SLK55 is horrible......
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,276
Likes: 0
From: mymbonline
mymbonline
SLK55 is horrible......
according to the current issue of autocar (rs4 v. cayman s v. m3 comp. v. slk55).... go get it, nice read 
btw,
rs4 beats a slk55 to 100 by .1 sec, 10.5 vs. 10.6
btw,
rs4 beats a slk55 to 100 by .1 sec, 10.5 vs. 10.6
Super Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
From: UK
987S
Originally Posted by AMG_55
according to the current issue of autocar (rs4 v. cayman s v. m3 comp. v. slk55).... go get it, nice read
btw,
rs4 beats a slk55 to 100 by .1 sec, 10.5 vs. 10.6
btw,
rs4 beats a slk55 to 100 by .1 sec, 10.5 vs. 10.6
Last edited by SLK55AMG; Feb 28, 2006 at 09:10 AM.
Newbie
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
I read this article. They really hated the SLK. Didn't like the interior or the ride, complained about the fuel consumption and the awful handling. Then again EVO magazine (and most other magazines) loved it and even had it in their shortlist for car of the year.
Someone I know has just got one, and he has previously owned a BMW M3 CSL and a 911 GT3 and he thinks the SLK55 is fantastic, and is great fun. Forget the magazines, real world people like us know the real truth about the car.
Someone I know has just got one, and he has previously owned a BMW M3 CSL and a 911 GT3 and he thinks the SLK55 is fantastic, and is great fun. Forget the magazines, real world people like us know the real truth about the car.
Super Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
From: UK
987S
EVO reviewed the SLK55 twice...... most recently they quite liked it during their car of the year test but their original review did mention their dislike of the 7G auto and nannying ESP system.
But as anissut says you shouldn't always take magazine reviews as gospel....... test drive, test drive, test drive...... if you like it buy it!
But as anissut says you shouldn't always take magazine reviews as gospel....... test drive, test drive, test drive...... if you like it buy it!
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
2006 SLK55 AMG/// 2006 Porsche CaymanS 2010 135i
Originally Posted by AMG_55
according to the current issue of autocar (rs4 v. cayman s v. m3 comp. v. slk55).... go get it, nice read
btw,
rs4 beats a slk55 to 100 by .1 sec, 10.5 vs. 10.6
btw,
rs4 beats a slk55 to 100 by .1 sec, 10.5 vs. 10.6
rs4 v. cayman s v. m3 comp. v. slk55???
How is that a comparo??
Anyway I look forward to the read, thanks!
Super Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
From: UK
987S
Originally Posted by Marktini
rs4 v. cayman s v. m3 comp. v. slk55???
How is that a comparo??
Anyway I look forward to the read, thanks!
How is that a comparo??
Anyway I look forward to the read, thanks!
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 367
Likes: 0
From: Chicago
2006 SLK55 AMG/// 2006 Porsche CaymanS 2010 135i
Originally Posted by SLK55AMG
They were looking for performance cars sub £50k...... I haven't read it yet but hear from others that the M3 CS was the fastest round the track, the RS4 was the best on the road point to point and the Cayman was hailed as the best handling car they'd ever driven.
I'll agree on the CaymanS handling, I seriously considered one before I bought the SLK55. The CaymanS drives like it's on rails, once the tuners get some more HP out of it that car will be quite the ride.
Trending Topics
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
6 Mercedes Models That Did NOT Age Well (But Are Somehow Still Cool)
Verdad Gallardo
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
Newbie
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
I actually find it shocking that they criticised the SLK55 for its poor ride and its poor interior. I have owned both an M3 and a M3 CSL in the last 18 months and the ride on both was worse. Also the E46 M3 is now 6-7 years old. As much as I loved the car the interior is now very dated whereas the SLK is fresh and leagues ahead in terms of the dash, DVD sat nav, airscarf, Harmon Kardon. They did say that the car was very quick though. They went on and on about the lack of feel in the steering, but the way I look at it, who gets to drive a Cayman the way magazines drive it on a day to day basis.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
From: sac, calif.
'06 slk55
Well, I would have like the SLK55 to fair out better in the comparison. However, it's apples to oranges.
Let's see... the more expensive, 4-door RS4 gave a more comfortable ride and was faster for $10-20k more.
The M3 and Cayman at comparable prices were probably slower but handled better than a hardtop convertible.
None of this is suprising. Although the comparo would still be bad, it would have made more sense with a Boxster S, M3 convert, and no Audi.
Some comparisons are interesting reads, but they should focus on what a BUYER would compare. I, for one, wished only for a convertible. The RS4 and SLK55?! Really? Give a couple years and compare the RS4 to the new C AMG and the new M3. That will make for a better comparison.
Finally, the SLK is a head-turner. I like that fact. How often do people double-take a M3? How about the Cayman? Even less likely with the RS4. If you want the sleeper look, fine. I sure didn't. I wanted a car that looks fast too.
Let's see... the more expensive, 4-door RS4 gave a more comfortable ride and was faster for $10-20k more.
The M3 and Cayman at comparable prices were probably slower but handled better than a hardtop convertible.
None of this is suprising. Although the comparo would still be bad, it would have made more sense with a Boxster S, M3 convert, and no Audi.
Some comparisons are interesting reads, but they should focus on what a BUYER would compare. I, for one, wished only for a convertible. The RS4 and SLK55?! Really? Give a couple years and compare the RS4 to the new C AMG and the new M3. That will make for a better comparison.
Finally, the SLK is a head-turner. I like that fact. How often do people double-take a M3? How about the Cayman? Even less likely with the RS4. If you want the sleeper look, fine. I sure didn't. I wanted a car that looks fast too.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,111
Likes: 1
R170
Originally Posted by anissut
Just to add, they tested the 030 Perfromance Pack SLK55. Maybe that's why they criticised the ride as I hear it's supposed to be worse than the std SLK55.
Newbie
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
From: Manchester, UK
SLK55 AMG
030 is harder
After having heaped praise on the SLK55 last year, Autocar have criticised the hard ride of the 030 package in their last two articles.
Could it be a possibility that the 030 pack (which was fitted to the SLK/Cayman/M3/RS4 test car) might not handle as well as the standard car?
Never seen a back to back test of the two setups.
Maybe the standard car handles and grips better.
Could it be a possibility that the 030 pack (which was fitted to the SLK/Cayman/M3/RS4 test car) might not handle as well as the standard car?
Never seen a back to back test of the two setups.
Maybe the standard car handles and grips better.
Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
From: Boston
SL 6.1 Brabus, E55, SLK55
Originally Posted by Peter Cee
After having heaped praise on the SLK55 last year, Autocar have criticised the hard ride of the 030 package in their last two articles.
Could it be a possibility that the 030 pack (which was fitted to the SLK/Cayman/M3/RS4 test car) might not handle as well as the standard car?
Never seen a back to back test of the two setups.
Maybe the standard car handles and grips better.
Could it be a possibility that the 030 pack (which was fitted to the SLK/Cayman/M3/RS4 test car) might not handle as well as the standard car?
Never seen a back to back test of the two setups.
Maybe the standard car handles and grips better.
I personally think that each author has his own preferences. Usually, I don't expect praising compliment when they compare our cars with M, RS or boxsters. Most of them always criticize AMG for having heavy front, poor handling and less driving feel. I for one don't really care. Because how often do I go to track??
I love slk55 as a whole...It's pretty complete compare to anything else available in the market.
Again, I'm not talking about tracking it.
Super Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
From: UK
987S
Is the RS4 really $10k-$20k more expensive in the US than the SLK55?
You have to remember that the article is writen for the UK market where the SLK55 is actually the same base price as the RS4 as they are both £50k (~$89k).
Funnily a guy over on the UK S2000 forum is considering these exact 4 cars so its not such a strange selection...... I would also consider every one given that price bracket but would probably end up with a drop top as I love the open air driving experience too much!
P.S. Whats the point of the 030 Sport package if it doesn't improve handling? I'd be VERY surprised if an 030 equiped 55 wasn't faster on a track than the standard car and I suspect it would be better on most roads as well.
You have to remember that the article is writen for the UK market where the SLK55 is actually the same base price as the RS4 as they are both £50k (~$89k).
Funnily a guy over on the UK S2000 forum is considering these exact 4 cars so its not such a strange selection...... I would also consider every one given that price bracket but would probably end up with a drop top as I love the open air driving experience too much!
P.S. Whats the point of the 030 Sport package if it doesn't improve handling? I'd be VERY surprised if an 030 equiped 55 wasn't faster on a track than the standard car and I suspect it would be better on most roads as well.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
From: sac, calif.
'06 slk55
I haven't read the article but I think...
-the 030 is good to have at the track, but the Cayman & M3 performed better
-the 030 is not so good on bumpy roads and this is where the RS4 performed better.
-the 030 is good to have at the track, but the Cayman & M3 performed better
-the 030 is not so good on bumpy roads and this is where the RS4 performed better.
Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
From: FT Worth at the moment
SLK 55 AMG
Been racing on the track a little lately myself. Vs M3's and a couple of Cayman's.. wiped the floor with them in the 55.. Then my friend probably wipes the floor with me in his BMW 318i.. Guys it's really not the car after a certain point.. Thats why I didnt get the cayman.. the 55 is by far the best all rounded.. if you want to cruise, pose, race and be comfy you really cannot beat it.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,990
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area
'10 Porsche Turbo PDK, 500e, GL450
tracking
While I don't think the SLK55 is the optimal car for tracking ... its interesting to note that on the Tsukabe (however its spelled) the SLK55 was doing the same lap times as a M3 CSL and was killing a boxter S.
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by gerritg
F U C K Autocar Magazine
