Should I - This SL500 (photos inside)
Discussion
Been idly looking for a 2003-2006 SL350 or 500 in the £12-14k region for a couple of months now. They seem affordable now and I hoped to acquire one in winter, enjoy for 1-2 years and sell it on without losing stacks on depreciation and repairs. As such I hoped to find as new a model in as good condition as possible, not too many miles and ideally with some options, and in silver which seems to suit these cars best. I also hoped for a 350 since the 500 has notoriously unreliable, expensive to repair (but effective) ABC suspension which the 350 does not bother with. However nothing has caught my eye within budget yet. Plenty of average looking cars in questionable spec/condition/aftermarket wheels around though.
What has caught my eye though is the car below. It is below budget (in fact it's nearly the cheapest one on the market @ £11.5k) in tasteful spec, looks nice, seems in good nick and has nearly all the options which really appeals to me, and based just on that I am tempted. However am I making a mistake? Should I follow the rules- e.g. "don't buy the cheapest car - it will work out more expensive in the long run"? Should I hold out for what I wanted, or risk it with this? I'm mainly worried that being the oldest and highest mileage car I've seen, it's the most likely to throw a big bill. Although the condition is generally very good it does show its age for example in the under bonnet photo and that just got me thinking. I promised myself I wouldn't buy the cheapest one around for my next car (I ended up spending lots on my current car). Also of course when I come to sell, it will be 10 years old, over 100k, 'only' on a 52 plate, and not with the most popular colour or wheels.
So any thoughts from PH. Hold out or throw it all away?
Pics from the seller below, there are a lot but this helps to give a good idea of condition
Edit- forgot the details
2003 SL500 Metallic green
92,000 miles
Extras:Bose, distronic radar cruise control, massage seats, ventilated seats (seats with fans in).
What has caught my eye though is the car below. It is below budget (in fact it's nearly the cheapest one on the market @ £11.5k) in tasteful spec, looks nice, seems in good nick and has nearly all the options which really appeals to me, and based just on that I am tempted. However am I making a mistake? Should I follow the rules- e.g. "don't buy the cheapest car - it will work out more expensive in the long run"? Should I hold out for what I wanted, or risk it with this? I'm mainly worried that being the oldest and highest mileage car I've seen, it's the most likely to throw a big bill. Although the condition is generally very good it does show its age for example in the under bonnet photo and that just got me thinking. I promised myself I wouldn't buy the cheapest one around for my next car (I ended up spending lots on my current car). Also of course when I come to sell, it will be 10 years old, over 100k, 'only' on a 52 plate, and not with the most popular colour or wheels.
So any thoughts from PH. Hold out or throw it all away?
Pics from the seller below, there are a lot but this helps to give a good idea of condition
Edit- forgot the details
2003 SL500 Metallic green
92,000 miles
Extras:Bose, distronic radar cruise control, massage seats, ventilated seats (seats with fans in).
Edited by Pentoman on Saturday 12th November 10:44
Its probably worth posting this in the Mercedes forum, there's loads of experts there.
FRom the photos it certainly seems a nice car, only thing that would concern me is the service history. It seems to be very infrequent and with an indy from the 2nd service onwards. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it might indicate a certain minimalist approach to maintenance.
I'm impressed with the 29.8mpg fuel consumption. I can get that in my R129 SL with same engine ona long run with restrained use of the throttle, but if I really enjoy myself, the consumption rapidly drops
FRom the photos it certainly seems a nice car, only thing that would concern me is the service history. It seems to be very infrequent and with an indy from the 2nd service onwards. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it might indicate a certain minimalist approach to maintenance.
I'm impressed with the 29.8mpg fuel consumption. I can get that in my R129 SL with same engine ona long run with restrained use of the throttle, but if I really enjoy myself, the consumption rapidly drops
Always been a fan of SLs ever since my old man owned the previous shape SL500. Lovely motor, but regardless of mileage and age, anything that goes wrong on this motor is going to be expensive. Personally, at 92000 miles I would be expecting at least something to go wrong. My dad used to own the same shape CL600 bi-turbo. Something as trivial as a headlamp unit was over a grand!
A grand for a CL headlight!! I'm hoping that with the age, then in the worst case I can find parts at a Mercedes breaker/salvage place.
To get 29 mpg i'm sure the seller has driven very slowly. I will be using it in town and expect 18. Luckily I hardly do any miles.
Still looking for some more comments I hope..
To get 29 mpg i'm sure the seller has driven very slowly. I will be using it in town and expect 18. Luckily I hardly do any miles.
Still looking for some more comments I hope..
Someone has stuck nasty chav things on the pedals. Unless they really came out of Sindelfingen like that?
The tyres are cheap and nasty, especially for such an expensive car. Must have cost less than a tank of fuel each.
Neither of these things bodes well - I'd want one from a more 'respectable' home, given the amount of amazingly expensive stuff to go wrong on a car like this.
Just my 2p...
The tyres are cheap and nasty, especially for such an expensive car. Must have cost less than a tank of fuel each.
Neither of these things bodes well - I'd want one from a more 'respectable' home, given the amount of amazingly expensive stuff to go wrong on a car like this.
Just my 2p...
The thing about the SL is it would never look like a 52 car if you changed the plate. I have to say that looks in lovely condition for the age but do concur about the s
tty tires.
The v8 itself is a reliable motor, its the ancillaries you need to worry about on a car like this. Have you checked how much a warranty would be?
Edit: Just done a warranty wise quote and it says for the platinum cover you would be looking at 1400 quid but you could probably get this down to 1200 with a bit of bargaining. Get some money off from the dealer and it starts to look reasonable.
tty tires.The v8 itself is a reliable motor, its the ancillaries you need to worry about on a car like this. Have you checked how much a warranty would be?
Edit: Just done a warranty wise quote and it says for the platinum cover you would be looking at 1400 quid but you could probably get this down to 1200 with a bit of bargaining. Get some money off from the dealer and it starts to look reasonable.
Edited by mikearwas on Saturday 12th November 11:23
N Dentressangle said:
Someone has stuck nasty chav things on the pedals. Unless they really came out of Sindelfingen like that?
The tyres are cheap and nasty, especially for such an expensive car. Must have cost less than a tank of fuel each.
Neither of these things bodes well - I'd want one from a more 'respectable' home, given the amount of amazingly expensive stuff to go wrong on a car like this.
Just my 2p...
I believe those pedals are correct.The tyres are cheap and nasty, especially for such an expensive car. Must have cost less than a tank of fuel each.
Neither of these things bodes well - I'd want one from a more 'respectable' home, given the amount of amazingly expensive stuff to go wrong on a car like this.
Just my 2p...
RE: the tyres, yes they are bit cheap. However, it's possible the owner knew they were going to sell soon, so in the hope that a new buyer would just see "new tyres", they weren't overly fussed about getting a set of quality tyres.
Also, given the MPG showing on the trip, I dare say that the previous owner has any need for "performance tyres"!!
After all that though, for some reason I always seem suspicious about cars with pics taken in a field. Always makes me think of....... (finish the sentence
)N Dentressangle said:
Someone has stuck nasty chav things on the pedals. Unless they really came out of Sindelfingen like that?
The tyres are cheap and nasty, especially for such an expensive car. Must have cost less than a tank of fuel each.
Neither of these things bodes well - I'd want one from a more 'respectable' home, given the amount of amazingly expensive stuff to go wrong on a car like this.
Just my 2p...
As above they are the correct pedals, fitted to most SL's and most AMG spec cars. The tyres are cheap and nasty, especially for such an expensive car. Must have cost less than a tank of fuel each.
Neither of these things bodes well - I'd want one from a more 'respectable' home, given the amount of amazingly expensive stuff to go wrong on a car like this.
Just my 2p...
In the flesh they are nice to look at and give good grip when your shoes are wet.
However you can swap them to the 'standard' covers and they are just covers held on with a rubber boot.
I don't know that much about these Mercs. However my old boss had a new 350SL which was forever at the Dealership having some gremlin fixed and he would pootle in to the office in his wifes Polo!..Also one of my best mates has the 500SL and he too has been less than enamoured with the reliability compared with his older CLK. Another mates Dad who only ever owns Mercs has a 350SL and ne also owns a 1992 500SL, he is far more impressed with his 1992 car than his 2006 one!!..
Is it normal for a UK Merecedes service book to be all in German? I'm pretty sure it wasn't on the C class I had a few years ago.
Google says you're right about the pedals. Blimey - they look like those horrid Halfords stick on things though, don't they?
I don't know what it is, but there's something I don't like about that car. Could be wrong, but I'd be walking away, and maybe not sure why...
Google says you're right about the pedals. Blimey - they look like those horrid Halfords stick on things though, don't they?
I don't know what it is, but there's something I don't like about that car. Could be wrong, but I'd be walking away, and maybe not sure why...
The pedals are indeed correct. That car looks very nice, the only potential problem is the apparent missing service, a quick call to any Merc dealer will confirm if it has had an additional service between the circa 7k and 36k ones shown (if it was carried out by an official MB dealer), if it really did go 29k on the same oil, then personally I would walk away, M113 engines a pretty bomb-proof, but that's alot to ask from one dose of oil.
Also, I would'nt bet on low depreciation on the next two years, there are more SL500's than there are people wanting a 5 litre two seaters, which is why this one is cheap now!
Also, I would'nt bet on low depreciation on the next two years, there are more SL500's than there are people wanting a 5 litre two seaters, which is why this one is cheap now!
My pal had an '06 SL. Lovely motor but not without its gremlins. I can certainly see the appeal as it's a very timeless car and with a cherished plate who's to know how old it is? Tyres are cheapies yes but tyre brand fascism is a PH thing, in the real world people don't care or notice. Also the history is patchy but hell it's 10 years old - a car of that age will always come with some question marks. On balance I'd say go for it.
Service history looks too patcy, though the indy servicing shouldn't really be a worry, there don't seem to be enough.
That age and mileage you really need to go an condition. Check for signs of damp in the boot floor area, there were problems with water leaks, and a lot of expensive electronics hide there.
That age and mileage you really need to go an condition. Check for signs of damp in the boot floor area, there were problems with water leaks, and a lot of expensive electronics hide there.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff