Discussion
I'm looking to buy something a bit less sensible to replace both my W204 C220 cdi and my MX5. I have a few things on my list but I have just realised that an SL or SLK 55 is within my budget. The problem is, my budget is under £15k and it would need to be a reliable daily.
Would a 55 be a money pit? I'd expect to keep it for 4 years or more.
Another choice is a 996 C4. If anyone has experience of both I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.
Would a 55 be a money pit? I'd expect to keep it for 4 years or more.
Another choice is a 996 C4. If anyone has experience of both I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.
I own an SL55 and as a daily I would say don't!
The SLK55 is a lot more usable as a daily as it doesn't have the ABC suspension, fuel tank baffle, boot seal leaking and other major issues that the SL55 does. For anything other than extreme autobahn or track work the SLK55 will be just as much fun. If you are wanting to modify/enhance performance though then the SL55 is a better bet as the supercharger means there is more to go at.
I often wonder if that's the one I should have bought.
The SLK55 is a lot more usable as a daily as it doesn't have the ABC suspension, fuel tank baffle, boot seal leaking and other major issues that the SL55 does. For anything other than extreme autobahn or track work the SLK55 will be just as much fun. If you are wanting to modify/enhance performance though then the SL55 is a better bet as the supercharger means there is more to go at.
I often wonder if that's the one I should have bought.
Hi
Had both a 996 and a slk 55. Considering your budget the 55 would be the safer bet. Depends on your yearly milage. Just be careful with things like front disk if they are floating, can be expensive to replace, with relative sensible driving should last 45k miles. Also remember that they are 16 spark plugs when it comes change time. I had a 2005 model and did 8K miles only issue was the cam covers that sprang an oil leak.
I had the 996 much longer great car much more involving drive than the 55 and felt as quick. Had a few minor niggles with it but nothing serious however it had only done 32k miles when I bought it and 52k miles when sold. Hoping that helps.
Had both a 996 and a slk 55. Considering your budget the 55 would be the safer bet. Depends on your yearly milage. Just be careful with things like front disk if they are floating, can be expensive to replace, with relative sensible driving should last 45k miles. Also remember that they are 16 spark plugs when it comes change time. I had a 2005 model and did 8K miles only issue was the cam covers that sprang an oil leak.
I had the 996 much longer great car much more involving drive than the 55 and felt as quick. Had a few minor niggles with it but nothing serious however it had only done 32k miles when I bought it and 52k miles when sold. Hoping that helps.
As above, the SLK55 is considered to be 'cheap' as far as AMG's go, and likely to be *significantly* cheaper than an SL55 (and a 996, I suspect).
the front disks, and big service (due to spark plugs) are your only big maintenance bills to be aware of, and buying carefully can avoid both of these. Otherwise, there are no major known issues with SLK55's, but don't forget it's still an AMG, so if you're unlucky, big bills can be thrown up.
I own a 2005 SLK55 and your budget will put you in cars like mine.
As a daily, the SLK55 would be the better choice. I've owned for 4 years now and it's a garage toy/sun days, but it is surprisingly cheap to run, except needing shares in BP, but you can get 30MPG out of it if really REALLY tame cruise control 65mph motorway driving. one of my trip meters I haven't touched for 4000 miles and it says i'm getting 24MPG average. more like 20 on normal driving.
Apart from the rotors & calipers (all brembo so top top quality) and AMG struts & Springs, the rest is C class of same vintage underneath. no scary bills. cam cover gaskets leak on all M113 V8's but its an easyish DIY, sunday afternoon and cups of tea for fuel. use a smidge of liquid gasket to help the original gaskets, mine haven't passed a drop in 6000 miles since done.
I sometimes wonder if the SL55 would be more suited to my sunny days out but the potential for huge bills really puts me off and we've got a young family now so blowing 1000's to keep an older lady in shape wouldn't go down well with the purchasing department.
the SLK55 is a little harsh, not overly crashy but it is no wafter. is your commute on smooth, sweeping roads. if so no problem, but if it's a bit B Road then you may find it tiring work, especially if 40+ miles for example. As an A road crusier its pretty faultless, the auto makes traffic jams easy and the power on tap is quite something. I've owned 1000cc bikes and this thing is quick. weighs a fair bit thou so hauling her ass up needs 300yard stare. you'll notice the baulk from the MX5.
depending on where you are i'd happily show you around mine to give pointers and a proper look at one, drive, show around, things to look for.
there is a lot of useful threads on PH about these.
My advice would be, if a daily, definitely the SLK55. if you were in my position of a sun car, then a harder decision. personally I do not feel i'm in a lesser car in a SLK55 over an SL55, but the waft and engine mountain in the SL55 does appeal. I think a sensible alternative could be the SL350 as a daily, all the show without the bills. Also, pretty cheap. but the same old boxster & 911 adage, once in a 350 it'll be "should've got the 55"......
As a daily, the SLK55 would be the better choice. I've owned for 4 years now and it's a garage toy/sun days, but it is surprisingly cheap to run, except needing shares in BP, but you can get 30MPG out of it if really REALLY tame cruise control 65mph motorway driving. one of my trip meters I haven't touched for 4000 miles and it says i'm getting 24MPG average. more like 20 on normal driving.
Apart from the rotors & calipers (all brembo so top top quality) and AMG struts & Springs, the rest is C class of same vintage underneath. no scary bills. cam cover gaskets leak on all M113 V8's but its an easyish DIY, sunday afternoon and cups of tea for fuel. use a smidge of liquid gasket to help the original gaskets, mine haven't passed a drop in 6000 miles since done.
I sometimes wonder if the SL55 would be more suited to my sunny days out but the potential for huge bills really puts me off and we've got a young family now so blowing 1000's to keep an older lady in shape wouldn't go down well with the purchasing department.
the SLK55 is a little harsh, not overly crashy but it is no wafter. is your commute on smooth, sweeping roads. if so no problem, but if it's a bit B Road then you may find it tiring work, especially if 40+ miles for example. As an A road crusier its pretty faultless, the auto makes traffic jams easy and the power on tap is quite something. I've owned 1000cc bikes and this thing is quick. weighs a fair bit thou so hauling her ass up needs 300yard stare. you'll notice the baulk from the MX5.
depending on where you are i'd happily show you around mine to give pointers and a proper look at one, drive, show around, things to look for.
there is a lot of useful threads on PH about these.
My advice would be, if a daily, definitely the SLK55. if you were in my position of a sun car, then a harder decision. personally I do not feel i'm in a lesser car in a SLK55 over an SL55, but the waft and engine mountain in the SL55 does appeal. I think a sensible alternative could be the SL350 as a daily, all the show without the bills. Also, pretty cheap. but the same old boxster & 911 adage, once in a 350 it'll be "should've got the 55"......
The 996 has the Sword of Damocles engine history having over it. The SLK has no known vices, brakes aside. I'd add that SLK55s with over or close to 100k miles on the clock seem virtually unsellable (well, they seem to hang around for aeons) so bear this in mind and haggle very hard if the car is up there in miles. Also I found a number with corrosion around the latch holes for bonnet and boot.
The SL55 just seems to have the potential for big bills at any time. That's why I plumped for the SLK despite being a big fan of the SL55.
The SL55 just seems to have the potential for big bills at any time. That's why I plumped for the SLK despite being a big fan of the SL55.
I had an SL55 for a good few years and it didn't throw up any major bills but still cost a good few grand a year to keep on top of things. I made sure the suspension on the one I bought had been rebuilt with Arnott parts so was unlikely to break but reading the previous owner's receipts was sobering stuff. The SLK is surely the more sensible choice as it is missing the leaking roof, ABC and other issues.
Then again SL55s and petrol will only be this cheap NOW so you should get one!
Ben
Then again SL55s and petrol will only be this cheap NOW so you should get one!
Ben
stuartdenton said:
Hi
Had both a 996 and a slk 55. Considering your budget the 55 would be the safer bet. Depends on your yearly milage. Just be careful with things like front disk if they are floating, can be expensive to replace, with relative sensible driving should last 45k miles. Also remember that they are 16 spark plugs when it comes change time. I had a 2005 model and did 8K miles only issue was the cam covers that sprang an oil leak.
I had the 996 much longer great car much more involving drive than the 55 and felt as quick. Had a few minor niggles with it but nothing serious however it had only done 32k miles when I bought it and 52k miles when sold. Hoping that helps.
I had both and found the complete opposite. The 996 bored me to death, the 55 on the other hand was a hoot.Had both a 996 and a slk 55. Considering your budget the 55 would be the safer bet. Depends on your yearly milage. Just be careful with things like front disk if they are floating, can be expensive to replace, with relative sensible driving should last 45k miles. Also remember that they are 16 spark plugs when it comes change time. I had a 2005 model and did 8K miles only issue was the cam covers that sprang an oil leak.
I had the 996 much longer great car much more involving drive than the 55 and felt as quick. Had a few minor niggles with it but nothing serious however it had only done 32k miles when I bought it and 52k miles when sold. Hoping that helps.
I had no issues with the 55 other than a leaking boot, which just required a new seal.
Fantastic car.
I'm actually back in a classic MX5 now too (as a weekend car), so have gone full circle. As much fun as more power may seem, the little Mazda just suits the UK roads so well and you can scream its little arse off everywhere.
Edited by RowntreesCabana on Tuesday 20th June 00:39
Thanks again everyone. Much more to think about.
My daily routine is a 22mile commute on exclusively b-roads, cross-country between Wokingham and Kingsclere (half way between Basingstoke and Newbury. Less than 1 mile of it is A road, and I only hit motorways very rarely when I visit my folks in Norwich.
The roads aren't smooth but also aren't stop/start too much, free flowing enough to average 55mpg in mt C220 (yes, I know I will be halving that as well as paying a lot more in tax & insurance. My 5 has track suspension and was until recently supercharged so the ride quality doesn't bother me too much, I just need to inject a bit of fun into my day
My daily routine is a 22mile commute on exclusively b-roads, cross-country between Wokingham and Kingsclere (half way between Basingstoke and Newbury. Less than 1 mile of it is A road, and I only hit motorways very rarely when I visit my folks in Norwich.
The roads aren't smooth but also aren't stop/start too much, free flowing enough to average 55mpg in mt C220 (yes, I know I will be halving that as well as paying a lot more in tax & insurance. My 5 has track suspension and was until recently supercharged so the ride quality doesn't bother me too much, I just need to inject a bit of fun into my day
Gassing Station | Mercedes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff