Kubazzz

Both fantastic but much different cars - that's why choice is so difficult
what do You think about that? Let me know your opinions and experiences
i'm not 100% sure if i'll have possibility to accomplish that plan but i want to be well-informed :p

jettie1767

They are not of the same class. I don't know how you would compare. I would say the 645ci is more of a CLK competitor and will be a more fair comparison.

One thing you should ask yourself is if you need the 2 extra seats in the rear. If the answer is yes, then, the 645 is your car. If you're looking for a fun 2-seater car with lots of sex appeal....no question....the SL!

Kubazzz

yes i know - that's why I said they are "much different". Additional rear-seats are neutral for me. Question is more about real performance, driving pleasure & comfort, reliability and quality. I really like SL as much as 6 cabrio but there is no way i can afford both There is a little difference in price - SL is more expensive but it gives possibility to add Individual Package to 645.

elbimmer

I would go for the SL500. But only with an AMG package....
On the other hand 645Ci is the way faster and more reliable...

lorinserbenz

The 645ci is not way faster than an SL500.. I had a 645 for a few days and does not seem faster than my SL. I highly doubt the 645 is more reliable than the SL. What are you basing your comparsion on? The 645 hasnt been out long enough to compare reliability.

Personally I like the 645, IMHO its a good looking car. Of all the current BMW styles it is the one that looks the best.
What turned me off was the interior, the dash looks cheap and the materials used throughout are not of the same quality as an SL.

If you have a family then I would go for the 645... if not then get the SL it will NOT disappoint.

Dr Do

645 is a beast compared to the clk. I drive an 03 clk and it's like driving a toy compared to a 645. I test drove the 645 and sl500 and loved both of them. I chose the sl500 due to the hard top and always wanting an sl500. If you get a cab 645 and start adding options you aren't much less than a comparable sl500. Both cars look great and I could be happy with either one.

RJC

Compare a CLK 500 to a 645 not a 320 for a reasonable comp.; actually a CLK55 is the best comp $for $...

Kubazzz

that's why i'd go for BMW Individual with full-leather upholstery and higher quality.[afaik].

I don't have my own family [children]. I need 2 seats - the only option for a passanger is a girl Besides, the rear seats in 645Ci are not very useful - too tight.

This whole situation is little confusing
When i'm at BMW Dealer, I look at the 6series, sit in it for a few minutes, I think that this is one of the best cars I've ever seen... But it goes the same way when i'm at Mercedes-Benz Dealer and look in an SL
I think 645Ci is somewhere between CLK and SL. Not as exquisite as SL but not so middle-class as CLK. There should be the CL Cabrio :p [though the price'd kill me]

Dr Do

Comparing strictly performance I would agree using a clk500 or clk55 to a 645. But still disagree that a clk compares to a 645 in size or style. A 645 is a pretty big car with a much larger interior feel. Again, my clk feels like a small toy when compared to the 645, performance or not. All three are nice cars. I have had my fill of the clk styling when my lease is up. I look forward to driving the sl500 in Sept. To each his own.

RJC

The CLK does compare well as a two door, four seat coupe, just like the 645 and in 55 guise, in price as well, albeit with much better performance...the 6 is a bigger and heavier car by 200 lbs to the 500 and close to 300 I'm sure against your 6 cylinder 320.

I've had my fill of MB period :p and will look at the 6 when my lease is up in early next year. Since the new 7 gets a new 360 hp 4.4 V8 I'd imagine the coupe should for 06 too??? I do love the pillarless design (which costs much more to produce) of the CLK especially with all 4 windows down, something BMW does not have in it's coupe costing $15,000 more vs. a CLK 500. The new CLK is due out in MY 07 and from the pics I've seen looks very very nice; MB quality needs to go way up by then for me to give it a serious look.



Kubazz:

Here's a great comparo between the 55 and 645 and all the info, MSRP's are within a few $'s. The CLK 55 is the best comp.

Click on this and go to the comp section.
http://www.mbusa.com/brand/models/CLK55C.jsp



Hope this is helpful.

Kubazzz

thanks for answers.
to make it clear - i'm thinking about 6 Convertible vs SL. IF Coupe then only CLS :p

clkcadet

645 is a nice car, bmw really hit the spot with this car, is it better or worse than the sl500?? thats up to you look at a pic of a 6 put it down then look at a pic of an SL whichever one gets your blood pumping faster is the car for you! lol

btw the SL does it for me every time!!

Kubazzz

both do this, that's the problem

RJC

Not too crazy about the 6 in the rag top version especially with the top up, I prefer the coupe. The folding hard top in the Sl is much nicer.

Gunther

It's easy....

the 645 is a hot car - no doubt....but for my $$$ I want a hard top. The SL offers way more just in the hard top option. You don't have to worry about any one cutting it, ripping it or it wearing. Had a 560 SL with the rag top before my SL500 - hands down there is no comparison; the hard top is far superior.

Kubazzz

BMW says that the roof in 6 convertible is kind of extra-high-tech thing, i think probably far better than in yet old 560SL :p
but you're right - hard-top is still better than any rag top.

Scotsman

When I bought the SL, the dealer told me 2 guys who'd bought a 6-series traded them in for an SL with 2 weeks of getting them. Nice looking cars but they just didn't like the drive. I think they're easily the nicest looking BMW but then again the rest are ugly!

I'd have a long, long test drive as it could be an expensive mistake.

BiTurboBenz

IMHO, 645 Cab is waaaay overpriced. 645 Coupe is still heavy, the sunroof doesn't open and the rear windows don't go down. It isn't that fast either. I drove both and the only thing I like about the 6 is the exterior styling. I'm not afan of iDrive or the interior either.

The SL is in a different class than the 6, I might compare the 6 to the CL.

WIldcat465

You might compare them, but it wouldn't be fair to the either car. The CL is MB's flagship and a better all around car than the SL and certainly far superior than the 645. I own both the SL an CL and the 645 is outclassed by both cars.

The 645 is more closely matched to the CLK and in that comparison, I'd take BMW. Better reliabilty and styling the the MB, not to mention a better maintenance plan and better resale value. I-drive has improved so for me it's the clear champ.

BiTurboBenz

Yeah, but the CLK500 bases for less than $55K and the 645Ci bases for more than $70K...we are talking a $15,000 gap.

Tico

get the SL500 with the AMG package then put the car on sport instide of comfort i want a 645 to beat that. I dont really like soft tops on cars.

egxpimp

if your going to get a sport car, their is no reason to get a convertable in my opinion. I think we should compare the 6 series with the CLS...

Overclocked412

I would take the SL over the 645, but the 645 over the CLK (unless the CLK had all the options and a AMG kit on it)

tiggerfink

645Ci v SL500?

645Ci v SL500?

Hemm, is that like comparing pizza to ice cream? Those two cars are not comparable.

ano0oj

Haha, you're asking a Mercedes Fanatics board, what car do you think they'll choose?