RE: New Mercedes SL prices announced

[patch5674]

RDMcG said:

I have never liked any SL since the R230,

The R230 was only the last generation, so when you say you've not like ANY SL, you just don't like the model since.

[Welshbeef]

As there is marginal differences to 62mph do we have proper times 0-100mph and 0-150mph increments which is where the SL65 v12 biturbo will utterly destroy the others. Until Bravus come along and do some crazy things to it charge you half a million for the pleasure but you have something unique brutal.

[LooneyTunes]

AH33 said:

They're asking a lot of £ for a little bit of extra performance, why would you get anything but the SL500?

Have you ever driven a 500? Admittedly it's 5 years since I tried one, but it felt like a compromise for a strict two seater...

[E65Ross]

Welshbeef said:

As there is marginal differences to 62mph do we have proper times 0-100mph and 0-150mph increments which is where the SL65 v12 biturbo will utterly destroy the others. Until Bravus come along and do some crazy things to it charge you half a million for the pleasure but you have something unique brutal.

I don't think the 65 will destroy the 63, there isn't that much difference in power, and the 63 also has a very flat torque curve. The main difference will be how insanely smooth the V12 would be. It would be quicker though, having almost another 50bhp.

[kambites]

Traditionally the V12 cars have been a fair chunk heavier than the V8s, too, so the power to weight ratio of the two AMG models is probably pretty similar.

[BIRMA]

Plus the SL 63 got the wonderful MCT gearbox I know it has become available to a lot more cars in the MB range.

[Welshbeef]

E65Ross said:

Welshbeef said:

As there is marginal differences to 62mph do we have proper times 0-100mph and 0-150mph increments which is where the SL65 v12 biturbo will utterly destroy the others. Until Bravus come along and do some crazy things to it charge you half a million for the pleasure but you have something unique brutal.

I don't think the 65 will destroy the 63, there isn't that much difference in power, and the 63 also has a very flat torque curve. The main difference will be how insanely smooth the V12 would be. It would be quicker though, having almost another 50bhp.

http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-sl65-amg-black-series

Seems the old SL65 is a 7.6 second car to 100mph (That's F40 fast) and does 0-150mph in 17.9 seconds. 358 bhp per tonne
The SL63 AMG ie the v8 bi turbo does 0-100 in 10.3 and 0-150 in 28 seconds. 238 bhp per tonne

Both bloody fast cars but the SL65 is in a totally different league.



http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-slk-55...

[E65Ross]

Welshbeef said:

E65Ross said:

Welshbeef said:

As there is marginal differences to 62mph do we have proper times 0-100mph and 0-150mph increments which is where the SL65 v12 biturbo will utterly destroy the others. Until Bravus come along and do some crazy things to it charge you half a million for the pleasure but you have something unique brutal.

I don't think the 65 will destroy the 63, there isn't that much difference in power, and the 63 also has a very flat torque curve. The main difference will be how insanely smooth the V12 would be. It would be quicker though, having almost another 50bhp.

http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-sl65-amg-black-series

Seems the old SL65 is a 7.6 second car to 100mph (That's F40 fast) and does 0-150mph in 17.9 seconds. 358 bhp per tonne
The SL63 AMG ie the v8 bi turbo does 0-100 in 10.3 and 0-150 in 28 seconds. 238 bhp per tonne

Both bloody fast cars but the SL65 is in a totally different league.



http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-slk-55...

That 0-100 seems very slow, I'd have thought it'd be very similar to the bmw M6 which is very low 8's to 100. 8.1 IIRC.

[anonymous-user]

Welshbeef said:

http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-sl65-a...

Seems the old SL65 is a 7.6 second car to 100mph (That's F40 fast) and does 0-150mph in 17.9 seconds. 358 bhp per tonne
The SL63 AMG ie the v8 bi turbo does 0-100 in 10.3 and 0-150 in 28 seconds. 238 bhp per tonne

Both bloody fast cars but the SL65 is in a totally different league.



http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-slk-55...

The SL65 figures are from a r230 Black series, and the SL63 figures are from a hair dressers car .

2012 SL63 figures

http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-sl-63-...

2012 SL65 figures

http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-sl-65-...

The figures are pretty much identical. 4 or below to 60, about 8 to 100 and 17.5 to 150MPH (I assume these cars both had some sort of performance pack that adds a LSD, hence the quicker figures to 0-60s than mentioned here)

The Bi Turbo V8 makes the gap between the 63 and 65 non existent. It was the N/A 63 that was comparatively gutless compared to the V12TT.

09 SL63
http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-sl-63-...
0-100MPH 9.5.

Its mad we live in a world where a 6.2L V8 isn't considered to have much torque!

Edited by 279 on Saturday 6th February 14:16

Edited by 279 on Saturday 6th February 14:58

[E65Ross]

279 said:

Welshbeef said:

http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-sl65-a...

Seems the old SL65 is a 7.6 second car to 100mph (That's F40 fast) and does 0-150mph in 17.9 seconds. 358 bhp per tonne
The SL63 AMG ie the v8 bi turbo does 0-100 in 10.3 and 0-150 in 28 seconds. 238 bhp per tonne

Both bloody fast cars but the SL65 is in a totally different league.



http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-slk-55...

The SL65 figures are from a Black series which I'd be wary co, and the SL63 figures are from a hair dressers car .

2012 SL63 figures

http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-sl-63-...

2012 SL65 figures

http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-sl-65-...

The figures are pretty much identical. 4 or below to 60, about 8 to 100 and 17.5 to 150MPH (I assume these cars both had some sort of performance pack that adds a LSD, hence the quicker figures to 0-60s than mentioned here)

The Bi Turbo V8 makes the gap between the 63 and 65 non existent. It was the N/A 63 that was comparatively gutless compared to the V12TT.

09 SL63
http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-sl-63-...
0-100MPH 9.5.

Its mad we live in a world where a 6.2L V8 isn't considered to have much torque!

Edited by 279 on Saturday 6th February 14:16

Just as I thought, knew the twin turbo V8 wouldn't be that slow.

[Ozzie Osmond]

swisstoni said:

If ever a car needed a clean sheet of paper redesign, this is it.

Surely if you want a different Merc you just buy the AMG-GT?

[Welshbeef]

279 said:

The SL65 figures are from a r230 Black series, and the SL63 figures are from a hair dressers car .

2012 SL63 figures

http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-sl-63-...

2012 SL65 figures

http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-sl-65-...

The figures are pretty much identical. 4 or below to 60, about 8 to 100 and 17.5 to 150MPH (I assume these cars both had some sort of performance pack that adds a LSD, hence the quicker figures to 0-60s than mentioned here)

The Bi Turbo V8 makes the gap between the 63 and 65 non existent. It was the N/A 63 that was comparatively gutless compared to the V12TT.

09 SL63
http://fastestlaps.com/models/mercedes-benz-sl-63-...
0-100MPH 9.5.

Its mad we live in a world where a 6.2L V8 isn't considered to have much torque!

Edited by 279 on Saturday 6th February 14:16

Edited by 279 on Saturday 6th February 14:58

Got it - then yes the v12 option offers nothing extra in even up to 150mph so it's purely the fact it is a v12 over a v8 will be uber rare and without question if your into buying these new the fact it's got that v12 badge on the side says yes I'm considerably richer than yaw

[swisstoni]

Ozzie Osmond said:

swisstoni said:

If ever a car needed a clean sheet of paper redesign, this is it.

Surely if you want a different Merc you just buy the AMG-GT?

My point it, the SL is a cornerstone of the range. They seem still fixated on the R230 outline and the combination of that and the need to include the current corporate grilles is resulting in unhappy looking designs.
They need to forget the R230 and move on. Maybe the AMG-GT will point the way.

[anonymous-user]

kambites said:

Indeed. The original R230 was a fabulous looking car, I'd argue one of the more cohesive and timeless designs of the 00s; but the face-lifted R230 and everything since have been woeful. The overall proportions are still good but the detailing, especially of the nose, is a complete mess.

Couldn't agree more, a mess is the best description I can find for it too. The R230 was just about perfection, but it is a rare rose in a marque full of thorns to be honest as most of Mercedes output is pretty hideous from a design aesthetic point of view. Square boxes on wheels or if they do try a curve or two they invariably get it wrong. The C63 looks purposeful I guess and the CLS is a nice design from some angles, but the rest of the marque is pretty awful!

[Ozzie Osmond]

swisstoni said:

They need to forget the R230 and move on. Maybe the AMG-GT will point the way.

Perhaps.

To my mind the oddity of the GT is they started out with an SLS from the windscreen forward and then attached that to a 911 from the windscreen back! Not unlike Lotus glueing the front of their 20-year old Exige to the back of an Evora.

But let me tell you, the AMG-GT drives very well indeed. The £125k price point is going to be real slugging match between Merc, McLaren and 911 turbo.

[only1ian]

Bought a 2009 sl63 with the performace package by far the best car ive owned. Looks jjgreat, handles well with the optional diff installed and it'll swallow 2 large suitcases whilst showing a ferrari california a clean pair of heals.

Ive owned or reviewed more cars than my profile lists amg gt s and nothing beats a n/a 6.2 v8!

Edited by only1ian on Monday 8th February 10:19

[BlackLabel]

The S-Class Cabriolet is replacing this in 2017 isn't it?

That looks much nicer imo.

[E65Ross]

BlackLabel said:

The S-Class Cabriolet is replacing this in 2017 isn't it?

That looks much nicer imo.

S class cab is a different model. Like the E class cab hasn't replaced the SL....

[kambites]

BlackLabel said:

The S-Class Cabriolet is replacing this in 2017 isn't it?

The S-class isn't a replacement for the SL.

[only1ian]

BlackLabel said:

The S-Class Cabriolet is replacing this in 2017 isn't it?

That looks much nicer imo.

Well its a 4 seater convertible saloon so no its not a 2 seater replacement