redse2000

Which one should I get? I know that slk 350 is V6 with more horsepower but SLK 250 is a turbo 4 which could be easier to "fix up" than the natural aspirated V6 in SLK 350? Can anyone speculate on this?

ferrariyellow44

I have an Audi A4 2.0T, which I have heavily modded and I can tell you, its far cheaper and more satisfying to tune a turbo 4. The A4 3.2 V6 is very rarely modded because its harder and more expensive to mod. On the turbo 4, all you have to do is increase the boost and your already making 3.2 power! (Literally, stage 1) Im sure Merc tuners will do he exact same thing with the turbo 4 that APR does with Audis turbo 4s.

So, I can almost guarantee that people looking to mod a SLK or a C will probably choose the turbo.

Totally speculation based on my experience with Audi!


Hope this helps

pteam

I believe the new slk 250 is supposted to have 200 hp vs the 350's 300 (for round numbers) . I dont think your going to be able to tune 50% more horsepower out of the 200 to get to 300 very easily or reliably. You'd be much better getting the 350 and just throwing an intake and exahst on it if you wanted to. Pluse these engines are brand new due to direct injection and stuff and tuning and engine management probably wont be able to be tweaked right away. ALso if your in the US the 250 isnt even offered yet and would be an additional wait.

ncgo4

Have they posted expected mileage for the 250 yet? I haven't been able to find it.

ImInPA

True, but the turbo four could easily produce far more torque and at far lower rpm's, I have no doubts that 250 hp and 300 lb-ft torque would be easily achievable without changing hardware. Turbos rock in producing low end torque.

dbtk

The 250s are going to be popular here in the States. I have seen a lot of 250s (C-classes) here in San Francisco. I confident the SLK250 will be popular as well. There'll be a half dozen tuners with flash upgrades soon. Can't wait.

mac911

Honestly, in the US, I do not know why they are bringing the 250.

It would be one thing if it had a 2.0 Liter Turbo like BMW's new one.

However, this 1.8 is just a step backwards. Not enough power and torque.

It would still be an enjoyable car, but if you're spending $50,000 why not spend a tiny bit more and have a lot more fun?


The C250s are so popular because one dealer near me has 90 C250s and count them, 4 C350s. It's what MBUSA gives them.

MBRedux

From AutoBlog.com

Vodil

Sure if you want a lighter, cheaper, more fuel efficient car that you have to work at driving, then the 250 is a better choice. But, really we are talking about MB not Lotus. What you save is pretty miniscule given the starting weight, cost etc.

I had an R171 350 and now have a 172 350. I would not go for a smaller engine unles maybe it was a turbo diesel so I could be a bit greener.

BioRage

I went ahead and pulled the trigger on a 2013 SLK350 for April 1st.

Original order was a 13' SLK250... I figured that even with a 1.8T it would shift at higher rpm than the V6, plus the turbo would eat if not more, the same amount of gas. (Based on my foot )

Also I suppose I want to experience the 300hp on the SLK350, compared to my now (heavy) E350CW4M. Also that V6 is just mean, not as mean as the SLK55, but sounds a lot better when revved than my current :P

Heymon

Damn the man. I have to wait 3 months for my damn car. Turns out all the cars are made in GERMANY. I will not be doing this too soon

miguelmaybe

This is an old thread....now that we've had the opportunity to drive both the 250 and the 350....which one do YOU like better?

greasykid

Recently bought 2012 SLK350. Have driven 250. My thoughts: If you like to drive buy a 250. If you REALLY LIKE to DRIVE buy a 350. Great fun!

Willie T

Just got a 2014 250 for my wife. So far she is still smiling!!!!!
Happy Birthday!!!!