SL/R129: Fascinating read -
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
From: far west chicago suburbs
Fascinating read -
Junior Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
From: London
SL320
Originally Posted by den500sl
That's a great read Den500sl. Thanks for posting it.
The writer has done a great job. Gives the breakdown perfectly - everything is spot on as far as i can see. Wish i had this info when i was purchasing my SL.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,415
Likes: 2
some
Originally Posted by den500sl
ive read this article several times, once was about a year ago. i feel that this guy is a little biest tward the 1997 R129. a lot of his facts are off about the 1990-1995 models. he says that there is a much better 5 speed tranny. but Mbz just added an over drive to the 4speed. he also says that the 1996-98 tranny " The transmission learns what you're doing, so if you're racing it stays downshifted for a while before upshifting. For instance, in a 100MPH acceleration run uphill it stays in 3rd gear for quite a while even after lifting off the gas, in anticipation of being hammered again mercedes has had an "adaptive transmition" in the R129 sence it was debued in 1989. also he talks about how the 99-02 were not as "good" because the motor had less Hp. but sence 1996 when they added the OD, and changed the Fuel Inj. they had the 302 hp. vesus the 315 in the 94-95 and the 322 in the 90-93. so i deff. think he is just staiting his opinion but making it sound like the 97s are the best oned and everyone knows it. but after talking to my machanic. all of the SLs pre 1996 are the best electronicly because when you press a button (eg. window) the button will tell the window to go down. but on the 96-02 the buton will tell the computor to put the window down, and most of the time on the 99-02 SLs if the computor cant put the window down for some reason and then you have to thake it to a machanic and he has to run a bunch of tests and take up a lot of you time to figure out that it is a connector switch going from the "brain" to the engine of the window. that is what mercedes is having most of there problems with now, communication between a switch, the computer, and the recieving motor.
if you read up on his BMW : http://www.kenrockwell.com/bmw/540.htm : you will see that of course his BMW 5 is the best one. ever. ever. period, even if there are no cup holders.
in my opinon of you are going to wright somthing on the internet, leave your pride and your ego at home. and wright some facts tested several times.
Mark H,
sorry for the spelling.
Newbie
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 6
Likes: 5
Uncanny Accuracy of Ken's SL History Page
Hi Guys,
I agree more with Fais than Mark H, although Mark certainly has more ride-on toys than Ken has.
Ken gets the data for his pages direct from MB press releases and original sales brochures personaly collected at the dealers each year. Of course he only speaks for the USA market, not Europe or elsewhere. Someone in Japan has even sent data for Japanese versions - they have 12-disc Technics CD changers with friggin remote controls (!!!) - stay tuned!
It's pretty obvious: the good transmission came out with the 1996 model year. The previous one was dull hydraulic that was too pokey to downshift fast. This reticence to downshift is why it's boring for hotrodders. The electronic one offered 1996 - 2002 is obviously completely different. Don't believe me; go read the car mags of the time who concur, or simply punch any SL while coasting at 60 MPH and see what happens. 1990 - 1995 eventually downshift a gear or two. 1996 - 2002 shift all the way down to second and haul ***, immediately nailing redline at 75MPH and upshifting to 3rd etc. Do this at 35 MPH and the 1996 - 2002 nail first gear till 45 MPH.
The engines are similar from 1990 - 1998, the quad cam, 322 - 315 hp. I forget the M number.
The current three-valve 302 hp engine came out in 1999 MY and is still the same engine today in 2006. Hopefully MB will release the new four valve replacement soon. Jeeze, I had to get a friggin BMW 540 to get a quad cam V8 this year. Don't get me started: BMW sucks at service. After I get this resolved with the selling dealer you'll see a full report. I'm not getting anything other than MB again; I've learned my lesson.
Macht Schnell,
Ken
I agree more with Fais than Mark H, although Mark certainly has more ride-on toys than Ken has.
Ken gets the data for his pages direct from MB press releases and original sales brochures personaly collected at the dealers each year. Of course he only speaks for the USA market, not Europe or elsewhere. Someone in Japan has even sent data for Japanese versions - they have 12-disc Technics CD changers with friggin remote controls (!!!) - stay tuned!
It's pretty obvious: the good transmission came out with the 1996 model year. The previous one was dull hydraulic that was too pokey to downshift fast. This reticence to downshift is why it's boring for hotrodders. The electronic one offered 1996 - 2002 is obviously completely different. Don't believe me; go read the car mags of the time who concur, or simply punch any SL while coasting at 60 MPH and see what happens. 1990 - 1995 eventually downshift a gear or two. 1996 - 2002 shift all the way down to second and haul ***, immediately nailing redline at 75MPH and upshifting to 3rd etc. Do this at 35 MPH and the 1996 - 2002 nail first gear till 45 MPH.
The engines are similar from 1990 - 1998, the quad cam, 322 - 315 hp. I forget the M number.
The current three-valve 302 hp engine came out in 1999 MY and is still the same engine today in 2006. Hopefully MB will release the new four valve replacement soon. Jeeze, I had to get a friggin BMW 540 to get a quad cam V8 this year. Don't get me started: BMW sucks at service. After I get this resolved with the selling dealer you'll see a full report. I'm not getting anything other than MB again; I've learned my lesson.
Macht Schnell,
Ken
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,181
Likes: 75
From: Abbotsford, BC, Canada
1999 SL 500 & 2011 E 550 4Matic
