SL55/63/65/R230 AMG: SL63 or SL65? Help, which do I buy??????
11-03-2011, 09:01 AM
#26
Yes this subject has been up before, but so do shows on TV. If you missed it
then it will come up again in the future. I am glad you picked the 63 because
to me owning a car is all about fun and excitement. I have owned a SL55,
CL65, and had an extended test drive in a SL65. If you want just straight line speed the 65 would be the one, but it's old tech. Once you master the gearbox on the 63 you will be able to play tunes on the exhaust which is
fabulous, also it handles very well particularly with AMG button pressed.
There is something about the 63 that just makes you smile every time you drive it.
then it will come up again in the future. I am glad you picked the 63 because
to me owning a car is all about fun and excitement. I have owned a SL55,
CL65, and had an extended test drive in a SL65. If you want just straight line speed the 65 would be the one, but it's old tech. Once you master the gearbox on the 63 you will be able to play tunes on the exhaust which is
fabulous, also it handles very well particularly with AMG button pressed.
There is something about the 63 that just makes you smile every time you drive it.
11-03-2011, 11:41 AM
#27
MBWorld Fanatic!
11-03-2011, 01:00 PM
#28
MBWorld Fanatic!
It looks like the OP made his decision already...but I will just shoot a couple of things out there in this debate:
Obviously, the acceleration #'s are heavily in the SL65's favor.
The SL65 is capable of accelerating 0-60mph in 3.7s, 0-100mph in 8.1s and 1/4 mile in 11.8 @121.6mph.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/var/ezfl...ecda0bcb87.pdf
The SL63 tested by R&T was able to do 0-60: 4.0s, 0-100: 9.5s and 1/4m in 12.4 @115.3mph.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/co...l63_amg_page_2
The interesting thing is that R&T tested the SL63 with the Performance Package including LSD (car's top speed was listed as 186mph), yet it recorded the same skidpad g's (.89g) and lower slalom speed (66.6mph) than the SL65 (67.4mph). The SL65 also had better braking figures (60-0: 115' and 80-0: 202') compared to the SL63 (120' and 211'). The SL63 does weigh 135lbs less (4,420lbs vs 4,555). You would think that SL63's lighter weight would result in better handling and braking figures...but it doesn't.
When people talk about "old" technology in the V12 Biturbo...they conveniently forget that the N/A 6.2L is pretty much an obsolete engine platform in the AMGs. The new Biturbo V8 will replace it soon enough across the entire S/CL/SL/E/CLS line. In talking to an AMG brand manager recently, there is no plan to get rid of the Biturbo V12....as he put it..."there will always be customers who "have to have" a V12 car...and we will keep building them to meet that demand".
Tom
Obviously, the acceleration #'s are heavily in the SL65's favor.
The SL65 is capable of accelerating 0-60mph in 3.7s, 0-100mph in 8.1s and 1/4 mile in 11.8 @121.6mph.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/var/ezfl...ecda0bcb87.pdf
The SL63 tested by R&T was able to do 0-60: 4.0s, 0-100: 9.5s and 1/4m in 12.4 @115.3mph.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/co...l63_amg_page_2
The interesting thing is that R&T tested the SL63 with the Performance Package including LSD (car's top speed was listed as 186mph), yet it recorded the same skidpad g's (.89g) and lower slalom speed (66.6mph) than the SL65 (67.4mph). The SL65 also had better braking figures (60-0: 115' and 80-0: 202') compared to the SL63 (120' and 211'). The SL63 does weigh 135lbs less (4,420lbs vs 4,555). You would think that SL63's lighter weight would result in better handling and braking figures...but it doesn't.
When people talk about "old" technology in the V12 Biturbo...they conveniently forget that the N/A 6.2L is pretty much an obsolete engine platform in the AMGs. The new Biturbo V8 will replace it soon enough across the entire S/CL/SL/E/CLS line. In talking to an AMG brand manager recently, there is no plan to get rid of the Biturbo V12....as he put it..."there will always be customers who "have to have" a V12 car...and we will keep building them to meet that demand".
Tom
11-03-2011, 04:37 PM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Central NJ
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
335i
It looks like the OP made his decision already...but I will just shoot a couple of things out there in this debate:
Obviously, the acceleration #'s are heavily in the SL65's favor.
The SL65 is capable of accelerating 0-60mph in 3.7s, 0-100mph in 8.1s and 1/4 mile in 11.8 @121.6mph.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/var/ezfl...ecda0bcb87.pdf
The SL63 tested by R&T was able to do 0-60: 4.0s, 0-100: 9.5s and 1/4m in 12.4 @115.3mph.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/co...l63_amg_page_2
The interesting thing is that R&T tested the SL63 with the Performance Package including LSD (car's top speed was listed as 186mph), yet it recorded the same skidpad g's (.89g) and lower slalom speed (66.6mph) than the SL65 (67.4mph). The SL65 also had better braking figures (60-0: 115' and 80-0: 202') compared to the SL63 (120' and 211'). The SL63 does weigh 135lbs less (4,420lbs vs 4,555). You would think that SL63's lighter weight would result in better handling and braking figures...but it doesn't.
When people talk about "old" technology in the V12 Biturbo...they conveniently forget that the N/A 6.2L is pretty much an obsolete engine platform in the AMGs. The new Biturbo V8 will replace it soon enough across the entire S/CL/SL/E/CLS line. In talking to an AMG brand manager recently, there is no plan to get rid of the Biturbo V12....as he put it..."there will always be customers who "have to have" a V12 car...and we will keep building them to meet that demand".
Tom
Obviously, the acceleration #'s are heavily in the SL65's favor.
The SL65 is capable of accelerating 0-60mph in 3.7s, 0-100mph in 8.1s and 1/4 mile in 11.8 @121.6mph.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/var/ezfl...ecda0bcb87.pdf
The SL63 tested by R&T was able to do 0-60: 4.0s, 0-100: 9.5s and 1/4m in 12.4 @115.3mph.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/co...l63_amg_page_2
The interesting thing is that R&T tested the SL63 with the Performance Package including LSD (car's top speed was listed as 186mph), yet it recorded the same skidpad g's (.89g) and lower slalom speed (66.6mph) than the SL65 (67.4mph). The SL65 also had better braking figures (60-0: 115' and 80-0: 202') compared to the SL63 (120' and 211'). The SL63 does weigh 135lbs less (4,420lbs vs 4,555). You would think that SL63's lighter weight would result in better handling and braking figures...but it doesn't.
When people talk about "old" technology in the V12 Biturbo...they conveniently forget that the N/A 6.2L is pretty much an obsolete engine platform in the AMGs. The new Biturbo V8 will replace it soon enough across the entire S/CL/SL/E/CLS line. In talking to an AMG brand manager recently, there is no plan to get rid of the Biturbo V12....as he put it..."there will always be customers who "have to have" a V12 car...and we will keep building them to meet that demand".
Tom
http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...-sl63-amg.html
0-60 (sec): 4.8
0-75 (sec): 6.7
1/4-Mile (sec @ mph): 12.9 @ 110.5
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 4.5
30-0 (ft): 27
60-0 (ft): 109
Slalom (mph): 71.2 (69.7 stability control on)
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.90g (0.90 traction control OFF)
The 2007 SL65 AMG they tested for reference
http://www.insideline.com/bmw/m6/200...-sl65-amg.html
Track Test Results
0-45 mph (sec.) 2.7
0-60 mph (sec.) 3.9
0-75 mph (sec.) 5.4
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 12.1 @ 119.4
Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) 27
60-0 mph (ft.) 110
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) 67.4
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) 0.89
Last edited by 02Drunkenup; 11-03-2011 at 04:39 PM.
11-03-2011, 07:50 PM
#30
MBWorld Fanatic!
Insideline tested a non-Performance Package SL63, and got far better results handling results than the P30 SL63 that R&D tested.
http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...-sl63-amg.html
0-60 (sec): 4.8
0-75 (sec): 6.7
1/4-Mile (sec @ mph): 12.9 @ 110.5
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 4.5
30-0 (ft): 27
60-0 (ft): 109
Slalom (mph): 71.2 (69.7 stability control on)
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.90g (0.90 traction control OFF)
The 2007 SL65 AMG they tested for reference
http://www.insideline.com/bmw/m6/200...-sl65-amg.html
Track Test Results
0-45 mph (sec.) 2.7
0-60 mph (sec.) 3.9
0-75 mph (sec.) 5.4
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 12.1 @ 119.4
Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) 27
60-0 mph (ft.) 110
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) 67.4
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) 0.89
http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...-sl63-amg.html
0-60 (sec): 4.8
0-75 (sec): 6.7
1/4-Mile (sec @ mph): 12.9 @ 110.5
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 4.5
30-0 (ft): 27
60-0 (ft): 109
Slalom (mph): 71.2 (69.7 stability control on)
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.90g (0.90 traction control OFF)
The 2007 SL65 AMG they tested for reference
http://www.insideline.com/bmw/m6/200...-sl65-amg.html
Track Test Results
0-45 mph (sec.) 2.7
0-60 mph (sec.) 3.9
0-75 mph (sec.) 5.4
1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 12.1 @ 119.4
Braking, 30-0 mph (ft.) 27
60-0 mph (ft.) 110
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft. (mph) 67.4
Skid pad, 200-ft. diameter (lateral g) 0.89
Tom
11-04-2011, 01:56 PM
#31
MBWorld Fanatic!
Talking in laymen terms, as I said if you want straight line speed then get the
65. However the biggest difference is the gearbox, this is high tech compared
to the auto box , although the auto box is good. Even using the MCT box in
auto mode is better, kicks down better, changes quicker. It doesn't matter
what you do to a 65 in terms of exhaust,tuning, suspension wheels and
brakes you can never get the feel of the MCT box. I have a S600, a quick
car with an auto box, the minute I drive it the gearbox issue is immediately
noticeable, particularly on kick down, where sometimes it does sometimes
it doesn't, sometimes it drops 1 sometimes 2 , the mct box will even change
down to a gear where there is only 500 revs left before the red line.
For every driving through traffic I think it's instant gear change is worth a
couple of seconds, but in a straight drag sure the 65 would win. I think it's
fair to say most of you guys with 600's or 65's have tweaked them in some way or another, particularly exhausts and brakes, whereas the only thing worth doing on the 63 is re map with limiter taken out, I have done 180 now
65. However the biggest difference is the gearbox, this is high tech compared
to the auto box , although the auto box is good. Even using the MCT box in
auto mode is better, kicks down better, changes quicker. It doesn't matter
what you do to a 65 in terms of exhaust,tuning, suspension wheels and
brakes you can never get the feel of the MCT box. I have a S600, a quick
car with an auto box, the minute I drive it the gearbox issue is immediately
noticeable, particularly on kick down, where sometimes it does sometimes
it doesn't, sometimes it drops 1 sometimes 2 , the mct box will even change
down to a gear where there is only 500 revs left before the red line.
For every driving through traffic I think it's instant gear change is worth a
couple of seconds, but in a straight drag sure the 65 would win. I think it's
fair to say most of you guys with 600's or 65's have tweaked them in some way or another, particularly exhausts and brakes, whereas the only thing worth doing on the 63 is re map with limiter taken out, I have done 180 now
