SLK55 vs SL600
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,875
Likes: 4
From: Tallahassee, Florida
2006 SL600, 2001 S500, 1996 SL320
SLK55 vs SL600
Curious what you SLK55 owners think, SLK55 versus SL600 with Renntech ECU/TCU Upgrade.
Who would you pick?
Off the line
1/4 Mile run
0 to 60
Who would you pick?
Off the line
1/4 Mile run
0 to 60
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,049
Likes: 1
From: Miami, FL
Lotus Elise SLK55
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,875
Likes: 4
From: Tallahassee, Florida
2006 SL600, 2001 S500, 1996 SL320
I was beginning to wonder
I was beginning to wonder, not one but two different SLK55's, in the past few weeks wanted to street race me, I would have been up for it, but in the area we were in, way too much traffic. One of them sounded really loud, must have done something to the car. Both of the cars looked really nice, personally never drove one, but I am sure you guys are enjoying yours.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,164
Likes: 0
From: sac, calif.
'06 slk55
You guys are both in Florida... why don't you find out which is faster? lol.
Stock form, the SLK would get murdered against the Renntech SL. Kleeman or Renntech SLK would probably still lose but much of the loss is probably due to poor traction. Can't fit anything wider than 265 at the rear.
Stock form, the SLK would get murdered against the Renntech SL. Kleeman or Renntech SLK would probably still lose but much of the loss is probably due to poor traction. Can't fit anything wider than 265 at the rear.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,116
Likes: 4
From: NY/NJ
2012 W212 E350 Bluetec
I was beginning to wonder, not one but two different SLK55's, in the past few weeks wanted to street race me, I would have been up for it, but in the area we were in, way too much traffic. One of them sounded really loud, must have done something to the car. Both of the cars looked really nice, personally never drove one, but I am sure you guys are enjoying yours.
Even without the Renntech ECU/TCU Upgrade, stock for stock it's an NA v8 vs a BiTurbo V12..............take a guess
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,990
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area
'10 Porsche Turbo PDK, 500e, GL450
sl
even an SLK modded heavily with a supercharger would most likely lose to a SL600 that was modified.
Have I beat a SL65 modified before? Yes but I think that car had an intercooler pump failure!
These are completely different cars.
Have I beat a SL65 modified before? Yes but I think that car had an intercooler pump failure!
These are completely different cars.
Trending Topics
Super Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 770
Likes: 0
From: Silicon Valley, CA
'93 RX-7, SLK55
An SLK would need ~ 460 Hp (372 rwhp) to run even with a 600 Hp SL600 (actualy, the SLK would likely pull the SL just a hair due to it's 7 Spd tranny advantage). A stock SLK has ~ 300 rwhp so it would get pulled.
-Matt
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
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,990
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area
'10 Porsche Turbo PDK, 500e, GL450
yup
I understand but until I see an SLK start trapping over 120 in the 1/4 I"m gonna vote for the v12s. BTW the thread is about a modified SL600.
Also the supercharged SLKs get all their torque immediately. They are much harder to launch than the v12s. The V12's have progressive boost I believe.
With slip my best is in the 118mph. The best I've seen for a Kleemann K8 is 119mph.
You've had your car long enough ... take it to the track!
Also the supercharged SLKs get all their torque immediately. They are much harder to launch than the v12s. The V12's have progressive boost I believe.
With slip my best is in the 118mph. The best I've seen for a Kleemann K8 is 119mph.
You've had your car long enough ... take it to the track!
Super Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 770
Likes: 0
From: Silicon Valley, CA
'93 RX-7, SLK55
I understand but until I see an SLK start trapping over 120 in the 1/4 I"m gonna vote for the v12s. BTW the thread is about a modified SL600.
Also the supercharged SLKs get all their torque immediately. They are much harder to launch than the v12s. The V12's have progressive boost I believe.
With slip my best is in the 118mph. The best I've seen for a Kleemann K8 is 119mph.
You've had your car long enough ... take it to the track!
Also the supercharged SLKs get all their torque immediately. They are much harder to launch than the v12s. The V12's have progressive boost I believe.
With slip my best is in the 118mph. The best I've seen for a Kleemann K8 is 119mph.
You've had your car long enough ... take it to the track!
All cars with huge power need traction - it holds for the SLs as well. The SLK can wear DRs to mitigate wheelspin. YOU need a limited slip!
You will never run a faster ET or trap with ONE wheel trying to hook up. As for our SLK - I already know how fast it is. I ran it against my RX-7. The SLK got pulled a bit (from what i can tell, the SLK seems to be a mid 11 sec car or a hair faster than a C6 ZO6 based on prior ZO6 encounters with my RX-7). Besides, I'm not into driving to Sacto to beat on my wife's primary car - just not my cup of tea when I know how quick/fast it is. Seca is much more engaging.
-Matt
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,990
Likes: 0
From: Bay Area
'10 Porsche Turbo PDK, 500e, GL450
My figures are correct - the modded SL600 was quoted at 600Hp (a stock SL600 puts out 517 Hp). As you know, power to weight ratios are just real world physics - an SLK55 weighing in at 3400 lbs would need ~ 370 rwhp to run even.
All cars with huge power need traction - it holds for the SLs as well. The SLK can wear DRs to mitigate wheelspin. YOU need a limited slip! You will never run a faster ET or trap with ONE wheel trying to hook up.
-Matt
All cars with huge power need traction - it holds for the SLs as well. The SLK can wear DRs to mitigate wheelspin. YOU need a limited slip!
You will never run a faster ET or trap with ONE wheel trying to hook up. -Matt
I'm sure one trip to sac won't bother her!
Not to mention you barely drive it. 
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,049
Likes: 1
From: Miami, FL
Lotus Elise SLK55
I understand but until I see an SLK start trapping over 120 in the 1/4 I"m gonna vote for the v12s. BTW the thread is about a modified SL600.
Also the supercharged SLKs get all their torque immediately. They are much harder to launch than the v12s. The V12's have progressive boost I believe.
With slip my best is in the 118mph. The best I've seen for a Kleemann K8 is 119mph.
You've had your car long enough ... take it to the track!
Also the supercharged SLKs get all their torque immediately. They are much harder to launch than the v12s. The V12's have progressive boost I believe.
With slip my best is in the 118mph. The best I've seen for a Kleemann K8 is 119mph.
You've had your car long enough ... take it to the track!
Jesse, it would all depend on power to weight. Our Kleemann put down 16 less rwhp than a stock SL65 but SLs are extremely heavy. 490 rwhp is ~ 604 Hp with a 19% drivetrain loss (so the SLK, in this instance, would destroy the modded SL600 due to its extra ~ 1,045 lbs of heft).
An SLK would need ~ 460 Hp (372 rwhp) to run even with a 600 Hp SL600 (actualy, the SLK would likely pull the SL just a hair due to it's 7 Spd tranny advantage). A stock SLK has ~ 300 rwhp so it would get pulled.
-Matt
An SLK would need ~ 460 Hp (372 rwhp) to run even with a 600 Hp SL600 (actualy, the SLK would likely pull the SL just a hair due to it's 7 Spd tranny advantage). A stock SLK has ~ 300 rwhp so it would get pulled.
-Matt
http://www.kleemann.dk/site/Main/thecars/slkr171
There has to be something wrong with that 490whp dyno. No other supercharged SLK55 has gotten that and even kleemann doesn't claim that much hp. That's close to 600bhp!
Super Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 770
Likes: 0
From: Silicon Valley, CA
'93 RX-7, SLK55
A limited slip is absolutely a help - this is why drag cars have both tires LOCKED for maximum adhesion. More surface area providing resistance/friction to the asphalt is an absolute must. I've owned, wrenched, & driven high Hp cars since I was 17 & if you are lacking a limited slip - you are severely handicapped from a dig against someone who has both wheels grabbing the pavement.
Super Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 770
Likes: 0
From: Silicon Valley, CA
'93 RX-7, SLK55
Supercharged SLK55's have around 500bhp, or 540bhp at most with all other mods available. SLK55R's car put down 410whp (if I remember correctly) and my car put down 425whp. There was another member who's kleemann SLK55 dyno'd at 540bhp in Europe. Kleemann themselves only quote 500bhp with kompressor and 540bhp with all their mods:
http://www.kleemann.dk/site/Main/thecars/slkr171
There has to be something wrong with that 490whp dyno. No other supercharged SLK55 has gotten that and even kleemann doesn't claim that much hp. That's close to 600bhp!
http://www.kleemann.dk/site/Main/thecars/slkr171
There has to be something wrong with that 490whp dyno. No other supercharged SLK55 has gotten that and even kleemann doesn't claim that much hp. That's close to 600bhp!
There is nothing wrong with the dyno - you have no idea what has been done to my car.
I watched a stock SL65 out down 505 rwhp right before mine went on (after ~ 2 months of dyno tuning). His jaw hit the floor when he heard & saw my repeated pulls. I'm not your average bear, my cars put down pretty high Hp numbers because I know what I am doing. My RX-7 is putting down more power than anyone in the country on stock twins (tuning is HUGE, as is proper fuel & boost when running forced induction).
Super Member
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 770
Likes: 0
From: Silicon Valley, CA
'93 RX-7, SLK55
Addicted, BTW, I hope you don't think I was being an azz - I was attempting to clarify our SLK has significant dyno tuning & other mods so you have an idea not all blown 55s develop the same power. See ya.
Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 194
Likes: 2
From: Redondo Beach, CA
2006 SLK 55 amg, 2002 CLK 430 Cab (hers), 1989 944 Turbo (sold), CLK 500 (sold), 125cc shifter kart
Depends what you want. Straight acceleration is only part of the fun; kind of like only doing it "missionary style" for the rest of your life. I really enjoy the smallness of the SLK which allows for quick acceleration, but also allows quick direction changes and much shorter braking distances. Similar to why a 170hp Mini Cooper is sooo much fun to drive. The SL is a great grand tourer and more HP makes it even grander, but every now and then I like to do it doggy...
