alx

This is not a car an mb dealer is interested in. Too old, too troubleful, hard to get rid of since most banks will not touch it either. The only way an mb dealer ends up with a car like this is if they got slapped with it on a trade in and got it for dirt cheap. My guess is they got it for less than 30k. If it doesn't sell off to the auction it goes and after fees they will break even on it.

DASHIP

Well, you bring up a couple good points that it is an older car for a dealer, and that most banks won't give a loan on a car that old. However, from what I have read on these forums, these cars aren't that much trouble. Most of them have very low miles for their age, and have been garaged and are well taken care of, simply because most of the owners have a good income. It seems to me that a car like this for low $30's is a good deal, if there isn't something really wrong with it. That's why I am so interested in this model in general, because you can wind up with a pile of power, technology, and panache for a very reasonable price. Plus, the bulk of the car's life should still be ahead of it.

Viper98912

Alright guys need more advice as I'm starting to narrow down (and my budget is getting cheaper; isn't it supposed to be the other way around? Start high go higher?). I'm contemplating whether I should bring the SL55 back onto the table. If I can find a good one, is this a smarter buy than the SL65 (I ask myself). Powerful hardtop convertible either way you look at it.

05 SL65 in NY, dealer:
- V12
- 55,000 miles
- Clean carfax, MB service records, 1 owner, southern car
- Unsure if it has pano roof
- No parktronic no distronic
- Nicer front bumper
- Would change burl wood to black birdseye or carbon fiber
- $36,500
- Plus shipping costs
- Plus dealer fees
- Plus tax
- The feeling of "too good to be true"

07 SL55 in FL, private:
- V8 S/C
- 67,000 miles
- More reliable? Maybe?
- Clean carfax, MB service records, 1 owner, southern car
- Has pano roof and parktronic
- No distronic
- Has carbon fiber interior
- Would change wheels to SL63 or SL65 wheels
- $37,900
- Would drive back to GA; no extra costs
- Has shift paddles and little extras
- ABC suspension and SBC brakes were upgraded in 07 supposedly to more reliable units?
- Minor upgrades to calipers, taillights, etc

Thanks for the opinions

DASHIP

You shouldn't have to pay tax for either vehicle when buying them, because they are both out of state. You will probably have to pay for in-state tax when licensing it or on property tax at year end (each state is different), but that would be the same for both vehicles. Not sure what dealer fees you are referring to, but I wouldn't accept any "extra" fees for anything. You should be able to talk the dealer down a bit on price, unless it is a brand new listing.

Personally, I vote for the SL65 just cause it has more power and panache, but that's me. Either would be great. I'm jealous. If you want someone to drive the SL65 down from NY, I can probably help you with that.

V12TTenthusiast

If the car is around NYC, I wouldn't bother with all those stop and go traffic I'd question the transmission. I feel like the gears would be shredded and this is from my personal experience living and working in NYC for weeks at a time when I'm way from Wash. DC

Brakes and Ignition coils sound like they are just about due too, usually after 50k these parts start to go and your gonna be looking at 4k+ for brakes and 2.5k+ for Coils, that and the spark plugs would need to be changed so that's another 300-500

As for the SL55 I've always question FL cars since ppl in FL tend to drive exotics like Honda's and drive them hard all day.

If you have proof that brakes/coils are okay and this wasn't a NYC car then Id take the SL65, If not then I'd keep looking it seems you really want a 65 badly and I can tell you from experience I picked a 55 over a 65 and I regretted it, which is while later on in that same year I swapped to a 65, That or buy a warranty and swap the coil, when they go bad, But you will be facing a huge brake job bill. If you want to avoid maintenance cost as much, Get the 55 with a warranty and the brakes on the 55 are no where as bad as a 65

caraudio1

In Georgia you will have to pay taxes either way. There is a handy calculator on the GA DOR web site at http://onlinemvd.dor.ga.gov/TAP/Welcome.aspx The 2005 SL65 and the 2007 SL55 are going to be real close tax wise.

Viper98912

Wow, I did not realize that the new law that changed ad valorem also eliminated the sales tax. But now ad valorem is just as high as the sales tax! So now they definitely get their money either way. Oh well. Thanks for the heads up on this!

Viper98912

You offering to go check it out for me?

Viper98912

Are brakes as bad as everyone says they are? On my C55 I replaced the rotors at around 100k, and they had plenty of life left. Are people replacing them too early? I like to do most of the work myself as well, so I would hope that would save some coin somewhere.

As much as I want an SL65, I mostly care about having an R230 AMG. I just find them to be such beautiful, amazing cars. 65, well 65 just because it's a rediculous car that they should've probably never made as a production, non-special (black) car. I do want a V12, but nothing says that can't be an S600 or Aston DBS in the future. So if in the short term, a more-reliable, slightly newer SL55 is available, it catches my eye too.

BlownV8

You need to keep reading because that is not at all correct. Why do you think these depreciate so quickly. They are very unreliable, complex, and very expensive to repair.

DASHIP

Well, most of what I have read about the SL65's from a maintenance issue standpoint are what I would consider minor issues. Brakes and coils are easy to change in the driveway with some basic tools, assuming you are willing to spin a wrench. I have read a few posts about ABC system issues, but those issues don't seem to be systemic. Are there any other common issues with the SL65?

Also, I understand that the SL65 has two-piece brake rotors, which means you can change just the rotor/friction part and not the hat. I can't image 4 bare rotor frictions would be that much, although I admit I don't currently have a link to buying them. EvoSport was supposedly selling a replacement rotor that allowed you to just replace the outer friction steel, but I can't seem to find a link that works. If you have to replace the 2-piece fronts, I see they are around $1,700 for aftermarket, but I saw a posting that said OEM is around $1,100. The rear aftermarket 2-piece is around $1,200. I would expect the front to go before the rear, but there is a good chance the rotors are still fine. It just depends a lot on how the car was driven.

Does anyone have a working link for buying just the rotor/friction steel for these brakes?

V12TTenthusiast

Cause Evosport doesn't exist anymore, theres huge drama that went on in that company apparently, you would need to figure out how to get them from Brembo

Wolfman

That is not correct either. Any MB V12 ( and many other brands) depreciates independent of reliability. This is well known and has nothing to do with the SL65. While we had a SL600, it was a 1000 times more reliable than our SL55. We bought that one new and it racked up about $25k in covered repairs in the first year alone. In the end all R230's have similar maintenance and repairs. Now any informed buyer will know what goes wrong with these. As was already pointed out in these posts, the age is less relevant than the service history. See what was replaced on the car already; if you are running on first gen parts, your risk will be higher. I loved our SL55, but IMHO, a SL65 is better in all ways but drive dynamics due to its heaver engine. But then all SL's are cruisers anyway...

BlownV8

MB V12's have a terrible reputation for reliability. Now, is that warranted on the bi-turbo V12? Not exactly but on the previous NA V12.....absolutely! Save for the coil packs and the idler pulleys, the bi-turbo V12's are great engines. The V12 MB's depreciate very quickly due to the bad reputation especially in the S class. The 230 SL and 215 CL also depreciate very quickly due to all the issues with the car in general such as the ABC suspension.

Sure, all/most MB's depreciate quickly but the ABC equipped cars seem to depreciate like a boulder sinks in water. It's just about straight down and doesn't stop until it hits the bottom.

Is this a bad thing. For a long term owner that buys new or nearly new, it's horrible. However, for the person wanting to buy a SL65 at 1/5 the cost of the car when it was new, it's awesome! That is, if you can turn a wrench or you have lots of money for maintenance and repairs, it's great.

Viper98912

Sigh, and of course, that's what also bugs me a little bit. Selling what I think has been a fairly reliable car for one that's potentially very unreliable.

Wolfman

Pre-2003 V12's were crap to be sure but that changed with the TT as you stated. But my point is that these cars do not depreciate due to reliability issues, like ABC. The R230 cars depreciated long before anyone ever heard of any ABC issues which btw was a million times more reliable than the prior ADS.

BlownV8

I had a plethoria of ABC issues on my, at the time, two year old bi-turbo 600. I went through two tandem pumps, just about every ABC line, idler tensioners, coil packs, seat fan, and misc bits and pieces. Maybe the 65 was/is more reliable but the 600 sure the hell wasn't.

Viper98912

I think I'm going to pony up and wait for a good deal on an 07-08 SL65 since it has a few of the small extras that I like. Just need to wait a few months to get everything on track.

DASHIP

I am not very familiar with the changes that happened between years, except that there seems to have been some fairly major updates in '09 I think. When you say that '07 - '08 have a few extras, what are you referring to? Is there anywhere that has a list of all the changes between model years?

xpl0sive

Didn't really want to start a new thread, but it's kind of related... What do you guys think a 2007 SL55 with 90k miles is worth? I know the mileage is high, but it's got maintenance records for it's entire life, 90k Service B just completed. Would it be a good deal at $25k?

Ken Silver

Gee, I find this thread depressing. If I read it as a newbie before buying an SL I wouldn't touch any model at all.

Over 20 years I've had five SL's - three of them were R129's.

Then I bought a 2003 SL600 and kept it for a couple of years. The idle pulley went but that was a few hours into the purchase, so the dealer took care of it. Nothing else went wrong after that, it was a dream car.

After a break with a 2003 Vanquish, couple of late model Bentley Continental GTs and a 2010 Range Rover, I bought a 2006 SL500 as a runaround. Now, a year later, 4,000kms and no issues.

Maybe it was luck? I like to think it was the brand. I had more ongoing problems with the low mileage Aston Martin than any of the SL's.

Like many here I lust after the SL65, but the maintenance costs seem extreme. Does all this really go so horribly wrong for an SL65?

BlownV8

How many miles did your SL 600 have? How many miles did you drive the car and how long did you own the car?

Having issues is a function of how many miles you drove and how long you had the car. The maintenance costs are directly proportional to mileage and time.

V12TTenthusiast

Yes this issues are bound to happen, I already had to change the engine mounts, both coil packs go bad, an ABC pump, both my front struts, and my brakes, pse pump and so on all go out from the 50-60k range but it helps a lot when you get warranties on these cars, basically paid for almost everything except the brakes since those are wear items.

jrgator

I have an '07 SL55 with 83,000. Great car. Looks and drives extremely well, and I wouldn't consider selling it for $25K. If I have to use that money to get a replacement what would I get?

Ken Silver

It was a third car so got little mileage, maybe 3-4000 a year.

I now know why owners trade up every 2-3 years