SL55/63/65/R230 AMG: 2013 SL spy photos
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
From: Jersey
SL55
Banned
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 955
Likes: 1
2008 C63 ,2009 SL 63 AMG, 2011 SLS AMG
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
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
From: Maryland
SL55 AMG
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!
Banned
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 955
Likes: 1
2008 C63 ,2009 SL 63 AMG, 2011 SLS AMG
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!
looool...very funny. when my SL63 was stock I ate SL55's for breakfeast. Now they disapear on my rear view miror
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
From: Maryland
SL55 AMG
...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 
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 388
Likes: 1
From: Austria
Mercedes
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.
Banned
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 955
Likes: 1
2008 C63 ,2009 SL 63 AMG, 2011 SLS AMG
In your dreams
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
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
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,653
Likes: 5
From: Ann Arbor
'03 SL55
LOOOOOOL
In your dreams
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
In your dreams
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
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 8,137
Likes: 26
From: Maryland
Eurocharged 2004 E500, Eurocharged ECU/TCU 2005 SL600, 2010 Caddy SwaggerWagon
LOOOOOOL
In your dreams
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
In your dreams
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
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.
Last edited by Benz-O-Rama; Jul 9, 2011 at 12:18 PM.
Banned
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 955
Likes: 1
2008 C63 ,2009 SL 63 AMG, 2011 SLS AMG
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.
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
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,653
Likes: 5
From: Ann Arbor
'03 SL55
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.
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.
Banned
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 955
Likes: 1
2008 C63 ,2009 SL 63 AMG, 2011 SLS AMG
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.
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.
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
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 388
Likes: 1
From: Austria
Mercedes
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.
Banned
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 955
Likes: 1
2008 C63 ,2009 SL 63 AMG, 2011 SLS AMG
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.
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
Last edited by jacob502; Jul 10, 2011 at 07:42 AM.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 388
Likes: 1
From: Austria
Mercedes
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
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?
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,653
Likes: 5
From: Ann Arbor
'03 SL55
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.
Last edited by jmf003; Jul 10, 2011 at 10:31 AM.
Banned
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 955
Likes: 1
2008 C63 ,2009 SL 63 AMG, 2011 SLS AMG
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
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
Last edited by jacob502; Jul 10, 2011 at 04:12 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 388
Likes: 1
From: Austria
Mercedes
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
oh and by the way, the website that was posted about the 0-60mph about the SL63 making 4.6, well, check this out
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.
Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
From: Brooklyn, NY
2007 SL55, 2004SL55, 2002 CLK55, 2000 CLK430
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.
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.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 388
Likes: 1
From: Austria
Mercedes
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.
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).
Banned
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 955
Likes: 1
2008 C63 ,2009 SL 63 AMG, 2011 SLS AMG
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
you all have a nice day
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,491
Likes: 2
From: Vancouver, BC
Enzo, my Benzo
This new one will impress, the new model mb's always do.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 8,137
Likes: 26
From: Maryland
Eurocharged 2004 E500, Eurocharged ECU/TCU 2005 SL600, 2010 Caddy SwaggerWagon
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.
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.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 4,929
Likes: 5
From: Tampa, Florida
06 SL65 / 97 993tt /11 Suburban/ 2012 GTR (AMG è la mia Famiglia la Bestia è la mia protezione)
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 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.
...how many beers you have on the golf course today?
