SL55/63/65/R230 AMG: SL63 v SL65
12-29-2013, 05:25 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
SL63 v SL65
Hi all,
I decided to move my question to a new thread as it is really an offshoot of from the OP's topic of SL55 v.SL65. As some may know in looking down the line at my next car I am looking to go back to my family's SL roots (280SL, 350, 450). In looking at the SL55 I like the vehicle but post the upgraded ABC system's 3 micron filter upgrade. IIRC that takes you to 2006-08 by which time the 55s get replaced by the 63's in 08-09. So for me I was really settling in to look for a late model 55 or early model 63. The only thing that I did not like about the 55/63's form that time frame were the SC, just not a fan of them over turbos. This made me think about 65s. When I read the threads on total cost of ownership for a 65
!!! They seem to average between 2500 (low) to 6000 and up. I just wanted to clear up the final piece of the puzzle left behind in the SL 55 SL 65 debate, where does the 63 rate in this comparison regarding reliability, cost of ownership as measured in repair costs, after market parts availibility, etc. I have been looking at all three and while 06-08 SL55s seem more reliable, lower incidence of ABC probs, 06-08 SL63s seem to be the sweet spot. The cost of ownership of 65s just seemed stratospheric and out of my range. As such I'd love to hear your ranking of the 63s in this mix. Thanks.
I decided to move my question to a new thread as it is really an offshoot of from the OP's topic of SL55 v.SL65. As some may know in looking down the line at my next car I am looking to go back to my family's SL roots (280SL, 350, 450). In looking at the SL55 I like the vehicle but post the upgraded ABC system's 3 micron filter upgrade. IIRC that takes you to 2006-08 by which time the 55s get replaced by the 63's in 08-09. So for me I was really settling in to look for a late model 55 or early model 63. The only thing that I did not like about the 55/63's form that time frame were the SC, just not a fan of them over turbos. This made me think about 65s. When I read the threads on total cost of ownership for a 65
!!! They seem to average between 2500 (low) to 6000 and up. I just wanted to clear up the final piece of the puzzle left behind in the SL 55 SL 65 debate, where does the 63 rate in this comparison regarding reliability, cost of ownership as measured in repair costs, after market parts availibility, etc. I have been looking at all three and while 06-08 SL55s seem more reliable, lower incidence of ABC probs, 06-08 SL63s seem to be the sweet spot. The cost of ownership of 65s just seemed stratospheric and out of my range. As such I'd love to hear your ranking of the 63s in this mix. Thanks.
12-29-2013, 05:53 PM
#2
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,155
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
11 Posts
Vath ML63 Brabus C63 SL63 CLK63BS C63BS
Hi all,
I decided to move my question to a new thread as it is really an offshoot of from the OP's topic of SL55 v.SL65. As some may know in looking down the line at my next car I am looking to go back to my family's SL roots (280SL, 350, 450). In looking at the SL55 I like the vehicle but post the upgraded ABC system's 3 micron filter upgrade. IIRC that takes you to 2006-08 by which time the 55s get replaced by the 63's in 08-09. So for me I was really settling in to look for a late model 55 or early model 63. The only thing that I did not like about the 55/63's form that time frame were the SC, just not a fan of them over turbos. This made me think about 65s. When I read the threads on total cost of ownership for a 65!!! They seem to average between 2500 (low) to 6000 and up. I just wanted to clear up the final piece of the puzzle left behind in the SL 55 SL 65 debate, where does the 63 rate in this comparison regarding reliability, cost of ownership as measured in repair costs, after market parts availibility, etc. I have been looking at all three and while 06-08 SL55s seem more reliable, lower incidence of ABC probs, 06-08 SL63s seem to be the sweet spot. The cost of ownership of 65s just seemed stratospheric and out of my range. As such I'd love to hear your ranking of the 63s in this mix. Thanks.
I decided to move my question to a new thread as it is really an offshoot of from the OP's topic of SL55 v.SL65. As some may know in looking down the line at my next car I am looking to go back to my family's SL roots (280SL, 350, 450). In looking at the SL55 I like the vehicle but post the upgraded ABC system's 3 micron filter upgrade. IIRC that takes you to 2006-08 by which time the 55s get replaced by the 63's in 08-09. So for me I was really settling in to look for a late model 55 or early model 63. The only thing that I did not like about the 55/63's form that time frame were the SC, just not a fan of them over turbos. This made me think about 65s. When I read the threads on total cost of ownership for a 65
!!! They seem to average between 2500 (low) to 6000 and up. I just wanted to clear up the final piece of the puzzle left behind in the SL 55 SL 65 debate, where does the 63 rate in this comparison regarding reliability, cost of ownership as measured in repair costs, after market parts availibility, etc. I have been looking at all three and while 06-08 SL55s seem more reliable, lower incidence of ABC probs, 06-08 SL63s seem to be the sweet spot. The cost of ownership of 65s just seemed stratospheric and out of my range. As such I'd love to hear your ranking of the 63s in this mix. Thanks.The only thing I have had to replace on my 09 SL63 has been the battery. Oh and a few sets of tyres!
12-29-2013, 10:00 PM
#3
The denser abc filter can and is recommended for all abc- equipped cars. So that should not be a parameter in your decision process.
All cars have pretty much identical abc sans the valve blocks that has been upgraded for the my 07 r230. All valve blocks are bullet proof so once they start to leak they can cleaned or refreshed with new o-rings.
The blower motor is bulletproof and has no glaring problems as long as you don't get greedy with the stock blower ratio.
The 63 motors are prone to carbon build ups. Chevron Techron and heavy right foot are your friends.
The 65 motor blows ignition coils and modules but the updated parts are generally problem free.
The 55 and 65 trannys are very stout. The 63 tranny requires a special dialysis procedure one time at 40k miles.
In my mind all the r230 Amg cars are generally the same in terms of cash to maintain them.
Drive all three and decide which one feels the best.
All cars have pretty much identical abc sans the valve blocks that has been upgraded for the my 07 r230. All valve blocks are bullet proof so once they start to leak they can cleaned or refreshed with new o-rings.
The blower motor is bulletproof and has no glaring problems as long as you don't get greedy with the stock blower ratio.
The 63 motors are prone to carbon build ups. Chevron Techron and heavy right foot are your friends.
The 65 motor blows ignition coils and modules but the updated parts are generally problem free.
The 55 and 65 trannys are very stout. The 63 tranny requires a special dialysis procedure one time at 40k miles.
In my mind all the r230 Amg cars are generally the same in terms of cash to maintain them.
Drive all three and decide which one feels the best.
Last edited by alx; 12-29-2013 at 10:03 PM.
12-30-2013, 05:49 AM
#4
Member
One of the biggest recurring costs on my R230 was brakes jobs. SL55's with the 030 performance pack and SL65s have larger diameter rotors which run $900 ea vs the $120 or so for the regular 55. so a brake job ends up costing a lot more on the cars with bigger brakes.
12-30-2013, 08:22 PM
#6
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Land of 10,000 lakes
Posts: 9,988
Received 3,175 Likes
on
1,978 Posts
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
I personally didn't care for the naturally aspirated 63 engines; always liked the enourmous amount of torque I got from the sc/tt engines. And its simply not fast enough without mods...
Reading the forum posts on the E/S/SL forums, the engine has its own share of issues, but people either love it or hate it. I would check the forums on NA63 experiences and take one for a spin; it drives very different than a 55, 600 or 65.
Reading the forum posts on the E/S/SL forums, the engine has its own share of issues, but people either love it or hate it. I would check the forums on NA63 experiences and take one for a spin; it drives very different than a 55, 600 or 65.
12-30-2013, 08:29 PM
#7
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In my garage
Posts: 8,445
Received 1,011 Likes
on
817 Posts
E55, GLS450, GL63, GLE350
I personally didn't care for the naturally aspirated 63 engines; always liked the enourmous amount of torque I got from the sc/tt engines. And its simply not fast enough without mods...
Reading the forum posts on the E/S/SL forums, the engine has its own share of issues, but people either love it or hate it. I would check the forums on NA63 experiences and take one for a spin; it drives very different than a 55, 600 or 65.
Reading the forum posts on the E/S/SL forums, the engine has its own share of issues, but people either love it or hate it. I would check the forums on NA63 experiences and take one for a spin; it drives very different than a 55, 600 or 65.
Trending Topics
12-31-2013, 11:37 AM
#9
12-31-2013, 01:36 PM
#10
Senior Member
Thread Starter
One of the biggest recurring costs on my R230 was brakes jobs. SL55's with the 030 performance pack and SL65s have larger diameter rotors which run $900 ea vs the $120 or so for the regular 55. so a brake job ends up costing a lot more on the cars with bigger brakes.
12-31-2013, 05:43 PM
#11
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,155
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
11 Posts
Vath ML63 Brabus C63 SL63 CLK63BS C63BS
I don't know much about Sl55s but I test drove one once as my girlfriend was looking to buy one. I don't know what model year it was but were some of the earlier models not supercharged? I only ask because I found it slow and lacking in torque
12-31-2013, 06:56 PM
#12
Senior Member
Thread Starter
I am pretty sure is wasn't dropped because it washt any good. It's emissions legislation. This is one of the best engines ever made
I don't know much about Sl55s but I test drove one once as my girlfriend was looking to buy one. I don't know what model year it was but were some of the earlier models not supercharged? I only ask because I found it slow and lacking in torque
I don't know much about Sl55s but I test drove one once as my girlfriend was looking to buy one. I don't know what model year it was but were some of the earlier models not supercharged? I only ask because I found it slow and lacking in torque
01-01-2014, 06:50 PM
#13
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Land of 10,000 lakes
Posts: 9,988
Received 3,175 Likes
on
1,978 Posts
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
55 engine definitely has more torque than a 63. For somebody that is concerned about maintenance costs on an SL, modding the 63 engine is probably out of the question as well. My thoughts are that there is a price of admission owning any one of these SL's. It used to be purchase price, but now that they so cheap to buy, it is the maintenance/repair. Lots of fun factor on any of these and a whole lot cheaper than many high performance cars but if the maintenance/repair costs are scary, better stay away.
There is no cheap AMG SL out of warranty...
There is no cheap AMG SL out of warranty...
01-02-2014, 12:29 AM
#14
Junior Member
sounds like the supercharger was disengaged on your run......more than likely it needed a new intercooler pump.......when it shuts off the performance is pretty pathetic........lucky the pump is only about $100...........
As Wolfmann says the 55 has more torque than your 63 (stock v stock)
Last edited by theintelligent1; 01-02-2014 at 12:33 AM.
01-02-2014, 02:59 AM
#15
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,155
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
11 Posts
Vath ML63 Brabus C63 SL63 CLK63BS C63BS
All SL55s were supercharged.........
sounds like the supercharger was disengaged on your run......more than likely it needed a new intercooler pump.......when it shuts off the performance is pretty pathetic........lucky the pump is only about $100...........
As Wolfmann says the 55 has more torque than your 63 (stock v stock)
sounds like the supercharger was disengaged on your run......more than likely it needed a new intercooler pump.......when it shuts off the performance is pretty pathetic........lucky the pump is only about $100...........
As Wolfmann says the 55 has more torque than your 63 (stock v stock)
01-04-2014, 01:56 AM
#17
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Poland
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SL 63, GL 500
All SL55s were supercharged.........
sounds like the supercharger was disengaged on your run......more than likely it needed a new intercooler pump.......when it shuts off the perf ormance is pretty pathetic........lucky the pump is only about $1ct00...........
m
As Wolfmann says the 55 has more torque than your 63 (stock v stock)
sounds like the supercharger was disengaged on your run......more than likely it needed a new intercooler pump.......when it shuts off the perf ormance is pretty pathetic........lucky the pump is only about $1ct00...........
m
As Wolfmann says the 55 has more torque than your 63 (stock v stock)
never drove SL55... all I heard it has got old transmission. SL63 has got MCT - I believe this is a real advantage.
so torque might be lower, but you smile everytime your car changes the gear - something you do not have driving SL 55 or SL 65
Last edited by and808; 01-04-2014 at 07:13 AM. Reason: missing word
01-04-2014, 07:01 AM
#18
Senior Member
Thread Starter
55 engine definitely has more torque than a 63. For somebody that is concerned about maintenance costs on an SL, modding the 63 engine is probably out of the question as well. My thoughts are that there is a price of admission owning any one of these SL's. It used to be purchase price, but now that they so cheap to buy, it is the maintenance/repair. Lots of fun factor on any of these and a whole lot cheaper than many high performance cars but if the maintenance/repair costs are scary, better stay away.
There is no cheap AMG SL out of warranty...
There is no cheap AMG SL out of warranty...
This thread and others, are really a big assist in helping me work through the issues of MY to look at, things to look for during test drives, getting a realistic sense of TCO which in turn affects the purchase price I will be willing to pay and inform the true need for an after market warranty or not and length of coverage and items covered. So in advance thanks guys and keep it coming. Much appreciated.
Last edited by City Rat; 01-04-2014 at 07:10 AM.
01-04-2014, 03:17 PM
#19
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Land of 10,000 lakes
Posts: 9,988
Received 3,175 Likes
on
1,978 Posts
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
Completely understood. Perhaps the comments of some of the posters in this forum have confused you about my purpose in this thread. I love these cars. In this owners group these subtle differences between these cars are discussed and magnified in minute detail, which is perfect for me as I try to make an educated decision based on my experience and that of others. To the rest of the world, these cars are the stuff of legends and dreams. I mean seriously, coming out of the factory with 700+ horses! There are guys who spend fortunes modifying cars to track who yearn to get to 500! I have no desire to modify the engine of any of these cars. Of course if I get a 55 I'll swap out known problem parts on day one,e.g. IC pumps, sc pulleys, etc. But no desire to fiddle with engine internals, e.g. camshafts. I used to buy cars and had fun modding them, until I realized that the mods were really subconscious efforts to build the car I had into the car I really wanted. So I now I buy the cars I really want and then, after owning it for a while and really getting to know the car possibly making a few mild touches to the exhaust or air intake system, MAYBE. That is why I will not be the guy yearning for the Stage X rebuild, chasing after 1000 horses. Engine swaps, engine rebuilds, frame up rebuilds, been there done that. Drinking a different cup of tea these days.
This thread and others, are really a big assist in helping me work through the issues of MY to look at, things to look for during test drives, getting a realistic sense of TCO which in turn affects the purchase price I will be willing to pay and inform the true need for an after market warranty or not and length of coverage and items covered. So in advance thanks guys and keep it coming. Much appreciated.
This thread and others, are really a big assist in helping me work through the issues of MY to look at, things to look for during test drives, getting a realistic sense of TCO which in turn affects the purchase price I will be willing to pay and inform the true need for an after market warranty or not and length of coverage and items covered. So in advance thanks guys and keep it coming. Much appreciated.
Get one with an extended warranty and you are all set...
01-04-2014, 06:14 PM
#20
Super Member
Before I decide to by an Mercedes SL R230. I test drove first the SL V8 … and the first feeling was woow.. amazing car and so on…… and I was nearly close to by it.
Then when I test drove SL600 with V12 Bi-turbo engine…. I was sold directly and bought it. Cheap to upgrade the engine…. and the TOOOOOOORGUE is so amazing after that….
Sorry V8 owners but the V8 SL55AMG felt like a "toy boy" car vs the V12 Bi-turbo.
When you drive V12 Bi-turbo you felt like you are the king at the roads….. not the fastest but it feels like you are a "gentleman" with a BIG toy…
I would never again even thinking about a car with an V8 engine after this.
I have cut of the rear mufflers also…. now it's feel like a BIG train at the roads..
Yes… it's a expensive car to use… I have had lot of problems with it but it doesn't matter…
This was my experiences about a V8 vs V12.
Then when I test drove SL600 with V12 Bi-turbo engine…. I was sold directly and bought it. Cheap to upgrade the engine…. and the TOOOOOOORGUE is so amazing after that….
Sorry V8 owners but the V8 SL55AMG felt like a "toy boy" car vs the V12 Bi-turbo.
When you drive V12 Bi-turbo you felt like you are the king at the roads….. not the fastest but it feels like you are a "gentleman" with a BIG toy…
I would never again even thinking about a car with an V8 engine after this.
I have cut of the rear mufflers also…. now it's feel like a BIG train at the roads..
Yes… it's a expensive car to use… I have had lot of problems with it but it doesn't matter…
This was my experiences about a V8 vs V12.
01-04-2014, 06:58 PM
#21
Senior Member
Thread Starter
This is exactly the kind of recommendation with a basis that I need. Thanks
In the end I figure on hunting for a year plus for this vehicle based on the reports of others. Mostly in hunting your price point, and the right vehicle, exterior and interior color, etc.
To review the "bidding":
SL65- MY09+
SL55- MY06-08
SL63-?
What are the best year 63s and why?
In the end I figure on hunting for a year plus for this vehicle based on the reports of others. Mostly in hunting your price point, and the right vehicle, exterior and interior color, etc.
To review the "bidding":
SL65- MY09+
SL55- MY06-08
SL63-?
What are the best year 63s and why?
01-04-2014, 10:56 PM
#22
These threads always end up the same way:
V12 guys bash the V8's power,
V8 guys (sometimes) bash the V12's weight and maintenance cost.
Drive both then decide for yourself. Ultimately you have to live with the car you buy.
One is not "better" than the other they are just different. There's a reason Mercedes built both.
V12 guys bash the V8's power,
V8 guys (sometimes) bash the V12's weight and maintenance cost.
Drive both then decide for yourself. Ultimately you have to live with the car you buy.
One is not "better" than the other they are just different. There's a reason Mercedes built both.
Last edited by vtvette; 01-04-2014 at 11:05 PM.
01-04-2014, 11:39 PM
#23
The 55 is sportier, lighter, more snotty. Throttle tip in is more precise, more jumpy.
The v12 is more fluid and packs more punch, but is very hush hush. It is the lazier motor to get up and go. The sl65 also comes with LSD which is a requirement for that kind of power imo. The v8 needs the p030 package to get the LSD.
The 63 is the sportiest of them all. It is also quicker at highway speeds compared to the 55 cars courtesy of the higher redline and 7g tranny... But it feels soft below 4000 rpms compared to the 55. The 65 can't put its power to the ground at anything below 70-80mph and runs out of gears at 150 or so when it goes into 5th which is tallish even for the 800 tqs.
So... Each one has a character. Maintenance is roughly the same. Pick the one that fits you driving style.
The v12 is more fluid and packs more punch, but is very hush hush. It is the lazier motor to get up and go. The sl65 also comes with LSD which is a requirement for that kind of power imo. The v8 needs the p030 package to get the LSD.
The 63 is the sportiest of them all. It is also quicker at highway speeds compared to the 55 cars courtesy of the higher redline and 7g tranny... But it feels soft below 4000 rpms compared to the 55. The 65 can't put its power to the ground at anything below 70-80mph and runs out of gears at 150 or so when it goes into 5th which is tallish even for the 800 tqs.
So... Each one has a character. Maintenance is roughly the same. Pick the one that fits you driving style.
Last edited by alx; 01-04-2014 at 11:42 PM.
01-05-2014, 01:53 AM
#24
The 55 is sportier, lighter, more snotty. Throttle tip in is more precise, more jumpy.
The v12 is more fluid and packs more punch, but is very hush hush. It is the lazier motor to get up and go. The sl65 also comes with LSD which is a requirement for that kind of power imo. The v8 needs the p030 package to get the LSD.
The 63 is the sportiest of them all. It is also quicker at highway speeds compared to the 55 cars courtesy of the higher redline and 7g tranny... But it feels soft below 4000 rpms compared to the 55. The 65 can't put its power to the ground at anything below 70-80mph and runs out of gears at 150 or so when it goes into 5th which is tallish even for the 800 tqs.
So... Each one has a character. Maintenance is roughly the same. Pick the one that fits you driving style.
The v12 is more fluid and packs more punch, but is very hush hush. It is the lazier motor to get up and go. The sl65 also comes with LSD which is a requirement for that kind of power imo. The v8 needs the p030 package to get the LSD.
The 63 is the sportiest of them all. It is also quicker at highway speeds compared to the 55 cars courtesy of the higher redline and 7g tranny... But it feels soft below 4000 rpms compared to the 55. The 65 can't put its power to the ground at anything below 70-80mph and runs out of gears at 150 or so when it goes into 5th which is tallish even for the 800 tqs.
So... Each one has a character. Maintenance is roughly the same. Pick the one that fits you driving style.
01-05-2014, 03:38 AM
#25
Senior Member
My impression of the SL65 is:
You need a lot of road, to see the full potential of the mighty V12TT.
I remember when I bought the car (stock), I took it to the German Autobahn, put it in manual 4th gear at 50MPH, floored it without a downshift and was full on the throttle up to approx. 170 MPH !!! I only thought. WOW! This is a hell of a motor, with only using 1 Gear! Which other car can do this??
It is very quiet, effortless and feels like a freight train under Big-Steam. With modified ECU it pulls even harder, it is great to be in 5th gear and pass 3.000 RPM and feel the Torque and power rush comes in. I love it.
The only thing which can make it even better (who feels the need for it) is to switch to bigger turbos, which are capable to deliver more boost in the higher rev-range. Then you can call your car a real Super-Car, regardless of the high weight of the R230.
Enjoy your cars!!
You need a lot of road, to see the full potential of the mighty V12TT.
I remember when I bought the car (stock), I took it to the German Autobahn, put it in manual 4th gear at 50MPH, floored it without a downshift and was full on the throttle up to approx. 170 MPH !!! I only thought. WOW! This is a hell of a motor, with only using 1 Gear! Which other car can do this??
It is very quiet, effortless and feels like a freight train under Big-Steam. With modified ECU it pulls even harder, it is great to be in 5th gear and pass 3.000 RPM and feel the Torque and power rush comes in. I love it.
The only thing which can make it even better (who feels the need for it) is to switch to bigger turbos, which are capable to deliver more boost in the higher rev-range. Then you can call your car a real Super-Car, regardless of the high weight of the R230.
Enjoy your cars!!
