Mercedes SLK World banner

Which should I get?

  • SLK 55

    Votes: 29 93.5%
  • SL 55

    Votes: 2 6.5%

  • Total voters
    31
1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am shopping for a faster convertible, 2003 to 2007 are in price range but do not know if I should focus finding an SL55 or SLK55.
Also there are few at 80,000 to 100,000 miles, do not know if engine with that much mileage is still reliable.
Any comment about the 2 models is appreciated.
 

·
Administrator 2009 SLK 55 AMG/Founding Member 2006
Joined
·
95,062 Posts
I will talk of the 55 because the SL is a long cigar/an old fogy car :D and after all this is SLKWorld and we will miss you if you get an SL

My 09 SLK 55 has 110000 miles
It is so bullet proof I added a Supercharger when it had 100000 miles on it (See my albums/mod threads if you haven't)

My previous was a 2005 SLK 350....see how we are similar? :D

I have had it 10 years. The smile is still on my face.
I would not even consider an SL.

Hope this helps
 

·
Administrator 2009 SLK 55 AMG/Founding Member 2006
Joined
·
95,062 Posts

·
Super Moderator CA 2012 SLK55 AMG w/P30
Joined
·
12,491 Posts
Difficult to say without knowing your tastes, attitudes, etc

If you're interested in just sedate driving (comparatively speaking), get the SL.

If you're interested in occasionally (often :wink: ? ) letting loose, the SLK.

I thought the SL was a real cool looking sports car (long, sleek) when I was younger and was enamoured of the XKE. Having the '55 for two years now, although I still love the long sleek look the "shortness" of the '55 is what drives (pun intended :wink: ) me now. Just finished a five hour drive to Kingston Ont. It was a helluva lot of fun (and comfortable too).

I do get tired on those long drives but only because at the speeds I travel, intense concentration in heavy traffic is required.

Like Jeff said, the SL is a fogey car. Superb in it's own way.

I guess one must ask you:

1)what cars HAVE you had in the past?
2)what do you drive now?
3)what cars do you drool over?

That might elicit more helpful responses.
 

·
Super Moderator UK SLK 55 AMG 2007
Joined
·
26,210 Posts
You're asking on an SLK/C forum, so don't be surprised at the outcome.


Cars are an individual taste and needs thing, so it is hard to judge for others.


I didn't feel that the extra expense of the SL gave me much for the money.
Parking is easier in the SLK.


Try pricing insurance for both when considering the financial side.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
SL's are priced much higher when they are new but give it 10 to 15 years, both SL's and SLK's are close in price.
Also the big engine SLK or SL that I buy next will most likely look like the pic below,so it's gonna come to me for less than 4K.
My first SLK350 is now running perfect (except no AC but I am not gonna charge it as it is freezing here most of year)
 

Attachments

·
Administrator 2009 SLK 55 AMG/Founding Member 2006
Joined
·
95,062 Posts
Check the poll results :D :D :D
 

·
Premium Member 2005 SLK55 AMG
Joined
·
11,404 Posts
No real surprise which way the poll has headed here (on SLKWorld). :D

When shopping for my 2-seater hardtop convertible, I'd found a 2005 SLK55 AMG, and was about to buy it when I saw a very similarly priced 2003 SL55 AMG for sale less than 2 miles from where I live. So, I went over to that dealer, and told them I was about to buy an SLK55 from elsewhere unless they could convince me otherwise.

Well, the salesman couldn't grab the keys to the SL55 quick enough! However, after taking it for a test drive, it just didn't feel as nimble and 'pointed' as the SLK55 was. Still a very quick car, especially with that supercharger, but I preferred the drive and feel of the SLK55 myself. Also, the SLK felt more modern than the similarly priced SL (probably because it is). Add to that the potentially higher running costs (not my major deciding factor, but to be considered none-the-less), and I opted for the SLK55 AMG that you see in my signature pic... and I don't regret it... the only thing I wish the SLK had that the SL has is the convenience access to larger items in the boot/trunk when the roof is down.

However, I've had my SLK for almost 4 years now, and still have no plans to sell or change it! :tu:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I had a V12 in 80's that was fun but rarely drool over cars. I like my SLK350 because of retractable roof and been amusing myself by that since I got it.
I miss my 200 horsepower bike,due to old age, I have trouble pushing 700 plus pounds bike in and out of garage so a car that could accelerate good
is to replace what I drool, I know it's hard to find such cars, SLK55 could be one.
 

·
Registered 2005 SLK55 AMG
Joined
·
1,697 Posts
I drove both before deciding, and the SLK won hands down. The fact that it's smaller (British roads and parking spaces) and doesn't have ABC suspension, of which I've only heard £££/$$$ horror stories, it was a no-brainer. I also drove SLK300 and 350, but despite the similarities on paper, again for me they were worlds apart. The 7-Gtronic gearbox, if operating correctly, suits the car perfectly. Very rapid progress can be made with very little effort.

I'm 5 years in and there's virtually nothing else on the market I'd consider until we get into fancy money. I could possibly live with an F-Type V8 but they are still circa £50k. Since I believe that lotteries are effectively a tax on the poor and stupid, that ain't gonna happen...:wink:
 

·
Registered 2005 SLK55 AMG & 2006 Kleemann 55K S8
Joined
·
911 Posts
They are really very different cars. Are you looking for a long distance GT car and don't mind some maintenance costs? Get the SL. If you want a smaller car that handles well while having good power, then get the SLK. The SLK is actually even a little faster stock vs stock despite the huge HP deficit, mainly because the SL is a porker.
 

·
Premium Member 2013 SLK350
Joined
·
1,075 Posts
Considering the guy already has an SLK350, it is down to all the questions Len asked above - all about what you crave for (or drool over) now. If the 350 has been good to you, and the next car is a replacement, then either SL or SLK will suffice. However, speaking of myself... when buying my Silver 2005 SLK55, I found the car sitting next to another Silver 2005 SL55 AMG. Neither the spouse nor I cared to even test drive the SL... sitting next to the SLK is a darn good easy decision to make... Just put both side by side... For us, it was the SLK55 all the way... bcos... well... bcos the SLK55 was far cuter, more sporty and a lot more fun to own and drive.... Last time I was shopping for another SLK (late 2016), I did see a late model SL55 (2015 or 2016) at an MB dealership, and that car was handsome and a looker with all the gizmos... Sat in it and really liked it... but not enough to change my search for an SLK...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
300 Posts
There's an excellent article titled 'Heart of the matter' in this month's Mercedes Enthusiast concerning ' A celebration of AMG's mighty M113 V8 in two of its most influential applications - the SL55 and SLK55' .

Their conclusion? 'Long may big V8s remain an Affalterbach staple!'
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
My two cents: When I was looking to upgrade from my well used Miata, I sat in both the SL and the SLK and found that the SLK actually had more headroom than the SL (important to my husband who is six foot). Also a local dealer had an SLK 55 that had the red inlays in the seats (not something I cared for) but I took it for a test ride and wow was I impressed. The following day I took a SLK 350 -2009 with the more powerful engine- for a test ride. For me they were like two different cars, I went back and bought the 55. Been smiling ever since.
Juliette
 

·
Registered 2005 SLK55 AMG
Joined
·
1,697 Posts
My two cents: When I was looking to upgrade from my well used Miata, I sat in both the SL and the SLK and found that the SLK actually had more headroom than the SL (important to my husband who is six foot). Also a local dealer had an SLK 55 that had the red inlays in the seats (not something I cared for) but I took it for a test ride and wow was I impressed. The following day I took a SLK 350 -2009 with the more powerful engine- for a test ride. For me they were like two different cars, I went back and bought the 55. Been smiling ever since.
Juliette
I'm glad it's not just me, Juliette! `:smile:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
I periodically consider an SL63 as they aren't much more than an SLK55.
But as was mentioned above, I recommend checking on insurance.
My insurance cost would nearly double, going to SL from my SLK.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
The price gap is too wide, well in Australia at least

At the same price point, SL no doubt, but having a friend who paid a healthy premium over an SLK, and also had the suspension issue, SLK would look to be the wiser choice

Good luck in your search
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top