Traded up
11-21-2004, 06:10 AM
#11
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Port
Yea I'm serious, I dont have an album option.
anyway her is a likn to the pictures on the mbworld site
http://forums.mbworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=89199
I hope it works.
cheers
Yea I'm serious, I dont have an album option.
anyway her is a likn to the pictures on the mbworld site
http://forums.mbworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=89199
I hope it works.
cheers
11-21-2004, 08:09 AM
#13
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
love this car
I had a S2000, what i consider the purest sports car ever built (only the FY00-03 models), so that is what I compare it to.
the 55 is way more confortable, but comfort was not a factor when I bought the S, now that I'm older and have back problems it's a definite factor now.
I loved the connected feel of the S to the road and thought I would have to give that up. I was wrong, the 55 feels stuck to the road and lets me feel every inch, but does not beat me up with it.
The power is awsome, my S always felt like it wanted to just run fast, this thing feels like a lion just waiting for me to tell it to attack. I'm just waiting for the 1000mile break in. I test drove the SLK350 at my dealer. that car is very comparable to the S in performance. from 0-20mph I think the 350 would have a slight edge, 20-100 almost exactly the same feel, 100> (This is why I went for the 55 instead of the 350) the s2000 is definitely quicker from 100 to 120. I think it's because of the automatic slk vs the manual on the s the manual slk would probably be slightly quicker.
Handling the s2000 (old version) handled as good as or better than a F348 (my opinion, I did a comparison) The 350 would proably not be able to stay with a S on the curves but would not be out of visual range either, hard to say with the 55, it feels just as solid on the road as the S but I tend to think the physics of the extra 600lbs on the 55 would push it out of the curve earlier, it would probably come down to what kind of rubber you have.
Overall I think the 55 would probably compare in performance to a supercharged S2000, as good or better than a 911S, (just an opinion)
Cheers
I had a S2000, what i consider the purest sports car ever built (only the FY00-03 models), so that is what I compare it to.
the 55 is way more confortable, but comfort was not a factor when I bought the S, now that I'm older and have back problems it's a definite factor now.
I loved the connected feel of the S to the road and thought I would have to give that up. I was wrong, the 55 feels stuck to the road and lets me feel every inch, but does not beat me up with it.
The power is awsome, my S always felt like it wanted to just run fast, this thing feels like a lion just waiting for me to tell it to attack. I'm just waiting for the 1000mile break in. I test drove the SLK350 at my dealer. that car is very comparable to the S in performance. from 0-20mph I think the 350 would have a slight edge, 20-100 almost exactly the same feel, 100> (This is why I went for the 55 instead of the 350) the s2000 is definitely quicker from 100 to 120. I think it's because of the automatic slk vs the manual on the s the manual slk would probably be slightly quicker.
Handling the s2000 (old version) handled as good as or better than a F348 (my opinion, I did a comparison) The 350 would proably not be able to stay with a S on the curves but would not be out of visual range either, hard to say with the 55, it feels just as solid on the road as the S but I tend to think the physics of the extra 600lbs on the 55 would push it out of the curve earlier, it would probably come down to what kind of rubber you have.
Overall I think the 55 would probably compare in performance to a supercharged S2000, as good or better than a 911S, (just an opinion)
Cheers
11-21-2004, 09:05 AM
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: columbus
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"My wife and I were driving and we saw what looked like SL tails. But one of the lights was fu(&ed up and steady bright on one side. Got closer and it pulled to the side of the road... White 2005 SLK with temp plates... and already electrical problems.
Lovely looking car and drives well from the reviews... hope the Chrysler influence isn't too strong.... car looks sweet. "
This is the rear fog light option that most u.s. cars do not have, owner probably didnt know how to work it!!
Lovely looking car and drives well from the reviews... hope the Chrysler influence isn't too strong.... car looks sweet. "
This is the rear fog light option that most u.s. cars do not have, owner probably didnt know how to work it!!
11-21-2004, 11:34 AM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ckcrigger,Nov 20 2004, 09:43 PM
My wife and I were driving and we saw what looked like SL tails. But one of the lights was fu(&ed up and steady bright on one side. Got closer and it pulled to the side of the road... White 2005 SLK with temp plates... and already electrical problems. 
Lovely looking car and drives well from the reviews... hope the Chrysler influence isn't too strong.... car looks sweet.
Lovely looking car and drives well from the reviews... hope the Chrysler influence isn't too strong.... car looks sweet.
Anyhoo, congrats on the new SLK55. I was going to go test drive the SLK 350, but maybe I should wait for that one.
I test drove the BMW Z4 3.0 w/ SMG yesterday due to the hugh rebate. The sales person told me that MB is doing away with the 4 yr/50k mile FREE maintenance due to the merge w/ Diamler Chrysler. Is that true?
