RE: New Mercedes SL63 AMG - official details

[TaylotS2K]

The more I look at this new SL, it's growing on me, much the same as the SLS has. I love the looks of the SLS now.

[Johnboy Mac]

564bhp/664ft lb, it can only just be awesome on the autobahns. But I suspect a plain Jane 500 or 350 for that matter is all you'd really need.

[LuS1fer]

Looks like Lanzarote.

The car is what I would expect of Mercedes - nothing more, nothing less, nothing to offend or particularly desire - just generic Mercedes.

Probably fantastic to drive though.

[Richiefly]

Please stop comparing 0.60 times and BHP and different variants and who'd win in a drag race, blah and blah. Yawn. We don't care.

These merc roadsters never see a day of anger IMO. The only people that 'suit' these cars are older gents or kept women (that earlier comment made me giggle, second woman transportation device!)

The only mercs I've ever warmed to are the ridiculous, the SLS and the SLR, the SLS wins on styling however.

First glance of all the roadster variants from Mercedes look like they're all from the same mould and all rather dull to look at which is a shame. They're just not beautiful enough and there's no reason why they can't be.

They're almost asexual if you follow(?) My Boxster is a lady, an S200 is probably a bloke. The SLR is a hooligan skin headed bloke. I don't know what sex these Merc roadsters are though.

[Itsallicanafford]

Affalterbach said:

I agree amd I am a 60+ with an SL55. But it is a bit of a hairdressers car with the top down.

...Sorry about that, i feel really bad now saying that about a SL...if it makes you feel any better, and with reference to your hairdressers car bit, these are the thoughts of a man who drives a white Mk1 MX-5!

[Johnboy Mac]

Itsallicanafford said:

with reference to your hairdressers car bit, these are the thoughts of a man who drives a white Mk1 MX-5!

[Stu R]

I quite like it.

[Nick Beef]

Can't wait to see this at the Geneva show now.. There has never been an ugly Sl to my knowledge it seems Mercedes always deliver with this particular model.

[tombstone]

yes. I'll have one please. Desigino colour/options... AMG pack, dark red/Black Kirsch type colour, graphite wheels..... but is it faster round the 'ring than a remapped 335d?

[fastgerman]

Can't see the SL55 AMG's (R230) models dropping much more in value i.e. 18-22k. They are so much better looking than the new models and the 2 before it. Modern classic?

[rajkohli81]

2012 - 537 bhp, 60 in 4.6 in standard form and 28 combined 'manufacturer's figures...and she aint pretty.

Now rewind back ten years...

2002 - 517 bhp, 60 in 4.6 in standard form and I was averaging 18 mpg in town and 23 mpg on a run 'real world - 21 year old driving'..it did and still does look good. Oh and that supercharger whine and machine-gun exhaust note was addictive

It was timed by Autocar (und Sport) at Nardo to hit 202 mph, quicker to 170 mph than Lambo Moochy/550M/GT2/Vanquish.

Agreed, official figures were 476 bhp, but every one to hit a rolling road made 500+ and they raised the official figure to 517 bhp in 2005. It was well regarded a torquier and better drive than the later SL63 and much more usable and characterful than the non-supercharged SL65.

From what I can see, other than airscarf and a variotint roof, this model offers nothing exceptional new to the already stupendous package...of 2002.

[Greg_D]

George H said:

Moog72 said:

Why retain the SL63 moniker though when the engine that gave it the name has gone?

It was a 6.2 last time. I was under the impression it was called 63 in some sort of homage to the Mercedes M100 6.3 engine

nope it was, as always, a marketing led exercise. 63 is bigger and therefore better than 55. It really was that facile. it can't be allowed to appear retrograde in any way, even down to the badge.

[dele]

I'm guessing this is going to cost similar to the new BMW M6 Convertible?

Would much rather have the BMW

[Dagnut]

Carfolio said:

Why didn't you make that clear? I'm not a fking mind-reader. I could only respond to what you'd typed, not what you were thinking.

Because I was quoting him, it was directed at him, he has a V8 R8.

[Steve Gunnis]

Dagnut said:

Thanks for the Info on a limited edition V10 R8... I was comparing it too his car...anyone who thinks this will be slow has never be in an AMG sl..this is a fast car once up and moving...how often do you launch from the lights?

0-60 is a meaningless figure for a GT..50-100mph is where these things excel and more a measure of real world GT car performance.....even the R230 model SL 55 is a very fast car once up and moving when the weight is less of an issue

Edited by Dagnut on Wednesday 22 February 11:54

I don't want to sound troll like here, and in principle I agree with your sentiments, AMG Mercedes are all quick, but the weight is an issue to acceleration whatever speed you're doing, you might be thinking of top speed where weight is almost irrelevant. Your power to weight ratio which directly affects acceleration is the same off the line as at 200mph. If anything, a heavier car with the same power to weight as a lighter one will be quicker off the line as it should have better traction over the driven wheels.

[rajkohli81]

dele said:

I'm guessing this is going to cost similar to the new BMW M6 Convertible?

Would much rather have the BMW

Sorry to go off topic, but..

I think BMW are having us on a bit with the 6 series pricing though... for example 6 series GranCoupe is based upon a 5 series mechanicals just like every other 6, so why are they charging £70k for a 640d when you buy a CLS350 CDI Sport for less than £50k... same sector 'swoopy saloon'... it may have the edge on the E-Class based CLS for power, but it's not a £20k edge..

Think they are trying to market it at Panamera customers... a bit ambitious for a Beemer

The last 6 suffered pitiful depreciation depite being a good drive, think this one will suffer the same fate... and that includes the Cab.

Edited by rajkohli81 on Wednesday 22 February 13:53

Edited by rajkohli81 on Wednesday 22 February 13:54

[Steve Gunnis]

Greg_D said:

nope it was, as always, a marketing led exercise. 63 is bigger and therefore better than 55. It really was that facile. it can't be allowed to appear retrograde in any way, even down to the badge.

That's a very interesting point (if you're a car bore). I wonder how BMW would have dealt with their displacement downgrade with the new M5 if their top model wasn't (cleverly?) disguised by a simple M5 badge. The new 328 is still called that despite it's 2 litre displacement (although the last straight six had 3 litres - so was selling itself short a bit). How would potential customers have felt going from their E60 M550 to an F10 M544?

Edited by Steve Gunnis on Wednesday 22 February 14:06

[jackal]

Coast road to El Golfo alert !

[katulu]

Oddball RS said:

Erm, sorry to break it to you, but its like the CO arms race - its all lies.....

And why do Mercedes need this and the SLS?

the SLS is the full galwing doored supercar,

this is the one for the executive wanting some top-down fun, on his way to the golf course... they actually have two different markets

[reyne111]

Is it just me or is everyone else fed up of these Rep- mobiles that are meant to be performance vehicles. All that ends up sitting in them is a banker or someone who can't actually afford it. Mercedes stick to your S Classes and E classes, When you decide to bring out an AMG keep it to the AMG black specs.

Also you need to fire the designer who designed those rear lights, last thing what is it with these stupid droopy headlights this is a £100,000.00 plus Mercedes and all I can compare it to is the new 1 series???