well, that's that. Waiting to "see" the next SL ......

 

Soft top and a 2+2 Seater? Why? We have the C, E and S Cabriolet with this configuration already. So basically it has the same set up as my 2004 CLK Cabriolet.... No real progress has been made here as the SL went backwards in my opinion.

 

Bolt statement without knowing anything about the car
This will still be a roadster which the CLK or any cabs never were. The S-Class Cab is also killed off.

 

I disagree. A roadster is defined as an open top automobile with 2 seats. So a 2+2 is not a roadster. A cabriolet is an automobile with a folding roof so a roadster can also be called a cabriolet.

 

Flashback to a recent conversation with a grandchild - a square is a special case of a rectangle, which is a special case of a parallelogram, which is a special case of a trapezoid, ... Conclusion - they are all special lol

 

Well said, but a 2+2 cabriolet with a folding soft top and an almost useless back seat means I am not a buyer. Good luck Daimler selling many of these "new SLs".

 

100% a bold statement and you are correct. However, you have to somewhat see why I am saying this right? It seems that 2+2 seating is the way. While the R107 560SL I had came with "Rear Seats" that was also a very different time and a different car. My R129 600SL did not have a rear seat as it was a 2 seat roadster. The rear seats in the R107 I said had 0 purpose. Maybe for insurance ? Also, from the pics I have seen I do not know who will even fit back there?

 

If you need a rear seat there is the C, E and S Cabriolet already Now the new SL really makes 0 sense. Again and as always until I see it in person and drive it then I cannot make a final judgement.

 

Nice fleet! They are beautiful. Do you still own both? Did you ever find it be redundant or not? I have 0 time behind the wheel of the AMG GT.

 

I guess you are missing my point. Until anyone sees the new interior or even dimension of the car and cabin, the whole discussion is moot.

My point was that there was a SL roadster with useless rear seats and nobody raised an eyebrow.
Most sports cars have unusable rear seats from Porsche 911’s to Aston Martins.
They all are 2+2’s with a soft top and nobody in their right mind would compare those with an old CLK.

I get the point, most are fond of the SL hardtop, myself included. After all, we had 5 R230 & R231’s alone...

But I don’t buy the notion that the SL is synonymous with folding hardtop. It isn’t.
Hard top was present during the last 18 years of its 70 year history and the SL was more iconic before those models arrived.

 

Thanks! We got the AMG GTC to replace our SL and did have some overlap (a month or so) During that time we had ample opportunity to compare these cars and I posted my first impressions here a year ago.
The AMG is not for everyone. It terms of creature comforts you get less for more. Top up the car is louder than top down. Ergonomically the rear of the cabin is vastly inferior (the soft top & flap mechanism comes straight from the SLS) but besides that it just provides a more visceral driving experience with better dynamics. Plus I like the looks
There are just lots of things the next SL can benefit from and I know that they will make this car very different than the hardcore model we have.

Personally prefer an actual experience before passing any judgement on upcoming cars or different models instead of just reading articles or looking at pics.

 

If I may weigh in on this... I agree -- not for everyone. My 16 GT S was a beast and a true driver's car. I loved it and it was a privilege to have owned it. It growled, snarled, and popped at every downshift and very quick on acceleration (although my CLS63S was quicker, particularly at launch due to the 4Matic.) But the GT S was not comfortable or enjoyable for passengers. Road noise was unacceptable and intolerable, to the extent that I added a significant amount of sound deadening material (see https://mbworld.org/forums/coupe-roa...lled-rear.html. Actually, my CLS53 has a lot of road noise and I've also added material to it.) Perhaps later GT models have improved road noise. As I recall my only other complaint about the GT S was that the side mirrors were mounted too high, significantly blocking side visibility.

In contrast, my previous SL500 and my current SL550 are so comfortable for both driver and passenger. My wife loves it. Of course the retractible hardtop adds another dimension. The SL550 is probably the most favorite MB that I have owned. Yes, ultimate 0-60 time is not quite up to GT standards but 4.3 seconds is not too shabby. I refer to the performance of the 550 and the CLS53 as "adequate" compared to "awesome" for the GT S and CLS63S. I can imagine taking a month-long, 4000 mile trip in the SL, but more than a few days in the GT would be a challenge.

 

We got that color on our GLE. Love the look of the GTS! The 2016 GTS models were known for their harsh suspension, especially when equipped with the DPP (Dynamic Performance Package). They have fixed that in later years. Coincidently we have no unwanted noises (tire noises or panels creaks, etc.). The car is just very loud which is something I like on these and the soft top does nothing IMO to reduce the noise which is not great. This is something I assume MB would fix as the S-Class cab soft top has exceptional sound dampening.

I do use my wife as a gauge for comfort. With a couple spine surgeries and unfortunate chronic pain she is ultimately the decision maker on cars. She is stoic so we tried the E63s but that wasn't a good move for her. She loves the GTC and the M8. I recently asked which convertible she likes better in retrospect and she surprisingly picked the GTC.

 

No you are right I would not compare the 911 or Aston to a old CLK as they not even the same brand lol. But think about this... MB already has C, E and S Cabriolets in a 2+2 seating. So why do it again but yet smaller and say it is something different? Since the 90's it has been the SL is seats. By 2003 The hartop came out with the push of a button. Hell the old R170 SLK had a push button hard top. I am just having trouble understanding why there are regressing features. Also, the Aston and 911 are not really direct competitors with the SL. The SL is sort of in a class of its own. 2 Seats, front engine, hardtop and trunk. It really is a one of a kind car as it is truly a dying breed. The SL was more iconic back then but times were just so different. It made sense then. Not in 2020. Even the 4 seater cabriolets are not selling much..

 

I agree. Do not understand why Daimler thinks they need another 2+2 with a folding softop.

 

Correct. And I am not saying the car is bad or junk or anything like that at all. I will be the first to admit I will be the one drooling over it in a showroom as I am 100% sure it will incredible in nearly every way like all the SL's before hand. Every SL is a very special car. My only issue is why have so many of something similar. Look at the MB SUV lineup. And everything has AMG version now. MB will not make a single hardtop car since the SLK/SLC is done.

 

She's absolutely right to ask that question. I disagree with the "weight reduction" explanation for the loss of the hard top. Porsche is the only German car manufacturer that truly cares about weight. If MB actually cared about weight, the SL wouldn't have been a two-passenger, two ton car for the last...how long? I think that, at this point in time, MB's bean counters have more clout than their marketing people (who have to be pulling their hair out over this change). The bean counters, knowing that the SL is an ultra-low-volume vehicle, are dying to peal cost out of its production process. I bet they're salivating over the considerable savings that a rag top will engender. The car won't sell any cheaper, so that gives them a wider margin on a car that doesn't generate as many sales as they'd like. They can give whatever excuse they think we'll swallow...just follow the money.


While we banty numbers about here, the only really meaningful difference in weight between the two tops will be the weight of the "skins" of the two tops (the current one being aluminum/glass, and the larger new one being a thick fabric of some unknown mass...also with a single glass window), and the complexity of their frameworks. They both do still require folding mechanisms (framework and actuators). The current actuators are probably hydraulic as they tend to be quieter and more powerful, and I'd be surprised if that didn't continue...unless MB decides to deliver the SLINO with a manual soft top. Not likely, though...as you say, "Mercedes wouldn’t offer such a low tech solution on their cars". Purely from a weight reduction viewpoint, I'm having difficulty seeing a 200 lb difference between them. The soft top could probably take up less space, and stow more conveniently, but the current hard top has to be one of the best-executed examples to date and is amazingly compact when stowed. Obviously, the current hard top has some added mass vs a soft top but when it's stowed, the car's center of gravity lowers and its weight distribution moves slightly rearward...which are not bad things. I guess you could say that this is another argument for the soft top, as it affects the car's dynamics less. And that's true, but is the SL's primary target role to be a great track car, or a plush cruising performance GT? That will be up to potential buyers.



This is so funny. Before I read your reply, I thought "a square is a rectangle, but a rectangle is not a square"...

 

In the past, the SL always took place of the S-Class level convertible. Then MB introduced the S-Class cab which was somewhat the 1970's revival which put the SL arguably a step below the S-Class given that the Cab was $40k plus above the SL entry point. Now the S-Class cabriolet is being discontinued (August) and the SL will now more formally become the Cab replacement.
We have discussed this many times that the feature set of the SL is unique; no argument. The only car having a similar would be the Ferrari Portofino (front engine, folding hard top 2 seater).

 

No disrespect Bob but you seem to be heavy on speculation and assumptions. You are welcome to back up your opinion with something tangible. I had posted some info regarding emissions. Nobody gives a hoot of what Mercedes did a few years ago...

 

As much as I truly LOVE the retractable hard top, in my particular case, at this point in my life, it would not be the deciding factor in whether or not I would buy the new SL. I drive my car 99% of the time with the top down. I mostly take it for “drives,” almost never parking it anywhere but in my garage. If the new model is an attractive design, is as comfortable as my current car, is not over-the-top tech heavy with a gigantic touch screen like the upcoming 2021 S Class, is offered in interior & exterior colors I like, I could certainly get excited about a car like that, even with a soft top.

My fear—based solely on rumors—is that the new SL will be way more AMG “rocket sled” and way less boulevard cruiser. With AMG doing the car, based on one of their existing platforms, it just makes sense to me that it will be aimed much more at Lewis Hamilton wannabes and won’t be nearly as appealing to folks like me, trying to channel Cary Grant as I cruise luxuriously down Pacific Coast Highway.

 

Streamliner - two things:
1. great analogy of "channeling Gary Grant" ...
2. if you start a list of people interested in purchasing "MM" when the time comes, put me at the top !

 

Now why would the owner of an SL63 be interested in my lowly 450?

 

 

https://www.motortrend.com/news/futu...cedes-benz-sl/

Motor Trend has quite a bit of info, but maybe taking some liberty here. Interesting quick read.

Among their projections:
- 4Matic?
- 43 variant with 4 cylinder turbo?
- Hybrid?
- 700+ monster?

Im wondering if this means an entire rebirth?

But alas - still no hardtop.

 

It’s nice looking, but it’s a RENDERING, not a photo.