bknreh

I owned a 2002 AP1 for three years, and at the time it was my favorite car I had ever owned. After three years, I needed something big enough to haul kids and mulch and all that stuff. Since I had always been interested in offroading, I bought a Wrangler. It's awesome, and I love it, but I badly miss my S. Now my Jeep is paid off, and I'm looking at getting a second car.

I don't want to get another S2K because I've always believed that since I have limited funds and a finite lifespan that I should avoid purchasing the same car twice. I've found an immaculate 2005 manual SLK350 AMG with only 52k mi. My question is whether or not I will be disappointed in this car after experiencing an S2000. I've heard some people say that the handling isn't as good on the SLK, etc, etc. Any personal experience comparisons between the two would be greatly appreciated.

And since I know we all enjoy pictures, I've included photos of each vehicle mentioned. (I don't have a picture of this specific SLK, but it looks very similar to the one in this photo.)

TL;DR: Former S2k (AP1) owner. Looking at getting a manual SLK350 AMG. Will I be disappointed?

[attachment=78276:4525644565_4266168f0c_o.jpg]

[attachment=78279:WranglerJK_600px.jpg]

[attachment=78278:2005_mercedes-benz_slk-class-pic-4125184942267858804-1024x768.jpeg]

cbehney

I don't think that car exists. Are you sure it doesn't just have AMG badges thrown onto it?

vader1

AMG's are not 350's and are all auto's I thought.

mosesbotbol

Did you drive the SLK yet? Since you've owned the S2000 for a while, you'll know as soon as drive the SLK if it's for you.

bknreh

Not to be confused with the SLK55 AMG. The AMG package was/is available on the SLK350. It's most styling, exhaust, and suspension changes from what I can gather. Still has the 3.5 V6. Kind of like the difference between the Audi S5 and the A5 S-Line thing that they're doing now.

bknreh

It's being transferred here now. It's a CarMax vehicle. I'll get to drive it next week.

Jdrum1

I've ridden in one (I think it was exactly the same; I wasn't much of a performance car guy then). Haven't had a chance to drive one.

Nice.....very nice, but no surprises there (it is a Merc, after all). Much more comfy than the s (again, no surprise).

I remember a great exhaust note.


I guessing it will feel heavy, and not as analogue as the s.

waltk88

If you really don't want another S2000 but are dead set on a roadster, test drive a Boxster before making a decision.

termigni

I had a few variants. SLK350, SLK350 with AMG kit, SLK55AMG.

SLK is luxury sports car and S2000 is sports car. The ride in the SLK350 is much quieter and refined whereas S2000 is harsh, loud and feels very light and cheap(due to less insulation and fabric top vs. hardtop on the SLK)

Speed wise, I ran 60-110mph on a slight uphill vs a S2000 (Stock vs. Stock) and the SLK350 was actually walking away from S2000. However, S2000 is a quicker car on road courses, not saying that the SLK350 is a slouch in the turns neither. it's about compromises. everyone knows MB can make good ass sports cars. but MB chose to make SLK what it is.

Choosing between SLK 55 AMG and S2000? hands down 55AMG. Loved that V8 growl in that tiny roadster. had a black one and kids used to run up to me asking me about the "bat mobile". what a perfect daily sports car it was..

Marioshi

3250 lbs with only 268hp? I would pass... That gives it a worse power to weight ratio than a Stock S2000 which is already slow.