Oh get over yourself.

The SL63 is an outdated, slow, piece of ****. SL65? The engine makes up for all the SL shortfalls. I'd take a SL65 over the 997 Turbo but SL63 over the Turbo? No.

The 997 Turbo with full leather is of higher quality than that outdated SL63 interior. The SL65 interior makes up for the lackluster, plasticky SL63 interior the stictching and nicer leather.

Why would anyone waste their money buying the SL63? For that money, I would stretch it a little more and buy something else. The Porsche isn't that nice looks wise, but the SL63 is just as ugly (that silly nose in particular and that beyond hideous silver platic thing on the side). Boring too.

What was the point of changing the nose of the SL? The SL was gorgeous circa 2003-2008(?), but this abomination 2009 SL needs to be put out of its misery and be redesigned ASAP.

 

now now boys.

 

I presume you have driven both! or are these just YOUR personal thoughts.

 

while I acknowledge the following is magazine racing, i found the following stats in a Car & Driver magazine:

sl63 did 0-60 in 4.4 with a 12.9 sec 1/4 time. Skidpad grip was .88g and braking from 70 was 165 feet.

The 997 turbo got to 60 in 3.7sec, with an 11.8 sec 1/4. Skidpad was .97g and braking from 70 was 154 feet.

So, in just about every performance measurement, the porsche has it all over the sl.

Not to mention, there is no question that the porsche's steering and brake feel offer far more feedback.

 

Another thread started by a hater.

 

BTW, the big easy to read dial in the TT....THAT WAS NOT YOUR SPEED.

 

Your kidding...right? I've driven (or owned) all of these cars. The SL is the hands-down winner from a strictly luxury/comfort perspective. On the other hand, Lambo (Gallardo LP560), Ferrari (F430, 599, etc.). Porsche (Turbo 997, GT2, GT3) and McLaren win in the all around performance area. Anyone who suggests otherwise is simply uninformed!

Tim

 

Agreed. From a perfomance perspective the SL63 is kind of a dog. Comparing it to a 911 turbo, let alone anything more, is silly. Even in a straight line it doesn't stand out. The 63 powerplant is not an upgrade from what it had before, more of a lateral move if not a slight move backwards.

 

yeah I was being sarcastic; that's whay I made those outrageous comparisons... The post was intended to be fun and somewhat over the top silly (i.e comparison with the open cockpit cars)

 

Anybody calling the 997 TT crap is clearly not somebody that knows much about cars. I can see why somebody might not like the 997 TT for their set of needs but it is a very well made and engineered car. I have owned 2 997 Turbos 1 coupe and one soft top as well as about 14 other P cars over the past few years. I have also had a brabus sl55 an e63 ans s63. I currently have a 997 gt3 rs and debating either a 997 TT cab or an sl63 for days I was to drive but not drive as hard as I do when I am in the rs. I think I might go for the s63 but its not an easy choice and the 997 TT cab is clearly one of the best cars ever made.

 

SL vs 911?

there is an azz for every seat!!

 

These two cars are so different its almost impossible to compare..!!!

One is a GT cruiser, the other a track ready road car...

 

Simply put:

You want luxury, comfort, performance and one of the nicest cars out there, you get the SL63. Nothing beat it!

You want best handling, best performance, no luxury, no comfort and want to look like a man in a mid-life crisis, you get a Porsche.

The only Porsche I like and own is the 2nd generation Cayenne SUV, the rest of Porsche looks like a smashed down VW Bettle. Nothing manly about it; no wonder it was a female character in "CARS" but the ultimate reference in sport cars!

ps: How about you get an Audi R8? You get the best of both worlds: better lap time than a 911 Turbo and almost the comfort of a S Class (I said almost ); handling is also the closest to a F430 than you can get all while not being one.

 

The only Porsche I like and own is the 2nd generation Cayenne SUV, the rest of Porsche looks like a smashed down VW Bettle. Nothing manly about it; no wonder it was a female character in "CARS" but the ultimate reference in sport cars!


utter sexist drivel

 

You gotta be kidding Cayanne ...the market forced porsche to make an SUV kicking and screaming all the while....those "smashed down VW's" are responsible for the lineage of one of the premier racing marques of all time, a stout design that has been proven over decades of trial in all sorts of sanctioned GT and road racing venues...the Cayanne is a burden of need, strategized by bean counters concerned with bottom line and profitability and a marketing team that was concerned with consumer trends as they were being pressed to bolster growing sales figures...the 911 on the otherhand was pure passion from day one asa it is even now...it's roots are traced back to a time when engineers from a once small company had spirit, drive, and dedication to create a world class sportscar that would win on the track and please road goers and that car, my firend, was made for all the right reasons, that is the difference!

 

I agree that the Cayenne was a pure marketing strategy to save Porsche and make it the only stand alone independent car maker in the world. Nevertheless, I find it great. I have the top of the line model and it drives better than most sports car I've driven.

If you paid attention, I also said that Porsche (2 door coupe such as the 911 Turbo, GT2, GT3, etc...) was the ultimate sports car reference.

 

Yes I actually own and drive both Porsches and MBs and even Ferraris and they are totally different cars! I have owned and raced Porsches for 40 years and I also own and drive MBs.

The Porsche Turbo is and has always been a drivers car, mainly focused on ultra high performance with nice appointments for comfort. They are designed to be a little harsh in the interest of speed!

The SL is and has always been a touring car mainly focused on comfort. The 300SEL 6.3 and later the 450SEL 6.9 were great drivers but they had their absolute limits. The original AMG engineers and tuners tried to overcome the disadvantages of the MBs weight and make a racer out of a MB driver. They stripped the car to make it lighter.. Kinda like a Porsche!!

The SL is heavy... I correct my self, VERY heavy and AMG with the SL55, SL65 and now the SL63 has done a great job making the car a much better drivers car. But there is absolutely no getting around that the SL is a 4,400lb pig and there is only so much that can be done. Strip the car to make it lighter and you have a BS.

Had you driven a BS SL65 I think that you would be complaining about EXACTLY the same issues (harsh, loud and uncomfortable).. Oh yeah the BS seats in Europe are form fitted and you would hate those also.

If you actually drove a standard SL65 you might not like that either because the SL65 is much firmer then the SL63. Unless you have the 030 package.

Carcomander whats with the slam about a blue SL? My SL65 is blue!

 

I have owned 3 911's and 2 turbo cayennes.
i agree, the cayenne is overall, a more practical vehicle. it can be driven in any weather (must have snow tires in the winter) and has the feel and performance of the 911. i believe it is a perfect compliment to my SL63.

 

F the 911! Who cares is accelerates like a jet. I rather be in a SL63. It's more enjoyable. I don't need a 0-62 of 3.5sec ... I want to enjoy the ride.

 

I had a 09 cayenne turbo S and sold it for a G55

why have a SUV that drives like a sport car? plus the cayenne looks like a pancaked mini-van

 

Not buying the Turbo was a smart move, because you should of boughten a GT3 RS.

 

I stick with what I said, haven't changed my mind one iota, yes I have,
I prefer the 63 even more, after 9 months of ownership I love it more and
love driving it, what's the point of spending even more money when it wasn't
the Porsche speed I criticized, go read it through again!!

 

the 2010 trubo 911 PDK is an improvement over the manual shifting 2009 turbo 911. however, the optional paddle shifter steering wheel is a JOKE. it is bfu! however, if they get the paddle shifter steering wheel right on the next iteration, i might actually consider getting a new 911! after owning the sl63 and f430, i would find it disconcerting to go back to a manual tranny!

 

This is my 996 Turbo. It had the 450 engine and was responsible for putting me in hospital. It opened up an old wound ( prolapsed disc ) in 2 months.
Sure it was quick just under 9 secs to 100, but the ride was horrendous.
Too much weight at the back, meaning 40 lbs tyre pressure rear, I tried 4 different makes of tyre to find the one with the softest side walls. Sold it
after 4 months and had treatment to my back for another 6 months. Bad design, when I drove the new Turbo it all came back because it was still
a Porsche, slightly quicker maybe, but still the same. That's why the 63
is a far better car imo.
Now all you young studs can say you don't have bad backs, then enjoy!
while you can.