SLK/R171: '05 SLK350 and 55 on MBUSA.com!
08-17-2004, 11:48 PM
#1
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,093
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2014 C250 sport
08-18-2004, 05:24 AM
#2
Super Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
987S
Interesting that the 360 degree tour claims the SLK350 manual does 0-60mph in 5.4 seconds and the 7G in 5.5
Previously MB have claimed that the 7G was quicker and quoted the manual as doing 0-60 in 5.6 seconds
Previously MB have claimed that the 7G was quicker and quoted the manual as doing 0-60 in 5.6 seconds
08-18-2004, 11:30 AM
#3
Senior Member
Interesting that the 360 degree tour claims the SLK350 manual does 0-60mph in 5.4 seconds and the 7G in 5.5
08-18-2004, 12:03 PM
#4
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A bucket on wheels
Originally Posted by mbslk350
I have a thread with this same question on the other forum. I've concluded, after reviewing European MB sites, that the 0-60 times are transposed. They should be 5.4 sec 7G and 5.5 sec manual.
08-18-2004, 01:19 PM
#5
Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA / Berlin, Germany
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2005 MB SLK 55 AMG
There a a few typos still on the web site (for example, the SLK55 is featured to have an 'enhanced 5 speed automatic transmission'; it's of course an AMG version of the 7G. They'll fix that, along with the timings (DIN norm measures 0-100km/h and it's indeed simply transposed here; the 7G is a tad quicker than manual in DIN tests). Same for the bhp - looks like it's final now, but that also always changes a bit as DIN measures it differently and takes into consideration the higher Octane level of EU fuel (The 350 being 272 HP in Germany for example). Anyway :-)
d
d
08-20-2004, 11:31 AM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA/Naples, FL
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C320 Coupe
yeah, i also noticed they messed up the weights of the car - shouldn't the auto weigh more than the manual? the site has the manual weighing 3231 or something and the auto at 3154 i believe it was.
http://www.mbusa.com/brand/container...0&class=05_SLK
http://www.mbusa.com/brand/container...0&class=05_SLK
08-20-2004, 11:57 AM
#7
Senior Member
It does seem odd that the manual is heavier than the auto. I noticed that the weight given for the 2005 SLK with auto trans is EXACTLY the same as the 2004 SLK with auto trans, despite the 2005 having a different body, different engine and different transmission. It appears that someone just re-used the 2004 weight in the 2005 spec sheets.
You would think a company like MB wouldn't make so many careless errors in their marketing materials.
You would think a company like MB wouldn't make so many careless errors in their marketing materials.
Trending Topics
08-20-2004, 01:00 PM
#8
Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
'13 SL550 '15 C400 4MATIC and a really old Honda Accord
MBSLK350,
When the top is down on your current SLK and you open the trunk, how do you put stuff in the trunk? Is is a latch or button(like the SL) to raise the hard top up so that you can store things in the trunk?
Thanks
When the top is down on your current SLK and you open the trunk, how do you put stuff in the trunk? Is is a latch or button(like the SL) to raise the hard top up so that you can store things in the trunk?
Thanks
08-20-2004, 01:55 PM
#9
Senior Member
There is no latch or mechanism like the SL. It would be a nice feature, though. You can only slide skinny things into the trunk when the top is down. I always raise the top when I park in public places, so it's not too much of a problem.
