: )…

Yes the car need only two gears…

As I mention before … is amazing "Boeing 747"…

 

very nice comparison.
I understand you had a chance to drive SL63. how about its transmission ? did you feel a big difference between 5G and MCT ?

 

I want to show you this video where you can see how the car shift the gears….. does this car need more gears than 5….Yes it's slow to change the gears vs SL63. … but does it need it do it faster?
This V12-biturbo have only a tune and do this…. and listen to the engine… when it's start to scream ….


But you must test drive them booth first…..

 

Holy smokes that car pulled so hard

 

I wouldn't call the V12 a lazier engine. If I recall, it delivers more torque at a lower rpms than the 55. The transmission is lazy to be sure, but I don't think it's handicapped by its 5 versus 7 gears. It also delivers plenty above 150 (150 isn't particularly fast IMO)

 

not really. the mct tranny shifts are a bit faster and more positive/ aggressiv, but in cars with so much tq i dont think the shifting speed makes a difference. however, it makes the mct car feel sportier...

 

i am not talking amount of tq delivered, but the fashion it does it in. the v12 is fluid and things happen sort of slow compared to the 55 and especially the 6.2 motor. the turbo lag (small, but definitely there) doesnt help either. the v12 is the more relaxed engine albeit packing the bigger punch.

the speed of shifting is irrelevant, but the more gears (denser tq multiplication) helps the 7g tranny car to be almost as fast (if not the same) as the v12tt at higher speeds. amg knew what they are doing and slotted the 63 cars between the 55 and 65 cars.. and the 55 cars are close to the 65 to begin with when it comes to highway roll ons...

 

100% completely agree


I have got SL 63 I love the way MCT shifts gears. specially in manual mode. definately something you will not get in SL 55/65. actually all I like to do is to drive in manual mode. this is way - as you said - MCT car feels sportier, but again you are right: you will not replace fast gerabox with loads of torque.

 

I drive my 55 in manual mode 90+ percent of the time. The faster you're going the crisper the shift. It's a nice transmission but, I can see where there is room for improvement in the shifting area. The 63 transmission sounds amazing.

I would have assumed the 63 and 65 would have the same transmission but, it doesn't sound like this is the case?

 

I'm sorry but I have experienced the whole opposite situation. The faster you get the more the 65 destroys the 55 and also the 63. Maybe this is because of the aprox. 100HP difference stock, but the 65 is definetely in another league above 200 KM/H.

Under 200 KM/H the differences are not that big between the 3 Cars.

But above 200 KM/H:

SL65 stock 0-300 KM/H was tested 33 sec.
SL55 stock 0-300 KM/H was tested 49 sec.
SL63 525HP was 54,9 sec.

 

OK guys, I am not boasting, but I started with a SL55 , changed it to a
2009 SL63 N/A , then I put the 63 in part ex for a 2007 SL65, then last
April I was wooed by a SL63 bi-turbo.
I swore I would never change it when I had it, shows how fickle we are.
All I can say is they all have their good and bad points, and they were all

GREAT to drive, long live the SL

 

This pretty much sums it up.

There's a reason Mercedes went through the expense of creating all three models.

One really does have to drive each model they are interested in and experience them for themselves. Discussion certainly helps but nothing replaces the feel and experience of driving these amazing cars for yourself. I'm sure the answer will become readily apparent once you drive them.

 

i think your numbers are off... the sl55 was tested on nardo in 2001 and posted 32.5 to 300 km/h

 

The Numbers is not so important but you must understand that the diffrences is Clear. +100 HP + much more torgue it cant be in same class. I have test drove SL55 ( my friend have one / Stock) and my SL600 with Speedriven ECU/TCU tune. About same power as SL65 Stock and I must tell you the diffrence is Clear.
Thats true the SL55 and SL63 feels much more sportier than SL V12 Biturbo. But I think this is Clear for al of us.
You must test drive them first and after that you know what you want...... We have al own opinions and feelings about this modell of cars.
Why not the SL63 with V8 Biturbo engine? Easy to tune and I'm sure its a strong car also

 

Point well taken and i intend to do just that. In order to better focus my search and focus on which cars to test drive we need to hone the conversation a bit. In an effort to.re focus the conversation in this thread the question on the table was what would you say was the best model years for the 63 and why? Thanks.

 

Of course it's very interesting to hear the different perspectives from those who own different models.

Please report back when you have had occasion to drive each model. It will be interesting to hear your opinion of each after reading through this thread.

 

SL63 only came in +09-12 for R230. I'm pretty sure the components are the same for the SL63 within those three years

If you drive one make sure the pump is working otherwise the performance is comprised by a lot (I had a bad pump on both my SL55/65 and the it was slow, more in the 55 than the 65 as the heat from the supercharger really effects the engine)

If you don't have any plans on modifying your car then just get one that meets your needs (cost of maintenance, budget, power, handling etc) but make sure you buy a warranty.

IMO you are much better off buying a car and having years of worry free maintenance compared to buying a high mileage AMG and wasting a ton on fixing it. (you'd be surprised reading some of the post of people buying 80-100k mi AMGs then are shocked at paying a 5-15k repair bill)

But If you do plan on modifying your car then I'd pick the SL65 just cause the transmission can handle more compared to the SL55/63

 

This is excellent advice. I recently bought a 2005 SL55 w/96,000 miles this past July. I just turned 100,000 mile. Mine was a one adult female owner, all interstate (phoenix to LA back and fourth), never abused and always maintained.

The "common issues" list of R230 SL issues reads like a laundry list of items I've addressed since buying the car:

Front suspension bushings
Motor Mounts
Trans Mount
Driveshaft Flex Disks x2
New Tires (fronts were fine but I replaced x4)
Brake pads/rotors (fronts were fine but VERY dusty. New Akebono pads = no dust or squeal at all. Rears pads and rotors were both bad).
Flush ABC fluid, new filter (will do every 20k from now on)
oil change
rebuild front and rear ABC valve blocks (preventive maintenance)
Replace all 3 ABC accumulators (preventive maintenance)
Fuel Filter
Transmission Fluid flush/filter
Starter Battery
Accessories Battery (very soon)

I know there is more I'm forgetting

This weekend I'll flush the brake fluid completely.

I purchased a Star Diagnostic unit as soon as I bought the car.

Mind you this is a well maintained, never abused SL55 with 100,000 miles. The car was a great deal for me as I do all my own work and am very comfortable around a car as complex as the SL55 (I've worked for factory sponsored race teams me whole adult life).

I order all my parts online (genuine Mercedes parts) at a great discount and do all my own work. Some of the work I've done is preventive but, I am proud of my SL55, while a good deal it was certainly not "cheap" and I want the car to be 100% all the time.

These cars do not get cheaper to maintain as they get older. If you are not comfortable or inclined to do your own work spending the money up front and buying a lower mile car is excellent advice.

 

I agree..I probably wouldn't own my SL65 if I couldn't spin a wrench...parts gouging is bad enough..to get boned on labor because of the car you own, too much for me.

 

Yes, this was Nardo-Test in 2001, and there was a LOT of discussion behind the Scenes in Germany.

This special SL55 had a SLR-Prototype Engine in it, with at least 600-620 HP.

No later car was able to come even a Little bit Close to this times, and when you compare it to the Lamborghini Murcielago 580HP, 34,2 Sec.0-300 from this 2001 Nardo Test it is obvious, that you can't reach 33 Sek. with only 500 HP. You need at least 600 HP+in the SL, like the SL65 to do it...

All 3 Cars SL55, Sl63, and SL65 are phantastic cars. Pick the one, which suits you best.

 

Come on guys, all you keep talking about is horse power.
Horse power alone doesn't make a car.
All cars have a feel to them, often a car with less horse power drives better,

as I say all SL's despite their horse power have different personality, besides
how fast they are.
So let's also include, comfort, Audio, brakes, cornering, lights, steering
wheels both steering and road, accessories, you get the picture.

 

They could have saved a LOT of trouble on an engine swap. The right pulley and a tune can get you damn close to 600hp and over 600lb ft torque. Throw in headers and you're there plus.

 

There is one thing you guys are missing. Big V12 TT have got Auto boxes,
very good as well, when I tweaked my SL65 sure it was fast but let down by the gear box.
The MCT type gearbox not only changes quicker, it kicks down far better with
out delay, and it blips the throttle and slows the coming down.
I think it's majic and seriously better than an auto.
For cruising either will do.

 

I did not. I had said it before :-)


fabulous gearbox

 

Hello…
I found this… old school vs new school…..
http://www.video.az/en/video/41799/m...series:tyson::)