sound 8

Is it possible to tune a SL600 to get the same power as a stock SL65, if so
isn't this the way to go, could save you 40k or so.
I only say this because on a good day my S600 felt almost as quick as my
CL65.

Benz-O-Rama

Um, yes it is. I have virtually the same power numbers and 1/4 mile times as a stock SL65, with only an ECU tune.

**SEE SIG***

jmf003

I'm going to dissent on this one. The SL65 displaces 6.0L compared to 5.5L for the SL600 and should make slightly more power if both cars are tuned similarly.

JackStraw

The answer to the OP's question about getting the same amount of power from a tuned 600 as a stock 65 is yes. As to whether it is "the way to go" is another matter. You get a lot more than a power boost for your $40-50K when you go for the 65 vs the 600. The buyer needs to determine if the extras are worth the extra dough. This has been discussed in multiple threads here.

Marcus Frost

Having owned both (a tuned 600 and stock 65) - the answer is yes, however the 65 is easily worth the extra price of admission because of it's numerous other attributes that come with being an AMG. My old 600 had real trouble handling the added power from the tune, and this was partially because of the stock 600 ABC programming, lack of LSD, etc.

I chose to spend the extra dollars and go 65, no regrets at all.

-m

sound 8

This is great, a good smattering of opinions.
But tell me what extras you get over a SL600 apart from power. My S600
was 98k new and my CL65 was 158k but as far as I know the 65 never had
extras that the 600 didn't have, in fact my 600 has exclusive nappa leather
and my 65 didn't. Assuming then that the 65 has similar extras, the extra
money is for the power or the Status..mmmm maybe that's the reason.
If I didn't want the noise and gearbox of the 63 I would go for a SL600, and
even if it cost 10k to get similar power I would save over 40K.
I wouldn't be keen to tune the 65 as this puts the price up even more, and with that sort of torque it certainly going to be a handful in the wet.

Benz-O-Rama

You get a hand built, larger displacement engine, rather than an assembly line motor
You get an LSD, which is huge
You get AMG sport tuned ABC

I would never buy one of these new, so for me, the price difference isn't 40K, it's more like 10K.

I was at the limit of what I wanted to spend on an SL, so I opted for the SL600 and got a simple ecu tune for $1000.00

I'm as fast or faster than most stock SL65's out there.

MRAMG1

I TOTALLY agree with everything you posted.

Hence that is why I bought an S600 instead of the S65. The difference for me, last spring was almost 40K

Sorry, but there is NO way that the S65 is 40K nicer, IMHO.

IngenereAMG

The 65 v 600 argument looks obvious, until one looks at the details.

The AMG65 cars are more than just larger displacement V12s. It is more about the entire package.... power, braking, LSD, suspension improvements, etc.

We have worked with a number of these cars and the 600 can be tuned for power, but without the rest of the package, the cars are a bit unbalanced.

TMC M5

Not sure about the UK...but here in the US all 65s get Nappa leather as do the 600s.

Aside form the bigger turbo compressor wheel and additional .5L of engine displacement, the 65s also get much bigger/better brakes (easily $4-5K to install), standard AMG body kit (optional $5.3K on 600s), auto trunk closer ($500), gorgeous 19" wheels/tires ($10K from MB), and quad exhaust tips on a 1/4" larger diameter exhaust. So when you compare apples to apples (CL600 to CL65) you are paying $20K of parts/labor without the engine modifications.

In the US a 2005 CL600's at the time MSRP was $129K before deilvery and taxes...so with AMG appearance package and trunk closer figure $135K. A CL65's MSRP was $178K. If you wanted to turn a CL600 into a CL65 clone it would bump the $'s spent to $150K just on wheels and brakes. Are the engine upgrades of the 65 worth the extra $28K? Probably not to most of us. However, most of the people here have purchased their 65s second hand. So our buying decisions were based on a $10-$25K differences between a 600 and 65. When you factor in the price to upgrade the 600 to 65 level of amenities it became a no brainer in favor of the 65. It wasn't all about status and badges.

Tom

sprins

Don't the 65 engines also have bigger turbo's than the 600's? This also plays a role on the bottom line I assume.

sound 8

Sure I agree, second hand both cars become more affordable with less difference in price, I was thinking more about someone who wants to buy new. I.m sure the SL600 could have most of the 65 extras at extra cost, except of course the hand built engine, brakes etc. As you say its hard to swallow the huge depreciation on a 65 new, perhaps it's slightly better on a 600 when you spent 50k less. It does make you think though how good the 600 is, and what you get extra for another 50 odd grand.
Personally I wish my S600 had an AMG badge.

Sunir

Why not get an "02 - '04 v8K for low thirties or what have you and throw mods at it and be faster than the SL65 or SL600 even with a tune (I'd been told that the v12's pretty much tune and that's the extent for the most part)...with the reliability of the 55K engine and drivetrian...

TMC M5

You are talking about 1 SL55 out there that has cracked into the 10s ...and from what I understand he did a number of weight saving mods to achieve that run.

SL600s can be found in the low $30Ks as well...when you factor in the costs of the SL55's pulley, tune, headers..etc...the SL600 with just a tune will be just as fast...if not faster and you will spend less money in total.

The

Sunir

Good point Tom Just did an autotrader search for SL600 under $50K and under 75K miles across the country...found 14 cars, of those 3 were under $40K and they had over 60K miles, they were 2004 model years...the SL600 is at a comparable price point to the SL55 and true with a tune it can be a mid 11's car for sure...but it's not an AMG and it doesn't feel the same in terms of driving feel and experience and it's styling and features are identical to the SL500, so for a slightly lower or comparible initial price point the SL55, which is an AMG car with all the AMG features as the 65, can be had and modded...

This said the SL600 is silky smooth though and very fast with a stellar driver behind the wheel as BOR has shown us all! I think with an exhaust system, and some styling cues it can be excellent...one only need look to BOR to lead the way in making a great SL600...fast, clean, and classy

What weight reduction mods hav you heard URNext (Sal) did to his SL55? I know he got the SL63 facelift but was not aware he lightened the car outside of drag wheels/tires and maybe a lighter battery?

TMC M5

I heard he took both seats out...80lbs each. Not even sure he put a driver's seat in there....

Tom

Tom

Benz-O-Rama

Thanks for the kind words, Sunir.

Two points:

1. I thought the brakes on the SL600 were the exact same as those found on the SL55/65. I'm pretty sure they are, they just have the MB stamp rather than the AMG stamp.

2. The SL600 can be had with the AMG body kit, as mine does. The only thing that looks different on my car than the AMG cars, is the tail pipes, tail lights and wheels. All of which are an easy fix.

And actually, I just finished my SL65 AMG tail light swap 10 minutes ago.
https://mbworld.org/forums/sl-class-...ml#post3893065

But yes, the AMG cars just feel different. More taut, if you will. No doubt attributed to the AMG tuned ABC system. And the inclusion of the LSD on the SL65 should not be glossed over. It's a very important need for these cars that are making ridiculous power. I do wish my car had it.

TMC M5

The 65s have 15.4" rotors and 8 piston calipers in the front and 13.7" 4 piston rear rotors. I believe both the SL55 and SL600 have 14.2" front rotors and 13.0" rear rotors.

One other difference. The SL600 uses a 2.65 rear differential ratio and the SL55 has a 2.82.

Tom

Benz-O-Rama

Ahhhh,

It shares brakes with the 55, not 65. My mistake.

kevinpuri

Cooling these massive engines is very important for performance too,
Dont forget on the 65's the liquid to air intercoolers dedicated radiator is enlarged by 70% and that each piston is cooled by the spray of an individual oil nozzle!

sound 8

So it appears there are more differences than I thought. I also thought they
shared the same suspension, but ti appears not. Still having owned both I would still probably go for a modified 600 and have cash left in my pocket,
used though. The 63 offers something different to both.

TMC M5

You had an SL65...I thought you had a CL65??? There are numerous differences between the SL65 and the CL65....

Tom

Benz-O-Rama

It's just one letter difference. I mean, how much difference could there be?

Carl Lassiter

Amazing the inconsistencies in peoples stories on what they own/lease (and what they know about the vehicle they own/lease) on this site.

I was having a conversation with a member here who has a well-modded SL600 and we came to the conclusion that if you keep cars stock or close to stock then the 65 is the better buy (lsd, bigger brakes, susp, .5L extra displacement and 100bhp/150lbft) but if you're into modding then the sizable saving and near-identical gains on an SL600 makes better sense.

sound 8

quite true, what I meant was I have experienced what it's like to drive a car
with a 65 engine as apposed to driving a car with the 600 engine. I presume
it doesn't matter what body it's in the engine differences remain the same. What engine differences are there between a SL65 and a CL65?