LeeT

Hello guys, i will shortly be on the lookout for a high powered rear wheel drive car. I will be looking at spending circa £20k gbp. I have shortlisted both the SL55 and the Bmw M6. For my budget, i would be looking at a 2003/2004 SL or a 2005/2006 BMW M6.
I know opinions on this forum will be biased but could do with some honest opinions. Its just a car for fun. I like the fact that M6 has rear seats but not essential as i have a B5 RS4 too. Ive been looking on youtube and fell in love with the M6 sound 😍 Sounds like an F1 car with the right exhaust. The torque figure of the SL is also attracting me though.
Anyone had both or driven both?

JumpinJim

Had an SL55, never had an M6. Raced many M6 v10s with the SL55 at the local car club; M6 is faster if that matters. SL55 is heavy and doesn't handle well. However, if you want a comfortable top down cruiser the SL is the benchmark and has no equal. Stay away from the 2003 SL as they were problematic.

LeeT

Nope, doesnt bother me which is fastest. Just a comparison from someone who has driven both would be handy 😄 What is problematic about the 2003 SL's ?

JumpinJim

Usual first model year gremlins, but the SL seemed hit particularly hard with the roof and other electrical things.

IngenereAMG

2003 cars are just fine. I have had mine since new and it has been extremely reliable, and a great car.

We have tuned cars from all years and for the most part the vast majority of these cars are strong and reliable.

The web is full of opinions and bad news travels faster than good, if you know what I mean. Just find a well cared for car, with good service history, and you will be fine.

xpl0sive

I'm also in a similar situation... found a 2007 SL55 with 90k miles, it's going for about $28,000CDN. There's also a 2007 M6 with about 70k miles for sale for $29k... I think the SL55 is a better deal as most of the 2007's go for $35k+, but M6's go for around $30k all day... I'm surprised to hear that the M6 is faster, I thought the SL55 would be faster

rune solem

I talked to a guy that had a M6, but the gearbox was shifting too uncomfortable, so he bought a sl 55 instead.

The gas tank in the m6 is also small so don't plan for too long journeys without a stop, because that v10 is thirsty.

LeeT

Go drive them both and then post up your thoughts and opinion

Ekselent

BMW M5 E60 is also faster than SL55… stock vs stock…. and MUCH better to drive and handle .. one of the best in the world. M6 and M5 behave identical.
I own an M5 and SL600 R230 so I have compare them booth. BMW is more compact car than mercedes… my friend have an SL55 2003 . Only 15 000 miles on the clock….. and I have test drive it to. …. TOP speed is also much faster.
I love the V10 engine… . I will never sell that car because the engine…. max.rev. 8250 rpm…. its amazing to hear it.
Good luck...

BlownV8

SL55 seems to hold its own against the M6 cabrio even on a roll where you would be negating the SL55's huge torque advantage.
The SL was also running 20" wheels. In the second race, the M6 won but the result was similar to the SL55's win over the M6 in the first race. Looks like a drivers race to me. From a dig, I'd bet the SL would really take it to the M6. Not to mention, the SL55 is much easier to mod and make much quicker.

I agree with the comment on the M6's sound. It sounds fantastic. Too bad it wasn't a good enough engine to keep long term.

xpl0sive

I test drove an m6 today... The gearbox definitely takes some getting used to... And I could only drive it with paddles, in automatic is absolutely terrible. As soon as I got on the freeway I floored it and the traction control immediately came on. Once I got up to about 50mph I floored it again to see the top end. Once I got up to around 7,000rpm the check engine light came on "engine malfunction, engine power reduced". I promptly drove it back to the dealer and said thanks but no thanks. Driving the car normally before that felt fine, like any other car really. Didn't feel special though. I will drive the SL55 tomorrow and report my findings. I suspect it will be much like my previous CLS55 except the roof goes down

jrgator

I had an M6 for 2 years before I bought my SL55. I loved the interior and quietness of the M6, and it was pretty quick. The SL seems quicker because of the torque. I had smg in the M6 and really grew to hate it. The automatic mode is worthless and a pain. Never used it for that reason. I was glad to get rid of it and have never missed it. On the other hand I've never tired of the SL, especially with a top that goes down.

GT Bill

Agreed !

LeeT

Any feedback?

xpl0sive

Finally drove the SL55 the other day. I have to admit they made some good changes in 2007. The steering wheel was a lot stiffer than my CLS55 ever was. Felt like the BMW's steering. Acceleration was great, car drove nicer than the M6. Ride was smoother and car didn't feel like it needed to be "on edge" all the time. You can cruise around normally in it, but it'll get up and go when you step on the gas. I'm getting a PPI done on it tomorrow and will most likely buy it if everything checks out. I did notice that the front rotors were pretty worn and they are about $900 each to replace.... Yikes.

I did find another option... A 2007 CLK63 Convertible. I understand those are very rare cars with only about 170 ever imported into North America, I suspect it's one of only a few in Canada. I emailed the seller, waiting to see if it's still available. What are your guys thoughts? SL55 vs CLK63 Cab?

ttboost

If you're into exclusivity, the CLK63 cab is the way to go. You really should drive the SL65 too...

BlownV8

SL looks better but the CLK will be much less expensive to operate due to maintenance costs on the SL.

xpl0sive

I want a car 2007+ so I can't afford a 2007+ Sl65 yet....

As far as the maintenance costs, I think the brakes are the same on both cars, CLK has a regular suspension where the SL has ABC...
Biggest difference here is that the CLK has under 30,000 miles where the SL has over 90,000 miles. Other 2007 SL's I have found with lower miles would cost me a lot more as well. So it's either a high mile SL55 or a low mile CLK63...

vtvette

You are referring to the front brakes on a SL55? Rotors for my 2005 SL55 were $98.00 each factory Mercedes rotors purchased from a Mercedes dealer online. I don't believe the SL55 brakes changed at all between the years.

The $900 you were quoted above sounds more in line with what I've heard for the V12 SL's with 2 piece rotors.

vtvette

This goes against many people's conventional wisdom but IMHO I would purchase a higher mileage car that has not been abused and has been serviced regularly over a car that sits not driven for extended periods of time. I have spent my entire adult life working in Motorstports and high end vintage car restoration. The worse thing for a car - most any car - is to sit for extended periods of time unused. Regular heat cycles (car operating at temperature) keeps Orings and seals from drying out, fluids moving and lubricating their respective systems, heat cycling tires keeps them from dry rotting, the list goes on and on.

You will see many, many threads here on the form of cars with low miles acting strangely, having issues (especially "I went out and started my car after xxxxx weeks/months and suddenly it's doing xxxxx").

I'm not saying all low mileage cars automatically have issues but, be especially diligent in your inspection of a car that has sat for extended periods of time or has very low miles.

My 2005 SL55 has 102,000 miles. I bought it from the original owner, a lady who commuted frequently between Phoenix and LA. Amazingly she has the ABC fluid flushed regular (she owned 3 SL's!!) and the car has all the original shocks and original ABC pump. There is no weeping whatsoever from any ABC hoses. Other than routine maintenance the car never gave her any issues at all. I now drive it everyday 60 miles a day and would not hesitate one bit to hop in and drive her across the country tomorrow.

xpl0sive

Thanks for your input. Mercedes changed a few things in 2007 for SL55's, including the brakes. They went to the two-piece rotors with 6 piston calipers, same as on the CLS63, C63, etc. The $900 price for each rotor is from Ebay... dealer price they are $1000+ each.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Genuine-...aa25d3&vxp=mtr

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mercedes-Benz-SL55-SL63-07-12-AMG-Brake-Front-Rotor-Rotors-Genuine-2194210212-/190850309802?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item2c6f909eaa&vxp=mtr

vtvette

I (obviously) did not know that thanks for the info!

Was 2007 the last year for the SL55?

xpl0sive

I believe 2008 was the last year for the SL55 before the facelift in 2009 when they went to SL63. 2007 and 2008 Sl55's are identical

LeeT

Thanks for keeping the thread up to date and alive. I spotted an SL55 local to me at a garage so may well pop along and give it a test drive.
Interior wise, was the M6 a nicer place to be? It just looks so much more luxurious from pictures. I need to get out and start looking in person i think. Looking at youtube, the sound of the M6 with the Eissenmann exhaust is intoxicating

xpl0sive

The M6 interior was like every other BMW I've ever driven. I recently sold my 2008 X5 4.8i and the M6 interior was nearly identical.