R129 - what should i look for?
Discussion
Hi all,
I'd like to buy an R129 and would be very grateful for any pointers
- my head says buy an SL320, but i don't do many miles (c. 4k per year), i don't plan on keeping the car forever so resale is an important consideration which is why i am erring on the side of the 3.2, is this sensible?
- my budget is £6k-£7k; there are quite a few higher mileage cars (post facelift) - I've read that these cars can take 100k miles within their stride if well maintained, aside from electrics and suspension, is there anything i should be looking out for?
- any advice when viewing the cars? i drove a 3.2 (listed on PH actually) and it only pulled on kick down until 4k rpm, i think this could be the MAF sensor, but i walked away given that i have no idea whether it could be the 'box
Thanks,
Ollie.
I'd like to buy an R129 and would be very grateful for any pointers
- my head says buy an SL320, but i don't do many miles (c. 4k per year), i don't plan on keeping the car forever so resale is an important consideration which is why i am erring on the side of the 3.2, is this sensible?
- my budget is £6k-£7k; there are quite a few higher mileage cars (post facelift) - I've read that these cars can take 100k miles within their stride if well maintained, aside from electrics and suspension, is there anything i should be looking out for?
- any advice when viewing the cars? i drove a 3.2 (listed on PH actually) and it only pulled on kick down until 4k rpm, i think this could be the MAF sensor, but i walked away given that i have no idea whether it could be the 'box
Thanks,
Ollie.
You want a car without rust, evidence of bodywork repairs, evidence of heavy wear and tear, defective systems. At your budget, you should be able to find plenty of cars which are like 2 year olds.
You should seek out a car which is original and free of modifications (unless that sort of thing is your bag). An original, unmodified car is more likely to have been looked after by an owner who appreciates its virtues. Original wheels, amber indicators (on early cars), original wireless set, original grille, original rear lamp lenses, maybe even original numberplates.
A good service history is more than a stamped book. Invoices detailing work done are what you need. Miles are nothing to be afraid of so long as the car has been well maintained: these cars suffer lack of use terribly. My car has 249,000miles and still is tight and reliable and efficient and fast. A good sign is that the car has good quality tyres: Michelin, Continental and Dunlop were the only tyre manufacturers homologated for use on the 129. It is often said that the 1997 cars are in a sweetspot and it is accepted that early cars were better built than later cars but an early car is up to 12 years older than a late car and these days the youngest car is over 14. How it has been looked after since is much more important than when it was built. Buy on condition, not year. A neglected 1997 car will be a lot worse than a cherished 2000 car.
A SL320 is quite quick and should go like the clappers above 4,000rpm. A SL500 is a fast car still by any measure. 0-60mph in 5.5seconds, 0-100mph in 14seconds. There is nothing to separate them in running costs. 23mpg or 24mpg, who cares? The 280 is adequate but if going hell for leather is your thing it might frustrate. The 600 is very fast, faster than the 500, but the difference is felt above 100mph when the 600 just pulls away. A 600 is a riskier proposition than the other cars if only because they tend to be loaded with kit and engine parts are expensive.
Buy on condition. Look at plenty. The good ones are obvious; likewise the duffers.
You should seek out a car which is original and free of modifications (unless that sort of thing is your bag). An original, unmodified car is more likely to have been looked after by an owner who appreciates its virtues. Original wheels, amber indicators (on early cars), original wireless set, original grille, original rear lamp lenses, maybe even original numberplates.
A good service history is more than a stamped book. Invoices detailing work done are what you need. Miles are nothing to be afraid of so long as the car has been well maintained: these cars suffer lack of use terribly. My car has 249,000miles and still is tight and reliable and efficient and fast. A good sign is that the car has good quality tyres: Michelin, Continental and Dunlop were the only tyre manufacturers homologated for use on the 129. It is often said that the 1997 cars are in a sweetspot and it is accepted that early cars were better built than later cars but an early car is up to 12 years older than a late car and these days the youngest car is over 14. How it has been looked after since is much more important than when it was built. Buy on condition, not year. A neglected 1997 car will be a lot worse than a cherished 2000 car.
A SL320 is quite quick and should go like the clappers above 4,000rpm. A SL500 is a fast car still by any measure. 0-60mph in 5.5seconds, 0-100mph in 14seconds. There is nothing to separate them in running costs. 23mpg or 24mpg, who cares? The 280 is adequate but if going hell for leather is your thing it might frustrate. The 600 is very fast, faster than the 500, but the difference is felt above 100mph when the 600 just pulls away. A 600 is a riskier proposition than the other cars if only because they tend to be loaded with kit and engine parts are expensive.
Buy on condition. Look at plenty. The good ones are obvious; likewise the duffers.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
The post by r129SL on the subject is excellent.
The post by r129SL on the subject is excellent.
Edited by ras62 on Tuesday 17th November 07:55
R129SL - thanks, i didn't appreciate that the sl500 was quite that fast!
Being sensible, i actually won't need that kind of power for this car so i think an SL320 makes more sense.
There are quite a few around, the question for me is whether to go for a newer (2000) with parking sensors, panoramic roof, AMG alloys but with 95k miles, or an older (1997) with lower miles...
Tricky call! I do like them in silver though
Being sensible, i actually won't need that kind of power for this car so i think an SL320 makes more sense.
There are quite a few around, the question for me is whether to go for a newer (2000) with parking sensors, panoramic roof, AMG alloys but with 95k miles, or an older (1997) with lower miles...
Tricky call! I do like them in silver though
A pano roof is worth looking out for but, as said above, they are very heavy so you'll need help to remove it. None of my wives has been very keen to help. None of them came with parking sensors. Differences in condition are more important than differences in specification. Condition is everything. The best advice really is, don't look for a specific year or a specific engine or a specific trim or a specific combination of accessories, look for the best condition car you can find.
I really like the early models. I suspect the classic car market will run out of puff and collapse pretty soon, but if any r129 is going to appreciate, it will be an early car. Their design is pure and undiluted.
I really like the early models. I suspect the classic car market will run out of puff and collapse pretty soon, but if any r129 is going to appreciate, it will be an early car. Their design is pure and undiluted.
olliete said:
R129SL - thanks, i didn't appreciate that the sl500 was quite that fast!
Being sensible, i actually won't need that kind of power for this car so i think an SL320 makes more sense.
There are quite a few around, the question for me is whether to go for a newer (2000) with parking sensors, panoramic roof, AMG alloys but with 95k miles, or an older (1997) with lower miles...
Tricky call! I do like them in silver though
olliete,Being sensible, i actually won't need that kind of power for this car so i think an SL320 makes more sense.
There are quite a few around, the question for me is whether to go for a newer (2000) with parking sensors, panoramic roof, AMG alloys but with 95k miles, or an older (1997) with lower miles...
Tricky call! I do like them in silver though
As r129sl has said, condition and service history should be the guiding factor here rather than outright mileage comparisons. Never driven a Mercedes V6 unit myself, only ever experienced straight six or 5 litre V8 quad-cam 32v engines. My point here is that whatever the mileage, condition and service history of either the '97 or 2000 SL you will have differently configured engines as the older car has a straight six engine whilst the later employs a V6.
That may or may not be important to you.
Intermittent inability to pull past 4k rpm on kick down.
Other changes through the 'box were absolutely fine so i was fairly sure it was electrical.
Any thoughts on Dark Blue car with Black leather? It isn't a colour combo that i would traditionally go for but it seems quite 'Mercedes' to me. Other option is Black with Beige leather, but i'm not convinced that thoroughly suits the SL.
Thanks.
Other changes through the 'box were absolutely fine so i was fairly sure it was electrical.
Any thoughts on Dark Blue car with Black leather? It isn't a colour combo that i would traditionally go for but it seems quite 'Mercedes' to me. Other option is Black with Beige leather, but i'm not convinced that thoroughly suits the SL.
Thanks.
I like beige leather with a dark exterior, a buddy of mine has an absolute stunner. 
To be practical I had a black interior, the cars I saw in my price range with lighter trims showed their age. I use my car as a daily and dog wagon, so silver & black it had to be. Mine came with a blue hood, not my 1st choice but now I've lived with it I like it.
To be practical I had a black interior, the cars I saw in my price range with lighter trims showed their age. I use my car as a daily and dog wagon, so silver & black it had to be. Mine came with a blue hood, not my 1st choice but now I've lived with it I like it.
Gassing Station | Mercedes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff