Mercedes SLK World banner

1 - 20 of 61 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
185 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Pretty pointless question I know.......but, is an SLK 55 AMG classed as a SuperCar or a High Performance car?

I think that I know the answer!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
771 Posts
The 55 is nowhere near being a super car.

The performance figures aren't good enough in todays market for that label to apply - but even if they were, it takes more than just performance to warrant that tag. It lacks the theatre and visual rarity - not least because it's just a fast version of a relatively common car.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,059 Posts
The original qualification for supercar status was 150mph plus performance and 0-60mph in less than 6 seconds.

I think the SLK350 and the SLK55 qualify on those requirements !
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Agreed, no supercar. I just can't see it lined up on a Top Gear segment next a Veyron or F40 or such. Though I would be curious about the track time of the Stig.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
771 Posts
The original qualification for supercar status was 150mph plus performance and 0-60mph in less than 6 seconds.

I think the SLK350 and the SLK55 qualify on those requirements !
they qualify if you own a time machine and can take the car back to when that was still the case :)

these days I'd say the bare minimum to even have a sniff at the badge is a vmax of 200mph+, 0-100mph in under 8 seconds and lots of visual/aural theatre.
 

·
Founding Member
Joined
·
4,599 Posts
The 55 is nowhere near being a super car.

The performance figures aren't good enough in todays market for that label to apply - but even if they were, it takes more than just performance to warrant that tag. It lacks the theatre and visual rarity - not least because it's just a fast version of a relatively common car.
I agree, it's no super car. Too common to be, doesn't have the price tag that comes with a super car.
 

·
DAS/STAR Registered Owner
Joined
·
4,018 Posts
I'm sure I've heard the term 'Hypercar' bandied around in relation to the Lambo's , High end Porsches, Ferraris etc etc - wasn't that to distinguish them from mere 'supercars'...

And in my book, something that'll do 0-60 in around 4.5 secs and has a top end (unrestricted of course) of around 180 mph in standard form, plus more than the average number of cylinders could well be classed as a supercar....

Cheers
Sean
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
A decent caterham would knock the SLK 55's performance figures sideways, a CSR manages 60mph in 2.9 seconds.....and a caterham certainly isn't a supercar.

I think the definition changes over time, and with new technical advancement.

The nearest Merc I can think of that may nudge close to being (at one point) considered a supercar is the Mercedes SLS AMG Gullwing...

thats just my opinion, and its as subjective as the definition of a supercar....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
806 Posts
Not at all. Performance numbers don't tell the whole story. You can stuff a Corvette V8 in a Miata and walk all over the SLK55's acceleration numbers, but that doesn't make it a supercar.

There are quite a few "normal" and "value" sports cars that can do 0-60 in 4.5 now. For example, the Nissan 370Z does 0-60 in 4.5 seconds and has a base price of $29,990. Does that make it a sub $30k super car?
 

·
Premium Member 2014 SLK55 AMG
Joined
·
1,643 Posts
A decent caterham will blow the doors off a lot of todays 'supercars'.

My 55 amg is a 'middle class supercar', certainly within 5 miles of where I live there is nothing that will come close to it's performance and that goes for most of the hardware parked on the forecourt of the local Porsche dealership! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
185 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
I posted this question and thought that the answers would be one way traffic. It is apparent from the replies that there is an argument each way.

I suppose that when I was a kid, SuperCars were obvious in the Ferraris and Lambos as there wasn't much else around. Nowadays, there are lots of 'fast cars' around hence the need for the term Hypercars.

A good example of earlier cars is a Ferrari 308. In the early 80's this was dare I say a SuperCar. I don't think that I would be calling it now as its moved into the 'Classic' class of car.

Oh we'll, I'm pleased with my extremely fast, fantastically loud and totally reliable car which also gives unbeatable 'bangs for buck' rewards. To me, it's my SuperCar. :Beer:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,059 Posts
Very interesting thread and a number of diverse views and thoughts.
Great to see differences of opinion without it evolving into bad manners - so congrats everyone and it was good to hear the various views.
One thing apparent to me is the term " Supercar " has different meanings for different age groups and the term itself has obviously evolved.
As a 51yold a Supercar was anything, as i previously posted, over 150mph and 0-60mph under 6 seconds, in an age when the average sedan couldn't do 100mph and the 0-60mph time was around 11-12 seconds.
As has been pointed out many affordable sports cars can now do 180 - 200 mph and 0-60 is expected around the 5 - 6 seconds ie 370Z etc.
Another point of view is the exotic look or wow factor of a car, also its cost - over GBP100,000 .
I am from an age when an E-type Jaguar was a way out and stunning design, its performance and handling was mind blowing and it cost as much as the average house!
A friend of mine has a Ferrari 348TB as a general runaround and a Ferrari California as a special drive , but he doesn't consider them super special as he owns them and has access to them.
And i guess this could be the same for us too, as we own a genuine ' Super Car '.
When i drop my daughter off to school many kids come around to look at the SLK and admire it and make comment " Cor mister , how fast does it go , how big is the engine, what did it cost " etc.
It reminds me i drive something most people, and in fact only 7 or 8 years ago , I could only dream owning..
So i guess there is no correct answer or definition of a 'Supercar'.
But for me the Mercedes Benz SLK will always be worthy of 'Supercar ' status.
Drive the dream and enjoy something many, many people will never experience in their life time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
390 Posts
The 55 is nowhere near being a super car.

The performance figures aren't good enough in todays market for that label to apply - but even if they were, it takes more than just performance to warrant that tag. It lacks the theatre and visual rarity - not least because it's just a fast version of a relatively common car.
You nailed the response from my point of view. I would only add that the definition of "Super Car" is constantly shifting as technology advances.

Maybe the SLK55 when it was first introduced in 05 or 06 was close to super car numbers of that day in a couple of measurements. But it has never really achieved that status. And that was never what Mercedes/AMG intended for the car. Too many produced (exclusivity), never at the pinnacle of the numbers game (performance), no really exotic materials or technology (design), just tried and true engineering.

For me, what the SLK55 represents is sort of the German interpretation of the U.S. pony car. Big engine in a small chassis, two doors, great numbers if not the very pinnacle, at a cost far below the "super cars", in a package you can enjoy every day. Mercedes just took it to a completely different level with a folding hard top and a level of refinement that U.S. pony cars will never achieve.

If I were going to call the SLK55 a "super car" it would be because of the overall value + enjoyment + performance the car delivers in the real world every day in a pretty durable package at a not outrageous price. That's the stunning achievement of this car in my book. 4.3 seconds 0-60, six piston brakes, 400 hp blowdryer, and the quiet of a sedan, nav, Harman Kardon audio, and digital climate control. There aren't many "Super Cars" you'd want to live with on a daily basis over the long haul.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
193 Posts
Just my opinion..

The only true Mercedes super car & "Exotic" is the Mercedes SLR McLaren. It's "super" that the R171 trims 200 through SLK 55 AMG were touched with a bit of the good looks DNA of the SLR but that doesn't make it a Supercar.

The SLS Gullwing supposedly handed down some of it's DNA looks to the R172, but I still don't see it unless I cross my eyes and squint really hard. I do love the looks of my new R172 but I just don't see the SLS genes.

The break through design at the time of the R170 was definitely the offspring of the timeless elegant style of the SL.

Although our SLKs are no supercar, our SLKs are fun, fast, stylish and are in a class of their own because they are a Mercedes!

I suppose the vehicle Superman drives could be considered a Supercar.

Anyway...

Drive fast everyone! (the SLK is a super car to drive!)

bobbyM R)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
No, not a supercar. Obviously a very fluid definition, but I would actually suggest that the speed isn't that much of a killer in this case. 4.3 to 60 can still be supercar territory, just, if other factors are present. The SLK lacks the theatre, price, exclusivity and just plain road presence to be considered a supercar IMO. Also, it's a variant of a common car-not a ground-up design.
I don't consider my '55 a supercar, but I DO consider my R8 4.2 a supercar, once again just, for those reasons above. Plenty or road presence, theatre, price and a ground-up design...but it also only does about 4.0-4.3 to 60. (different story around a track of course).
 

·
aka John
Joined
·
13,012 Posts
Interesting thought - I just popped by the local Audi dealer (Houston, Tx now!) a couple of weeks ago and was blown away by the fact that they had 10 R8's on the forecourt, as well as the prices on the pre-owned ones. They also had a stunning BRG DB9 that was attracting a lot more attention - and a much more insane price tag.




No, not a supercar. Obviously a very fluid definition, but I would actually suggest that the speed isn't that much of a killer in this case. 4.3 to 60 can still be supercar territory, just, if other factors are present. The SLK lacks the theatre, price, exclusivity and just plain road presence to be considered a supercar IMO. Also, it's a variant of a common car-not a ground-up design.
I don't consider my '55 a supercar, but I DO consider my R8 4.2 a supercar, once again just, for those reasons above. Plenty or road presence, theatre, price and a ground-up design...but it also only does about 4.0-4.3 to 60. (different story around a track of course).
 
1 - 20 of 61 Posts
Top