RE: Mercedes-AMG SL63 vs. SL65
Discussion
V12s are just better than V8s. V8s are just a bit gauche.
What a V12 doesn't really need to be is stereotyped in to cruiser type cars or personalities.
They don't need to be massively powerful and they shouldn't be silenced in the name of refinement. They definately shouldn't be attached to automatic gearboxes.
The whole attraction of a V12 is the spine tingling sound it makes when wrung out.
The V12 Mercs are "almost" cars for me. Like the V12 BMW 850i and V12 XJS. Almost wonderful, but then someone decided that the car should be pitched at someone old who'd rather not be driving at all and made it all user friendly.
I want a flame spitting ricketty V12 engined b
h of a car. With number plates.
What a V12 doesn't really need to be is stereotyped in to cruiser type cars or personalities.
They don't need to be massively powerful and they shouldn't be silenced in the name of refinement. They definately shouldn't be attached to automatic gearboxes.
The whole attraction of a V12 is the spine tingling sound it makes when wrung out.
The V12 Mercs are "almost" cars for me. Like the V12 BMW 850i and V12 XJS. Almost wonderful, but then someone decided that the car should be pitched at someone old who'd rather not be driving at all and made it all user friendly.
I want a flame spitting ricketty V12 engined b
h of a car. With number plates.sideways man said:
As previously mentioned, book some time at MB world and try these out for yourself. I am a 'poor person' and to go from my seat ibiza to one of these, it blew my mind. And I will be doing it again this summer. The one I tried was non turbo, will be interesting to see how these compare.
I couldn't. I'd be far too depressed on the drive home.Matt UK said:
Ozzie Osmond said:
jamieduff1981 said:
I want a flame spitting ricketty V12 engined bh of a car. With number plates.
I just wonder where one finds one of those!h of a car. With number plates.
sealtt said:
Not everyone wants loads of attention - hence why an SL65 is a far more desirable car for many than a similar priced Aston / Ferrari / etc.
Exactly this. My very wealthy Uncle has had SL's for years, and tried others along the way. But in his words 'It's a car I can go to the chippy in'.If ever there was a car criticised by those who have never owned it then it is the SL65 AMG. I regret selling my R230 version. I just did not have the garage space to keep it. I have owned Lamborghini, Ferrari, Porsche but if I was asked which car would I take for a journey across Europe on the auto routes it would be an SL65 AMG. Effortless power. You will arrive at your destenation unfrazzled quick shower and out to dinner. Having said that I do not particularly like the current shape and agree let the first buyer take the depreciation hit. If you can find a low mileage R230 model they represent amazing value.
I now desperately want an SL63. I had always thought the Bentley Continental would be my first lottery win car. That'd be the car I'd use to go and buy all of the other cars I wanted! However, this is now making me think twice. It's beautiful. Perhaps a bit incongruous in the UK but in America, where there is the space on the carriageway, and miles and miles of distance to cover, I can imagine this being incredible. I've always been a fan of the SL though.
Baryonyx said:
I now desperately want an SL63. I had always thought the Bentley Continental would be my first lottery win car. That'd be the car I'd use to go and buy all of the other cars I wanted! However, this is now making me think twice. It's beautiful. Perhaps a bit incongruous in the UK but in America, where there is the space on the carriageway, and miles and miles of distance to cover, I can imagine this being incredible. I've always been a fan of the SL though.
Very interesting point, a while ago I was toying with idea of a Bentley Flying Spur, Porsche Cayenne Turbo S etc, my total budget was at a stretch £65K. I landed up with a Phaeton V10 four seater LWB and also bought an excellent SL 63 all well within my initial budget. Not being a badge snob I'm over the moon with my Phaeton and the facelift SL63 is proving to be a wise choice. There is a lot to be said for setting a budget, not having any preconceived ideas about any marque, trying everything within your budget and choosing what suits you the best. Not wanting to be too picky but does .5 of a second really count as a great difference between the two cars when the SL63 was N/A. This has been extracted from the official MB specification brochure.
AMG 6.3-litre V8 engine developing 386 kW (525 hp) and 630 Nm of torque
PERFORMANCE :
Top speed 250 km/h (electronically limited), acceleration from 0 to 100 km/h in 4.7s
CHASSIS :
AMG sports suspension with AMG gas-filled shock absorbers and specially tuned spring elements based on Active Body Control (ABC)
BRAKES :
AMG high-performance braking system with 360 x 36 mm composite front brake discs and 6-piston fixed callipers
TRANSMISSION :
AMG SPEEDSHIFT MCT 7-speed sports transmission and AMG steering-wheel gearshift operated using shift paddles
AMG 6.0-litre V12 biturbo engine developing 450 kW (612 hp) and 1000 Nm of torque
PERFORMANCE :
Top speed 250 km/h (electronically limited), acceleration from 0 to 100 km/h in 4.2s
CHASSIS :
AMG sports suspension with AMG gas-filled shock absorbers and specially tuned spring elements based on
Active Body Control (ABC) with limited- slip rear axle differential
BRAKES :
AMG high-performance braking system with 390 x 36 mm composite front brake discs and 6-piston fixed callipers
TRANSMISSION :
AMG SPEEDSHIFT 5-speed automatic transmission and AMG steering-wheel gearshift operated using shift paddles
SL 63 AMG
SL 65 AMG
The SL63AMG and the SL 65 AMG
kW 400
kW 450
400
350
Nm Nm
300 1000 250 900 200 800 150 700 100
360
320
280 700 240 600 200 500 160 400 120
2345678 1234567
ENGINE :
ENGINE :
AMG 6.3-litre V8 engine developing 386 kW (525 hp) and 630 Nm of torque
PERFORMANCE :
Top speed 250 km/h (electronically limited), acceleration from 0 to 100 km/h in 4.7s
CHASSIS :
AMG sports suspension with AMG gas-filled shock absorbers and specially tuned spring elements based on Active Body Control (ABC)
BRAKES :
AMG high-performance braking system with 360 x 36 mm composite front brake discs and 6-piston fixed callipers
TRANSMISSION :
AMG SPEEDSHIFT MCT 7-speed sports transmission and AMG steering-wheel gearshift operated using shift paddles
AMG 6.0-litre V12 biturbo engine developing 450 kW (612 hp) and 1000 Nm of torque
PERFORMANCE :
Top speed 250 km/h (electronically limited), acceleration from 0 to 100 km/h in 4.2s
CHASSIS :
AMG sports suspension with AMG gas-filled shock absorbers and specially tuned spring elements based on
Active Body Control (ABC) with limited- slip rear axle differential
BRAKES :
AMG high-performance braking system with 390 x 36 mm composite front brake discs and 6-piston fixed callipers
TRANSMISSION :
AMG SPEEDSHIFT 5-speed automatic transmission and AMG steering-wheel gearshift operated using shift paddles
SL 63 AMG
SL 65 AMG
The SL63AMG and the SL 65 AMG
kW 400
kW 450
400
350
Nm Nm
300 1000 250 900 200 800 150 700 100
360
320
280 700 240 600 200 500 160 400 120
2345678 1234567
ENGINE :
ENGINE :
I'm not arguing that the difference is going to be usable on the road in the UK, but there's a big difference in performance there. 0.5 seconds off a car that takes 11 seconds to get to 60 is neither here nor there. Taking it off a car that does it in 4.7 seconds is a big increase in acceleration.
Furthermore, everyone with fast cars (I see you have an AMG in your garage) knows that fast 2WD cars are traction limited from a standing start, so the performance difference will be somewhat blunted because neither car can (I assume) achieve WOT in 1st gear without excess wheelspin.
From a rolling start on an autobahn, the V8 SL would be eaten alive by the V12.
Furthermore, everyone with fast cars (I see you have an AMG in your garage) knows that fast 2WD cars are traction limited from a standing start, so the performance difference will be somewhat blunted because neither car can (I assume) achieve WOT in 1st gear without excess wheelspin.
From a rolling start on an autobahn, the V8 SL would be eaten alive by the V12.
jamieduff1981 said:
I'm not arguing that the difference is going to be usable on the road in the UK, but there's a big difference in performance there. 0.5 seconds off a car that takes 11 seconds to get to 60 is neither here nor there. Taking it off a car that does it in 4.7 seconds is a big increase in acceleration.
Furthermore, everyone with fast cars (I see you have an AMG in your garage) knows that fast 2WD cars are traction limited from a standing start, so the performance difference will be somewhat blunted because neither car can (I assume) achieve WOT in 1st gear without excess wheelspin.
From a rolling start on an autobahn, the V8 SL would be eaten alive by the V12.
No doubt about it the V12 would on an autobahn, but for everyday driving on our roads I can't really say I'd notice any difference in .5 of a second between the cars.Furthermore, everyone with fast cars (I see you have an AMG in your garage) knows that fast 2WD cars are traction limited from a standing start, so the performance difference will be somewhat blunted because neither car can (I assume) achieve WOT in 1st gear without excess wheelspin.
From a rolling start on an autobahn, the V8 SL would be eaten alive by the V12.
The 5.5TTSL63 is hugely faster than the old NA SL63. Let alone considering the new SL65 which would decimate it on the straights and even around corners due to the big changes made between the R230 and R231 platforms.
You will certainly notice either the 5.5 SL63 or the SL65 as being far, far quicker cars, even in normal driving on Uk roads, than the old SL63.
You will certainly notice either the 5.5 SL63 or the SL65 as being far, far quicker cars, even in normal driving on Uk roads, than the old SL63.
sealtt said:
The 5.5TTSL63 is hugely faster than the old NA SL63. Let alone considering the new SL65 which would decimate it on the straights and even around corners due to the big changes made between the R230 and R231 platforms.
You will certainly notice either the 5.5 SL63 or the SL65 as being far, far quicker cars, even in normal driving on Uk roads, than the old SL63.
I'm guessing like me you have driven the new 5.5 SL63 around the test track for three hours then, are you a test driver for MB?You will certainly notice either the 5.5 SL63 or the SL65 as being far, far quicker cars, even in normal driving on Uk roads, than the old SL63.
I would be most interested in hearing your in depth driving analysis of there cars as I've taken quite an interest in them since owning one and read up on every test report by people like Chris Harris etc.
My original point of the small time difference related to factory figures and my actual experience, talking of which the 911 Turbo S that I tried with a sub 3 second 0-60 time was certainly noticeable.
Edited by BIRMA on Wednesday 9th March 17:26
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff