SLK55 AMG - Opinions

[mph]

Went to look at a low-mileage 2013 model a couple of days back. Only managed a short test drive in less than ideal conditions so would appreciate some opinions from any owners on here.

The car in question seemed reasonably priced compared to others on offer but looking on some of the Internet sites they can be bought new with HUGE discounts. Are they a depreciation nightmare ?

The discs seemed worn more than I would expect for the mileage (12k) do they have any problems in this area ?

Any general comments on the plus and minus of ownership would be appreciated.

Only the current model obviously.

Thanks

[Rahul uk]

I had a 2007 model for a little over a year. Mainly used by my wife. Great to look at and sounded amazing but not very inspiring otherwise. Compare that to my C63 and the difference is night and day. I also think the current shape doesn't look that nice. For the money there are much better 2 seater sports cars out there. If I was able to live to with a 2 seater it would probably by a Cayman S/R/GTS.

[DJRC]

They aren't a depreciation nightmare to be honest, they follow fairly standard curves. Compared to the Cayman, the interior is night and day better as is frankly the engine - it is immense. The folding hardtop makes it a vastly different car to the Cayman to be honest. Where it suffers is on the twisty stuff, the Coxster family is much nicer in the twists, but on more of an A road, long sweepers, etc none of the Coxster family, inc a new GT4 would see which way a 55 went. The ride is better in the Porkers, a 55 doesn't really do subtle or "British" damping. You can see 32mpg on a long cruise and the boot is ok, but disappointing if you come from a Mk1 SLk for instance.

Ive done 10,000 miles in mine since August, the vast majority of it long drives up and down the country, the wife uses it around town as her daily when I haven't left it at Heathrow.

Never ever forget about the engine. Its so tractable and easy going mooching around in C and ECO mode you forget what its like sometimes. Let it off the leash and you need serious firepower to keep up.

[CaptainRAVE]

I love my 55, it is a fantastic car. The sound just blows me away every time, especially with the top down...something a c63 for example can't do. The brakes are quite hardy, but they will wear if you rely on them heavily! These cars are also fantastically quick, quicker than the specs would show - you just can't beat an AMG engine.

[BobTurner]

DJRC said:

They aren't a depreciation nightmare to be honest, they follow fairly standard curves. Compared to the Cayman, the interior is night and day better as is frankly the engine - it is immense. The folding hardtop makes it a vastly different car to the Cayman to be honest. Where it suffers is on the twisty stuff, the Coxster family is much nicer in the twists, but on more of an A road, long sweepers, etc none of the Coxster family, inc a new GT4 would see which way a 55 went. The ride is better in the Porkers, a 55 doesn't really do subtle or "British" damping. You can see 32mpg on a long cruise and the boot is ok, but disappointing if you come from a Mk1 SLk for instance.

Ive done 10,000 miles in mine since August, the vast majority of it long drives up and down the country, the wife uses it around town as her daily when I haven't left it at Heathrow.

Never ever forget about the engine. Its so tractable and easy going mooching around in C and ECO mode you forget what its like sometimes. Let it off the leash and you need serious firepower to keep up.

You've run a GT4 back to back with your SLK then?

[DJRC]

No Bob. I have however, indulged with various other incarnations of the family, a cpl of GT3 variants and some Lambo fun. The GT4 Im sure will be a hell of a lot better than a 55 around corners, having fun, handling etc, etc. but it simple hasn't the grunt to keep up with a 55. I have no issues with Porsche we run a cpl in the family. The 55 does some stuff the Porks can't, the Porks do some stuff the 55 can't, such a thing works for me. The 55 is all about the engine and for me thats just fine.

[ZX10R NIN]

The SLK won't out handle the Porsche but they are very different cars OP if it was my money I'd get the older model for few reasons.

1) IMO the new Model look a bit Ugly compared to the previous version
2) The worst of the depreciation is behind you
3) The money saved can go on an exhaust etc

Here are Two of the older models at very agreeable prices.

6000 miles 2010
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...

4000

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...

38000 but it does have the Performance Pack

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...

in terms of depreciation here's a 2005 model with 68k on the clock so I think you'll be okay.

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...

[rgv250ads]

As a 2nd Generation SLK55 owner i think i can comment and confirm there are not a great deal of fans on the latest Gen model. Maybe becuase it just doesn't have a different enough look about it to make it seem like a special little car? it really borrows off the SL model the front end.
When you think a decent Gen2 SLK55 can be had for 17/18, that's such a massive difference. especially if it is an occational car or summer toy. Guess it depends on your resource level. If i had 40 grand odd for a summer toy that was V8'ty and Merc ish, i'd get a low mileage mint Gen 2 and take it to Kleeman in Denmark for the treatment. then you have a 550HP+ summer mental mobile - wrapped up in a pretty little two seater. And put the difference into the bank and laugh.

The new/2012> SLK55 appeals to eco-nerds with the cylinder shut down and what not. no doubt lots of other little tweeks to get it over the line as a model change, but enough to warrant double the hike?I sat in one at a merc gathering and thought it was nice 'enough' but the Gen2 is not that far behind and to those of us without big pockets i thought the difference price wise at the mo is far bigger than the gap between the vehicles being compared.

Also there is not much on the market yet for the new SLK55, exhausts and what not.

Be interesting to hear the real story why your looking at one and what twists and turns you've taken to start a thread on opinion gathering.

Edited by rgv250ads on Monday 9th March 14:14

[mph]

rgv250ads said:

The new/2012> SLK55 appeals to eco-nerds with the cylinder shut down and what not. no doubt lots of other little tweeks to get it over the line as a model change, but enough to warrant double the hike?I sat in one at a merc gathering and thought it was nice 'enough' but the Gen2 is not that far behind and to those of us without big pockets i thought the difference price wise at the mo is far bigger than the gap between the vehicles being compared.

Also there is not much on the market yet for the new SLK55, exhausts and what not.

Be interesting to hear the real story why your looking at one and what twists and turns you've taken to start a thread on opinion gathering.

Edited by rgv250ads on Monday 9th March 14:14

I'm just looking for something interesting before summer, no real twists and turns to speak of.

I don't consider myself an eco nerd but I do like the idea of a big V8 in a small(ish) convertible.

I don't like the Audi TT. I've previously owned a Boxster S and wanted to try something different.

The SLK55 and the BMW Z4 35i are the only other options I can think of. Unfortunately both of them generally get pretty poor reviews in the press hence I was looking for opinions from those who actually own them.

Thanks to another poster who's put some interesting earlier cars for sale but I wouldn't want to fork out £25k for a previous generation no matter how low the mileage. I'd rather pay a bit more and get a car that's five years newer and still with MB warranty.

Looks like I'll have to try and get an extended drive in one.

[rgv250ads]

Drive a R171 SLK55 and see what you think? or is it a case of a R172 in in budget so no need to look at R171.

do you plan to keep the car for a while or just a few years as a bit of fun? the 2012> cars are depreciating quite quickly as, you've found out, the discounts on new are very keen.

I dont think the R172 has much more than a few years left on its run and probably wont be replaced unless they develop a turbo-less version of the new 4L V8.

I'd have thought most dealers would bite your hand off if you wanted a 24hr test dirve.....

[ZX10R NIN]

mph said:

I'm just looking for something interesting before summer, no real twists and turns to speak of.

I don't consider myself an eco nerd but I do like the idea of a big V8 in a small(ish) convertible.

I don't like the Audi TT. I've previously owned a Boxster S and wanted to try something different.

The SLK55 and the BMW Z4 35i are the only other options I can think of. Unfortunately both of them generally get pretty poor reviews in the press hence I was looking for opinions from those who actually own them.

Thanks to another poster who's put some interesting earlier cars for sale but I wouldn't want to fork out £25k for a previous generation no matter how low the mileage. I'd rather pay a bit more and get a car that's five years newer and still with MB warranty.

Looks like I'll have to try and get an extended drive in one.

You were looking at a 2013 model with a 2010 with such low mileage you can still get a MB Warranty but each to his own, but take another look at the car because it's not a looker in any sense of the word

[tonys]

What about a Daimler XJ coupe Oh, wait a minute.......

[mph]

tonys said:

What about a Daimler XJ coupe Oh, wait a minute.......

Now you've got everyone scratching their heads

[PompeyPaul]

Watching this topic with interest. In a similar topic in main section, people suggestiong if getting an SLK AMG for around £18,000, that you need around £5,000-£10,000 for when it goes wrong!!

I assume there is no more risk with one of these than any similar style vehicle? Any major common faults to be aware of that could cost the earth? I'm guessing engine issue from the backup figures being quoted, albeit possibly from an internet expert that has never owned one!

[ZX10R NIN]

PompeyPaul said:

Watching this topic with interest. In a similar topic in main section, people suggestiong if getting an SLK AMG for around £18,000, that you need around £5,000-£10,000 for when it goes wrong!!

I assume there is no more risk with one of these than any similar style vehicle? Any major common faults to be aware of that could cost the earth? I'm guessing engine issue from the backup figures being quoted, albeit possibly from an internet expert that has never owned one!

I have had a lot of AMG's without warranties & the worst bill i've had was for the ABC on my SL55 cost £1200 the SLK doesn't have this suspension set up it's pretty reliable the worst job I had on an N/A 55 was the Alternator not an expensive part but a labour intensive one but that's about it

[Jester86]

PompeyPaul said:

Watching this topic with interest. In a similar topic in main section, people suggestiong if getting an SLK AMG for around £18,000, that you need around £5,000-£10,000 for when it goes wrong!!

I assume there is no more risk with one of these than any similar style vehicle? Any major common faults to be aware of that could cost the earth? I'm guessing engine issue from the backup figures being quoted, albeit possibly from an internet expert that has never owned one!

Where on earth are you hearing those kinds of figures! One of the things that attracted me to the SLK55 in the first place was the fact it is a relatively simple beast with very few problems associated to it. The engine is widely reported to be absolutely bullet proof, a lovely piece of work. Most slightly weep a little oil but once warm there isn't an issue. Heated seat elements seem to be a common one across the R171 SLK range and there are easy fixes to this on slkworld.com. Check the transmission fluid has had its once in a lifetime swap at 40k miles and you are good to go.

One of the benefits is that it shares most of its parts with the lesser models so running costs are relatively cheap. Even the dreaded brake discs are coming out of exclusive Merc/Brembo supply agreements this year and we are all hoping that the silly prices get slashed. But even those in reality are a small consideration with the "float" you are being quoted! Find a good independant garage and costs are even less. I am more than happy to run mine under no warrenty.

[rgv250ads]

[quote=PompeyPaul]Watching this topic with interest. In a similar topic in main section, people suggestiong if getting an SLK AMG for around £18,000, that you need around £5,000-£10,000 for when it goes wrong!! [quote]

Can you post a link to this thread PompeyPaul ?

Seems on the face of it people muddling up SL with SLK.

[CaptainRAVE]

Jester86 said:

Where on earth are you hearing those kinds of figures! One of the things that attracted me to the SLK55 in the first place was the fact it is a relatively simple beast with very few problems associated to it. The engine is widely reported to be absolutely bullet proof, a lovely piece of work. Most slightly weep a little oil but once warm there isn't an issue. Heated seat elements seem to be a common one across the R171 SLK range and there are easy fixes to this on slkworld.com. Check the transmission fluid has had its once in a lifetime swap at 40k miles and you are good to go.

One of the benefits is that it shares most of its parts with the lesser models so running costs are relatively cheap. Even the dreaded brake discs are coming out of exclusive Merc/Brembo supply agreements this year and we are all hoping that the silly prices get slashed. But even those in reality are a small consideration with the "float" you are being quoted! Find a good independant garage and costs are even less. I am more than happy to run mine under no warrenty.

Agreed, those figures are rubbish. The engine is bulletproof. The oil leak costs about £80 to resolve, the brakes are £1500 but last a long time and are some of the best brakes on ANY car. Transmission can have a few oddities, but nothing major.

Any mercedes will cost, these really don't cost as much as people think. I love mine - not a fan of the R172 styling (not as aggressive as the R171), so went for the R171 and have never looked back. Plus xpipe it is an absolute beast.

[ZX10R NIN]

The brakes are £1500 for the Discs but if you ditch the Floating Discs & use solid discs(by solid I mean the area that the Bell Housing would sit) they are around £350.

I can't claim credit for this I found it on another thread.




[/quote]

[CaptainRAVE]

True, the floating discs are only needed if you track often, but you still need to find someone or somewhere to get those resized.