Huncowboy

I personally love it. I wish they would have tweaked the tail a bit more but the front, to me, looks great. Of course the picture shows the AMG models. They always look just a bit sharper for a... cough, cough... slight premium.

I am also glad the interior does not have an iPad that looks like a 80" TV in a 10 x 10 living room... like the C class or the CLS. I hope the iPad person got his job back at Apple and left MB for good.

Wolfy90503

I don't think most MB buyers care about beauty, otherwise there wouldn't be so many GLK's and CLS's on the road. But yes the new SL looks better than the previous one, though IMHO the 2001-2008 SL looks the best.

Count Laszlo

Isn't the face-lift designed by Gorden Wagener? I'm not sure if he designed the pre-face-lift, but I never found it to be ugly. I found it gorgeous and out-of-the- box. It was aggressive in the sense of designing something "different" and nothing was more memorizing than those front headlights, a work of art IMO. I think Mercedes was knocking it out of the park with their previous generation and pre-face-lift designs... BUT they seem to be a bit soft and homogeneous now.

I miss the more angular and masculine front ends that were very attractive for both women and men. It seems now, they've gone with "happy" faces, maybe to meet some sort of "green" or environmentally friendly agenda. Who knows.

I love all the new and old Mercedes but really wish they'd pull back on the soft, happy, happy looks. The new SL is not an improvement IMO, but rather a victim from the pressure from corporate to revise the SL which was being called ugly when in fact it wasn't. It's a loss of confidence.

Tommyboy928

looks ok, but not agressiv enought,, still looks little dead from behind . 2017 models?? this not come early 2016 ??

cliffyk

It looks like every other gaudy trendy comically "aggressive" design from every other manufacutrer.

I think I just heard Walter Gropius rolling over in his grave...

Streamliner

Still waiting for them to build a BEAUTIFUL SL again. Looks like my 2004 will spend a few more years in my garage.

Streamliner

The SL, in my opinion--I've owned five new ones--should not be aggressive looking. It is a luxury roadster, meant for cruising down the highway in high style and comfort. If someone wants aggressive, they should go buy a hard core sports car.

Wolfy90503

A roadster or Grand Tourer CAN be aggressive and beautiful -- just look at the Jaguar F-Type or XKR

akmopowr

Love the new interior, can't stand the exterior. The rear end has way too much swoop and the tail lights no longer stand out as pronounced as they once did, an icon in traffic the car now simply blends into the see of other cars... the AMG's once elegant muscular stance now softened like a Kia, is that a V12??? Doesn't matter anymore

jalex65

I couldn't agree more, although it might be because I own one? No really, I have always thought the 2005-8's are the best looking.

codeblue5007

MB usually hits a home run with the SL. This one is one of the worst designs of any new roadster in this class. The front especially is uninspired if not ugly.

dennypayne

Agree, I think my '15 is more aggressive looking in the front. Worst aspect of this car (and mine) is the side view with the top up. With the top down though, it's quite fetching

I think an aggressive look combined with comfort is not out of line. I don't want a feminine-looking car, and the '17 seems to be creeping that way.

Exactly!

AlanBob

Prettiest Lexus ever!

cliffyk

Funny...

That is part of my problem with modern automotive design, the excessive "fantasy aggression" influence first seen in Asian comics and video games in the 80s and early 90s; that then manifested itself in their automobiles (altessa tail lights, squinty headlights, etc.).

jboreilly

I completely agree that the previous SL was 'UGLY', I wouldn't take one if it was given to me...really!
However, the re-styled 2017 is marginally better and I would take one!
What is missing though is that 'Classic MB SL "LOOK"'. it's hard to explain what that "LOOK" is, but obviously almost everyone else knows what I mean. So my advice to the current MB Stylists is "go back and study the 'style and lines' that made the SL "iconic" and "sharpen your pencil, not your touch-pad", just bring the design forward, and you'll know when you've got it!!
Then I can justify buying one!

JaredWL

Haha, I feel like I'm the only person who likes the facelift. I thought the prefacelift model was the worst SL design to date, but I didn't find it all-out ugly. The headlights were funny looking (more so in pictures than in person) and the front end seemed extremely blunt. This radical facelift reminds me of what Mercedes did to the R230 (by keeping the rear almost identical) but overall, I really like it.

My favorite part of the redesign is how the hood seems even longer now, and the blunt nose doesn't seem as pronounced.

I agree, and lol the iPads definitely need to go!

Wolfman

Funny to think that the late model R230 was the most controversial one. So many people hated that facelift. Took me some time to like that one too but now I feel the same way.

Actually I just have grown really tired of the old round headlight/small grill look.

Wolfman

Pretty bold statement you are making here. Tastes might just differ (although I agree on the GLK - it's replacement, the GLC looks great).

jmprimack

Personally, my first impression of the new SL is not favorable. The huge scoop intakes on the grille resemble a jet engine intake, and the rear bumper sticks out like an oversize tush. Just seems to be too radical a change to me. However, like many things, the longer you look at it, perhaps the more it will grow on you.

Cigarzman

Looks almost the same as my 2015 sl 63. Not terribly exciting to me. The front looks a little different but the interior looks the same. I'm probably not going to trade me for a 2017.

Wolfman

No need if you have a 2015. The front end is more pleasing but the car as a whole is very close to what you have, apart from the electronics upgrade.

The regular V8 gets a more power and a 9 speed tranny.

Wolfman

I understand that many like various versions of the old R230.

We have had these for almost 12 years ourselves and I loved the look at the time. Now after driving the R231 for almost 3 years, it's changed for me.

Exterior: The grill just looks too small (apart from the 2009-12 FL). The round headlights I have seen on countless other MB models; done and boring. Feels a bit dated now...

Interior: No contest, the R230 interior is inferior to the R231 is every way. The only advantage were were the covers on the door pockets.

Suspension: R230 had ABC by default. R231 has springs (which I feel are inferior) Still decent ride though. ABC is available for $4k+ and worth every penny. This is a newer gen. ABC and will have active curve tilting in the MY17.

Power: We had a SL55 and SL600TT and the R231 is faster than either stock. It's just a very fast car. It's listed at 4.5sec. but on tests showed 3.9-4.2sec.
MY17 has more power and is rated at 4.3sec. Be interesting to see what it will be for real

I highly recommend any SL500/550 owner to take a current model for a spin.

BSDTWD

MB has got to step it up with their interior of the new SL. Looks dated. The SClass interior is a big improvement and the S600 is the new Standard.

Lately it's hard to tell the MB models from one another until you see the trunk lid letter and numeral. The big MB star is found on everything from a stripped down service van to the SL.

Still the only brand of sedan that will need new engine mounts before you trade or sell. It's starts with vibrations and ends with a big check written for the needed repairs, a reduced trade in amount and scream to accompany both.

Streamliner

You are correct. My question is WHY make it so aggressive looking? Every automaker out there is looking to make their vehicle look like something Darth Vader might drive. At some point, you would think that a luxury automaker would reserve one or two of their "halo" models to be beautiful, exquisite, utterly refined, luxurious and elegant, without playing to the video game/monster truck/tractor pull/fast & furious crowd. I think the SL should be designed with graciousness and understated elegance. Something that might conjur up visions of Cary Grant & Grace Kelly, off for a drive along the Pacific Coast. Oh well, one can only dream.......

Wolfman

I see it a bit different. The SL is a top down roadster and the interior should be different than the S-Class. I wouldn't want a digital dash for example. That would look tacky IMO. I don't see anything dated.
We also have the S550 in exclusive Nappa which is identical to the S600 interior so I have a pretty good comparison between the two.

1. Electronics on MY17 will match (actually exceed) the S-Class electronics. So that's cool since the current comand is/feels antiquated.
Would love a larger screen but want the integrated look, not the iPad screen (even though the AMG GT still looks good) That interior would not work in the SL. Different market.

2.SL seats beat the S-Class seats by a mile with the exception of massage functions. I have the nappa leather, so they are quite similar.
The US has very limited choices on the interior. For example, in Europe you can get the full leather headliner as a simple option; something impossible to get here for any money. Designo gets you the full leather/Alcantara treatment.

3. The SL only has 3 ambient colors and they are too dim, but it's a roadster. Prefer the S on that one...

Re. many MB models looking so similar that is true except for the SL. If you mix up that convertible with any MB model you need a new set of glasses.
Other than that, this is a formula that works (even though I hat e that myself). Same sausage, different length was pioneered by Audi and taken to a higher level by BMW. BMW then dragged down their real M-cars by providing cheap M-branded kits for every model. All has proved to make great money and MB has stepped into the same game. Proved profitable so far...