SL/R129: sl500's
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,681
Likes: 2
From: SF
07 E63 06 CLK55 Cab 03 P-car C4S
sl500's
what are the major differences among all the years?
i know there was a major enjinge change around '97, but what's the best year to own? i'm thinking late '99 to '01 SL500 sport?
perhaps this could be a future classic and just own it for 10 more yrs.
i know there was a major enjinge change around '97, but what's the best year to own? i'm thinking late '99 to '01 SL500 sport?
perhaps this could be a future classic and just own it for 10 more yrs.
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
From: So. Cal.
SL500 2001 Formula 1 Edition;
This is a good place to start:
https://mbworld.org/forums/sl-class-r129/122618-r129-buying-advise.html
Almost a Member!
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
From: Central Valley, Cali
Benz/Bimmers/Vdubs
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,415
Likes: 2
some
Trending Topics
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,415
Likes: 2
some
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Banned
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,982
Likes: 393
From: Atlanta, unfortunately
'09 S600, (2) R129 300SLs, '03 SL500, '03 SL55
The misquoted horsepower figures (315 for a '96) can be misleading. This is because they are peak horsepower and occur at well over 4000 RPM. Below 4000 RPM the newer engine makes more horsepower, and that is why 0-60 is 6.1 seconds vs. 6.4 seconds.
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,681
Likes: 2
From: SF
07 E63 06 CLK55 Cab 03 P-car C4S
This is incorrect. The tranny is identical after '95 and so is the gearing.
The misquoted horsepower figures (315 for a '96) can be misleading. This is because they are peak horsepower and occur at well over 4000 RPM. Below 4000 RPM the newer engine makes more horsepower, and that is why 0-60 is 6.1 seconds vs. 6.4 seconds.
The misquoted horsepower figures (315 for a '96) can be misleading. This is because they are peak horsepower and occur at well over 4000 RPM. Below 4000 RPM the newer engine makes more horsepower, and that is why 0-60 is 6.1 seconds vs. 6.4 seconds.
wow - what a difference!
i'm not sure if the 97 wasn't running well, but the 2001 drove so much better...smoother engine, smoother shifting, and also felt more balanced.
also, although the 97 had the contour seats which are nice, the newer seats are actually just as comfy. lastly, the i don't particularly like the 2001's steering wheel looks, but it felt very substantial vs. the 97 which felt skinny.
then, i got back into my 2001 E55 and thought...wow, how much fun was that? ...and drove home with a big smile on my face.
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
From: So. Cal.
SL500 2001 Formula 1 Edition;
just drove a 1997 SL500 and also a 2001 SL back to back, same dealer lot.
wow - what a difference!
i'm not sure if the 97 wasn't running well, but the 2001 drove so much better...smoother engine, smoother shifting, and also felt more balanced.
also, although the 97 had the contour seats which are nice, the newer seats are actually just as comfy. lastly, the i don't particularly like the 2001's steering wheel looks, but it felt very substantial vs. the 97 which felt skinny.
then, i got back into my 2001 E55 and thought...wow, how much fun was that? ...and drove home with a big smile on my face.
wow - what a difference!
i'm not sure if the 97 wasn't running well, but the 2001 drove so much better...smoother engine, smoother shifting, and also felt more balanced.
also, although the 97 had the contour seats which are nice, the newer seats are actually just as comfy. lastly, the i don't particularly like the 2001's steering wheel looks, but it felt very substantial vs. the 97 which felt skinny.
then, i got back into my 2001 E55 and thought...wow, how much fun was that? ...and drove home with a big smile on my face.
Are you saying that the 2001 R129 was more fun to drive than your 2001 AMG E55?
The E55 has almost 50 more HP and weighs 400 pounds less. And is supposed to go to 60 almost a second faster (5.4 vs. 6.1).
And the R129 is more fun? Is that with the top up or down?
How cool is THAT??!!!
See, I know these are GREAT cars!!!!!
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 391
Likes: 6
From: So California
2000 SL500
Take a look at this site for year to year differences.
http://consumerguideauto.howstuffwor...z-sl-class.htm
http://consumerguideauto.howstuffwor...z-sl-class.htm
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
From: So. Cal.
SL500 2001 Formula 1 Edition;
Take a look at this site for year to year differences.
http://consumerguideauto.howstuffwor...z-sl-class.htm
http://consumerguideauto.howstuffwor...z-sl-class.htm
http://www.mbusa.com/models/class-ov...=sl_class_main
Click on "features & specs" towards the bottom of the pop up is "16 year model overview" you can chose any year you like.
This is 1998:
http://www.mbusa.com/overview/1998/S...wMenu=sl-class
