SL65 Black Series M$RP announced with photo
You are right, all 12 cyl. SL's are a couple of inches longer in the front to fit the engine. SL 65 BS is based on SL 65 platform, not SL 63.
You are right, all 12 cyl. SL's are a couple of inches longer in the front to fit the engine. SL 65 BS is based on SL 65 platform, not SL 63.
The SL65 and SL63 are the same length. The 65 is NOT a couple of inches longer. The engine is tight but it fits just fine......
That doesn't answer the original question because the Black series clearly has a different front end. Has anyone found a web site for the SL Black yet?
Where does this stuff come from?
on this rep. since Brembo is AMGs main supplier of brakes, apparently this dude does not know what he is talking about. Look at my slotted and cross drilled (030) brakes (supplied by Brembo):
One more thing, which wing/spioler is going to be used or offered on U.S production models?
Now I have heard everything.... Where in the world did you hear this?
The SL65 and SL63 are the same length. The 65 is NOT a couple of inches longer. The engine is tight but it fits just fine......
That doesn't answer the original question because the Black series clearly has a different front end. Has anyone found a web site for the SL Black yet?
Where does this stuff come from?
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
$320,000 sounded too high to me, but now $191,000 sounds too low.
The hood of the BS is indeed [what seems like] an inch lower than the facelifted SL hood. This is because the BS is exempt from EU pedestrian/hood requirements due to its limited volume. This must assist immensely with the drag coefficient and higher speed aerodynamics.
Speeds above 199 are for bragging rights and I would assume are not [frequently] reachable in US or even EU autobahns. And, unlike someone suggested above, 220 is much more dangerous than 199mph. The marginal risk is far higher than proportional differences between these speeds. Remember than the marginal stress the tires submit to in order to squeze each additional mile is cubed [not entirely sure exactly, but it is exponential nonetheless] to the marginal speed gained.
$320,000 sounded too high to me, but now $191,000 sounds too low.
I love the SL black, but after viewing for some time doesn't it KINDA look like an SLR (front bumper) a new GT 500 Mustang (fender flares) & obvious current 2003-2009 SL had a bastar*d love child



Last edited by Thericker; Jul 15, 2008 at 08:36 PM.
$320,000 sounded too high to me, but now $191,000 sounds too low.
I agree less than $200k no way. The fixed roof in carbon fiber with engineering will add at least 50k to a normal SL65. No mention of an triangulated chassis. Hope your dealer is right at $191,000 I'm a buyer.
Jimmy
Ya, sounds too good to be true, at that price point it would be bargain. I second guessed, third guessed and even fourth guessed that price. Not sure where he got it but he e-mailed me a bunch of M-B info on the car along with the official allocation information e-mail sent out to all dealerships. Lots of color options, there are several more choices than on the CLK BS, two blacks, two silvers, a grey, red, and white Production is going to begin on August 29, first North American deliveries will not be until early Jan 2009. I told him to check into that figure and let me know ASAP and if that is indeed the case to put my name on the first one. He said I will hear back tomorrow.
I don't hear things, I usualy read and learn that way. Now if you would go onto mbusa and compare wheelbase of SL 63 and SL 65 it's the same: 100.8". But if you look at overall length, SL 63 is 178.5" and SL 65 is 181.3". Now I'm very sorry I said a couple of inches, it's in fact almost 3 inches. Well, nobody is perfect....
Wheelbase 2560
Overall length 4605
For both the SL63 and SL65.
Cheers!
Last edited by adam28; Jul 18, 2008 at 01:27 PM.
. Now put some weight behind it and buy a SL 65 BS 







