SL55/63/65/R230 AMG: Supercharged SLK55 VS Stock SL55
Super Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 553
Likes: 221
19 X3, 24 Tacoma Trailhunter, 25 CLE53
"On paper, it is clear that Kleemann SLK55 is far superior. Nearly 1,000lbs lighter, 80 more hp, 7 speed transmission, better weight distribution, etc"
On paper, for the items you quote, the Kleemann SLK55 is the right choice. Personally, I like the seats in the SL better. I like the panorama roof. I like the feel of the SL. I wouldn't mind taking the SL on a long trip. Don't get trapped in buying what looks good on paper. Drive the cars, and then make a decision. Afterall, you butt won't be sitting on the paper for the next 50,000 miles.
On paper, for the items you quote, the Kleemann SLK55 is the right choice. Personally, I like the seats in the SL better. I like the panorama roof. I like the feel of the SL. I wouldn't mind taking the SL on a long trip. Don't get trapped in buying what looks good on paper. Drive the cars, and then make a decision. Afterall, you butt won't be sitting on the paper for the next 50,000 miles.
Last edited by dunderhi; Dec 3, 2006 at 01:50 AM.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 348
Likes: 1
"On paper, it is clear that Kleemann SLK55 is far superior. Nearly 1,000lbs lighter, 80 more hp, 7 speed transmission, better weight distribution, etc"
On paper, for the items you quote, the Kleemann SLK55 is the right choice. Personally, I like the seats in the SL better. I like the panorama roof. I like the feel of the SL. I wouldn't mind taking the SL on a long trip. Don't get trapped in buying what looks good on paper. Drive the cars, and then make a decision. Afterall, you butt won't be sitting on the paper for the next 50,000 miles.
On paper, for the items you quote, the Kleemann SLK55 is the right choice. Personally, I like the seats in the SL better. I like the panorama roof. I like the feel of the SL. I wouldn't mind taking the SL on a long trip. Don't get trapped in buying what looks good on paper. Drive the cars, and then make a decision. Afterall, you butt won't be sitting on the paper for the next 50,000 miles.
Almost a Member!
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
I could purchase a $37,000 Mallet LS-1 Pontiac Solstice with 400HP that would walk your Lotus all day long. Not knocking your Elise. As a matter of fact, I'd prefer the Elise, but my point is that comparisons can go on and on that cause arguments that never solve anything. I have a 2004 NSX. It gets stomped 0-60 by Corvettes, but I see maybe 1 or 2 NSXs a year. I see 1 or 2 Corvettes an hour. The NSX is hand built, it's rare, and I enjoy the balance and capabilities of it as a track car as well as its everyday driveability and reliability. There are guys with Civics that produce way more horsepower and can out drag me, but to me there is more to a car than the 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. I guarantee they would trade me even up to have the NSX over their Civic.
I purchased the SL55 for its civility and refinement. Those are things that aren't on a price tag, but are things that some people appreciate and are willing to pay for. I found the SL more civilized and refined than the SLK, and really.....does it matter if one is a few tenths of a second quicker here or there?? To me, no. If that's what's important to you, then go for it. When you get the SLK, please post pics etc. of it. I'd love to see it. Good luck.
I purchased the SL55 for its civility and refinement. Those are things that aren't on a price tag, but are things that some people appreciate and are willing to pay for. I found the SL more civilized and refined than the SLK, and really.....does it matter if one is a few tenths of a second quicker here or there?? To me, no. If that's what's important to you, then go for it. When you get the SLK, please post pics etc. of it. I'd love to see it. Good luck.
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 975
Likes: 0
SL65 AMG
[QUOTE=Tuskir;1868266]I agree with you on that. I take my cars to the drag strip and the track way more than I do long trips (as well as occasional highway races, I will admit), so I was comparing it from a performance-oriented point of view I guess... By the way, here is my other car. Its a 300hp turbocharged lotus elise. I think the SLK55 will be plenty comfortable for me [/QUOTE
Wouldnt your lotus be faster then the slk55 in question? I saw a slk55 on the showroom floor and wanted to show my wife but she likes the looks of her m3 better. I liked all the carbon fiber in the slk55 very nice I thought and I was upset my car didnt have some of the trim the slk had. Tough call to make, Thats what happen to me on the e55 kleemann or 65 amg deal. After k2 on my 55 I asked kleemann how much more power was in it and after 85k on the car and 10k to kleemann I think I could have dumped another 10k and then I would have stayed even with the 65amg on paper. So for 105k would have had a very nice car with great power but in the end I jumped to the 65 and I am very happy.
[/QUOTEWouldnt your lotus be faster then the slk55 in question? I saw a slk55 on the showroom floor and wanted to show my wife but she likes the looks of her m3 better. I liked all the carbon fiber in the slk55 very nice I thought and I was upset my car didnt have some of the trim the slk had. Tough call to make, Thats what happen to me on the e55 kleemann or 65 amg deal. After k2 on my 55 I asked kleemann how much more power was in it and after 85k on the car and 10k to kleemann I think I could have dumped another 10k and then I would have stayed even with the 65amg on paper. So for 105k would have had a very nice car with great power but in the end I jumped to the 65 and I am very happy.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 348
Likes: 1
[QUOTE=BiTurboAmg;1868845]
Lotus would be obviously faster on track, but not a dragstrip. Plus, its a pain in the *** to drive daily, has no interior or traction control of any kind (impossible in the rain with its 300hp and 65% weight in the back), plus the roof only comes off manually. As far as E55 VS SL65, that's true, your kleemann E55 would be close to the stock SL65. But Renntech SL65 would definitely be faster, many of them trap close to 130mph and there is even a sub 11 second pass on dragtimes.com. Plus, E55 is really expensive to modify if you want to go all out, while with the SL65, all you really need is a chip. You say you spent like 105k on E55... that's pretty close to what a used SL65 costs anyway and don't forget you get a hardtop convertible too! You definitely made a right choice with the 65... that car is amazing and if I had the 115k I'd buy it. My perfect setup would be an SL65 for dragstrip and daily driving and Ferrari F430 challange stradale (2008) for weekends and track. For now, SLK55 for daily/drag and Lotus Elise for weekends/track will work pretty well I think.....
I agree with you on that. I take my cars to the drag strip and the track way more than I do long trips (as well as occasional highway races, I will admit), so I was comparing it from a performance-oriented point of view I guess... By the way, here is my other car. Its a 300hp turbocharged lotus elise. I think the SLK55 will be plenty comfortable for me [/QUOTE
Wouldnt your lotus be faster then the slk55 in question? I saw a slk55 on the showroom floor and wanted to show my wife but she likes the looks of her m3 better. I liked all the carbon fiber in the slk55 very nice I thought and I was upset my car didnt have some of the trim the slk had. Tough call to make, Thats what happen to me on the e55 kleemann or 65 amg deal. After k2 on my 55 I asked kleemann how much more power was in it and after 85k on the car and 10k to kleemann I think I could have dumped another 10k and then I would have stayed even with the 65amg on paper. So for 105k would have had a very nice car with great power but in the end I jumped to the 65 and I am very happy.
[/QUOTEWouldnt your lotus be faster then the slk55 in question? I saw a slk55 on the showroom floor and wanted to show my wife but she likes the looks of her m3 better. I liked all the carbon fiber in the slk55 very nice I thought and I was upset my car didnt have some of the trim the slk had. Tough call to make, Thats what happen to me on the e55 kleemann or 65 amg deal. After k2 on my 55 I asked kleemann how much more power was in it and after 85k on the car and 10k to kleemann I think I could have dumped another 10k and then I would have stayed even with the 65amg on paper. So for 105k would have had a very nice car with great power but in the end I jumped to the 65 and I am very happy.
Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
From: DFW
LS460L
I own both cars, and the only time I drive the SLK55 is when I pull it out of the garage for my wife.
It is too small for my taste, and does not feel as robust as the SL55.
It is fast and tossible though, but that does not make a car.
The SLK can not in any way compete with a C6Z06. It was not designed to do so. It does very well though for a small hardtop though.
The one thing the SLK has is a 2pc rotor, which only comes on the SL55 with the 030 package.
It is too small for my taste, and does not feel as robust as the SL55.
It is fast and tossible though, but that does not make a car.
The SLK can not in any way compete with a C6Z06. It was not designed to do so. It does very well though for a small hardtop though.
The one thing the SLK has is a 2pc rotor, which only comes on the SL55 with the 030 package.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 348
Likes: 1
Maybe you misunderstood me. I was talking about a Kleemann 580hp SLK55 (which still costs much less than SL55) competing with a Z06. Go to the SLK55 forum and check the video, these cars are neck to neck in terms of acceleration all the way to 150mph+. C2 design built Kleemann SLK55 ran 11.7 1/4 on his first try (check dragtimes.com) and that's definitely Z06 territory...
Last edited by Tuskir; Dec 4, 2006 at 08:58 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
From: So. Cal
1985 380 SL 2001 SL 500 2007 E350 Sport 2008 T & C Ltd.
I cross shopped the SL55 and SLK55 and expected to prefer the SLK55 because of its superior handling. I wound up preferring the SL55 because to my eye, ear, and touch it had a vastly better cabin and the handling was decent enough. For me, an SL55 is worth every penny it costs above and beyond the price of an SLK.
But that's me. If the cars seem nearly identical to you in terms of form, feature, and function then the SLK is the right choice for you.
Doc C
I purchased the SL55 for its civility and refinement. Those are things that aren't on a price tag, but are things that some people appreciate and are willing to pay for. I found the SL more civilized and refined than the SLK, and really.....does it matter if one is a few tenths of a second quicker here or there?? To me, no. If that's what's important to you, then go for it.
blk03cl55
It is too small for my taste, and does not feel as robust as the SL55.
It is fast and tossible though, but that does not make a car.
But that's me. If the cars seem nearly identical to you in terms of form, feature, and function then the SLK is the right choice for you.
Doc C
I purchased the SL55 for its civility and refinement. Those are things that aren't on a price tag, but are things that some people appreciate and are willing to pay for. I found the SL more civilized and refined than the SLK, and really.....does it matter if one is a few tenths of a second quicker here or there?? To me, no. If that's what's important to you, then go for it.
blk03cl55
It is too small for my taste, and does not feel as robust as the SL55.
It is fast and tossible though, but that does not make a car.
True on all counts for those looking for the features noted above. If you fit in it* and you're feelin' it, go with it. There are really no wrong choices here.
*SLK vs. 250/6'1"/57...are you kidding?. 175/5'10"/26 and looking for racers, no problem.
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
From: DFW
LS460L
Maybe you misunderstood me. I was talking about a Kleemann 580hp SLK55 (which still costs much less than SL55) competing with a Z06. Go to the SLK55 forum and check the video, these cars are neck to neck in terms of acceleration all the way to 150mph+. C2 design built Kleemann SLK55 ran 11.7 1/4 on his first try (check dragtimes.com) and that's definitely Z06 territory...
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
From: Australia
Unfortunatly Not A Silver Star
here are a few things to consider
The SL
More comfortable, more stylish, more upmarket, more trunk space and overall a classier car with far nicer interior !
But it also cost alot more
The SLK
More sporty, better handeling, more a true sports car, small and agile
It depends what u want out of a car i suppose
personaly for my money Id buy the SL !
The SL
More comfortable, more stylish, more upmarket, more trunk space and overall a classier car with far nicer interior !
But it also cost alot more
The SLK
More sporty, better handeling, more a true sports car, small and agile
It depends what u want out of a car i suppose
personaly for my money Id buy the SL !
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 348
Likes: 1
A stock SLK55 has run as low as 12.2 (member on this board)! I seriously doubt that 230 extra hp would only make a half a second difference in the 1/4 mile. With proper tires and a professional driver, Kleemann SLK is certainly capable of low 11's easy. You have to remember that Kleemann SLK has a higher hp and lb/tq to weight ratios (6.0 for SLK vs 6.2 for Z06 calculated: 3500/580 and 3100/500), not to mention its an automatic and will make launching it very easy. Even for me it is hard to imagine an SLK being as fast as a Z06, but the facts (not to mention video proof) speak for themselves.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,990
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area
'10 Porsche Turbo PDK, 500e, GL450
here are a few things to consider
The SL55
More comfortable, more stylish, more upmarket, more trunk space and overall a classier car with far nicer interior ! Very heavy, not nearly as sporty, doesn't sound aggressive.
But it also cost alot more
The SLK55
More sporty, better handling, more a true sports car, small and agile Definitely not a cruiser like the SL (meaning not nearly as comfortable), slower roof, the interior isn't even close to the luxury of the SL, and also better braking.
It depends what u want out of a car i suppose personally for my money Id buy the SL !
The SL55
More comfortable, more stylish, more upmarket, more trunk space and overall a classier car with far nicer interior ! Very heavy, not nearly as sporty, doesn't sound aggressive.
But it also cost alot more
The SLK55
More sporty, better handling, more a true sports car, small and agile Definitely not a cruiser like the SL (meaning not nearly as comfortable), slower roof, the interior isn't even close to the luxury of the SL, and also better braking.
It depends what u want out of a car i suppose personally for my money Id buy the SL !
I chose the SLK55(then did full Renntech mods) because I like the way the car drives. I don't know how to express this, but it gives a much more real driving experience. The SLs, Es, CLS, etc all have too many high cost (and heavy) options that, to me, takes away from the driving experience. Does that mean I wouldn't buy a SL, E or CLS, CL etc? No ... just at this point in my life I chose differently. Btw don't think that just because the SL is more comfortable that the SLK55 can't do long distance in comfort.
Just by your comments here it seems your preference is the SLK55 ... so go buy one.
Your posting in the SL section ... what input did you expect?Also for those that feel a supercharged SLK55 is girly ... I feel for you. You can continue to puff up your chests and be "real" men.
Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
From: DFW
LS460L
A stock SLK55 has run as low as 12.2 (member on this board)! I seriously doubt that 230 extra hp would only make a half a second difference in the 1/4 mile. With proper tires and a professional driver, Kleemann SLK is certainly capable of low 11's easy. You have to remember that Kleemann SLK has a higher hp and lb/tq to weight ratios (6.0 for SLK vs 6.2 for Z06 calculated: 3500/580 and 3100/500), not to mention its an automatic and will make launching it very easy. Even for me it is hard to imagine an SLK being as fast as a Z06, but the facts (not to mention video proof) speak for themselves.
There is documented proof of a stock Z running high 10's. High 10's vs low 11's is a HUGE difference, so I don't think that makes them comparable.
Again, you are comparing a highly modded car to a stock one. After the money you put into the SLK, it will cost more than the Z, and the Z is still faster.
Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
From: DFW
LS460L
Reading your post, you state an 11.7 time, which is a lot slower.
Also, you should never go by a street race. There are too many factors involved that can change the outcome dramatically with the slightest changes.
No doubt in my mind that the SLK55 with a blower would be fast. I would love to drive one and feel the power. I know how fast a stock one is, so I can only imagine. Just remember, anyone can mod anything to go as fast as they want, as long as they have the money to do it.
Also, you should never go by a street race. There are too many factors involved that can change the outcome dramatically with the slightest changes.
No doubt in my mind that the SLK55 with a blower would be fast. I would love to drive one and feel the power. I know how fast a stock one is, so I can only imagine. Just remember, anyone can mod anything to go as fast as they want, as long as they have the money to do it.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 348
Likes: 1
Is there video of an SLK55 running a low 11? If so, please post.
There is documented proof of a stock Z running high 10's. High 10's vs low 11's is a HUGE difference, so I don't think that makes them comparable.
Again, you are comparing a highly modded car to a stock one. After the money you put into the SLK, it will cost more than the Z, and the Z is still faster.
There is documented proof of a stock Z running high 10's. High 10's vs low 11's is a HUGE difference, so I don't think that makes them comparable.
Again, you are comparing a highly modded car to a stock one. After the money you put into the SLK, it will cost more than the Z, and the Z is still faster.
P.S. There are no videa of Kleemann SLK55 running the 1/4 mile at all... we only know of 1 SLK55 ever being at the dragstrip and it ran 11.7 on first attempt. I believe there are only around 10 Kleemann SLK's in the US... 2-3 on this forum.
Last edited by Tuskir; Dec 5, 2006 at 01:48 AM.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 348
Likes: 1
Just so you know the SLK55 will end up in the high 70s with most of the decent options. Also it is under 3400 lbs. I had mine weighed at all 4 corners. Add on all the perfomance modifications and install and you can easily add another 25k to 35k. Still cheaper than the SL55.
I chose the SLK55(then did full Renntech mods) because I like the way the car drives. I don't know how to express this, but it gives a much more real driving experience. The SLs, Es, CLS, etc all have too many high cost (and heavy) options that, to me, takes away from the driving experience. Does that mean I wouldn't buy a SL, E or CLS, CL etc? No ... just at this point in my life I chose differently. Btw don't think that just because the SL is more comfortable that the SLK55 can't do long distance in comfort.
Just by your comments here it seems your preference is the SLK55 ... so go buy one. Your posting in the SL section ... what input did you expect?
Also for those that feel a supercharged SLK55 is girly ... I feel for you. You can continue to puff up your chests and be "real" men.
I chose the SLK55(then did full Renntech mods) because I like the way the car drives. I don't know how to express this, but it gives a much more real driving experience. The SLs, Es, CLS, etc all have too many high cost (and heavy) options that, to me, takes away from the driving experience. Does that mean I wouldn't buy a SL, E or CLS, CL etc? No ... just at this point in my life I chose differently. Btw don't think that just because the SL is more comfortable that the SLK55 can't do long distance in comfort.
Just by your comments here it seems your preference is the SLK55 ... so go buy one.
Your posting in the SL section ... what input did you expect?Also for those that feel a supercharged SLK55 is girly ... I feel for you. You can continue to puff up your chests and be "real" men.
Very nice car you got there! Yes, SLK55 will end up at high 70's w/ options, but I was talking base MSRP for both vehicles. SL55 has as many costly options or maybe even more lol. How is your renntech SLK55? Have you taken it to the dragstrip or track yet? Although I like Renntech, I think I will personally go with Kleemann because their dynos seem to be higher....
P.S. And you say its under 3,400lbs? Thats even more impressive than I thought and gives it a power to weight ratio of around 5.8 (vs 6.2 of ZO6)!! I think I would go even further and reduce the weight to 3,500lbs or less with wheels/rotor/sound insulation/light battery/etc. As you can see, I can't wait to get one and start modding
Last edited by Tuskir; Dec 5, 2006 at 01:59 AM.
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 948
Likes: 0
From: Irvine, California
'10 MB E63, '08 ML550 ('05 E55, '05 SL55, '08 E63 GONE)
Sounds like you have a very fast car... though I'd still take the SL55 over the blown SLK55 in a heartbeat. Too small, too cramped, and too much of a chick car for my tastes - but to each his own.
~ Ian
~ Ian
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,547
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, CA
SL/M6
Almost a Member!
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
From: Coral Gables
1999 CLK 430, 2006 SL 55, 2006 Range Rover Sport, 2006 F-150 Super Crew
OK all this arguing is petty. You like the SLK, buy the SLK. Coming into an SL forum trying to covince people that obviously prefer the SL that the SLK is cheaper/faster/better is fighting a losing battle. Each car has it's own unique characteristics, and that is what makes them great in their own right.
I prefer the SL because of its comfort, it's style, and it's message. It is a luxury coupe/roadster that packs 493hp. This car is also a statement.
I have talked so someone who went to the AMG testing facility and got to drive all the cars and was amazed by the SLK, said it was the best car on the track. You feel like you're a part of the car, etc.
I know someone tried to use another analogy in a previous post but this is how I see it. OK there is a porsche 911 convertible vs a boxster s. You can mod the **** out of the boxster, but in the end it's still a boxster, and I'd still prefer a 911.
Good luck with the SLK, and when you get it post up some number's I'm really interested in how that thing will perform.
I prefer the SL because of its comfort, it's style, and it's message. It is a luxury coupe/roadster that packs 493hp. This car is also a statement.
I have talked so someone who went to the AMG testing facility and got to drive all the cars and was amazed by the SLK, said it was the best car on the track. You feel like you're a part of the car, etc.
I know someone tried to use another analogy in a previous post but this is how I see it. OK there is a porsche 911 convertible vs a boxster s. You can mod the **** out of the boxster, but in the end it's still a boxster, and I'd still prefer a 911.
Good luck with the SLK, and when you get it post up some number's I'm really interested in how that thing will perform.
Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
From: DFW
LS460L
You make it seem like an avarage Z06 runs high 10's in the 1/4 mile. Please... I'm up at Moroso every weekend and I've yet to see one run anywhere near 11 seconds flat. Plenty of low 12's too. The avarage Z06 runs mid to high 11's, and I'm telling you I can match or beat that with a blown SLK55. Sure it will cost more, but by only $10,000 or so. And does a Z06 have a retractable hardtop, luxurious interior, and Mercedes quality? I was definitely considering a Z06, however, I will pay 10.000$ more for a luxury hardtop-roadster that is as fast, or nearly as fast.
P.S. There are no videa of Kleemann SLK55 running the 1/4 mile at all... we only know of 1 SLK55 ever being at the dragstrip and it ran 11.7 on first attempt. I believe there are only around 10 Kleemann SLK's in the US... 2-3 on this forum.
P.S. There are no videa of Kleemann SLK55 running the 1/4 mile at all... we only know of 1 SLK55 ever being at the dragstrip and it ran 11.7 on first attempt. I believe there are only around 10 Kleemann SLK's in the US... 2-3 on this forum.
Not at all. I was mentioning the fastest recorded time, just like you were. Most Z drivers will never be able to get those numbers because they can't drive. There are people who ran high 11's in the C5Z06. I am showing what the car can do, and has been documented on doing. Remember, the car, not the driver.
I would not trade my SL55 for a 600 or 700 HP SLK. I love my SL that much more. There is a lot more to the car than just performance.
There are a lot of Hondas that will run these numbers, but I aint going to go trade my SL in for a Civic.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,990
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area
'10 Porsche Turbo PDK, 500e, GL450
fastest SLK55 so far
The fastest I've seen proof of so far is a Brabus/Renntech mix SLK55 with a TON of modifications. Its a 6.1 liter motor modified by Brabus and the tranny has been strengthened significantly.
It pulled a 10.8 in the quarter.
It pulled a 10.8 in the quarter.
Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
From: DFW
LS460L
But as you said, it was extensively modified, and would cost a lot of money.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 348
Likes: 1
Incredible, that's even faster than Renntech SL65 and would blow away stock SL55/SL600/SL65! Someone used a boxster/911 analogy, which makes absolutely no sense. One is 2 seat mid-engined convertible and the other is a rear-engined couple with 4 seats. A much better analogy is Cayman S VS 911 carrera S. However, the Cayman S is still far slower than 911 S, so even that analogy is bad. Stock SLK55 is almost as fast as a stock SL55 both on track (0.3 second difference, Fifth Gear) and in the straight line (0-60 4.3 seconds, C&D). Even then, Cayman has only 2 seats, while carrera has 4. With the SLK/SL, both have 2-seats, engine in the front, and hardtop roadster.
