[W126 Coupe] SLK ... MBCOUPES Digest, Vol 37, Issue 13

[Doug Gavin]

Eddie wrote:

>

> Yes, but the SL 55 costs $125,000 for a stripper (no options) car, 

> 0-60 mph is about 4.5s…which means it is the same or slower when 

> compared to my car. Quarter mile on the SL 55 is a hair under 13s 

> (12.9 usually), while my slk forum has members running 12.7s 1/4 miles.

>

> A stripper SLK 55 is around $63,000, quite evenly half the price. A 

> used SL500 of SL550 is also about $60,000 right now.

>

> No doubt the engine is awesome with around 510 hp and stupendous 

> torque, but it’s not quite the deal it seems when you look at the 

> whole package in terms of performance.

>

> Eddie

>

> * From: * mbcoupes-bounces at mbcoupes.com 

> [mailto:mbcoupes-bounces at mbcoupes.com] *On Behalf Of *Markus Meyer

> *Sent:* Friday, October 12, 2007 3:16 AM

> *To:* Mercedes Coupes Mailing Lists

> *Subject:* Re: [W126 Coupe] SLK ... MBCOUPES Digest, Vol 37, Issue 13

>

> Isn't it better to compare an SLK55 to an SL55 (both AMG)? I don't 

> think comparing the SLK55 which is "AMG tuned up" is a fair comparison 

> to the SL500 or newer SL550 which is just the stock setup.

>

> An SL55 (supercharged) is a little over 500 hp I believe with a lot of 

> torque and 0-60 in about 4.5 seconds.

>

> Markus Meyer

> mfm at meyerprobatepropertiescom <mailto:mfm at meyerprobateproperties.com>

> www.meyerprobateproperties.com <http://www.meyerprobateproperties.com/>

> Meyer Probate & Properties, LLC

> 484-919-9762

>

>     -------- Original Message --------

>     From: "Eddie" <cyberdrakon at hotmail.com>

>     Date: Fri, October 12, 2007 1:41 am

>     To: "'Mercedes Coupes Mailing Lists'" <mbcoupes at mbcoupes.com>

>

>     My SLK 55 is very well outfitted, with half tank gas and me it’s

>     about 3400 lbs (actually had it weighed at truck weigh station)

>     and has around 360 hp, 510 nm torque. The 350s are lighter and

>     better weight distribution, and the premium sound system, seat

>     heaters, and air scarf are pretty heavy options. 0-60 mph on my

>     car is around 4.3-4.5s depending on traction (never enough, even

>     with 265 series tires).

>

>     Well outfitted SL500 or SL550 would be near 4300 lbs with 320-380

>     hp, 460-nm torque depending on model year.

>

>     For comparison, US Spec SEC is around 4200 lbs, 242 hp, and 390 nm

>     torque (mine was dyno-ed to ~ 320 hp).

>

>     Eddie

>

>     * From: * mbcoupes-bounces at mbcoupes.com

>     [mailto:mbcoupes-bounces at mbcoupes.com] *On Behalf Of *Alexander

>     Hochhausl

>     *Sent:* Thursday, October 11, 2007 5:49 PM

>     *To:* 'Mercedes Coupes Mailing Lists'

>     *Subject:* Re: [W126 Coupe] SLK ... MBCOUPES Digest, Vol 37, Issue 13

>

>     What is the curb weight of the SLK? The SL just doesn’t have the

>     power to weight ratio it should.

>

>     -----Original Message-----

>     *From:* mbcoupes-bounces at mbcoupes.com

>     [mailto:mbcoupes-bounces at mbcoupes.com] *On Behalf Of *Eddie

>     *Sent:* Thursday, October 11, 2007 3:35 PM

>     *To:* 'Mercedes Coupes Mailing Lists'

>     *Subject:* Re: [W126 Coupe] SLK ... MBCOUPES Digest, Vol 37, Issue 13

>

>     Which SLK are you looking for?

>

>     I have an SLK 55, and it’s a blast, the handling and acceleration

>     is on a different level when compared to my 560 (and that was

>     already pretty fast compared to stock 560s). I was also looking at

>     a used SL, but the handling and acceleration is terrible compared

>     to the SLK. It’s really a matter of comfort vs. performance (SL

>     vs. SLK).

>

>     Even the 350s are a blast. If you are considering used cars, why

>     not even get a used SLK? Some great values to be found, especially

>     with the rumors of a facelift for 2009 model year.

>

>     Take a look at http://www.benzworld.org/forums/r171-slk-class/ and

>     slkworld.com. There are a lot of people disappointed with new

>     Mercedes, but I believe the current crop is much better, it’s just

>     the service departments that haven’t caught up. My SLK has been

>     perfect, but my CLK has had a couple electrical gremlins, but

>     nothing on the scale of my grandfather’s Lexus…so YMMV.

>

>     Eddie

>

>     * From: * mbcoupes-bounces at mbcoupes.com

>     [mailto:mbcoupes-bounces at mbcoupes.com] *On Behalf Of *jhlstyle at aol.com

>     *Sent:* Thursday, October 11, 2007 2:23 AM

>     *To:* mbcoupes at mbcoupes.com

>     *Subject:* Re: [W126 Coupe] MBCOUPES Digest, Vol 37, Issue 13

>

>     I am in the market for a new Mercedes...and would appreciate

>     feedback. I just learned that a new SLK is the same price as a 2

>     year old, pre-owned, low mileage SL 500. Given a choice, what

>     would be the preference? I just sold my 2001 SLK......Thank you in

>     advance.

>

>     See what's new at AOL.com

>     <http://www.aol.com/?NCID=AOLCMP00300000001170> and Make AOL Your

>     Homepage <http://www.aol.com/mksplash.adp?NCID=AOLCMP00300000001169>.

>

>     The MB Coupes Website!

>     W126 SEC Mailing List

>     Postings remain property of MB Coupes, L.L.C.

>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> The MB Coupes Website!

> W126 SEC Mailing List

> Postings remain property of MB Coupes, L.L.C.

Speaking of SLKs, I had some fun with one on Thursday while in my '90 SEC
Needless to say he blew my doors off but for the first 1500 feet from a 
running start it was fun. I think the driver knew of the SEC's 
capabilities and also was looking for some kicks. It's nice to turn the 
clock back 40 years now and then.

Doug