Will there by an SLK 63? C63 is coming, so why not?
Thread Starter
Super Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
'05 SL 55 Black/Black w/mods from Eurocharged/Kleemann/BuckheadImports
Will there by an SLK 63? C63 is coming, so why not?
Will there by an SLK 63? There's gonna be a C63 next year, and there's already a CLK 63 too, so why not an SLK 63?
The 475 HP version of the 6.3 V-8 in the CLK 63 cabriolet would be devastating in the SLK.
Logically, there's no reason to not put it in there, expecially since bmw will probably put the new V-8 from the upcoming M3 into their M3 hardtop convertible soon after the coupe is released.
The 475 HP version of the 6.3 V-8 in the CLK 63 cabriolet would be devastating in the SLK.
Logically, there's no reason to not put it in there, expecially since bmw will probably put the new V-8 from the upcoming M3 into their M3 hardtop convertible soon after the coupe is released.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 291
From: Dallas TX
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
There have been many debates and lots of rumors about whether or not there will be a SLK63. My guess is that there will be a SLK63 for the 2009 model year in the U.S. likely next spring. The old 5.5L V8 is being phased out slowly, but surely.
M
M
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 291
From: Dallas TX
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
Someone else was saying that someone from AMG told them that the 6.2L V8 has 2 fuel pumps or something like that and it wouldn't fit in the SLK. All will be revealed in Sept at the Frankurt auto show when the facelifted SLK is shown.
M
M
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 761
Likes: 0
From: Lausanne, Switzerland
SLK 55 AMG
Yes, it was said that the 63 needs two fuel pumps...
The engine itself is actually lighter and more compact then the 55.
But even the 55 can be boosted to 600hp on the standard pumps, so maybe if they made a 400-450hp version of the 63, a single pump would be enough?
Who knows... I'd love to see it, I'd love to drive it, but I'm not gonna hold my breath.
The engine itself is actually lighter and more compact then the 55.
But even the 55 can be boosted to 600hp on the standard pumps, so maybe if they made a 400-450hp version of the 63, a single pump would be enough?
Who knows... I'd love to see it, I'd love to drive it, but I'm not gonna hold my breath.
Trending Topics
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 761
Likes: 0
From: Lausanne, Switzerland
SLK 55 AMG
I think the SLK would benefit more from a diet, then it would from a more powerful engine.
Shave 200lb's and man, this thing would fly. I already feel a difference if I have a 140lb passenger and a full tank of gas versus just myself and a nearly empty tank of gas. The car is just so much more responsible.
But a larger engine does bring its own bragging rights
Shave 200lb's and man, this thing would fly. I already feel a difference if I have a 140lb passenger and a full tank of gas versus just myself and a nearly empty tank of gas. The car is just so much more responsible.
But a larger engine does bring its own bragging rights
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
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
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 291
From: Dallas TX
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
I think most cars could go on a diet, surely Mercedes-Benzes are right up there at the top of the list! Even with all their heft they're still faster than many so yeah loosing some weight would be an awesome change.
M
M
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 1
From: Chicago
04 C32
That has never been a problem before. If they are concerned, they'll just do what they've done in the past -- say that the car has less power than it really does.
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 761
Likes: 0
From: Lausanne, Switzerland
SLK 55 AMG
The SLK has some pretty thick steel in use on the body. Maybe using some aluminium like in the new TT would help. For example, compare the thickness of the body panels on the SLK to the Z4, and those on the Z4 are much more flexible and hollow sounding. The doors on the Z4 doesn't make a "thunk" sound when you close the doors, etc... etc...
Quite a few people have made this comment as few cars make that "Mercedes thump" when you close the doors and the like.
But then again, the Z4 is also several hundred pounds lighter. So do you want to forego a bit of solidity to having better speed, handling, braking...
Most would say yes, but it's an MB and so the badge dictates that solidity of feel and comfort must be considered important.
Quite a few people have made this comment as few cars make that "Mercedes thump" when you close the doors and the like.
But then again, the Z4 is also several hundred pounds lighter. So do you want to forego a bit of solidity to having better speed, handling, braking...
Most would say yes, but it's an MB and so the badge dictates that solidity of feel and comfort must be considered important.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,221
Likes: 11
From: Sydney, Australia
W203 slightly modified
Will there by an SLK 63? There's gonna be a C63 next year, and there's already a CLK 63 too, so why not an SLK 63?
The 475 HP version of the 6.3 V-8 in the CLK 63 cabriolet would be devastating in the SLK.
Logically, there's no reason to not put it in there, expecially since bmw will probably put the new V-8 from the upcoming M3 into their M3 hardtop convertible soon after the coupe is released.
The 475 HP version of the 6.3 V-8 in the CLK 63 cabriolet would be devastating in the SLK.
Logically, there's no reason to not put it in there, expecially since bmw will probably put the new V-8 from the upcoming M3 into their M3 hardtop convertible soon after the coupe is released.
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
From: Canada
Looking for a new toy.
I agree, a couple hundred pounds off the curb weight would make a BIG difference in this car - it's small in size, but there are times you can definitely feel it being a bit of a porker. The 5.4L engine is wonderfully tractable with torque everywhere across the rpm range. Easy power/performance without having to rev the bejeezus out of it to paste a grin across your face.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,761
Likes: 4
From: North Carolina
98 Black C43 , 12’ ML 350 Blutec
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 761
Likes: 0
From: Lausanne, Switzerland
SLK 55 AMG
That's a bit early in my opinion. It would mean the SLK run is only 5 years, and MB's runs are usually more then that. The SLK's still selling really well, so it might be a bit premature to think it would come out in 2 years time (even the facelift isn't out yet). I'm betting more on 2011 or 2012 for a brand new chassis.
I think the power and torque is quite plentiful, the SLK is a fast car and my idea of shedding weight is not to just make the car faster. The torque already ensures it can move the +1.5 tons of mass. What it would help to lower weight, is to make the car stop much sooner, lessen the understeer in tight/fast corners and overall improve slalom speeds. The SLK is quite well done, because even with its 200-500lb more weight versus the competition (Miata, S2000, Z4, etc...), it is only a few tenths of a second behind on some slalom or autox type try-outs. With that weight off its shoulder, it would become a completely different car!
I think the power and torque is quite plentiful, the SLK is a fast car and my idea of shedding weight is not to just make the car faster. The torque already ensures it can move the +1.5 tons of mass. What it would help to lower weight, is to make the car stop much sooner, lessen the understeer in tight/fast corners and overall improve slalom speeds. The SLK is quite well done, because even with its 200-500lb more weight versus the competition (Miata, S2000, Z4, etc...), it is only a few tenths of a second behind on some slalom or autox type try-outs. With that weight off its shoulder, it would become a completely different car!
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 291
From: Dallas TX
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
He means a facelift not a total re-design. 2009 is definitely going to be the year for the facelift since the 2008 model year is too close for anything to change now.
M
M
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,049
Likes: 1
From: Miami, FL
Lotus Elise SLK55
Who needs the SLK63 anyway? Just fit a kleemann kompressor on it and you'll have a lot more horsepower and torque than the 63, for less money. I'm doing mine pretty soon actually...
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 761
Likes: 0
From: Lausanne, Switzerland
SLK 55 AMG
You say it's cheaper to go Kleemann. Well, I disagree. The CLK 63 is only 10k swiss francs more expensive then the old 55. A Kleemann supercharger with installation (for 500hp) would cost about 30k swiss francs.
Secondly, you'd lose your warranty, and as with anything after market bolted on devices, you never know 100% if it's going to run flawlessly...
Thirdly, naturally aspirated, and in this case high revving engines, hold a special place in some peoples hearts. The 6.2 liter engine is quite rev happy, nice liner torque distribution and going past 7000rpm (the E class I drove went to 7400rpm before the revlimiter hit in) is quite fun. One reason why Ferrari's still not using turbos or superchargers in their modern cars. A supercharger will produce a nice effect, but is this what 'everyone' wants? Not to mention more moving parts and more complexity... The 6.2 liter engine is lighter (by over 50lb!) and simpler then a 5.5 liter with a supercharger.
Finally, having that 63 badge in place of a 55, well, some people find that badge very important.
Just a few opinions of mine, but cost may be different in your location, reliability may not be an issue, and the extra torque might be more valued by you as an individual
Super Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 770
Likes: 0
From: Silicon Valley, CA
'93 RX-7, SLK55
There are advantages and disadvantages in this reasoning.
You say it's cheaper to go Kleemann. Well, I disagree. The CLK 63 is only 10k swiss francs more expensive then the old 55. A Kleemann supercharger with installation (for 500hp) would cost about 30k swiss francs.
Secondly, you'd lose your warranty, and as with anything after market bolted on devices, you never know 100% if it's going to run flawlessly...
Thirdly, naturally aspirated, and in this case high revving engines, hold a special place in some peoples hearts. The 6.2 liter engine is quite rev happy, nice liner torque distribution and going past 7000rpm (the E class I drove went to 7400rpm before the revlimiter hit in) is quite fun. One reason why Ferrari's still not using turbos or superchargers in their modern cars. A supercharger will produce a nice effect, but is this what 'everyone' wants? Not to mention more moving parts and more complexity... The 6.2 liter engine is lighter (by over 50lb!) and simpler then a 5.5 liter with a supercharger.
Finally, having that 63 badge in place of a 55, well, some people find that badge very important.
Just a few opinions of mine, but cost may be different in your location, reliability may not be an issue, and the extra torque might be more valued by you as an individual
You say it's cheaper to go Kleemann. Well, I disagree. The CLK 63 is only 10k swiss francs more expensive then the old 55. A Kleemann supercharger with installation (for 500hp) would cost about 30k swiss francs.
Secondly, you'd lose your warranty, and as with anything after market bolted on devices, you never know 100% if it's going to run flawlessly...
Thirdly, naturally aspirated, and in this case high revving engines, hold a special place in some peoples hearts. The 6.2 liter engine is quite rev happy, nice liner torque distribution and going past 7000rpm (the E class I drove went to 7400rpm before the revlimiter hit in) is quite fun. One reason why Ferrari's still not using turbos or superchargers in their modern cars. A supercharger will produce a nice effect, but is this what 'everyone' wants? Not to mention more moving parts and more complexity... The 6.2 liter engine is lighter (by over 50lb!) and simpler then a 5.5 liter with a supercharger.
Finally, having that 63 badge in place of a 55, well, some people find that badge very important.
Just a few opinions of mine, but cost may be different in your location, reliability may not be an issue, and the extra torque might be more valued by you as an individual
). Kleemann warranties all parts & service for 1 year or 12,000 miles. And, the MB dealer I consort with will fix any non Kleemann item wrong with the car (the original warranty is not voided). This may depend on your Dealer, but I think most dealers still want your money from routine service intervals & most know Kleemann makes high quality products (unless you are a punk azz annoying kid that does burn outs in fron of the Dealership
).Reliability? The basic powerplant has been running for years in AMG cars (blown 5.5L) & I have not heard of any issues.
My car has had zero issues - runs like a champ. I speak with Cory & Brandon @ Kleemann on occasion & they have never verbalized (when asked) about blown engines/rel issues with the N/A 5.5L with the Kleemann blower. I dunno - seems to work just fine (or they would not sell the stuff - it's just not financially viable to stay in business when you are getting constant claims against your firm....ask John Lingenfelter).-Matt
Super Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 761
Likes: 0
From: Lausanne, Switzerland
SLK 55 AMG
30k swiss francs, more like $25k...
That's still quite a bit of cash. I remember asking people on the forums how much they paid for the blower in the US, and it was like $14k without the work. As it's a day or two worth of work to install, the total installation cost is almost $20k, no?
But anyway, the cost of the actual parts are much higher in Europe, sadly enough...
But if the cost of a CLK63 is just 10k (swiss francs, i.e. $8k) over the older 55, then would this be the same for the SLK, and if so, then wouldn't it be smarter to get an 'original' MB?
To each their own, of course...
And you're right, the 55 in the SLK is the same as the 55 in an SL, albeit the SL has an SC on it. No reliability issues on the SL, and most likely none on the SLK with Kleemann's kit.
As far as warranty, well... I guess it depends on the dealer. Some can be shady and will speak you down if they even think that you've modded your car. My dealer is an official Brabus reseller, so they do warranty Brabus stuff, but not Kleemann I would think. I haven't bothered asking, and besides, I'd need to pay another $12k to legalize my engine conversion for Swiss roads (long story).
Oh well...
That's still quite a bit of cash. I remember asking people on the forums how much they paid for the blower in the US, and it was like $14k without the work. As it's a day or two worth of work to install, the total installation cost is almost $20k, no?
But anyway, the cost of the actual parts are much higher in Europe, sadly enough...
But if the cost of a CLK63 is just 10k (swiss francs, i.e. $8k) over the older 55, then would this be the same for the SLK, and if so, then wouldn't it be smarter to get an 'original' MB?
To each their own, of course...
And you're right, the 55 in the SLK is the same as the 55 in an SL, albeit the SL has an SC on it. No reliability issues on the SL, and most likely none on the SLK with Kleemann's kit.
As far as warranty, well... I guess it depends on the dealer. Some can be shady and will speak you down if they even think that you've modded your car. My dealer is an official Brabus reseller, so they do warranty Brabus stuff, but not Kleemann I would think. I haven't bothered asking, and besides, I'd need to pay another $12k to legalize my engine conversion for Swiss roads (long story).
Oh well...
Last edited by Shinigami; May 22, 2007 at 03:48 AM.
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 348
Likes: 1
30k swiss francs, more like $25k...
That's still quite a bit of cash. I remember asking people on the forums how much they paid for the blower in the US, and it was like $14k without the work. As it's a day or two worth of work to install, the total installation cost is almost $20k, no?
That's still quite a bit of cash. I remember asking people on the forums how much they paid for the blower in the US, and it was like $14k without the work. As it's a day or two worth of work to install, the total installation cost is almost $20k, no?
Last edited by Tuskir; May 22, 2007 at 07:25 PM.
