SL/R232: Mercedes-AMG Unveils the New 7th Generation SL Roadster
02-28-2022, 05:55 AM
#151
Senior Member
Disclaimer: This is not directed at you, Wolfman and I'm also not some diehard R231 guy.
In response to these reviews you mentioned, if the SL is to "come back to what it should have been in the first place," it should've been a smaller, lighter, n/a inline 6er, with an optional hard top roof, which it obviously isn't. Ok, I can accept it having a turbo. Said argument also would presume that Merc's 59 years of production of the SL was in vain as it was never "what it should have been," a "gullwing" era SL that was produced for a mere 9 years. Moreover, even these 1st gen SLs had optional hard tops so not sure about these soft top arguments. The 59 years of production established the SL as a solid and luxurious roadster with a hard top option (and later a retractable hard top) for people to drive spiritly and enjoy a scenic drive with a secure roof. It was basically a S class convertible.
There was a reason for me buying a R231 SL (I'm in my late 40s BTW) , but I have no reason to ever buy this R232 "SL". Why? If I had $125K (base price for a SL53) to spend on a fast, convertible car, then 100% I would buy the better handling, better driving, better interior, better looking, better build, better practically everything, a new Porsche 992 (911) Cab, which may be even better priced at $121K.
My ultimate point is, just call it what it really is: an AMG GT Cab., not a SL. IMHO, the SL as we know it is dead.
In response to these reviews you mentioned, if the SL is to "come back to what it should have been in the first place," it should've been a smaller, lighter, n/a inline 6er, with an optional hard top roof, which it obviously isn't. Ok, I can accept it having a turbo. Said argument also would presume that Merc's 59 years of production of the SL was in vain as it was never "what it should have been," a "gullwing" era SL that was produced for a mere 9 years. Moreover, even these 1st gen SLs had optional hard tops so not sure about these soft top arguments. The 59 years of production established the SL as a solid and luxurious roadster with a hard top option (and later a retractable hard top) for people to drive spiritly and enjoy a scenic drive with a secure roof. It was basically a S class convertible.
There was a reason for me buying a R231 SL (I'm in my late 40s BTW) , but I have no reason to ever buy this R232 "SL". Why? If I had $125K (base price for a SL53) to spend on a fast, convertible car, then 100% I would buy the better handling, better driving, better interior, better looking, better build, better practically everything, a new Porsche 992 (911) Cab, which may be even better priced at $121K.
My ultimate point is, just call it what it really is: an AMG GT Cab., not a SL. IMHO, the SL as we know it is dead.
Additionally- reports from this morning indicate the SL43 will have a 4-cylinder engine. This is the ultimate insult to the idea of a Mercedes-Benz SL.
02-28-2022, 01:18 PM
#153
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Land of 10,000 lakes
Posts: 10,091
Received 3,282 Likes
on
2,040 Posts
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
Disclaimer: This is not directed at you, Wolfman and I'm also not some diehard R231 guy.
In response to these reviews you mentioned, if the SL is to "come back to what it should have been in the first place," it should've been a smaller, lighter, n/a inline 6er, with an optional hard top roof, which it obviously isn't. Ok, I can accept it having a turbo. Said argument also would presume that Merc's 59 years of production of the SL was in vain as it was never "what it should have been," a "gullwing" era SL that was produced for a mere 9 years. Moreover, even these 1st gen SLs had optional hard tops so not sure about these soft top arguments. The 59 years of production established the SL as a solid and luxurious roadster with a hard top option (and later a retractable hard top) for people to drive spiritly and enjoy a scenic drive with a secure roof. It was basically a S class convertible.
There was a reason for me buying a R231 SL (I'm in my late 40s BTW) , but I have no reason to ever buy this R232 "SL". Why? If I had $125K (base price for a SL53) to spend on a fast, convertible car, then 100% I would buy the better handling, better driving, better interior, better looking, better build, better practically everything, a new Porsche 992 (911) Cab, which may be even better priced at $121K.
My ultimate point is, just call it what it really is: an AMG GT Cab., not a SL. IMHO, the SL as we know it is dead.
In response to these reviews you mentioned, if the SL is to "come back to what it should have been in the first place," it should've been a smaller, lighter, n/a inline 6er, with an optional hard top roof, which it obviously isn't. Ok, I can accept it having a turbo. Said argument also would presume that Merc's 59 years of production of the SL was in vain as it was never "what it should have been," a "gullwing" era SL that was produced for a mere 9 years. Moreover, even these 1st gen SLs had optional hard tops so not sure about these soft top arguments. The 59 years of production established the SL as a solid and luxurious roadster with a hard top option (and later a retractable hard top) for people to drive spiritly and enjoy a scenic drive with a secure roof. It was basically a S class convertible.
There was a reason for me buying a R231 SL (I'm in my late 40s BTW) , but I have no reason to ever buy this R232 "SL". Why? If I had $125K (base price for a SL53) to spend on a fast, convertible car, then 100% I would buy the better handling, better driving, better interior, better looking, better build, better practically everything, a new Porsche 992 (911) Cab, which may be even better priced at $121K.
My ultimate point is, just call it what it really is: an AMG GT Cab., not a SL. IMHO, the SL as we know it is dead.
The SL on the other hand is an AMG but build for Mercedes driver comforts with a soft suspension, all entertainment goodies, LED light show and all wheel drive. The new SL55/63 are a perfect replacement for the S63 cab and SL63. Less so for the SL450 or SL550. Those customers will have to wait for a lesser SL model...
In regards to tops, hard tops are simply out. Soft tops are better these days, less weight, lower center of gravity and it didn't work for the cars seat configuration.
I for one loved the hardtop with the magic sky but understand the reasoning. The only two things that annoy me on the new SL are the weight and the clumsy windscreen design.
The following users liked this post:
wizee (02-28-2022)
02-28-2022, 01:42 PM
#154
Super Member
But wait, the old SLs did not have AWD and those nostalgic SLs were on the road long before Tesla invented a tablet installed in the center console to distract the driver and reflect the sun.
The following users liked this post:
places (02-28-2022)
02-28-2022, 01:44 PM
#155
Member
There seems to be some ongoing confusion about this. The new SL isn't anywhere close to the AMG GT(or C or R) roadster. Those cars are uncompromising sports cars with very limited practicality (in a good way) and a ride quality that most Mercedes customers can't handle. It's also 700 lbs lighter (weighs less than a 992 cab btw.).
The SL on the other hand is an AMG but build for Mercedes driver comforts with a soft suspension, all entertainment goodies, LED light show and all wheel drive. The new SL55/63 are a perfect replacement for the S63 cab and SL63. Less so for the SL450 or SL550. Those customers will have to wait for a lesser SL model...
In regards to tops, hard tops are simply out. Soft tops are better these days, less weight, lower center of gravity and it didn't work for the cars seat configuration.
I for one loved the hardtop with the magic sky but understand the reasoning. The only two things that annoy me on the new SL are the weight and the clumsy windscreen design.
The SL on the other hand is an AMG but build for Mercedes driver comforts with a soft suspension, all entertainment goodies, LED light show and all wheel drive. The new SL55/63 are a perfect replacement for the S63 cab and SL63. Less so for the SL450 or SL550. Those customers will have to wait for a lesser SL model...
In regards to tops, hard tops are simply out. Soft tops are better these days, less weight, lower center of gravity and it didn't work for the cars seat configuration.
I for one loved the hardtop with the magic sky but understand the reasoning. The only two things that annoy me on the new SL are the weight and the clumsy windscreen design.
02-28-2022, 01:54 PM
#156
Member
Basically, Merc has an identity crisis as I mentioned before. They developed the SLS as the "gullwing" successor - it actual had gullwings. It also made a convertible version of the SLS, which should have been the SL. But in their pursuit of being in the "sports" car market with the likes of the 911, they morphed the SLS to the AMG GT and R, etc. Now, they don't know what market they are in IMHO and seemed to just say f-it, let's make a new 2023 AMG GT, then chop the roof & give it a soft top and just call it the SL.
Either call it the SL in roadster version and SL coupe in the coupe version -or- go with the GT insignia through the model line. LOL. Either way, my money is on the 992 cab. LOL.
Either call it the SL in roadster version and SL coupe in the coupe version -or- go with the GT insignia through the model line. LOL. Either way, my money is on the 992 cab. LOL.
Last edited by thunderbenz; 02-28-2022 at 01:56 PM.
The following users liked this post:
places (02-28-2022)
02-28-2022, 01:57 PM
#157
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 3,286
Received 1,486 Likes
on
981 Posts
No more MB:(
If they called it a GT convertible, they would need to develop a new SL or sadly retire the model. This way they kill two with one stone. If you want a GT in convertible form, get the 63 for 63E, otherwise settle for the 55 with what I suspect will be an optional luxury package.
02-28-2022, 02:13 PM
#158
Member
I'm not trying to beat a dead horse or anything like that, but I just thought of something funny with the car naming game.
Remember when Ford decided it was a great idea to name the 4 door EV Mach-E a Mustang? What a joke! I feel bad for all the diehard Mustang people out there that they now have to share the legend of the Mustang name with a 4 door crossover EV washing machine. (I know the future is EV, but I don't have to like it LOL). It would have sold fine as just the Mach-E, but corp-dorks had to drag the Mustang name under the bus. Great gawd, who approves this crap?! Peace to Ukraine.
Remember when Ford decided it was a great idea to name the 4 door EV Mach-E a Mustang? What a joke! I feel bad for all the diehard Mustang people out there that they now have to share the legend of the Mustang name with a 4 door crossover EV washing machine. (I know the future is EV, but I don't have to like it LOL). It would have sold fine as just the Mach-E, but corp-dorks had to drag the Mustang name under the bus. Great gawd, who approves this crap?! Peace to Ukraine.
02-28-2022, 02:53 PM
#159
Member
They can call it whatever they want, it's a GT convertible IMO. The fact that there are conflicting opinions proves enough. Easy to confuse, so it's a softer driving GT Coupe convertible with 700 extra pounds minus 2 extra unusable seats...okay.
If they called it a GT convertible, they would need to develop a new SL or sadly retire the model. This way they kill two with one stone. If you want a GT in convertible form, get the 63 for 63E, otherwise settle for the 55 with what I suspect will be an optional luxury package.
If they called it a GT convertible, they would need to develop a new SL or sadly retire the model. This way they kill two with one stone. If you want a GT in convertible form, get the 63 for 63E, otherwise settle for the 55 with what I suspect will be an optional luxury package.
Last edited by wizee; 02-28-2022 at 02:59 PM.
02-28-2022, 03:48 PM
#160
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Land of 10,000 lakes
Posts: 10,091
Received 3,282 Likes
on
2,040 Posts
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
The SL is a soft cruiser by all reports and has a different customer base.
02-28-2022, 06:13 PM
#161
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Land of 10,000 lakes
Posts: 10,091
Received 3,282 Likes
on
2,040 Posts
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
. AWD ragtop with useless rear seats also describe 911 cabs; those are horrible too...
Last edited by Wolfman; 02-28-2022 at 06:45 PM.
02-28-2022, 06:45 PM
#162
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Land of 10,000 lakes
Posts: 10,091
Received 3,282 Likes
on
2,040 Posts
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
I'm not trying to beat a dead horse or anything like that, but I just thought of something funny with the car naming game.
Remember when Ford decided it was a great idea to name the 4 door EV Mach-E a Mustang? What a joke! I feel bad for all the diehard Mustang people out there that they now have to share the legend of the Mustang name with a 4 door crossover EV washing machine. (I know the future is EV, but I don't have to like it LOL). It would have sold fine as just the Mach-E, but corp-dorks had to drag the Mustang name under the bus. Great gawd, who approves this crap?! Peace to Ukraine.
Remember when Ford decided it was a great idea to name the 4 door EV Mach-E a Mustang? What a joke! I feel bad for all the diehard Mustang people out there that they now have to share the legend of the Mustang name with a 4 door crossover EV washing machine. (I know the future is EV, but I don't have to like it LOL). It would have sold fine as just the Mach-E, but corp-dorks had to drag the Mustang name under the bus. Great gawd, who approves this crap?! Peace to Ukraine.
Mercedes has killed/are killing off all convertibles due to slow sales. The C & E Class coupe becomes the CLE, the AMG GT roadster, SL, S-Class Coupe becomes the SL. The SLC just went the way of the DoDo bird. So 2 out of 5 survive.
The SL has the name plate worth preserving and AMG has been tasked to design the car that delivers performance for that price point (and the SL history) and make Mercedes customers happy in terms of ride quality and practicality.
This is what AMG came up with and this is what it is. The AMG SL.
Anytime when companies change things there will be those that bemoan those changes. We had 8 SL's including 3 R231's and moved to an AMG GTC. I'll see how the new SL fares when I have a chance to see it/drive it...
The following 3 users liked this post by Wolfman:
03-01-2022, 03:27 AM
#163
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Dallas TX
Posts: 4,846
Received 290 Likes
on
203 Posts
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
The only confusion is self inflicted here as usual lol. I don't see what is so hard to understand here. The SL and outgoing AMG GT are vastly different in character and packaging. The way they drive, feel, sit etc. The next AMG GT coupe will be far more hard edged than the SL is. What is there to be confused about? Two cars share a platform yet are tuned differently.
M
M
03-08-2022, 05:14 AM
#164
Senior Member
Recommend the ceramic brakes for serious driving. The exhaust sound is great, comparable with AMG GT, less aggressive then an GTR, but a little more aggressive then my S63 (all in S+/R mode).
Impressed by the build quality and the rigidity. Many cars are build every day in Bremen now to be delivered worldwide.
The following 4 users liked this post by HAWKiS63:
03-08-2022, 08:25 AM
#165
Senior Member
Had a test drive around a small circuit, with a professional driver, and it confirms my earlier experience: it is a great drivers car, more a new (but heavier and more luxiourious) AMG GT Roadster then anything else. Sitting position is (almost) as low as in a AMG GT. In a way the new AMG SL competes more with a 911 then any other MB or AMG car before.
Recommend the ceramic brakes for serious driving. The exhaust sound is great, comparable with AMG GT, less aggressive then an GTR, but a little more aggressive then my S63 (all in S+/R mode).
Impressed by the build quality and the rigidity. Many cars are build every day in Bremen now to be delivered worldwide.
Recommend the ceramic brakes for serious driving. The exhaust sound is great, comparable with AMG GT, less aggressive then an GTR, but a little more aggressive then my S63 (all in S+/R mode).
Impressed by the build quality and the rigidity. Many cars are build every day in Bremen now to be delivered worldwide.
Can you please specify which R231 SL to which you may be able compare the R232 SL?
I’m surprised by your comment about competing with a 911. Besides the back seats, I don’t see how it compares. It’s a much larger car and much heavier.
03-08-2022, 09:41 AM
#166
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,838
Received 1,586 Likes
on
982 Posts
Mercedes/Mazda/Genesis
Had a test drive around a small circuit, with a professional driver, and it confirms my earlier experience: it is a great drivers car, more a new (but heavier and more luxiourious) AMG GT Roadster then anything else. Sitting position is (almost) as low as in a AMG GT. In a way the new AMG SL competes more with a 911 then any other MB or AMG car before.
Recommend the ceramic brakes for serious driving. The exhaust sound is great, comparable with AMG GT, less aggressive then an GTR, but a little more aggressive then my S63 (all in S+/R mode).
Impressed by the build quality and the rigidity. Many cars are build every day in Bremen now to be delivered worldwide.
Recommend the ceramic brakes for serious driving. The exhaust sound is great, comparable with AMG GT, less aggressive then an GTR, but a little more aggressive then my S63 (all in S+/R mode).
Impressed by the build quality and the rigidity. Many cars are build every day in Bremen now to be delivered worldwide.
03-09-2022, 06:16 AM
#167
Senior Member
Thanks for your review. Can you expand on the test drive experience a bit more? Steering feel, steering quickness, body roll, view of the road, wind-buffeting/ air movement with top down (if you drove it with top down), etc?
Can you please specify which R231 SL to which you may be able compare the R232 SL?
I’m surprised by your comment about competing with a 911. Besides the back seats, I don’t see how it compares. It’s a much larger car and much heavier.
Can you please specify which R231 SL to which you may be able compare the R232 SL?
I’m surprised by your comment about competing with a 911. Besides the back seats, I don’t see how it compares. It’s a much larger car and much heavier.
Difficult to describe, but I would call it a "more agile and responsive" version of the previous SL and S63 cabriolet.
The AMG GT was even more agile, but not a huge difference, probably because the difference in weight is compensated somewhat by the extra torque this setup has (the MCT-9 can handle more torque then the double clutch transmission in the AMG GT). This also makes it an option for 911 drivers, since in real life driving, there is much less difference then the specs on paper suggests. Of course if you want a really track focussed car, where every (milli)second counts, a Porker might be the better choice.
The following 4 users liked this post by HAWKiS63:
brucewinter (03-09-2022),
California John (03-09-2022),
crconsulting (03-09-2022),
js_cls (03-09-2022)
03-24-2022, 01:23 PM
#169
Super Member
Yet it seems OK that some enthusiasts who have never owned at least one SL -- one SL with the convenience of a retractable or replaceable hardtop, an SL with a cockpit that embraces the occupants without the large cavity containing a useless rear seat, an SL which has rear-wheel drive and can spin the rear wheels and be driven like a traditional sports car without the crutch of AWD, an SL in which it is the dash in front of the driver actually displays information -- it seems OK that these enthusiasts who have never owned at least one SL promote this latest vehicle as the greatest thing since sliced bread. Really? But I'm sure there is also unquestioning love for these bloggers as well.
I expect this vehicle to be a pleasure to drive much of the time. But just because it's possible to add tiny rear seats, add rarely-needed AWD, save money and weight with a vulnerable rag top and imitate a Tesla display, doesn't mean these should be incorporated. It just is a shame to corrupt the SL lineage with this compromise vehicle.
Last edited by slk55er; 03-25-2022 at 09:14 AM.
03-25-2022, 07:49 PM
#170
Senior Member
It is always good to be loved. But I have sat in, owned and driven a GTS, a SLK55, a SL500 and an SL550 and it is disappointing to see the deterioration of the SL into this new, compromised and "improved" model. I'm sure this will be an enjoyable car to drive (if one is not distracted by the Tesla display) but it should be called something else. As I've suggested before, there are other letters in the alphabet.
Yet it seems OK that some enthusiasts who have never owned at least one SL -- one SL with the convenience of a retractable or replaceable hardtop, an SL with a cockpit that embraces the occupants without the large cavity containing a useless rear seat, an SL which has rear-wheel drive and can spin the rear wheels and be driven like a traditional sports car without the crutch of AWD, an SL in which it is the dash in front of the driver actually displays information -- it seems OK that these enthusiasts who have never owned at least one SL promote this latest vehicle as the greatest thing since sliced bread. Really? But I'm sure there is also unquestioning love for these bloggers as well.
I expect this vehicle to be a pleasure to drive much of the time. But just because it's possible to add tiny rear seats, add rarely-needed AWD, save money and weight with a vulnerable rag top and imitate a Tesla display, doesn't mean these should be incorporated. It just is a shame to corrupt the SL lineage with this compromise vehicle.
Yet it seems OK that some enthusiasts who have never owned at least one SL -- one SL with the convenience of a retractable or replaceable hardtop, an SL with a cockpit that embraces the occupants without the large cavity containing a useless rear seat, an SL which has rear-wheel drive and can spin the rear wheels and be driven like a traditional sports car without the crutch of AWD, an SL in which it is the dash in front of the driver actually displays information -- it seems OK that these enthusiasts who have never owned at least one SL promote this latest vehicle as the greatest thing since sliced bread. Really? But I'm sure there is also unquestioning love for these bloggers as well.
I expect this vehicle to be a pleasure to drive much of the time. But just because it's possible to add tiny rear seats, add rarely-needed AWD, save money and weight with a vulnerable rag top and imitate a Tesla display, doesn't mean these should be incorporated. It just is a shame to corrupt the SL lineage with this compromise vehicle.
The ragtop saved maybe a little weight... but their effort was to save money I expect. I bet they saved $15,000 when you look at the parts, pieces, paint, hydraulics, complexity, etc. Anybody can make a ragtop. Volkswagen even makes them. Nothing special there.
Oh... and don't forget that dandy windscreen that you have to manually fold up and I guess put in the trunk....bwahahaha.... I like the 231 design better.
Last edited by Panama; 03-25-2022 at 08:01 PM.
03-25-2022, 09:47 PM
#171
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,838
Received 1,586 Likes
on
982 Posts
Mercedes/Mazda/Genesis
We get it, this thread has been out for five months and the same R231 posters make the same complaints every few pages every month with nothing new to say. Too little too late, the new SL is here and is a completely different direction, if you don't like it, oh well.
The following 3 users liked this post by js_cls:
03-26-2022, 09:13 AM
#172
Super Member
."Well, the cars pictured below are ones that I have owned and HAVE actually driven! It is these upon which I base may disturbing opinion that this latest concoction corrupts the SL lineage. Yes, long live the R231 and the good old days when men were men and SLs were SLs.
Last edited by slk55er; 03-26-2022 at 09:56 AM.
03-26-2022, 10:13 AM
#173
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Land of 10,000 lakes
Posts: 10,091
Received 3,282 Likes
on
2,040 Posts
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
Yes, I thought the dust had settled, but blame it on Wolfman, our Super Moderator to rekindle the flame. It was his post of 2/28 (#161) that opened up this can of worms and that I thought was cast in my direction in which he stated, "Always love people discussing cars that they haven't seen, sat in or driven ."
Well, the cars pictured below are ones that I have owned and HAVE actually driven! It is these upon which I base may disturbing opinion that this latest concoction corrupts the SL lineage. Yes, long live the R231 and the good old days when men were men and SLs were SLs.
."Well, the cars pictured below are ones that I have owned and HAVE actually driven! It is these upon which I base may disturbing opinion that this latest concoction corrupts the SL lineage. Yes, long live the R231 and the good old days when men were men and SLs were SLs.
My point then was that you were complaining about the R232 which you have zero experience with, not what you have driven before.
As for your other bold statements, Mercedes calls it an AMG SL so you can feel better
The following users liked this post:
js_cls (03-26-2022)
03-26-2022, 11:30 AM
#174
Super Member
Yes. I had not visited this thread for a a month or so -- I thought this was a dead thread. But then, I just this past week saw your comment. Please let me know the next time you reply to any of my comments. Thanks much.
Yes, I understand that I've been complaining about the new concoction that is presented as an "SL" of sorts and that I have no experience with it. So apparently that means that I cannot comment about it in relation to prior SLs. And the addition of "AMG" supposed to make it right? Really? Hmm. OK. I'll check back in another month.
Yes, I understand that I've been complaining about the new concoction that is presented as an "SL" of sorts and that I have no experience with it. So apparently that means that I cannot comment about it in relation to prior SLs. And the addition of "AMG" supposed to make it right? Really? Hmm. OK. I'll check back in another month.
03-26-2022, 11:48 AM
#175
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Land of 10,000 lakes
Posts: 10,091
Received 3,282 Likes
on
2,040 Posts
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
Yes. I had not visited this thread for a a month or so -- I thought this was a dead thread. But then, I just this past week saw your comment. Please let me know the next time you reply to any of my comments. Thanks much.
Yes, I understand that I've been complaining about the new concoction that is presented as an "SL" of sorts and that I have no experience with it. So apparently that means that I cannot comment about it in relation to prior SLs. And the addition of "AMG" supposed to make it right? Really? Hmm. OK. I'll check back in another month.
Yes, I understand that I've been complaining about the new concoction that is presented as an "SL" of sorts and that I have no experience with it. So apparently that means that I cannot comment about it in relation to prior SLs. And the addition of "AMG" supposed to make it right? Really? Hmm. OK. I'll check back in another month.
But saying this is not a SL because of a soft top or rear seats (both were present in prior SL models) just seems illogical.
