RE: Mercedes SLK: Guilty Pleasures

[Gompo]

Is the manual gearbox as bad as some suggest?

[B'stard Child]

Gompo said:

Is the manual gearbox as bad as some suggest?

Not in my opinion (R170 SLK230 6 speed man)

[Ari]

Gompo said:

Is the manual gearbox as bad as some suggest?

No, people seem to like to spout this but it is nonsense.

I had a manual 200K straight after two MX5s (renouned for their excellent gear changes) and it was every bit as good - short of throw, precise, light.

[kambites]

The R171's manual gearbox is fine. Sure it's not as good as the S2000's box but it's on a par with, for example, the Z4.

The R170's was pretty dire.

[B'stard Child]

Ari said:

Gompo said:

Is the manual gearbox as bad as some suggest?

No, people seem to like to spout this but it is nonsense.

I had a manual 200K straight after two MX5s (renouned for their excellent gear changes) and it was every bit as good - short of throw, precise, light.

kambites said:

The R171's manual gearbox is fine. Sure it's not as good as the S2000's box but it's on a par with, for example, the Z4.

The R170's was pretty dire.

On the basis of that statement Ari and I have either had very good ones or you drove a bad one because Ari's description is pretty much same as mine in terms of gearbox feel and throw

Admittedly I do have to compare it to Getrag 265's and Corvette ZR1 boxes that are fitted to my other cars but although they are long throw and rather agricultural in operation even they aren't what I'd call a bad box

[kambites]

I've only driven one manual R170 so perhaps it was badly adjusted? It felt oddly rubbery and disconnected for a front engined RWD car.

[suffolk009]

My wife's R170 gearbox is amongst the worst I've ever used in a modern-ish car. Completely unsuited to spirited driving.

I'm slightly spoiled with a choice of Mazda Eunos gearbox, or Ford Type 9.

Even my midget with no-sync on 1st or 2nd is more fun to use.

[Cooper Green]

We bought a 2008 model SLK 200 with a meagre 8000 miles covered in January 2014.
My wife had run consecutive Mini Cooper S soft tops for 6 years and found the build quality and solid roof far superior. I was prepared for performance and an auto box to be a little underwhelming but have been quite surprised. Yes you find yourself shouting at the auto shift to change up during spirited driving but the handling seems balanced at all times and using tiptronic gear selection largely solves this.

My main and most serious concern regards the headlights !!! Has any other owner of the R171 found that driving at night is a game of chance unless you can get main beam on ? The headlight lenses look as though they should be able to illuminate the entire east coast for shipping, but in reality are the worst headlights I have ever experienced this side of a TVR Griffith.

[DJRC]

Just you I think Coop. Certainly neither of mine have been anything like as bad as the Griff. Yes agreed, short of a David Gerald job they were lethal!

[DickyC]

suffolk009 said:

My wife's R170 gearbox is amongst the worst I've ever used in a modern-ish car. Completely unsuited to spirited driving.

I'm slightly spoiled with a choice of Mazda Eunos gearbox, or Ford Type 9.

Even my midget with no-sync on 1st or 2nd is more fun to use.

Your Midget should have syncro on 2nd. Even the Frogeye had that.

[suffolk009]

DickyC said:

Your Midget should have syncro on 2nd. Even the Frogeye had that.

st. Something else to fix.

[SidewaysSi]

I like the Merc and in many ways do think it is the better, more focused car when compared to a Boxster.

My dad had been running a 1997 car for over 10 years and like others have said, it is brilliant. For what it is. And that is a supremely well made cruiser. It looks great, is well made and IMO is far more stylish than the Porsche. And you won't be faced with any big bills...

I have always found the Boxster a bit too much of a compromise. Very good at everything but brilliant at nothing.

My S1 Elise and Caterham are at opposite ends of the spectrum compared to the Merc but I can see the case for the SLK. And both would easily out-drive any Boxster

[scherzkeks]

SidewaysSi said:

I have always found the Boxster a bit too much of a compromise. Very good at everything but brilliant at nothing.

)

I would agree. And it's by design.

[Ari]

B'stard Child said:

Ari said:

Gompo said:

Is the manual gearbox as bad as some suggest?

No, people seem to like to spout this but it is nonsense.

I had a manual 200K straight after two MX5s (renouned for their excellent gear changes) and it was every bit as good - short of throw, precise, light.

kambites said:

The R171's manual gearbox is fine. Sure it's not as good as the S2000's box but it's on a par with, for example, the Z4.

The R170's was pretty dire.

On the basis of that statement Ari and I have either had very good ones or you drove a bad one because Ari's description is pretty much same as mine in terms of gearbox feel and throw

Admittedly I do have to compare it to Getrag 265's and Corvette ZR1 boxes that are fitted to my other cars but although they are long throw and rather agricultural in operation even they aren't what I'd call a bad box

To be fair, we're both talking about the 171, he's talking about the earlier 170. It's quite a different car and has a different engine so I'd guess the gearbox is likely different too.

[B'stard Child]

Ari said:

B'stard Child said:

Ari said:

Gompo said:

Is the manual gearbox as bad as some suggest?

No, people seem to like to spout this but it is nonsense.

I had a manual 200K straight after two MX5s (renouned for their excellent gear changes) and it was every bit as good - short of throw, precise, light.

kambites said:

The R171's manual gearbox is fine. Sure it's not as good as the S2000's box but it's on a par with, for example, the Z4.

The R170's was pretty dire.

On the basis of that statement Ari and I have either had very good ones or you drove a bad one because Ari's description is pretty much same as mine in terms of gearbox feel and throw

Admittedly I do have to compare it to Getrag 265's and Corvette ZR1 boxes that are fitted to my other cars but although they are long throw and rather agricultural in operation even they aren't what I'd call a bad box

To be fair, we're both talking about the 171, he's talking about the earlier 170. It's quite a different car and has a different engine so I'd guess the gearbox is likely different too.

Apologies - thought you'd owned a 170 too

I own a 170 and my comments on the "manual" gearbox I'll stand by - it's a damn nice little 6 speed box and I really don't understand the negativity towards it as I drove a few on test drives before buying the one I own

[ZesPak]

B'stard Child said:

Apologies - thought you'd owned a 170 too

I own a 170 and my comments on the "manual" gearbox I'll stand by - it's a damn nice little 6 speed box and I really don't understand the negativity towards it as I drove a few on test drives before buying the one I own

+1
Certainly no worse than the same-era Z4's and Z3's I drove.

[buzzsaw]

Cooper Green said:

We bought a 2008 model SLK 200 with a meagre 8000 miles covered in January 2014.
My wife had run consecutive Mini Cooper S soft tops for 6 years and found the build quality and solid roof far superior. I was prepared for performance and an auto box to be a little underwhelming but have been quite surprised. Yes you find yourself shouting at the auto shift to change up during spirited driving but the handling seems balanced at all times and using tiptronic gear selection largely solves this.

My main and most serious concern regards the headlights !!! Has any other owner of the R171 found that driving at night is a game of chance unless you can get main beam on ? The headlight lenses look as though they should be able to illuminate the entire east coast for shipping, but in reality are the worst headlights I have ever experienced this side of a TVR Griffith.

Where as mine are the brightest I've ever had on a car. Do you have bi xenons?

[nomank]

buzzsaw said:

Cooper Green said:

We bought a 2008 model SLK 200 with a meagre 8000 miles covered in January 2014.
My wife had run consecutive Mini Cooper S soft tops for 6 years and found the build quality and solid roof far superior. I was prepared for performance and an auto box to be a little underwhelming but have been quite surprised. Yes you find yourself shouting at the auto shift to change up during spirited driving but the handling seems balanced at all times and using tiptronic gear selection largely solves this.

My main and most serious concern regards the headlights !!! Has any other owner of the R171 found that driving at night is a game of chance unless you can get main beam on ? The headlight lenses look as though they should be able to illuminate the entire east coast for shipping, but in reality are the worst headlights I have ever experienced this side of a TVR Griffith.

Where as mine are the brightest I've ever had on a car. Do you have bi xenons?

Standard ones on the R171 are poor. I had xenon's on both versions - one with the cornering thing (SLK200) and one without (SLK55). Either way the the xenon's lit up the road and then some

[kambites]

I get the feeling people expect their headlights to be so bright they can forget it's night time at all.