Hi,

I currently own a 1985 380SE (fitted with a high compression 560 motor) and am thinking about purchasing a 500SL as replacement.

I had been considering the R107 and W140 but ruled out the 107 for being too slow, old and expensive. The 140 I thought was too heavy to be considered even slightly sporty.

A big question is the ASR or ESP. Can it be FULLY turned off? The owner of a 1992 S600 I drove recentely insisted it couldn't be switched off. In reviews of brand new Mercedes, the ESP apparentely interfers even when turned off!

I've got concerns about handling too since the 500SL is a whopping 220kgs heavier than my current car (thats about 480lbs for old people), so I'd be interested in any feedback about the handling from current owners.

Also how much difference is there between a 600SL and 500SL? I intially decided the V12 was the obviously choice with the extra 55KW and 100NM untill I found out it had a signifigant 210kgs (about 460lbs for old people) weight penalty.

I love nothing more than hammering my "560SE" along a windy road and I love the R129. I'm not sure though, whether it'd be as much fun to drive.

 

Flyinphil-

I can't comment on 380, but I can comment on the 500SL and 600SL.

I own a '97 600SL and it it a amazing car.

I looked at a '95 500SL before picking the 600.

They were both about the same price.

Here is what I noticed:

The 500 had a louder exhaust note, not quite as comfortable as the 600, and IMO did not handle as well as the 600.

The V12 has seemingly limitless power.

When you are on the highway and depress the throttle fully and kickdown into 1st/2nd gear depending on your speed, the response from the car is mindblowing - it is incredibly fast.

I know many owners of the 500SL may not agree with me, but these are simply my obervations.

I'm not sure what mileage you are getting, I am averaging 20-21 miles per gallon.

I'll be glad to help if you any specific questions on 600SL.

Best of luck with either car you go after.

Afterall, it is a Mercedes convertible.

Vincent

 

What's IMO? Were you saying to the 500 not handling as well as the 600?

I'm really big on handling. The problem is during a test drive, you really can't test it out cause the seller annoying always wants to come.

Can you switch the ASR off in your car? I need to be able to do powerslides !

For outright acceleration, was there much difference between the two?

I can't really see myself getting a 600 though, its so heavy. Does anyone know how that extra capacity weighs a extra 210kgs? The entire engine should barely weigh that much!

Thanks!

 

IMO - In my opinion.

Yes, I felt that the 500 did not handle as well, especially at high speeds on the highway.

You can disable ESP - I have never had the rear tires break loose, even with ESP disabled - believe me I've tried.

I have heard that it can be done - I just haven't been able to do it.

For acceleration, the 600 is between 1-2 tenths of a second faster in the 0-60 dash.

From 70-120, there is no comparison, the 600 is going to pull away much harder and much faster.

I would not reccomend powerslides, that really isn't why these cars were built.

They were designed as a high speed touring convertibles.

Best,

Vincent

 

hello.

as for the 600 handling better. im sorry but that is wrong. the 600 has a LOT more power then a stock, 500. i was driving a 95 SL600 for a while, and i could do a burnout up to 40 miles per hour. but the handling of the 500 is much better , how do i know this? for 2 resons 1) i have driven both, the 600 has 12% more body rool than the 500. 2) i have raced on canyons with two 129 600s. and they were behind me, and they needed to slow down a lot more before the turn, and one of them almost crashed even with the ESP on (and that is very hard to do)

so, if u are looking for a canyon runner and an around towner get the 500. if u want to get a freeway domonater, and a top speed killer get the 600.

my .02

 

I drove them all from stock to......SL 7.3 , SL 5.8, and SL B11......the v12 don't handle well due to the heavy weight in the front....... SL 5.8 and SL B11 handle the best......Good power to weight..........If you want to turn off the ASR get a car that 1997 or newer........

 

wtf is the B11?

 

something that make you .......lol..........B11 is the performance kit.... ..

 

hp? tq? 0-60? 1/4? GIVE ME NUMBERS DAMN YOU!!!!One!!1!!! hahahaaa

 

How did you calculate it has %12 more bodyroll? I wouldn't have thought that was something that could be measured that way.

So in pre 97 models ASR can't be turned off and in post 97 it can?
And when its turned off, is it fully off?
I know in the new model its always on even when turned off!

Could a circuit breaker or something be changed to disable it fully?

There's no way I'd buy a car which has a computer sucking away the fun all the time!


Thanks

 

lol.......read my signature........ good night Mark......

 

ASR fully can turn off 97 or newer........Trust me you want to leave it on.......I almost loss it on the SL 7.3.... ....you have faster 0 to 60 and 1/4miles run if you leave the ASR on.......

 

Mark (is it with a k or a c?)-

I have to disagree with regard to the superior handling of the SL500.

The vehicles that I test drove were considerably loud (both road and engine noise), much stiffer suspension, and not as comfortable.

I felt that the ride was not as smooth and comfortable as the SL600.

As I said before, these are only my observations.

Don't think that I am bashing you or the SL500.

I just prefer the 600 - To each his own.

Happy motoring,

Vincent

 

500 v. 600 Handling. I can't contradict experiance, but it is only logical everything else equal, the 500 is going to handle better than a 600. It is lighter and has more even weight distribution. You can probably head into corners faster also with the 500 if the brakes are the same as the 600, because you would have to brake earlier to slow down the extra mass.

But EVERYTHING else needs to be equal. Are you talking 500 Sport? What is tire width/size. Anything lowered? Active suspension? If the 600 has wider tires and active suspension, and the 500 is non-sport and narrow tires, 600 could handle better.

As fars as ESP, I have almost broken loose the rear of my 500 sport once or twice with it turned ON.

I think you won't have any problem sliding one of these babies sideways with it turned off.

But you don't want to. If you drive like that, with a car weighing as much as these, you are going to be buying tires every 10,000 miles . . . that's what I got on my first set.

If you want a sports car you can fling around corners, what about an SLK? Or maybe better a Boxster or one of the BMW's roadsters? Or even a Honda S2000. All more suited for thrashing around corners.

And Mark's car is the exception . . . his is lowered and otherwise modified for more performance driving. I followed him through a canyon once and I had to slow down because my brakes started to fade (even with the cross-drilled rotors). Another guy in a different type of MBZ actually warped his rotors on that run, or so he claimed.

Also, realize that this is NOT an "acceleration" car. Go back and read various car mag's test results. LOTS of cars can keep up and beat it zero to 60. But it is one of the fastest in the range or 50 to 100 or 120. Very few cars can keep up. And I've seen an idicated 140 on my speedo, with plenty of power still available (just not the nerve to go faster).

Anyways . . . if you want to fly at 100 -120 mph for hours on end and chew up miles in comfort and style . . . you cannot beat an R129. 500 or 600 is going to do the job. 600 will do it faster.

 

Hi, thanks for your input guys.

When I talk about handling I mean level of grip and cornering ability. Quietness, smoothness and comfort aren't charataristics of handling.

I don't worry about tyre wear. On my S class they only last 1000-3000 miles depending on what i've been doing.

All the other cars you mentioned are also missing one very vital component which is standard on even the cheapest Korean hatchback. A spare wheel. They're too expensive anyway. The reviews on SLK all say it just looks like a sports car, doesn't actually drive like one. And unless you got the AMG model (which you must really) the acceleration isn't that good either.

I have read reviews and they quoted around 6 seconds and 155mph. My current car already does that and I did wanted one faster. Except the only other cars that have similar acceleration have other issues.

I think a 500 would do fine for me as long as I could switch the ASR off! I can't afford a post 1997 model one, so I might speak to some Benz technicians to see it the system can be disabled somehow or just ripped out. It's ridiculous that some Benz engineer decided to take away peoples fun by making it permanent. No wonder the sales of the 129 and 140 were way down on the 107 and 126. There are probably even examples around that aren't even equipped with it. I thought they were standard with twin airbags, but I found one for sale without even a drivers airbag!

Would I be right in guessing the 500 has better initial acceleration? I've driven the 600 in a 140 S class and the initial acceleration was considerably slower than my 560, untill the V12 got wound up.

By the way, what happens with the roll bar if someone's sitting in the back seat (which I'd be getting). From the look of some pictures, it's positioned very close to where a back seater's head would be!

 

Note in my earlier post that I made no reference to "ride" quality.

All reports I've read say that the V12 is faster to 60 mph. V8 is about 6 seconds. Not faster than what you have.

155 mph is governed top speed of just about any German car sold in USA -- so, top speed in USA of V12 and V8 = 155 -- same in the R129 and all other MBZ. Don't know other countries. I understand limiter can be removed.

In USA, you can't get a factory-equipped SL with a rear seat. I imagine the roll bar would knock the reat-seat occupant's heads off. Or break their skulls or something bad. Solution: really short riders.

Re: SLK "not really a sports car" -- I don't know what you've read, but an R129 is NOT a sports car, either. I think every owner would agree. It has lots of sporting attributes (more or less depending on model), but it is more of a luxuary GT High Speed cruiser. When it first came out in 1990, it was one of the most advanced production cars ever made. It cost about $90,000 USA which is about $150,000 in 2006 money. Which might explain the slow sales.

Yes, AMG SLK would be the way to go. But when it comes to a new SLK -- both SLK 350 and AMG are quicker to 60 mph than any factory R129, and probably offer better handling because of the much lower weight.

I don't get your bit about the lack of a spare tire. Those cars completly lack a spare tire in Austrailia? Amazing. Can't you just buy one and put it in?

You don't care about tire wear? I put new tires on mine 2 months ago -- they cost $1300. If you can't afford an expensive car, how can you spend $200 or $300 or more per month on tires????

Oh, talking about expense -- be fore-warned -- when it comes to replacement parts, the R129 is a money pit. $900 for rear-view mirror. $600 for an antenna. (stealership prices).

Good luck.

 

I know about the acceleration and top speed etc. But I was curious to see if the V12 was slower to say around 30mph, cause the off idle response of the V12 isn't as good as my 5.6 V8.

There's lots of SL on the Australian market with a backseat. I'm assuming they're factory fitted. I've stuck a picture of one in. I haven't personally examined one myself, but doesn't it look like the bar would hit peoples heads?

I know any car that weighs as much as a R129 isn't going to have razor sharp handling. My S class doesn't. But it doesn't mean you can't have fun in the corners (as long as there's no ASR on).

SLks do have a spare tyre, but its a awful space saver, which when used, don't last very long and cost a fortune to replace, they're speed restricted and look stupid. Also would your flat (and BIG) SLK55 AMG RIM that you replaced with the space saver, actually fit in the boot?

The other cars mentioned, I dont know about the S2000, but no new Porsche has a spare wheel AT ALL (except a Cayenne, but thats just a VW anyway). According to Porsche a bottle of goo can fix a flat somehow. There's no where you could put a spare wheel either, except in a passenger seat! Most BMWs don't have one either and that includes the X5 which is supposed to be a off roader.

I get tyres really cheap. I go trawling through the internet or phone up dealers and pick up bargains. Usually the tyres are "used" which I know sounds really cheap, but when people upgrade their wheels, the left over tyres, if they're in good condition, get sold off at nearly nothing and I buy them. Though I am careful with cheap brands (DONT GET NEXENS).

 

I have never driven an SL500, but am very familiar with the S500 and 4Matic version. MB rates them both with equal acceleration (RWD W220). The 500 is fast, I have maxxed it out on an empty highway, and it is a boat meaning that 155/160 feels like 100 - incredible chassis. Now, for the SL600. I said the 500 is fast, the 600 is very fast, and treats the driver to an excellent midrange punch! At high speeds, it is solid and 140 mph can be held with one hand. Test drive both, take them on the highway, and compare for yourself. The 500 can be easily made into a "handler" (more so than the 600)for two key reasons. One, the 600 is a nose heavy car which will dominate on the highway. The 500 is lighter up front meaning you can push it into the corners more. Two, the 600 has a hydraulic suspension while the 500 has standard suspension. A lowering kit and stiffer springs can easily be swapped in to grant the vehicle increased cornering ability. But on the highway, the V12 will dominate the V8. More cylinders, double the valves, etc. Plus, for nearly the same amount of initial cost, you get all the little features such as all leather interior and stock xenons, etc. Only problem is gas. The M120 takes alot of it. So look, both are incredibly solid machines, relics of an era where build quality was a top priority at Mercedes Benz. Take both for a spin, and see which one YOU enjoy more.

HLG

 

HLG.........where have you been......meaning have not see you online lately.......

 

Hey Brabus,

Spent the last two weeks preparing for finals and a national test I had to take. But finally, summer is almost here.

HLG

 

There is a switch marked "ESP off" on the console; but you are right, the electronic nanny cannot be fully switched off. In the off position, ESP is switched off but ASR remains operational. The former is a dynamic stability system intended to correct driver-induced instability (eg oversteer or understeer in fast and sudden maneouvres like an emergency lane-change or an unexpectedly tight corner); the latter is a traction control system intended to reduce or eliminate wheelspin when pulling away from a standstill.

Even when engaged, ESP allows a small amount of lateral slippage; when disengaged it is possible (indeed, easy) to powerslide the car, but ASR will interfere to prevent a really long, smooth and satisfying slide. The handling under these conditions is predictable and "safe", but you need ***** to slide this kind of weight.

I understand that both ESP and ASR can be physically disconnected under the bonnet with specialist knowledge.

The R129 is a deceptively good handler. I say "deceptively", because there is a lot of body roll (compared to an out-and-out sports car) and because the steering is relatively dead (especially around the centre). However, outright grip levels are high and, once you have confidence in the car, you will be surprised at ultimate cornering speeds. Cornering ability is high: the multi-link rear suspension copes well with surface and camber changes; even a bump on the inside of a fast corner will not upset things unduly.

Like a good, old-fashioned rear-drive sports car, the chassis responds well if you take care and exercise skill in setting the car up before corners; but it also has the safety margin of a modern car if you are clumsy and hamfisted (get it really wrong, of course, and the car's weight will punish you). Ride is very good too. In fact, there is no ride/handling compromise: both are excellent.

I cannot comment on the SL600, never having driven one. General opinion in the contemporary motoring press was that the 500 handled better because there was less weight in its nose than the V12's. BUT: most 600s have the adaptive damping system (called ADS2), whereas most 500s make do with conventional steel springs and shockers (at least in the UK, maybe also in the USA). ADS2 reacts very quickly to directional changes (in the milleseconds range) and I should imagine would greatly enhance the average driver's experience.

 

Maybe the answer is the SL60AMG? About the same weight as the 500 and about the same power as the 600 but much quicker than both.

 

Good luck finding one of those, let alone at a price near the 500/600s. I would love to drive one and compare between the two, not to mention test out an SL73 as well. My friend is getting his uncle's SL65 AMG for the month of August - cannot wait to test that one out on the highway.

 

Hmmm . . . now this gives me some ideas -- has anyone tried to reduce the weight of their R129s???

Carbon-fiber hood?

Lighter seats? (the seats seem heavier than my big living room chairs at home)

Removing sound padding?

The doors must weigh at least a 100 pouds each. But what can you do about those?

Anything else?

 

for daily driving i dont have my spare tire in, it must weight over 50 lbs. a carbon hood costs 10K from Renntech, i called.

mark