This car is awful, no other word for it

Dont know what you all think. The new SL is absoloutely wonderful and sexy looking. I own an SL63 and I have to admit, this new model looks far more better and more powerful. I will certinly grab one when it hits the dealers

MB had the best design with the '03 - '08 R230 the facelifted SL63 is not as attractive and slower... the new ones look way too japanese car styles with the angular cues and sharper edges...whereas the ones from '03 - '08 just flowed extremely well and the design and shape were simply spot on!

SL63 slower?

looool...very funny. when my SL63 was stock I ate SL55's for breakfeast. Now they disapear on my rear view miror :D

My SL55 ran a 12.0 on street tires with a can off the shelf flash only (read my sig)... don't see any SL63 running that :D ...funny how SL63's dissapear in my rear veiw mirror, I would eat them for breakfast but honestly they are more like a little snack :eek: :rolf:

:bs:

Official data from MB
Acceleration from 0 to 100 km/h

Mercedes-Benz SL 55 AMG: 4.50
Mercedes-Benz SL 63 AMG: 4.60

Source: looool...very funny.

LOOOOOOL

In your dreams:rolf:

check dragtimes.com
a stock SL63 AMG made 12.5 and this was a US spec. While stock SL55\s are well around 12.7 and some recorder times of 13.0

have you raced an SL63 when your cars was stock. ???

just stay away from the modded ones(ECU tune only), because they will certainly murder you:rolf:

The problem with that argument is there are multiple stock SL55s listed on Dragtimes with 1/4 mile times quite a bit faster than 12.5: JR's 12.096, James' 12.143, Joe Mam's 12.223.

Sunir's BONE STOCK SL55, on street tires, ran a 12.3. Later in the day, after an 'off the shelf Eurocharged ECU TUNE', done at the track, it ran (8) 12.0x in a row. Back to back to back to back to back to back to back.

Ask me how I know.

The SL55 in both stock, and ECU tune only trim, is indeed quicker than an SL63. Make no mistake, there is no doubt.

BS. I raced a couple of Sl55 and I won back to back, back to back:naughty:

The problem with that argument is lots of SL55s have failed or failing intercooler pumps. When mine started to fail it added almost a second to my 1/4 mile time. A stock SL63 would waste an SL55 running with a bum intercooler pump.

But why argue about this? Just take your SL63 to a local track and post the timeslip on Dragtimes. If you run12.0 or better we'll all give you props.

Even better would be to show up at one of the regional dragstrip get togethers. They happen several times a year in all areas of the country. Run a 12.0 or better at one of those events and you'll get immediate props.

This discussion could go on forever. Tell you what...


you get a stock SL63 and a stock SL55 with the same milage and have them race from a standpoint and from a roll and get it on HD video. I'lll tell you what your going to see, the 63 murdering the 55

I know what i'm talking about.:)


A fully modded 55 and a fully mdded 63 is a diffrent story, the 55 at this point has the edge.....but when your talking about both cars having only an ECU flash, the 63 will defenitley stay ahead at all RPM ranges and at all distances.


If I were in the USA, I would have met with someone on the dragstrip and showed you guys.

Like I said, get both cars and a video camera and show us:)

How can you ignore the fact that MB (as the manufacturer of both cars!) says that the SL63 is slower? See my post above...!

Not only MB, but pretty much EVERYBODY who drove both cars, says that the 63 is slower.

So... you can have your own opinion. But it really is YOUR OWN opinion, only.

where in the hell does MB say that??. All what you have is a 0-60 mph, which is never a good indictaor and is written for commercial use. Like I said again, get both cars racing and get it on HD video and you will have our answer. I dont have paper BS, all I know is racing, and when it comes to that, the 63 wins. Especially with the new 7-speed MCT speedshif, sorry to knock your horses, but the 55 doesnt stand a chance. nuf said

MB (again: the manufacturer of both cars!) say that it's slower. If not MB themselves, who else would want the predecessor of a car look faster (for marketing reasons) on paper. But even they cannot ignore the fact that it's slower (hence the OFFICIAL 0-100 km/h). When you were "eating SL 55s for breakfast" (as you said above), then there's a simple reason for that: They didn't race you. They just let you go...

I've driven both and I totally agree to the official figures. The 63 needs revs (lots of them) to unleash its power. Until these revs are build up, the 55 is already off and away. It's not only faster from 0-100 km/h, but has a lot more torque, too. This is also not a secret, but just a quote from the official specs. There's absolutely no objective category, where the 63 is superior to the 55 (except for its exhaust note, maybe). However, due to it's slightly better handling capabilities, it might feel faster..., but that's pretty much it.

The 55 is a torque monster. And every AMG SL driver is a torque lover,... because otherwise, he would've gone for a 911. That's also the reason why they dropped the n/a 6.2l engine for the new SL 63, and went back to a charged 5.5 setup again. Guess why?

Also: the current SL 63 doesn't sell. Again: Guess why? Do you really think that a SL 55 owner goes for a new ride, when even MB admits that the SL 63 is slower and has less torque? Again: If the SL 63 was such a great car, why doesn't it sell?

Allow me to sum up.

1. You are the only SL63 owner on this forum who claims a stock SL63 is significantly faster than a stock SL55

2. You first cited Dragtimes as proving your point, except it didn't

3. You then cited unwitnessed head-to-head races as proving your point, except they didn't

4. I suggested you provide timed proof of your claim. You declined and suggested that other people submit timed proof, which should be easy since you claim the SL63 is so much faster. Except no SL63 owner claims to have a timeslip for a stock SL63 running a 12.0 second 1/4 mile.

If you've got additional facts to share I and others would enjoy seeing them. On the other hand if all you have are unsubstantiated claims that no data supports, it's a lot less interesting.

Mercedes Benz NEVER stated the SL63 is slower than the SL55. stop making things up on your own. you brought up a website that has a 0-60 mph timings, which are never a good indicator.

oh and by the way, the website that was posted about the 0-60mph about the SL63 making 4.6, well, check this out :

http://autos.yahoo.com/2009_mercedes...8085242&page=5

"such as in a long sweeping turns, so maximum torque is on tap when you're ready for the power again. Mercedes quotes a 4.4-second 0-60 time for the SL63, and we believe it."

0-60 timings always differ and are never a base for which car is quicker:)
you wont know that until you race
You talk about SL55 letting me go....loooool
we met up and raced about 6 times. and six times my car was smoking him
I raced three other stock ones, and one of the was my brother's SL, I was ahead all times. You dont want to beliee it, FINE, go try for yourself



and for the person who is bragging about facts and figures. Go to Dragtimes.com and see for yourself how awful a stock SL55 can get.
13.1s, will never get you ahead of the more brutal SL63.

you talk about tourqe, The Sl55 gives will give you full potential of both HP and toeque at around 4500 rpm. Whereas, the 63 will give you full potential as low as 2000 rpm. Therefore, when the 55 reaches its full power the 63 would already be ahead. The 63 is a more advaned and powerful engine. If you know MB very well, they would not replace anything with something lower in performance. they repalced the 55 kompresseor with the 63 for a good reason:)


I repeat for the third time, get both stock cars and race and get it on video, I'm sure you will change your mind

Where, WHERE did the website say anything about 0-60 mp/h times?

It states the OFFICIAL 0-100 km/h times. You get the difference between mp/h and km/h, don't you? 60 mp/h equals 96.5606 km/h. It's not a surprise that it reaches a LOWER speed faster, than a HIGHER. Damn... that's not too difficult to understand, is it?

The link I posted in my previous post quotes official 0-100 km/h times. For all MB models, as stated by MB Germany. I'm referring to that link and my personal experience. It's not me who needs to prove anything, but you for not agreeing with the official figures.

I think there is a reason why well to do SL55 owners are upgrading their exterior with the SL63 look, instead of just getting an SL63. And its not because they can't afford a newer SL63. It's because they want the slightly more aggressive look of the the SL63, with the better engine and performance of the SL55. Based on everything i have seen and read, I would want a SL55 engine, with the front look of the SL63.

+1

That's exactly what I did ...and it's also the reason why my ride proudly boasts the 5.5 AMG emblem (see my sig). :p:

imitating looks doesnt give you power. you can argue all you want. Im sticking with what I know and have seen and tried. if your SL55 is bone stock, find a stock SL63 and race it. paper and specs will not give you racing results. All what you have is assumptions and no trials. Lets see how you all argue after actually getting both stock cars and actually racing em.:)


you all have a nice day:y

No that was easy to top. It's called the R129 and the R230 '09+. I always found the double round lights way to soft/feminine on all mb's...W203, W210 (W211 wasn't AS bad) W215/216....

This new one will impress, the new model mb's always do.

Ever notice it's only the 63 owners, of a given model, that thinks it's quicker than it 55 counterpart? Took a while, but the w211 owners finally admitted defeat.

The owners of the 63s will always be the last to believe. They have to justify their choice. But again, make no mistake, a properly working stock 55, will always be quicker to 60, to 100, and in the 1/4 than it's 63 brother.

The truth hurts sometimes. More refined? Yes. Quicker? Nope.

Clayton...:tyson:...how many beers you have on the golf course today?