C5DRVR

Does anyone know what the production numbers are for the 2003 and up SL500? I am curious to know and can't find this information anywhere.

SDSL

I don't have the exact number for you, but 25-35000 a year for that period is probably right.

This 2002 factory visit post guesstimates 30-35,000 based on daily production. Keep in mind that this was during the R230 launch when the SL was the hot ticket. So that was probably the high point.

https://mbworld.org/forums/newreply....te=1&p=2597634

MB lumps S/SL/SLR/Maybach sales for financial reporting, but in 2005 sold 72,000 of these units down 17% from 2004. Say we deduct 2,000 for Maybach and SLR and assume Mercedes sells S to SL at a 3:2 ratio, you'd have about 28,000 SL in '05.

http://ar2005.daimlerchrysler.com/cg...edes_car_group

For the 1990-2000 period, Mercedes sold an average of 4,600 R129 SLs in the US (low 1,721 and high 7,540) which I'm guessing is similar to the US sales range for the R230.

IngenereAMG

However many they made is too many!!!

If they had the same philosophy as Ferrari.......If they think they can sell 1000 cars....make 999 of them! Our depreciation would be a bit more manageable!

CY

Seriously...way too many MB's in general.

C5DRVR

Thanks everyone. Very interesting. They produced more than I figured.

Germancar1

U.S. Sales

2007 - 6,126
2006 - 8,462

http://www.emercedesbenz.com/Jan08/0...s_In_2007.html

M

Steven

All of the above comments are true. One does not even have to look at Ferrari to see the problem of value that Mercedes has. At high end auto auctions, for example, an 05 SL500, maybe $100,000 new and an 05 Porsche 911 cabriolet, approx. same price new, will have at least a $15K spread in price. The SL will bring low $50 and the Porsche will bring at least mid $60s. Supply and demand. Also, factor in Mercedes wanting to saturate the market with inexpensive entry level models as well as specialty AMG models. This is not to say one is better than the other, just an observation of the market at work.

SDSL

I don't see how Ferrari pricing is in any way comparable to Mercedes SL pricing, SL55 or 600 included. Boarders seem fond of comparing the two marques, but as financial commodities, an exotic that cost several hundred thousand new vs. a mass-produced automobile like the SL (including AMG and 600 variants) aren't really similar.

I'd also respectfully disagree with the SL vs. 911 carrera cabriolet figures, due to asynchronous model update schedules.

Your specific 2005 example isn't analogous as that represents the previous SL500 iteration vs. the latest refreshed 997 iteration of the 911.

If you look at comparables such as:

2004 SL500 vs. 2004 911 cabriolet (996)

or

the refreshed 2007 SL550 vs. 2007 911 cabriolet (997)

you'll see that the figures are very comparable (actually the Mercedes values are higher).

2005 or 06 SL vs. 2005 or 06 Porsche will be in favor of the Porsche because the 997 Porsche is a dramatic improvement over the 996 and you're comparing old SL vs. New Porsche.

Steven

Year Make Model
Series Body Style
Engine Type Transmission Type
Drive Type Odometer (M) Purchase Price (USD) Number

2006 PORSCHE 911 CARRERA 4 2DR 3.8L H6 AUTO 8,932 $70,750
2006 PORSCHE 911 2DR CONVERTIBLE 3.8L H6 AUTO 15,306 $66,500
2006 PORSCHE911 2DR CONVERTIBLE 3.8L H6 AUTO 9,850 $70,000

WDBSK71F07 5,700 M BLACK 01/10/2008 $63,500
Options: Leather CV CD CC PL PST PW PB NS AC PS

WDBSK71F97 2,256 M BLACK $67,000
Options: Leather MN CX CC PL PST PW PB NS AC PS

WDBSK71F97 6,301 M BLACK $66,700

Here are some recent numbers to backup my assertions of Porsche values to SL values. The amount spreads further in 05 and 04. The point is the price new to resale value, not whether an 06 Porsche should be compared to an 07 SL550. Bottom line, SLs tend to plummet from new pricing in real $$$ when compared to a comparable new priced Porsche.

SDSL

This was your original assertion:

"...an 05 SL500, maybe $100,000 new and an 05 Porsche 911 cabriolet, approx. same price new, will have at least a $15K spread in price..."

You then posted some data for 2006 Porsches for your 2005 comparison (I assume to reach the "mid-sixties" level you cited), only two of which were convertibles and none of which were 911, all 3 of them are 911 S (3.8), which is about 10K more when new, and all 3 of which have automatic transmissions (+$3,500). I'm also NOT seeing the data for the comparable Mercedes SLs that shows the "at least $15k" price difference?

In general terms, the dealer trade-in price is the same price that the dealer is assuming he'll get at auction for the car.

These are the trade-in prices, from Edmunds for the last three model years.

05 SL 50,158 05 911 S Cab 56,339
06 SL 59,704 06 911 S Cab 66,079
07 SL 75,985 07 911 S Cab 76,003

You'll see that Edmund's 2006 number for Porsche is about the same as what you cite. You'll also see that the Porsche depreciates evenly over the three years, since they are unchanged 997 model specimens.

On the Merc side you'll notice that A) there's no $15k difference between the Merc and Porsche and you'll also see that the value of an 06 vs.07 is dramatically different than between an 05 and an 06 because 07 is of course the refreshed model.

The Porsche comparison is somewhat flawed, similar to the Ferrari argument. There are significantly more SL500s in the market place than 911 Carrera S cabriolets which of course impacts the pricing.

Steven

I gave you actual figures. I am just showing year to year valuations. These are actual figures from one of the highline auctions. I really could care less what Edmunds says. I see actual prices of the vehicles, whether from Mercedes Credit or Porsche Credit. Many times, options play little in wholesale values, mileage, condition and color play a big part. Look at a NADA book or a Galves book sometime, you will see what I am talking about.
Bottom line, a used Porsche, because of its scarcity, brings more money dollar for dollar used than the comparable MB that were simiarlly priced new.
Hey, I love my SL and I am not trying to put it down, I am just stating facts.

jl88

It's better to compare the 996 with the SL500. 2004 is a good MY.

I don't think there's any way to prevent the huge depreciation nowadays (for MB). Even limited production cars (AMG x65) are killed in the wholesale market. The only way to limit the free fall depreciation is to only produce a limited number of cars, like the SLR, and not go the sub-model route. But that isn't going to happen.

With the focus for most car companies being the bottom line, volume is number one priority. The number of leases are increasing every year, which further fuels the volume necessity.

iguess

65's arent selling because at the end of the day, you have a 65, someone else has a 55, and the next has a 500. Sure, your car is much faster than anyone elses, but who cares? honestly, it is because MB makes 10000 classes, C, CLK, SLK, R, M, E. If they didnt make a CLK, I couldnt afford a MB.but since there are so many classes, its not really "special" to have a MB anymore. Look at the Maclaren Mercedes. THere werent too many produced, and still, there are many of them still for sale. Some really rich guy out there would rather spend 450k on a Carrera Gt, than have a mercedes, because everyone has a mercedes.

SL2003driver

You could say the same about Lexus and BMW with their ES350's RX350's, 3series, X3's. Car people know the difference between a top of the line vehicle and the base cars. Non car people can't tell a chevy from a Lexus. I buy for my own pleasure. As long as the dealer takes care of me when I come in for service, I'll be happy. I would hope they would give some priority for a $100K+ vehicle over a $30K+ vehicle?

jl88

Super/Exotic cars, such as the Mclaren SLR, Carrera GT, F430, will always have a price floor. Due to the nature of these vehicles, there will always be a demand for it.

However, when you talk about an S class, AMG or not, the car will eventually depreciate down to the sub $10,000, or the cost of the parts of the car in the refurbished market.

That was the point I was trying to make, I don't think it came out clearly.

iguess

+1

iguess

i know what you mean lol. but the car dealership i go too doesnt seem to give a crap about me (whether its with the s500 or clk350)

sprucegoose

I am a humble man who enjoys the finer things in life. One of those finer things is a beautiful piece of sheet metal from Germany. My SL was 8 years old at purchase and I am the third owner. Low miles, all options and looks to kill for.... The car listed for $120K. I paid 27 and couldn't be happier. I'll run the hell out of it for ten years and sell it for a loss. Who the hell cares. If you want to MAKE MONEY on cars you should be a car dealer!

threeMBs

What year SL500 had a list of $120K?

egwu

Well said.

EVERY car depreciates in value. EVERY car. That may not be comforting to some, but that is the sad truth.

My philosophy is you either:

1. Drive it into the ground.
2. Sell it at a loss.
3. Sell it even.

I've never thought it was that special to have any car. It's about affordability. Of-course due to supply and demand, the rarer the car, the more expensive it would be. Unless it is a one in the world prototype, there is always someone else that can afford the same car. Name the car. Somebody in Hollywood or Manhattan has one, and another person in Bahrain or Qatar has the same car. The SLR, GTs and Ferraris that many speak of, are now every where in China.

sprucegoose

2003 plus all options and sales tax!!!! Do I need to send you a window sticker? The point I was trying to make is the value of the car is of little consequence if you like what you buy... I like nice cars and old ones that DO drop in price make them affordable. If you are lucky enough to get a cream puff with low miles all the better. It's still a crap shoot. One failed tranny or a/c unit and your joy of ownership really looks like a foolish pleasure.

EXECMALIBU

Most new cars deprecate in value but they are a few cars that definitely hold their value and actually appreciate once production is discontinued.

Have you checked the prices on Ford GTs they are up $50k over the cost new in 2004 or low milage BMW Z8s they are up $25K or even the Range Rover Defender 90s They are up $5K.

threeMBs

1. Posting sticker is always a good idea to back up any claims.

2. Your original post was "The car listed for $120K". Not exactly what you're saying now - "with all options and tax". No 2003 SL500, regardless of how many options were in it, were anywhere close to $120K. That was sticker of 2003 SL55 (optionless).

3. FYI: 90% of 2003 SL500s had sticker between $92K and $101K. Base MSRP was around $88K.

abiazis

It seems that SL 65 AMG Black series cars with low miles holding value at about $200K.....a $ 100k depreciation.........SLS AMG's can be had for about $ 150,000s with similar low mileage......

SL 65 Black was overpriced at $300K, but with only 175 made it may be the one that holds better than the SLS.....after 5 years.....and could actually be an item to have longer term....may actually appreciate?

SLS the first year sold over 400 in the US and probably similar numbers in 2011, 2012.....