C43AMG, you should read more carefully instead of just skimming. I don't think there will be SLK63, and i'm willing to bet on it. I still think the fuel pumps not fitting is a lame excuse, but i also know there are a lot of other difficulties.
BTW, i am on AMG private lounge and read the previous chat. I doubt anything will change this time around.

Germancar1,
obviously you have little experience with the SLK, and the other cars you consider sports cars. I'll bet you are going to say something like, 'slk 55 doesn't have manual transmission, therefore it's not a sportcar.' or some other narrow view point to use as your argument.

Tell me how much you want to bet and who you want to hold it.There will be a SLK63,probably not till 09'.Then you can join the ranks of the guys would said there wouldn't be a C63.You learn alot of things the public doesn't know when you go to Affalterbach.

Obviously you're assumed wrongly, and you know what happens when you do that. I've driven the SLK plenty. Ditto for other sports cars. My point stands, the SLK isn't as sporty as other similar cars. Yes in Mercedes speak it is a sports car, the SLK55 even more so. Please don't put words in my posts. The SLK55 not having a manual does indeed kill it as a sports car for a lot of people, MB fans needs to get over this. It happens. When every other "sports car" on the market offers one then Mercedes is the odd car out, not the other way around. Though that isn't the main point of my argument about the SLK. It just doesn't have the responses of a Z4 M Coupe, Cayman or Boxster, close (especially the SLK55), but still not quite in the same league as those cars. Nothing wrong with the SLK, its one of Mercedes' most complete packages, especially the SLK350 manual, but it still isn't a ball-out sports car a Boxster or Z4 M Coupe can be.

M

Yep and the ones that say there will be no SL63 either. I don't see what is so hard to see about the 6.2L V8 replacing the 5.5L V8 across the line. Mercedes has already stated that it fits into everything from the C-Class on up. A fuel pump isn't going to stop an engineering-heavy company like MB/AMG from putting their prized engine into one of their best chassis.

What people here don't get is that car companies don't like to talk about new models too far in advance for a variety of reasons. Main one being that the SLK55 had/has a while to go on the market.

BMW said that there wouldn't be a M version of the Z4, but sales didn't go according to planned an poof(!) there it was a M Z4.

M

C43 and germancar1, name a couple of the more senior members in cali to hold the money until the r172 comes out. I'll bet $10 against both of you that there won't be a R171 SLK 63. New engine, i think very possible, 63, doubt they'll bother. I'm not saying i can dictate what AMG does, but i'm willing to put money behind my guesses.

So C43, what did you learn in affalterbach that indicates a R171 SLK 63? Don't give me that, 'i can't say for legal reasons' crap, you already put it out there, either you retract your statements, or you post what you learned. Otherwise you are just another BSer.

Sales are still not going according to plan, the M isn't selling all that well either. Nice car, but I guess the looks are killing it for all too many people.

I can't wait to see a slk63

Unless you did a typo - you've just repeated what I said all along - not in this body chasis. As far as finding a senior California member to hold the money - I'll give mine to a NJ moderator -RBrenton - he'll have it by mid-next week.

We were told that the 6.3 would be THE powerplant for the entire AMG lineup.If you think that AMG would invest alot of time and money to develope this motor and put in into every class EXCEPT the "SLK" class......come on man...you really don't want me to go there ..do you?

C43, you've been saying the 09 SLK will have a 63, but with the facelift coming in 2009, there's no way the R172 will be out within a year of that. Therefore, 2009 SLK=R171, and my bet is that there will be no R171 SLK 63.

RE the R172 powerplant, it's definetely possible that there will be an SLK63, and i eagerly await it, but on the other hand, I and many other SLK 55 owners received a survey asking about our opinions on a supercharger or turbocharged engine, and whether or not having a v8 (regardless of power)was crucial to our decision to buy. To me that indicates they have already set a target HP, and will consider a turbocharged/supercharged v6 in place of a NA v8, since both will have similar power.

If you agree, i'd rather give my money to FrankW. I'll have to ask him, but i'm sure he won't mind.

We'll see. You sound mightly confident though. Let me think....uh yes...I'll take that bet! You're right about the R172 though, it is still at least 3 or so years away.

M

There will be a R171 SLK 63. I'm sure MB engineer will find a way to fit the motor in with 440-460HP. So, I'll take that bet! 3-4 years from now when R172 is due; may I say SLK64?

A 450HP 171 would be too much power for the current design. You'd need much larger tires in the rear, the current chasis maxes out at 275. You'd also need LSD to keep it on the road. The bigger cars can get away with more power, they're much heavier and have longer wheel bases. They're not going to make a car that's near undrivable.

A new chasis designed with those higher HP numbers in mind would be a different story.

I disagree, those with over 500hp Kleemann conversions are doing just fine.

Sure larger tires help to put the power down, but wider tires is not the biggest problem. That's actually a very easy problem to solve, I could even see a slightly wider body kit being made if it needs wider tires. With fresh tires, I can hammer the throttle and my car will go along just fine with minimal tire spin if any, on good tarmac. I've got the original 18" rims, 245 if I recall.

Also, if the car was lighter, the tires wouldn't have to be so large to get the power down since a lighter object will have less counter friction against the kinetic energy needed to propel it forward. An Ariel Atom for example can be had with 300hp giving it a power to weight ratio much better then the SLK's, yet the tires are not all that big and it manages insane track times and 0-60 times of 2.7-2.9 seconds.

A cheap mod from Brabus or Kleemann does this. If they can do it, so can MB/AMG.

True, but like I said above, the Atom is way different with shorter wheelbase, much lighter, and it puts the power down just fine.

Once again, Kleemann owners say theirs is perfectly drivable.

People say the chassis must be improved. Ok, but what exactly? Is it the torsional rigidity? I don't think so, cause the SLK has more of it then a 500hp Viper.

Is it the tires? Once again, I say, lose weight and it could use 450 just fine. Or add slightly wider tires and it also helps. LSD helps even more. None of this is 'impossible' to add to an SLK, it's already being done for a couple thousand bucks by tuners.

I believe (and it's just my opinion), but the SLK could take those 450hp just fine, and it seems to be in the hands of some owners.

based on the latest reports, i'm still right!