Tanvir

Hi

I am a newbie here....

As we dont have many E500's in the UK I was directed here for some advice.

Here goes: I currently drive an R129 SL500 which has covered nearly 70K miles and I have decided that its best to change car now whilst the SL still has some value.

Does anyone have any experience of the two cars? How does the E500 compare to drive to the SL500?? As of yet, I have not driven an E500, as the few cars that the UK dealers have are all too far away from where I live.

I am looking at a 2002 E500 in case that makes any difference.

Regards

Tan.

Brav

You best be treating yourself to a testdrive.. no comparisson. two differnet cars, different approaches, different platforms.

etenn

Are you sure that you are looking at a 2002? I think the 2003 was the first W211 E500.
However, it may be that the European version came out in the 2002 model year.

Tanvir

The cars that I am looking at are 2002 UK cars, its possible that they are 2003 Models. My current SL was manufactured in '98 even though the car is '99 Model.

Brav

the W211 was out in 02 for a lot of Europe.

glojo

Hi Tan,
I think it unfair to compare the two. The SL500 is an excellent sports car, and the E500 an excellent family saloon.

The performance from the E500 with 5 speed auto is more than adequate. You also have the option of a smaller engined E-class a year or so newer with a higher specification.

You will find that our 2002 E-class is refered to by US owners as an 03 model, and these are the ones that have the most complaints.


Good luck with your decision,
John

Brav

I would be hard pressed to call the SL an "excellent sports car"

glojo

Granted we all have different tastes and this was my personal opinion for a practical sports car used everyday and in the SL price range. I apologise for not being more explicit.

I include the Porsche which in my opinion is a better performing car, but for everyday use and comfort I personally would go for the SL, but each to his own, and I do not like insulting other folks choice of wheels. (except Hell-ona Yama-ha-ha)

Bye for now,
John

Brav

No flames intended..

I'd consider the SL more of a roadster or a GT

lig

I agree - the SL500 is a beautiful sporty hardtop convertible. No proper sports car should weigh two tons+

Lotus Elise = Sports Car

GT3 :drool: = Sports Car

glojo

Hi Brav,
I understand exactly what you are saying and I failed to correctly explain myself. It is the lack of choice in this country of 'sports' cars in that particular price range.

Jaguar? Not for me

Someone suggested a Lotus Elise Nice car for what it is, but a completely different price, and vehicle.

Porsche, then see my previous post.

More a question for the English members, but what other cars in the SL500 price range would you say are better?

Lotus
L = Lots
O = of
T = Trouble
U = Usually
S = Serious

John

Brav

haha..

B Big
E Expensive
N Needless
Z Zepplin

DWP

It just goes to show how little meaning the traditional terms used to describe car types now have, thanks to the makers and their advert agencies. Is a car with a minimal rear seat, like the SL, really a "roadster", or is it what's called (in the US, anyway) a "convertible"? Can any car with a rear seat and a steel roof be a "sports car", as Mazda and much of the auto press insist about the RX-8? Does anyone besides Mercedes and its flacks think that a car with four doors, the CLS, is a "coupe"? Questions, questions, with no answers.

FIAT = "Fix it again, Tony"
BMW = "Break my window"

Brav

Its all very subjective, and at that, most cars are boardering 2 or 3 different "types." But I think most people would consider the SL a roadster - big, heavy, 2 seater, convertible, big engine. Sports car is similar, but light weight, and usually less HP and smaller, more balanced. GT would be the hard top aspect of the SL - good car to haul @ss in, halfway decent handling, go long distances, ie, road trip, and be comfortable. Sports car is more like a 'day thru the twisties' type car. Not as comfortable and roomy, and more nimble. Many people consider the 911 to be a good everyday sports car - as its pretty easy to drive and relatively comfortable.

SAguirre

FIAT= Fuer Italiener Ausriechende Technik (for Italians enough techknology)
FIAT= Fehler In Alen Teilenn (defect in every part)
AUDI= Accelerates Under Demonic Influence
Chevrolet= Can Hear Every Valve Rattle On Long Extended Trips
FORD= Found On Road Dead, Fix Or Repair Daily
BMW= Big Money Waste

Tanvir

Hi John.

Regards the smaller engined cars... you would be suprised. After doing some fairly extensive research the E500 is proving better value. As the E500 is not that popular here they can be picked up fairly cheapily. I would consider an E320 or 320 CDi but can not find one with the kind of spec that I want within my budget £30k.

The main reason that I want the E500 is that I love V8's and the speed... I miss it when I drive our S280.

Regards

Tan

HELL ONA HARLEY

Watch it there fella.....

glojo

Hi Tan,
I totally agree with what you are saying, buying a motor vehicle is all about choice. Be it diesel, petrol, 4cylinder, or V12. (mustn't forget to mention a certain type of in-line 6 cylinder engine )

For the information of our US friends, when I first checked the Mercedes-Benz secondhand database there were TWO E500's for sale that were in Tan's price range. That is two in the whole of Great Britain. I must emphasis that this only applies to Mercedes-Benz dealers and up to a price range of £30,000, and it was at the beginning of last week.
The E500 is just not a popular vehicle in this country. (I included the estate version in the search, although I think Tan wants a saloon)

I have just had a quick check before typing this, and now there is only ONE. There might be a few more just above Tan's maximum limit that could be negotiated down?

Regards,
John

A nice sunny morning in Torquay

Silvergt02

On performance #s aolne, the e500 is actually a tad bit faster on 0-60 and 1/4 mile times....basically the same...100th of a second quicker. I think the e class tranny and the sl weight has alot to do with that.

BUT they are different cars i have an e500 while my brother in law has an SL. His SL is in his driveway most of the winter or when he goes out with the family while I get to drive mine all of time.

I chose a sedan for that reason. I have kids and wanted to use my car as much as possible. Yeah I can drive my other car (GMC Envoy) but who wants to when you have a Benz parked next to it.

I almost bought a Lexus SC430 (2 seat roadster) but didnt for this reason.

While the SL is a more prestigious car and has the drop top feature it a matter of what YOU need and want.

DWP

Nobody has mentioned a major non-mechanical difference between the E and the SL, at least in the US, so I'll be the troublemaker who does. It has to do with gender stereotypes. Isn't the SL often stereotyped as a "woman's car"? I hesitate to use the term "chick car" because anyone who can afford an SL is not a "chick", but the SL (and now, the Lexus SC) do carry that baggage, fairly or not. I don't think that the E comes with any particular gender stereotype, or at least the W211s I see driving around have male and female drivers in about equal proportion. An E500 in black with the sport package is a fairly macho ride; whether an E500 in Desert Silver/Stone - our car - is XY or XX, I don't claim to know.

Silvergt02

I definitley disagree with yoy that an SL has a chick tag. SLK? maybe but not an SL or a SC430 for that matter. To be honest I see alot of middle aged woman driving e class cars around here, BUT I wouldnt say my E is a middle aged chick car.

ATS

I would go with the E500 or an SL55 or SL65 and not the SL500.. I find that the SL500 looks as though it needs something else done to it to make it look complete (just my opinion).
I do like the ABC option though, and you get that with the SL55 and SL65.

sacguy

Hi silvergt02,
Can you add your city/country to your profile, so that "around here" has more relevance to us?

DWP

Last July 14 Dan Neil, auto reviewer for the LA Times, did a piece about automotive gender stereotypes under the heading "A lovely alternative; Lexus' SC430 seems made for the female driver. But just what constitutes a 'chick car,' anyway?" Regrettably, the article isn't available for free any more, but he analyzed the soap-bar styling of the SC, with the cabin squarely in the center, and the retro interior as strongly female-influenced. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

The automotive press, in reviewing the new SLK, has also discussed how one of M-B's main objectives with the redesign has been to add testosterone (check out the phallic nose) and overcome the image of the previous SLK as a "chick car."

Incidentally, it's worth it to register for the LA Times online just to read Dan Neil's columns. He's the first journalist to win a Pulitzer for writing car reviews.

Silvergt02

Better?