alibaba

HI Everybody,

I was checking the standerd option on the SLK55 brochure USA, I saw that the comfort package and the heated seats comes as standerd on the AMG which is worth about $1500. Is that Right?

Also is metalic paint comes as standerd or as an option?

Does the SLK55 comes with folding side mirrors and Tinted Glass?

Thnak you in Advance
Ali

Mercedesfan

Having just driven the new US spec SLK350 across Germany I highly question what more the SLK55 can bring to the table. Acceleration was fantastic. The 350 engine loved holding at 80 mph as it passed everything else going up inclines and mountain passes. I sincerely believe this engine is perfectly matched to this car and if I recall correctly the weight distribution is an even 50-50. The SLK55 will adversely affect that ratio, add only half a second in acceleration time and increase gas consumption. IMHO the 10 + K premium for the SLK55 is not worth it in terms of the diminishing returns offered. Of course, if you like the styling of the bodywork on the SLK55 then a case could be made for going ahead and getting the SLK55 instead of paying the $4000 premium on the SLK350 just to get the AMG styling package.

Motzkoman

Mercedesfan
Did you have any favorite routes that you recommend? I get mine October 1st and have a couple of weeks to spend in Bavaria, Austria and eastern France (am dropping off in Paris 10/14).

dosers

Well, I and other would disagree....

I quite like the 350 (heck, I had a great time with the 200k even) - but the AMG is a whole different ballpark. That's like comparing a Boxster S to a 911 Carrera (I know!). The AMG has a different suspension, different Speedshift, more torque, different engine spectrum altogether, and yes, much more power. It's not about the styling (the AMG kit only includes SOME of the 55 styling and stiffer suspension - I woudl say $4000 is a lot for that). Also, the price difference between the 350 and AMG are almost $20k (in Germany 37.400 Euro versus 55.150 Euro BEFORE taxes) - and frankly, I think it's worth it. THe SLK55 AMG has a lot of extras that are pay-options for the 350. It has interior options and seats not available on the 350.

The weight ration will sure change, but the new SLK was designed with the V8 in mind (the old 170 series was originally designed for a V4 only!).
Nothing against the 350 - it's very nice, but I would argue the SLK55 brings a LOT more to the table (as do the other AMG models - the SL 500 is a dog, nay boat compared to the SL 55 AMG for example).

Best,
Dan :-)

dosers

Alibaba,
no need to post the same question twice or thrice :-) ALready got answered on the SLK55 board ;-)

Dan

northbenz

Routes - Because of limited time we opted to skip the rally portion through the Black Forest that goes along "Clock Road." Had done it before, but would recommend it to anyone who hasn't experience it yet. Try to time it so you can catch the cuckoo clock shops while they are still open. The falls at Trier are worth the stop and take only an hour or so to explore once the car is parked. Into Austria don't miss the route that takes you into the mountain pass (Arlberg?). It was described in the old Black Forest Rally brochure. You will miss it if you just set your Nav Command for the destination. Also recommend a visit to the small town where Mad King Ludwig's fairy tale castle is located an hour or two outside of Munich. OH - at the European Delivery Center gift shop make sure you pick up the map at the counter. It is only 5 euros and is custom made by Mercedes for driving and laminated in plastic.

Motzkoman

Thanks for the tips Norhtbenz, will actually start with a weekend visiting relatives in my prior hometown of in Munich after getting the car 10/1. The car time will be 14 days. Hope your remaining travels are great!
...

Mercedesfan

A suggestion for those picking up their Mercedes at the European Delivery Center in Sindelfingen. At the factory tour desk ask for the booklet with photos and facts about the manufacturing of Mercedes Cars. It is free and offered in multiple languages with lots of nice photos. They won't hand it out unless requested. Has lots of the interesting facts reported on the tour included as well.

Motzkoman

Thanks Mercedesfan...I will be looking out for things in both English and German since I read and write both...can't wait until 10/1, just 2 weeks...

masmole

I think you are erroneously overestimating the weight distribution advantage the 350 will have over the 55. The official brochure lists a SLK55 with 7Gtronic at 3397 lbs while the SLK350 (with a lighter manual transmission) weighs in at 3231 lbs. Even if we ignore the fact that part of the weight advantage is due to a lighter transmission and also ignore the fact that the added weight the SLK55 has is due also to a heavier brake system (larger calipers, rotors), more body work, and even if we ignore the fact that due to the R171's short front overhang and longer wheelbase the engine actually sits a little aft of the front axle, it still shows that the SLK55's V8 motor is only 166 lbs heavier than the SLK350's V6. To simplify calculations, if the SLK350 has a 50:50 weight distribution, even if the SLK55 were 166 heavier over the front axel (and we can logically assume this isn't actually the case but we'll say so anyway for arguments sake), that still gives the SLK55 a 52:48 front to rear weight distribution. Realistically, factoring in what I mentioned above, the SLK55 is actually 51:49 if the SLK350 were indeed 50:50. And if you compare a SLK350 with 7Gtronic versus an SLK55, I think the difference is basically a wash. I hardly call this minute difference in weight "adversely affecting the weight ratio". Sure 50:50 versus 60:40 or even 55:45 would make a significant difference.... but 50:50 versus 51:49?

Everyone seems to think that the SLK55 will be a front-heavy porker compared to the SLK350 but they all fail to notice that there is only about a 150 lb difference (maybe even less) between comparable models with similar transmissions.

Lastly, I highly doubt the performance numbers are that close between the two cars. 4.9 sec 0-62 mph sprints for the SLK55 is a very conservative manufacturer's estimate. Several magazines have already tested an '04 CLK55 which is almost 400 lbs heavier and has the "slower" 5-speed auto with less favorable ratios at 4.5 secs. The SLK55 with 400lb less baggage and a quicker-ratio 7G tronic can surely at least match that.

Don't get me wrong, I've driven the SLK350 and I agree it is a hellishly quick car... and if the SLK55 did not exist, I would be more than happy with the 350. But the truth is, the SLK55 is coming and it seems MB is being very low-key about its introduction and underestimating performance figures as they always do with their AMG cars. It's going to be a completely different animal.

Dema

No doubts that SLK55 will be faster and the same stable. So what? It isn't sport car anyway, if you want fast car then get c32 with 600hp engine making 0-62 in 3.8 sec.

SLKfan

Masmole, I'm not sure if I'm missing an obvious answer to what you wrote, but why would Mercedes underestimate the 0-60mph times on their AMG models -- and what do you suspect is most likely the true 0-60mph time of the SLK55 AMG?

-Sam

Mercedesfan

Masmole - astute calculations. I guess it all boils down to the definition of "diminishing returns."

AC556F

M-B likes to keep the performance figures of its cars in the same order as the MSRP of the various models. AMG vs AMG, the Mercedes buyer that spends $100K wants the specs (0-60, etc.) to be better than thats of the $78K car. Case in point: SL55 vs E55. Lots of talk of why the different HP ratings of the two. Hint: it's probably NOT the $5 intake runner difference. YMMV