SL/R129: Sl 600
07-28-2003, 10:08 PM
#1
Almost a Member!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sl 600
I notice that SL 600s seem to sell for less money in my area. Are there issues with these cars related to the engine, or perhaps the electronic damping suspension that makes them especially expensive to repair? I would appreciate hearing from people on the problem/cost areas of this car relative to the SL 500. Thank you.
07-29-2003, 02:17 PM
#2
Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: San Jose, CA.
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SL 500 AMG
Well V12's never hold their value, cause of maintnance, cost to operate and mainly GAS, but I'm sure some V12 owners will say it's the same as V8's but in reality it's slightly more... if you got the Cash Go for it...
07-29-2003, 02:23 PM
#3
Almost a Member!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SL600
Well, I am not really concerned about gas. What I am concerned about is getting a car that is a potential pain in the you know what, relative to the 500. I guess I come to this a little prejudiced because I am a longtime BMW 7 series driver. And, the BMW v-12, up until the new 7 series came out, was really two inline sixes cast together, with two of everything because of this (air flow meter, caps, etc.), and with resulting lower reliability. Thus, you hear a lot of nightmare stories about 750iLs and the performance benefit of the motor is relatively modest over the 4.0 and 4.4 v-8s (although 750 drivers will claim the difference is gigantic).
Other than the motor, and the fact the car is two inches longer, it is the same car, so I would imagine the reliability would be similar, but I am not an expert, at least not yet.
The other SL600 feature that scares me a bit is MB's version of Electronic Damping Control, which BMW calls EDC. I would always rather have a traditional, non-electronic, non-hydraulic suspension becauase it is just less of a headache, especially for someone like me who buys cars and keeps them a while. But, if you have thoughts on this, I would welcome them. Thanks.
Other than the motor, and the fact the car is two inches longer, it is the same car, so I would imagine the reliability would be similar, but I am not an expert, at least not yet.
The other SL600 feature that scares me a bit is MB's version of Electronic Damping Control, which BMW calls EDC. I would always rather have a traditional, non-electronic, non-hydraulic suspension becauase it is just less of a headache, especially for someone like me who buys cars and keeps them a while. But, if you have thoughts on this, I would welcome them. Thanks.
07-30-2003, 06:21 PM
#4
MBWorld Fanatic!
Not sure where you get the idea the SL600 is two inches longer. Mine isn't!
I've done 72k miles in my SL600 and it's only ever needed one non-service part replaced, as it happens, the Adaptive Damping Control Unit which is an aluminium block with a zillion pipes connected and 4 solenoid valves, one of which had shorted out. About $1200 to replace.
Apart from that, only standard stuff and I do not treat the car with kidd gloves, it earns its keep. The performance is a huge improvement on the SL500 and, in a straight line, hints at what the SL55 provides. The SL600 sits midway between them. With the SL600, you get the feeling of the world receeding rapdily in your rear-view mirror which you just don't get in the SL500, the mid-range torque really shows.
Around corners, it's not so great because the heavy nose makes the car reluctant to turn in and heavy on tyres and brakes. It's better seen as an effortless, quiet, refined cruiser with potent take-off and overtaking ability, not so important in the US but a major factor to consider here in Europe.
The gas consumption is not much worse than what I used to get on a 1990 500SL. I get 21 consistently across country, 15 in town based on a UK gallon which is slightly bigger than a US gallon and this is 97 octane fuel.
At the end of the day though, the SL600 is difficult to sell on. The main reason I decided to keep mine as a daily driver when I got my SL55 was because of the ludicrously low trade-in I was offered and it's not the sort of car people want to buy secondhand. Maintenance has been fine for me overall, but when the Cats need replacing or if the transmission gives any trouble, I will not be happy. Anything electronic or electro-hydraulic is big money. But that's pretty much true of any 129. The SL600 is a much higher performance car, and if you use that performance, some elements of the car will wear faster than in an SL500. You make your choice...
That said, my Ferrari is going in to have its cam belts replaced next week. Needed (supposedly) every 3 years, $3000... which makes the SL600 look very reasonable in terms of maintenance.
I've done 72k miles in my SL600 and it's only ever needed one non-service part replaced, as it happens, the Adaptive Damping Control Unit which is an aluminium block with a zillion pipes connected and 4 solenoid valves, one of which had shorted out. About $1200 to replace.
Apart from that, only standard stuff and I do not treat the car with kidd gloves, it earns its keep. The performance is a huge improvement on the SL500 and, in a straight line, hints at what the SL55 provides. The SL600 sits midway between them. With the SL600, you get the feeling of the world receeding rapdily in your rear-view mirror which you just don't get in the SL500, the mid-range torque really shows.
Around corners, it's not so great because the heavy nose makes the car reluctant to turn in and heavy on tyres and brakes. It's better seen as an effortless, quiet, refined cruiser with potent take-off and overtaking ability, not so important in the US but a major factor to consider here in Europe.
The gas consumption is not much worse than what I used to get on a 1990 500SL. I get 21 consistently across country, 15 in town based on a UK gallon which is slightly bigger than a US gallon and this is 97 octane fuel.
At the end of the day though, the SL600 is difficult to sell on. The main reason I decided to keep mine as a daily driver when I got my SL55 was because of the ludicrously low trade-in I was offered and it's not the sort of car people want to buy secondhand. Maintenance has been fine for me overall, but when the Cats need replacing or if the transmission gives any trouble, I will not be happy. Anything electronic or electro-hydraulic is big money. But that's pretty much true of any 129. The SL600 is a much higher performance car, and if you use that performance, some elements of the car will wear faster than in an SL500. You make your choice...
That said, my Ferrari is going in to have its cam belts replaced next week. Needed (supposedly) every 3 years, $3000... which makes the SL600 look very reasonable in terms of maintenance.
Last edited by blueSL; 07-30-2003 at 06:46 PM.
07-30-2003, 07:56 PM
#5
Almost a Member!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SL600 length
Thanks for your informative response. I appreciate it.
With respect to the length, both my research and a MB buying guide indicate the nose of the SL600 was stretched slightly, by about two inches, to accomodate the longer v-12 motor. With such a short increase in lenght, it is nothing you would notice unless you measured precisely.
With respect to the length, both my research and a MB buying guide indicate the nose of the SL600 was stretched slightly, by about two inches, to accomodate the longer v-12 motor. With such a short increase in lenght, it is nothing you would notice unless you measured precisely.
08-06-2003, 11:12 AM
#6
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Land of 10,000 lakes
Posts: 10,101
Received 3,303 Likes
on
2,049 Posts
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
Btw, only the bumper of the first 600SL was a couple of inches longer than the other SL's. The actual body was identical. This somewhat odd design was changed in 1995 with the first facelift which received a softer, rounder body cladding all around.
I share blueSL's experience; very smooth, lots of nice torque which makes the car feel much quicker around the city, even though it isn't actually much by the numbers.
But it's a big and heavy engine and makes the car feels nose heavy during turns. Certainly no big issue as this car was never marketed as a sports car anyway.
Bottomline, these SL's are a joy to ride and a true bargain, especially as many V12's were bought as a 3rd/4th/5th car and usually are fully loaded, low milage and well cared for (in short, owned by people that could afford to maintain cars properly).
In the US, any Mercedes dealer can get you the full service history in a print-out (based on the VIN) as long as the car was serviced by MB.
Look for a low milage car that was properly serviced and plan to keep it. I would also recommend a later model SL (96-02). Nicer bumpers, wooden steering wheel, leather dash, better seats, Bose stereo, depending on the year maybe even xenon and an AMG package.
Wolfman
I share blueSL's experience; very smooth, lots of nice torque which makes the car feel much quicker around the city, even though it isn't actually much by the numbers.
But it's a big and heavy engine and makes the car feels nose heavy during turns. Certainly no big issue as this car was never marketed as a sports car anyway.
Bottomline, these SL's are a joy to ride and a true bargain, especially as many V12's were bought as a 3rd/4th/5th car and usually are fully loaded, low milage and well cared for (in short, owned by people that could afford to maintain cars properly).
In the US, any Mercedes dealer can get you the full service history in a print-out (based on the VIN) as long as the car was serviced by MB.
Look for a low milage car that was properly serviced and plan to keep it. I would also recommend a later model SL (96-02). Nicer bumpers, wooden steering wheel, leather dash, better seats, Bose stereo, depending on the year maybe even xenon and an AMG package.
Wolfman
08-06-2003, 11:24 AM
#7
Almost a Member!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SL 600
That's very helpful. It sounds like the differences between the 500 and the 600, maintenance and reliability wise, are insignificant enough that if it is a financial issue one should probably not buy either car. Like I said, I just did not want to get a car whose maintenance and reliability issues would detract from my overall enjoyment, and it sounds like it is not an issue.
With respect to the handling issue, due to the greater front weight, that is something that I would like to investigate further by spending some time behind the wheel. While I totally agree with your sentiment and do not plan on driving the car aggressively, to some extent these things are subjective and I want to make sure that I like how the car handles. In your experience, would you say it is something that you definitely notice all the time, or only in more aggressive driving situations?
With respect to the handling issue, due to the greater front weight, that is something that I would like to investigate further by spending some time behind the wheel. While I totally agree with your sentiment and do not plan on driving the car aggressively, to some extent these things are subjective and I want to make sure that I like how the car handles. In your experience, would you say it is something that you definitely notice all the time, or only in more aggressive driving situations?
Trending Topics
08-06-2003, 11:38 AM
#8
MBWorld Fanatic!
I regularly drive an 85 mile trip in my SL600 which involves 40 miles of motorway (freeway), 10 miles of city driving and 35 miles of twisty rural road with long sweeping bends and short straights which are the only places to overtake, so you need the power if the opportunity presents itself to do it safely. In other words, a spectrum of driving conditions.
I'd say the SL600 excels around the city and on a high speed cruise, quiet, refined, comfortable. On the rural roads, it's one of the few cars which allows me to dispatch a Dutch holidaymaker towing his caravan (= trailer) with ease in the space available, and the only thing I need to be careful of is a tendency to understeer on the corners. I'm probably going way above the posted speed limit and as fast as I can to be able to stop in the distance ahread I can see, but the car is very docile, you just feel the understeer a little and when it comes time to replace the tyres, ypu find the fronts wear quicker than the backs - the electronics prevents you smoking the rears unless you want to.
All in all I'd rate the SL600 a fine car, of course the SL55 moves the game on and is better in almost all respects, though not such as relaxed cruiser, you need the new SL600 for that.
You're definitely correct about the differences in V8/V12 maintenance. Much of the potential cost of maintaining an SL properly is common to all the cars so if you think the maintenance costs of a V8 are going to make the difference, you need to think about the things common to both. Most telling is that in the service schedule, there's no specials for the '600; it just needs 50% more spark plugs and oil!
I'd say the SL600 excels around the city and on a high speed cruise, quiet, refined, comfortable. On the rural roads, it's one of the few cars which allows me to dispatch a Dutch holidaymaker towing his caravan (= trailer) with ease in the space available, and the only thing I need to be careful of is a tendency to understeer on the corners. I'm probably going way above the posted speed limit and as fast as I can to be able to stop in the distance ahread I can see, but the car is very docile, you just feel the understeer a little and when it comes time to replace the tyres, ypu find the fronts wear quicker than the backs - the electronics prevents you smoking the rears unless you want to.
All in all I'd rate the SL600 a fine car, of course the SL55 moves the game on and is better in almost all respects, though not such as relaxed cruiser, you need the new SL600 for that.
You're definitely correct about the differences in V8/V12 maintenance. Much of the potential cost of maintaining an SL properly is common to all the cars so if you think the maintenance costs of a V8 are going to make the difference, you need to think about the things common to both. Most telling is that in the service schedule, there's no specials for the '600; it just needs 50% more spark plugs and oil!
08-06-2003, 11:41 AM
#9
MBWorld Fanatic!
BTW, I agree with Woolfman, it will pay you to get a late car that's been loved and cherished. In many ways, an SL600 is more likely to have been better maintained than a cooking SL320...
08-06-2003, 01:21 PM
#11
Almost a Member!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SL 600
Thanks for that description. It is great to hear from people who actually own and drive the car, as you all have a depth of knowledge and familiarity that is difficult to get (obviously) when you typically only have a few minutes to drive the car. All of you have provided very helpful information.
The remaining issue, one with which I will have to deal, is my wife's desire for a clk convertible (new) versus my desire for the sl. Sound budgeting will not permit both, so we'll have to see who prevails in this battle of wills.
The remaining issue, one with which I will have to deal, is my wife's desire for a clk convertible (new) versus my desire for the sl. Sound budgeting will not permit both, so we'll have to see who prevails in this battle of wills.
