Mercedes SLK World banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am hell bent on finding a 32 this spring. Am struggling intellectually and emotionally with the notion of driving an automatic but am ready I think . That engine looks exciting enough to make up for it.

Between Craigslist and Autotrader there are a handful of 32's available being sold by private parties right now. Pretty low miles, appear cared for and every seller I have exchanged email with has been willing to go down on price. Looks pretty easy to get a car in the 50-60k range for $15-17k.

Question. Are the 2004 year cars worth anymore than the 2002's?, other than being 2yrs newer? Any model changes during the run?

I haven't read about any obvious probs to look for. Anything thoughts would be helpful.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
SFKJeld,

I purchased a 2002 SLK32 in January 2012. I had the same thought process about the transmission. I had been looking at similar vintage SLK320's with manual transmissions, but decided to forego the 6 speed to get the SLK32 engine. I have had no regrets. For me it is just a toy, and frankly the first toy car for me that was not a manual transmission, but I have no regrets.

I am unsure about differences between 2002 and 2004.

I think the issues that you will find for the most part will be easily fixed using the forum as a resource. The mechanicals in the car seem fairly bullet proof, and the cars seems to be robust.

Good luck in your search.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
604 Posts
the only difference between the 3 yr production is the 2002 does not have a engine signature plate and the production numbers for 2003 and 2004 are significanty lower
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
No regrets on owning an auto with an AMG at all.

As of today, there are three pretty rare SLK32's on Autotrader: 2 Sunburst Yellows and a Linarate Blue. I have seen a couple yellows, but that is the first of any of the blue variants I have seen since I bought mine.

There was also a red and white which were both higher mileage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Thanks for the autotrader tips. I have already been in touch with both the yellow and blue car owners. The blue one is sold I believe. While the cars look great, they both have 18" chrome aftermarket wheels. I don't think I can live with chrome. A tad much bling for my taste, sort of a pimpy vibe too. To each their own of course.

I am curious about the lower profile tire aspect tho. The cars I have done that to, feel as tho they handle better, but there are ride quality trade offs. I imagine that the SLK would probably not suffer as much tho, since the ride quality is much nicer than any sportscar I have owned. Might be a good performance upgrade.... in anything other than chrome.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
I must confess, my AMG is not the most comfortable car I have owned. Then again, I didn't buy it with comfort in mind :)

I currently have 18"s on my car and love them.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
30 Posts
it IS a sports car and needs the firm suspension to keep the car under control. the computers do a lot to stop you from losing it.
even with the ESP off the other systems will turn it back on if you get too lose. i can only drift 15 degrees without tripping the limit the the ESP reengages. but i can slip sideways up the on ramps until about 70 mph.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
There is firm then there is real firm. The slk350 with sports suspension I test drive was quite plush compared to my current S2000 and prior Lotus. The S2000 was not a good handling car. By the time I firmed up the suspension, bigger wheels and konis, it has become a buckboard on city streets. One of the reasons I am looking to the slk.
 

·
Registered 2015 SLK250
Joined
·
31 Posts
I'm on my 5th 170 type SLK...

In 2009 I *thought* I wanted an SLK32, searched high and low for the "right one", found a creampuff in St. Louis (~22K miles) and drove it home.

I liked almost everything about it except for the transmission. It was *boring*.

I ended up keeping the car only for about 4 months.

Last year, I found an SLK230 5-speed just like my original '99 (Magma Red/Salsa). I enjoyed driving it so much, I got rid of my SL550.

Drive the SLK32 for a while before buying one and then <potentially> being disappointed with it.

FYI, the heated seat elements are imbedded in the seats, apparently break more often and can be expensive to replace (you need a whole seat cover)... In other words, test them first to make sure they work properly...

-r
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
...and try not to plop your arse down on them to hard. I did that and my driver seat quit working : /

I'm on my 5th 170 type SLK...

In 2009 I *thought* I wanted an SLK32, searched high and low for the "right one", found a creampuff in St. Louis (~22K miles) and drove it home.

I liked almost everything about it except for the transmission. It was *boring*.

I ended up keeping the car only for about 4 months.

Last year, I found an SLK230 5-speed just like my original '99 (Magma Red/Salsa). I enjoyed driving it so much, I got rid of my SL550.

Drive the SLK32 for a while before buying one and then <potentially> being disappointed with it.

FYI, the heated seat elements are imbedded in the seats, apparently break more often and can be expensive to replace (you need a whole seat cover)... In other words, test them first to make sure they work properly...

-r
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Ah geez whitefang, not what I wanted to hear. Was thinking that spectacular motor would make up for the trans. I still want one but think now I will keep the s2000. The car is a ball to drive and the 32's prices are falling. Can probably hang onto to both. Thanks man.
 

·
Registered 2015 SLK250
Joined
·
31 Posts
SFK,

The best advice I can give on any purchase, is try it before you buy it. I liked the tigher suspension, but did *not* like the auto transmission. Part of the "fun factor" in an SLK is the manual transmission.

I would have thought the SLK32 would have been a *lot* faster, but it didn't seem that way.

Sorry!

-r

www.thewho.info/wfc/cars.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
ah come on Whitefang... You are killing me. First, reminding me that the auto trans is a drag, as I suspected anyway. But now... it isn't even fast? That was the point. I still haven't driven one, but did fire one up in a lot. I was offered the test drive, but knew I would never buy a car with over spray all over the place (I hate cheap resprays). Anyway, the motor sounded glorious.. almost as good as a Porsche. But I expected the car to be a rocketship.

So you are telling me it is sheep in sheep's clothing? Ah man.....

Kidding, of course. I appreciate the counsel.

Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
The SLK32 is plenty fast :) and can be plenty faster for relatively cheap. The automatic is indeed a draw back, but AMG does not make any manual gear box vehicles any longer. Not sure if they ever did, to be honest. I'd assume so pre-2000 at some point. Please keep in mind that what you get here are opinions, go out and try it yourself and see if you like it! :)

SFK,

The best advice I can give on any purchase, is try it before you buy it. I liked the tigher suspension, but did *not* like the auto transmission. Part of the "fun factor" in an SLK is the manual transmission.

I would have thought the SLK32 would have been a *lot* faster, but it didn't seem that way.

Sorry!

-r

www.thewho.info/wfc/cars.html
 

·
aka John
Joined
·
13,012 Posts
ah come on Whitefang... You are killing me. First, reminding me that the auto trans is a drag, as I suspected anyway. But now... it isn't even fast? That was the point. I still haven't driven one, but did fire one up in a lot. I was offered the test drive, but knew I would never buy a car with over spray all over the place (I hate cheap resprays). Anyway, the motor sounded glorious.. almost as good as a Porsche. But I expected the car to be a rocketship.

So you are telling me it is sheep in sheep's clothing? Ah man.....

Kidding, of course. I appreciate the counsel.

Thanks

No offense, but I'm not sure what you drove, but it must not have been a '32. I've driven a couple, and get followed by one quite frequently, and it's damned close to a '55. It's also a heck of a lot cheaper to make it as fast if not faster than a '55..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
@UK Why would I take offense? I wasn't the one that said the 32 was not fast. Read the thread again.
 

·
Registered 2015 SLK250
Joined
·
31 Posts
UK-C200, re:

>No offense, but I'm not sure what you drove, but it must not have been a '32. I've driven a couple, and get followed by one quite frequently, and it's damned close to a '55. It's also a heck of a lot cheaper to make it as fast if not faster than a '55..

I didn't "test drive" one - I *owned* one. :)

Relative to my SL550 (382 HP), it felt *slow*.

I don't think the tranny helped it - a car like that should have a manual trans.

I wasn't crazy about the car. On the other hand, I *love* my manual trans SLK230...

Here all the pix:

www.thewho.info/wfc/cars.html

-r
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
That's a whole lot cars!

One thing I did notice was that the factor air box on the 32 sucks. Upgrading to the dual CAI from NeedsWings was a fantastic upgrade.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Wow whitefang. That is a lot a cars and a lot of red. I do like your penchant for tan interiors. Always my fave.
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top