us

I see, so you guys never buy used cars? I was referring to the fact that Mercedes cars usuaully depreciate 20%+ the second you drive off the dealer lot, and you can get a basically brand new 2007 SL55 for 104,000$ (item # 170132909778 ) via ebay right now or 2006 SL55 for well under 100,000$....

**Ynot** · 07-28-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Addicted2Speed

I see, so you guys never buy used cars? I was referring to the fact that Mercedes cars usuaully depreciate 20%+ the second you drive off the dealer lot, and you can get a basically brand new 2007 SL55 for 104,000$ (item # 170132909778 ) via ebay right now or 2006 SL55 for well under 100,000$....

There are people that will never buy used, I was one of them, not anymore.

Addicted2Speed · 07-28-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ynot

There are people that will never buy used, I was one of them, not anymore.

I'm the opposite, every car I bought in my life was used. It doesn't make financial sense for me to buy new when you can buy the same car with 5-6k miles for 20% less. There really is no difference between 300 delivery miles and 5,000 miles. Someone is going to take that hit, why let that be you? The MSRP for SL65 is ~190,000$ but you can buy one for 110,000$ (almost 50% depreciation in 2 years!) right now, which is not that much more than new SL550 BTW. I guess if you're a multi-millionaire and don't really care about 20%+ depreciation than its a different story, but if that's the case you should be rolling in an SLR....

**Ynot** · 07-28-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Addicted2Speed

I'm the opposite, every car I bought in my life was used. It doesn't make financial sense for me to buy new when you can buy the same car with 5-6k miles for 20% less. There really is no difference between 300 delivery miles and 5,000 miles. Someone is going to take that hit, why let that be you? The MSRP for SL65 is ~190,000$ but you can buy one for 110,000$ (almost 50% depreciation in 2 years!) right now, which is not that much more than new SL550 BTW. I guess if you're a multi-millionaire and don't really care about 20%+ depreciation than its a different story, but if that's the case you should be rolling in an SLR....

Not a multi-millionaire, I wish though, my mindset at the time was, why would anyone want to try it in with only 5K miles on it, he must really really hate that car and it must be a lemon. That would be the only reason I would sell it so quickly. When I think about it now, it's different, I would not buy a used car w/o warranty, if anything bad happens, it doesn't come out of my pocket, if warranty expires, time to get rid of it. I've seen a lot of good deals on pre-owned vehicles.

Addicted2Speed · 07-28-2007

Exotics are usually not daily drivers and the types of people who buy them have other cars that they use as daily drivers, so its not uncommon to find low mileage "like new", AMG's for sale. Also, a lot of people change cars very frequently, every 2-3 years. I've seen a lot of threads of people trying to sell their SL65's that they bought just a year ago for $185,000 and put maybe 4-5k miles and being extremely surprised and upset that they can only get maybe 115,000$ for it.

**Cruzer 8** · 07-28-2007

Sorry that I mentioned that we didn't want to pay the extra for the models that are faster seems to have taken the thread off topic.
We bought new to get the color and accessories the way we wanted , the SLK that we traded in was a pre-owned and I'm sure if we had taken the time to look we might have come up with a used 07 in the right configuration.
But to get back on topic SLK v SL which do you prefer we have had both and as stated we liked the SLK but the SL won because of room and comfort if we were 20 years younger we would still have the SLK.
We had to sell our other car to swing this so now we do use the SL as the daily driver out of necessity.

Addicted2Speed · 07-29-2007

Yeah finding the model you want with the options you want can be a real pain, it took me a month to find the "right" used SLK55, which was located about 1,000 miles from me. It was still worth it though, even with the enclosed shipping cost since it was basically like new for 20,000$ off MSRP.

Anyway, back on topic. I actually test drove SL55, SLK55 (among many other cars) for several hours before deciding to go with the SLK55. My budget was 70,000$ or so. Here's how they compare in my opinion:

Interior - The seats are more comfy in the SL, more GT-like. I thought the SLK seats were more supportive and really hugged you in the corners. SL seats were a little too big for me and the visibility wasn't as good as SLK. The SL is a huge car... which isn't a good thing in my book. Interior materials were slightly better in the SL, especially the dash, but overall, all Mercedes interiors are high quality and there isn't a huge difference. Airscarf was a big plus in the SLK as well.

Acceleration - Pretty much even up to 60mph, both around 4.3-4.4 seconds. By 100mph, the difference is about 1 car lenght and by 120mph, the SL55 really starts pulling away. if you look at 1/4 mile times, SLK55 does it at around 12.7 and SL55 at around 12.5. At highway speeds, SL55 pulls away. Basically: from a stop, its even until 100-110 and SLK55 can overtake the SL55 if it has better traction. From a 60mph roll, the SL55 will pull the SLK55 without a problem by several cars up to 120mph and continue gaining.

Handling - SLK's superior handling is what made me buy it. I had a lotus elise before, so SL55 made me feel like driving a boat. There was way too much understeer and bodyroll, SLK was much more nuetral. You can really feel that SLK is 1,000lbs lighter in the corners. Steering and brake feel/feedback is much better in the SLK. As far as the brakes, I thought the SLK55 had stronger stopping power as well. Overall, I would consider the SL55 a GT and SLK55 a sports car.

IMO SLK55 was more fun to drive than SL55, so I got an 06 for around $53,000. I knew that 360hp wouldn't be enough for me after driving the SL55/SL600, so to fix that gap, I installed 25,000$ worth of kleemann upgrades (will make a thread about this soon). So basically for around 70,000$ total cash spend, I have an SLK that's as fast as SL65 in the straight line and handles a million times better than any SL... couldn't be happier

Corkscrew · 07-29-2007

Another plus for the SL is the "Distronic" which is great on road trips. We don't have it on the SLK; but, in Thailand it would not be too useful on our highways.

07-24-2007	#2 (permalink)
DansSlk Dude Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Wales Vehicle: 05 B55S (Brabus 6.1 S) Posts: 6,752 Country: Thanks: 96 Thanked 221 Times in 173 Posts	I prefer the SLK in its stock config and with the 55 engine its faster than the SL, more agile than the SL, offers a better ride than the SL because it has proper suspension, it has a better cockpit setup when compared with the SL offering much better seats that can actually hold you in place in a turn at speed unlike its big brother and it turns more heads than the SL Its not quite as pretty as the SL however because you just cant beat that traditional MB front end. __________________ One thing you will learn with German cars - If it's simple it ain't happening.

07-24-2007	#3 (permalink)
-1- Don Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Virginia USA Vehicle: SLK 55 ///AMG The MON55TER on the block Posts: 2,224 Country: Thanks: 54 Thanked 57 Times in 41 Posts	I periodically see a couple of SL's in my area. They're head turners and such classy vehicles. Just not for me. Given the opportunity to choose a SLK or SL for the same price, the SLK is MY choice. __________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. *----------------1-----------------* --------SLK 55 ///AMG--------- THE MON55TER ON THE BLOCK

07-25-2007	#4 (permalink)
Zeiser50 Elite SLK World Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Paris Vehicle: SLK 55 AMG Other Toys: Bike : '84 Z1300-6 Posts: 506 Country: Thanks: 6 Thanked 18 Times in 14 Posts	Before my SLK, i had to make the choice : either SLK or SL. At that time, exterior design point of view, i prefer the SL rear and SLK front. My wife doesn't like SL at all. My budget was enough for either new SLK 350 or used SL 350. i have discovered that all used SL was in very bad conditions (maybe because the owner has so much money that he doesn't care about his car). After having seen several used SL, i have seen a used SLK AMG (bah .... why not .... ?) . Perfect condition ... Whaoh ... And then the engine was started ..... . This sound is incredible .... AMG only !! 4 months after, i'm convinced that this choice was the right one. This car is great, this engine also , and the forum also !! __________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. ------Michel------ -SLK 55 AMG 2005-

07-25-2007	#5 (permalink)
Ynot Founding Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Colorado Vehicle: 06' MBZ SLK Posts: 2,795 Country: Thanks: 135 Thanked 35 Times in 30 Posts	When the SL first came out, I thought it was the best looking modern car ever, I was still in college and promise myself to study hard and get one. I still think it's a great looking car, with all the new designs that came and go, it's still a head tuner (maybe not if you reside in SoCal and So. Florida). But time has changed, the previous SLK isn't as fun or good looking IMO. Add the handling characteristics and the F1 styling. Even at the same price, I would pick the SLK. If only the SLK was a little lighter, it would be even better. __________________ 06' SLK 350, Iridium/Ash all pkgs. 6-spd, 19" DCR. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

07-27-2007	#9 (permalink)
Cruzer 8 Elite SLK World Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Peoria, AZ Vehicle: 07 SL 550 Mars Red Posts: 572 Country: Thanks: 31 Thanked 57 Times in 27 Posts	Well guys you already know which one we chose we really liked the SLK but the comfort factor took over and the SL won the other factors were we didn't give up any performance from the SLK 350 to the SL 550. 0-60 SL = 5.3 seconds with the sport configuration on, the suspension and trans perform great and with the Dynamic multicontoured seats the side bolsters are adjustable to snug you in for all the hard cornering its a little heavier 4300 pounds but it still has predictable understeer and if you hit the apex right it can corner like a stripped a$$ ape. They are two different cars but both are Merc's and built for performance,fun and pleasure. The SL 55AMG with the SC engine will do 0-60 in 4.4 seconds and the SL65AMG does 0-60 in 4.2 seconds for this heavy a car thats acceptable numbers - we couldn't justify either of these two for the extra bucks. We are looking forward to getting Cruzer on the road (San Diego) first and seeing our friends down that way and seeing what we can do running the ridge. __________________ GENE ---- See My Pic's To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. *To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.* SL 550 Mars Red

07-25-2007	#6 (permalink)
rlbawk Elite SLK World Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Hampton, GA Vehicle: 2008 Yukon Denali Other Toys: 2006 BMW 325 Convert Posts: 275 Country: Thanks: 16 Thanked 10 Times in 10 Posts	I went to dealer and test drove 2005 SL500 and new SLK55 (about the same price) and the SLK55 was the clear winner for me. The SL is a good driving car for laid back cruising and has more interior space but the SLK55 was just much more fun to drive and a lot more sporty....maybe SL55 might win me over but out of my price range since I didn't want anything older than 2005.

07-25-2007	#8 (permalink)
Corkscrew Banned Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Bangkok, Thailand Vehicle: 2008 S600, 2006 SL55AMG, 2005 SLK200k, 2004 280S Posts: 696 Country: Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Obviously, the SL is a much better car for road trips (especially if you have a wife who likes shoes and purses) as there is so much extra room for suitcases. That space behind the seats is very useful....(and Mercedes has a custom suitcase that fits it perfectly). But, the SLK is much friendlier when changing CDs while on the road.

07-27-2007	#11 (permalink)
Cruzer 8 Elite SLK World Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Peoria, AZ Vehicle: 07 SL 550 Mars Red Posts: 572 Country: Thanks: 31 Thanked 57 Times in 27 Posts	Price's per MBUSA SL550 = 96,000 SL55AMG = 130,000 SL600 = !33,000 SL65AMG = 187,000 These are base prices --- and 34,000 for an extra 8 or 9 tenths of a second is not worth it to us __________________ GENE ---- See My Pic's To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. *To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.* SL 550 Mars Red

07-28-2007	#16 (permalink)
Addicted2Speed Elite SLK World Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Miami, FL Posts: 225 Country: Thanks: 0 Thanked 17 Times in 5 Posts	Exotics are usually not daily drivers and the types of people who buy them have other cars that they use as daily drivers, so its not uncommon to find low mileage "like new", AMG's for sale. Also, a lot of people change cars very frequently, every 2-3 years. I've seen a lot of threads of people trying to sell their SL65's that they bought just a year ago for $185,000 and put maybe 4-5k miles and being extremely surprised and upset that they can only get maybe 115,000$ for it.

07-28-2007	#17 (permalink)
Cruzer 8 Elite SLK World Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Peoria, AZ Vehicle: 07 SL 550 Mars Red Posts: 572 Country: Thanks: 31 Thanked 57 Times in 27 Posts	Sorry that I mentioned that we didn't want to pay the extra for the models that are faster seems to have taken the thread off topic. We bought new to get the color and accessories the way we wanted , the SLK that we traded in was a pre-owned and I'm sure if we had taken the time to look we might have come up with a used 07 in the right configuration. But to get back on topic SLK v SL which do you prefer we have had both and as stated we liked the SLK but the SL won because of room and comfort if we were 20 years younger we would still have the SLK. We had to sell our other car to swing this so now we do use the SL as the daily driver out of necessity. __________________ GENE ---- See My Pic's To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. *To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.* SL 550 Mars Red

07-29-2007	#18 (permalink)
Addicted2Speed Elite SLK World Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Miami, FL Posts: 225 Country: Thanks: 0 Thanked 17 Times in 5 Posts	Yeah finding the model you want with the options you want can be a real pain, it took me a month to find the "right" used SLK55, which was located about 1,000 miles from me. It was still worth it though, even with the enclosed shipping cost since it was basically like new for 20,000$ off MSRP. Anyway, back on topic. I actually test drove SL55, SLK55 (among many other cars) for several hours before deciding to go with the SLK55. My budget was 70,000$ or so. Here's how they compare in my opinion: Interior - The seats are more comfy in the SL, more GT-like. I thought the SLK seats were more supportive and really hugged you in the corners. SL seats were a little too big for me and the visibility wasn't as good as SLK. The SL is a huge car... which isn't a good thing in my book. Interior materials were slightly better in the SL, especially the dash, but overall, all Mercedes interiors are high quality and there isn't a huge difference. Airscarf was a big plus in the SLK as well. Acceleration - Pretty much even up to 60mph, both around 4.3-4.4 seconds. By 100mph, the difference is about 1 car lenght and by 120mph, the SL55 really starts pulling away. if you look at 1/4 mile times, SLK55 does it at around 12.7 and SL55 at around 12.5. At highway speeds, SL55 pulls away. Basically: from a stop, its even until 100-110 and SLK55 can overtake the SL55 if it has better traction. From a 60mph roll, the SL55 will pull the SLK55 without a problem by several cars up to 120mph and continue gaining. Handling - SLK's superior handling is what made me buy it. I had a lotus elise before, so SL55 made me feel like driving a boat. There was way too much understeer and bodyroll, SLK was much more nuetral. You can really feel that SLK is 1,000lbs lighter in the corners. Steering and brake feel/feedback is much better in the SLK. As far as the brakes, I thought the SLK55 had stronger stopping power as well. Overall, I would consider the SL55 a GT and SLK55 a sports car. IMO SLK55 was more fun to drive than SL55, so I got an 06 for around $53,000. I knew that 360hp wouldn't be enough for me after driving the SL55/SL600, so to fix that gap, I installed 25,000$ worth of kleemann upgrades (will make a thread about this soon). So basically for around 70,000$ total cash spend, I have an SLK that's as fast as SL65 in the straight line and handles a million times better than any SL... couldn't be happier

07-29-2007	#19 (permalink)
Corkscrew Banned Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Bangkok, Thailand Vehicle: 2008 S600, 2006 SL55AMG, 2005 SLK200k, 2004 280S Posts: 696 Country: Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Another plus for the SL is the "Distronic" which is great on road trips. We don't have it on the SLK; but, in Thailand it would not be too useful on our highways.