Well after 2 months I got rid of my SL55. Its just not a practical car to have here in NYC. With all the pot holes, and this wretched weather we have had...I changed my SL55 for an '03 CL55. Its a more practical day to day car than that of the SL55.

Dont get me wrong...the SL is one of the finest cars I have ever driven in terms of a consumer road car. The acceleration is excellent for a non-manual shift car. There were a few things though that I thought MB skimmed on. For one, the sound system is not that great and the placement of speakers does not compensate well enough for draft noise heard at 65+ MPH (my opinion). Top up, sound is good but I wonder if other owners would also consider the sound a bit tinny for those that have a Pano roof - just bounces all over the place because of the glasss and there is no means to absorb the sound.

Just my opinion but I think the handling on the CL55 is better than that of the SL55 - I know weight differentiation has to do with it but the SL55 is more torque heavy in the rear than that of the CL55 and weight displacement seems to be more centered on the CL55 allowing for less roll and limited slip around sharp turns. As well, not sure if anyone else has experienced this but when you are in a sharp turn...or even one where you can exceed 20mph - try using the shift paddles and tell me if you can hear the gears...as well as feel the rear of the car jump a bit in an effort to compensate for the drafting. Maybe it was just me but "downshifting" through a turn seemed a bit hard on the car whereas in the CL55 it seems to embrace it.

Before I get killed for this post...please understand I believe both cars are well made machines and I am not suggesting one over the other. Anyone should be proud to have either.

 

I did the same thing , I drove the 2003 sl500 sport from 7/1/02

to 12/1/02

5,000 miles later I felt the car was ( a lot of work getting in and

out of several times per day) if your just driving to and from work

I am sure it would be fine. as i have had other sl's But the cl55 is

a better eveyday driver. Just my opinion.........I'm sure others will

disagree of course.

 

Good news? Bad news? to me i would die to have either one...

 

I don't know about the CL55, but I had a CL500. Definitely a great car, loved the Java interior and also found that getting or getting out is more difficult in the SL55 due to is larger side bolsters and smaller door opening.

But, the SL55 is more versatile as a coupe and a convertible, looks much better is my opinion and is much more practical with it's hardtop than the old SL.

While it's a bit harder to get in and out of, when sitting in the car the seating position and the seats are much better than the CL.

Two other personal observations:
1. I liked that the CL took easily 2 golfbags+ extra stuff; trying to fit them and the longer clubs into the SL is a pain, especially if you want to drop the top and have to close the internal cover.
2. I found that the rear seats of the CL were of marginal value. Getting in was easy, but unless used for kids, we found that some of our female friends had less than graceful exits. No fun in front of the valet at the restaurant

In short, I am not missing these extra seats...

Wolfman

 

For me, it has not been a question of SL vs. the CL, but rather the SL vs. the S. The CL is a beautiful car, but the rear seats are not very useful. The S has it all, but is not a convertible, and that is why I am going with the SL.

I was disappointed to hear about the noise problem observed by CL55NYC since I was was under the impression that the SL55 is almost as quiet as the S at high speeds (top up, of course).

 

I have the SL55 and an S430 - the noise in the SL55 is great, not a problem, but not in the same league as the pin drop silent S class.

IMHO

 

Thanks for posting you're opinions and comparison's on two completely different cars made for two different uses and driving styles. I drove the CL55 at last years AMG Challenge and found it to be the car it's made to be...a refined coupe with the latest technologies that doesn't give as much road and driving feel to the occupants as a sportscar.
I now own the SL55 because that's what I wanted and I would never compare the two.
But now to a more important question..can you share what you paid for the SL55 originally if not msrp...and what you sold it for or the transaction that got you the CL in it's place.

 

I tend to agree with Henry......2 very different cars with pros and cons for each. Not really fair to either car if you are comparing them side by side for equal uses. Maybe the S55 and the CL55 would be more of a comparison, or the BMWZ8 and SL55 being a close to equal comparison....although the SL55 is obviously a much better choice for the $$$ and the power to wallet ratio.

 

I paid MSRP for SL55 and sold it at same price after using it for 2 months.

CL55 paid MSRP as well.

Dont get me wrong, they are 2 different cars however from a technology and drivers standpoint, I was a bit disappointed that the CL55 drove better than the SL55. I am a car drivers junkie...I do not profess to be all that mechanical but I have been fortunate enough to own some pretty great driving cars and its possible that my expectations of the SL55 may have gotten the better of me.

Once again, dont get me wrong, the car is a dream and one of the finest machines that could be driven on a daily basis (just not in NYC). However, I was more surprised that the CL55 had less roll and less drafting. As well, I just had presumed that MB put it "All" in the SL55.

As for comparing the S55 with the CL55 - the weight on both cars makes it very hard to compare the two as well as dispacement. The drive is also very different. Having driven the S55 never owned it) the car is more like a sport tank. It handles incredibly well given its curb weight and that the displacement is more concentrated in the front as opposed to the rear so you dont feel as much kick when you really gun the gas.

I would disagree with henry though on saying they are 2 different driving styles.

 

Not that this has alot to do with CL55NYC topic of the two cars, but on another post about value I think I would have made my decision of keeping the SL55 instead of trading it into a CL55. You won't be able to drive the CL for a couple of months and hope to get the same you paid for it on another trade...imho.
But hey, if you didn't want the sportscar SL then more power to you.

 

CL55NYC,

Please tell me more about the draft noise you heard in the SL55. One of the major advantages of the steel drop top in the SL is the reduction in noise compared to a canvas top used by most of the competitors. How big an issue was the interior noise for you, because from the specs I have seen, the interior noise level of the SL55 is superior to most non-convertibles even over 70 mph. Do the numbers lie?

 

I am not sure the draft noise is the same in non-pano roof cars...since I had a pano roof I can only speak of that. there are two elements of drafting...top up and top down.

Top up is what I was referring to when you use the radio with the pano roof, I noticed that there was an issue with sound quality directly related (in my opnion) to the glass roof. Noise bounces off of glass with little to no absorbtion - as a result you can experience "indirect" sound giving what I referred to as a tinny sound.

The drafting I was referring to with the top down was more directly related to going on a turn and downshifting during the turn. The car seemed unhappy in that mode and as a result of wind drafting I felt the car pulling away from the turn in the downshift mode. Just my impression.

There is no question the noise level with the top down on the SL55 is superior to that of other converts - especially at high speeds (in excess of 70mph). You can not compare it to that of a rag top where the SL55 outshines all in that category.

 

I understand. I thought you were referring to wind noise or road noise intruding into the cabin causing you to have to increase the volume in order to hear the entire dynamic range of the music. The reflective/ absorptive properties of the pano/ non-pano roof is another issue, and this is the frst I have heard of it on this board.