Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Coupes & Convertibles Mercedes-Benz SL/SLK-Class Mercedes-Benz SL and SLK (all models)
766 messages, Last post on Oct 26, 2009 at 3:12 AM
You are in the Mercedes-Benz SL/SLK-Class Forum. Your Host is claires
|
Something MB needs, especially for the SL500, is a stunning visual example of engineering excellence. This is something I haven't seen MB try to advertise to the public for a while. Not many companies make an effort to do that, however when they do try the effect can be stunning. I think most people here remember the wine glass television commercials that accompanied the debut of the LS400. (The stack of wine glasses remaining perfectly balanced on a LS400 doing 150mph on a dyno.) That simple ad caused half the jaws in America to drop. MB needs something like that for the SL500. Fact or fiction, the encroachment of the luxury imports, the steady progress of BMW and Audi, and the growing QA concerns about MB are starting to tarnish the image of excellence that Benz has enjoyed for quite some time. If the SL500 is MB's response to the last five years, then it should be mated to a stunning advertising campaign that shows what the car is or means. For better or for worse, the press reviews on the SL500 are generally filled with praise but as the previous poster pointed out, they haven't had that "this is the best car in the universe" quality that the forum posters here were alleging the new SL to have prior to its actual release. If the SL500 is supposed to be something more special than "a very nice car for a lot of money" then now is the time for them to make a statement. Says edmunds.com: "What really separates the SL from its competitors, which we'll call the Porsche 911, Jaguar XKR, Maserati Spyder and the already-referenced Lexus SC, is that thrill you get from constantly discovering new features not even dreamed of in those other cars." Note that they didn't pin the SL's strengths on its build quality, or on the stuff "inside" that may not appear on the surface. On the contrary, the review essentially boiled down to, "the SL500 is a really cool car because it has a lot of gadgets and buttons." I can't explain why, but that isn't what I was expecting an auto journalist to take away from an experience in the new SL. This car should not be wowing auto journalists in the same way a 3000GT VR4 wowed journalists. |
|
| Good to have a Merc writer who isn't a quivering mess of cliches! Love the SL, but cosidering how long they've had to design it, and what the word is on what it delivers, I'm disappointed. I think Lexus offers a car about as good for $25k less with a more glamourous design. And the vents on the hood and fender suck..... still a great car though..... | |
|
For the record I think the SL500 is a nice car. However comparing its MSRP versus that of the SL55, the SL55 seems to be a lot closer to the car the SL500 *should* be for its price, and the SLK32's bang-for-the-buck makes me wonder about the value of the SL500. Which would you rather have: a new SL500, or a SLK32 AMG and about $40k cash? I could be wrong in saying this, but the only thing the SL500 seems to have on the SLK AMG are electronic gimmicks, a thousand pounds and "heritage"... I guess I'm not as impressed by the SL500 as I figured I ought to be, given what I believe are (in my opinion) two much, much better convertible hardtop roadsters in MB's own model lineup. Maybe the problem isn't so much that the SL500 is bad, but rather that the AMG models are so GOOD. |
|
| But I see the SLK as too small and toy-like. I'm well over six feet and need a full size ride. How much is the AMG upgrade? $20k? $25k? | |
|
|
|
The reference to "sawing the Mercedes in half" was only partially related to the idea of body strength. My point was that there are many hidden quality features in the construction of the car, which includes, besides strength, elegant forms of wiring, insulation, alloys, couplers, braces, hold-downs, and beautifully machined parts you will never see. I know a lot about Benz because I used to work for them and toured their factory many times as a VIP. I can't say how a 1990 Lexus compares point for point. My point was that if you can't see the $25K difference between an SL500 and an SC430, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THERE ISN'T ONE (emphasis added but no shouting intended). I was only suggesting WHY you or someone couldn't readily see the $25K. It's in the a) technology, and b) the details. As for Car and Driver, well they are the "bad boys" of the automotive press, and also it's a free country (more or less) . Personally, I thought their comments were pretty dumb. When you have to rail about dash vents you are getting fairly desperate for criticism. As for the ABC remark, I am no fan of automatic controls of any kind on a car, so I revel in any criticism of them. Basically it always comes down to this: If you cannot see and feel how the SL500 has raised the bar over the SC430, with your own test drive, research, and eyeballs, then buy the Lexus and be happy, because in truth then you have made the wiser choice. As for the Hyundai air vents, it well may be true. The Japanese probably copied them, just like Mazda Protege copied EXACTLY the air vents from my 1988 Alfa Romeo Spyder! I consider it a compliment, that from all the engineers in all of Japan, they chose my humble car to copy. Love it. |
|
|
Again your point is meaningless because you YOURSELF say that the SL is the better car. That should be the end of the discussion. If the SC is not the better car then why are still going on and on about it?? Your coments in post #50 about the CLK's structual rigidity make no sense at all. Read the introduction articles about the CLK320 Cabrio when it first came out the car was solid when it debuted and it's still more solid than your new Lexus of today. Period. Shows how much you know about Mercedes-Benz. You post is nothing more than continuious harping about the SC430 being a lesser car than the SL500, which you've (you yourself) have already agreed on. I don't understand what you keep bringing this up for. You can talking about Lexus until you loose feeling in your typing fingers, but the fact remains that Mercedes makes better convertibles, easily the best luxury convertibles on the market. If all you can do is quote C&D you're lost and will thus never get it. More dust. What I find truly amazing about your theories is that they're all exuses for Lexus, yet if Mercedes would have lost that comparo and I in turn said that the CLK430 should have lost due to it being the older car of the two....you wouldn't be trying to hear any of that. The Lexus SC430 looses to the CLK430 and the SL500, get over it. sphinx99, What are you talking about??? Mercedes needs a showcase of engineering achievements? The fastest folding hardtop, Electronic brakes, active suspension, rollover protection (they were first in 1990 to do this) not to mention all of Mercedes' traditional strengths, all wrapped in some of the best looking sheetmetal on the road. What you fail to realize is the Lexus needed something like balancing wine glasses on it's hood because it was a new brand and it had to prove itself. Mercedes would never need such hype (bs) to sell the SL, people who know Mercedes already know that the SL is where Mercedes does their best work. Mercedes needs no such fluff for a car that is sold out worldwide. Both you all pick up a copy of Sports Car International. Car and Driver believe it or not doesn't really like Mercedes, they're BMW fans overall. Neither of you have been able to answer this question for months. If the SL500 isn't the best in class, what is? It's seems to me that the SL500 is so untouchable in you guys minds to the point where you have to reach for something, anything to try and get around the facts about this car. Now the SLK32 makes the SL500's "value" questionable. Please.... The SLK32 is a completely different car, with much less technology, space, features, and it's playing the performance card first, luxury second. In the end it doesn't matter much, because Mercedes sells all the units available on BOTH cars. Yes you are wrong here. M |
|
|
They (C&D) have to reach to find something wrong with the car. Yeah the vents aren't as solid as they thought they should be and he retro styling details didn't set well with them...wow! I guess that make the SL a terrible car. M |
|
|
Last week I attended a launch party for SL at our local dealer, and over the weekend had a test ride. This car is beautiful & solid. I have had an SC430 for the past year. The SL has a much more solid feel and more responsive as well. Creature comfort is everywhere. The trunk "felt" as it had twice the room compared to SC. The SL trunk is deeper and goes a little further back. Although you have to push a button to have the folded top raised a bit before you can reach all the available space. Two more features on SL which are not on SC: 1 - You can operate the top with your remote key. 2 - Top can be opened and closed with the Windows up. One thing I did not like was the lack of in-dash CD changer. Although the cartridge is positoned behind the driver's seat and somewhat easy to access. Folks, MB did its job well. I have orders for both SL & SL55. No complaint about my SC. It's just time to move on. New orders for SL here in West LA have an eight months wait and growing. SL 55 should be here in March/April 2003. |
|
|
Did they mention if there was a SL600 coming? What's the price of the SL55? M |
|
| Shiftright........ the two probable factors in the price difference of the Sc and the SL are one, lower labor cost/efficiencies, and two, the extra safety/engineering technologies added in the SL. Obviously, if JD Power has a worthy opinion, Lexus vehicles are built to last as long and as reliable (if not more so) than any Benz....... and you seemed to miss the criticizm by C&D. They're saying that Bex TOOK HYUNDAIS interior pieces, implying lower quality/luxurious interior materials than may be required for the price. This ties in with the disappointed tenor of the article, harping on what they expected, but didn't get in the 2003 redesign......... Merc - YOU are the one pushing this argument by ignoring facts, being stubborn, and showing no respect for the competition. I'm TRYING to be HONEST! Now C&D all of the sudden has no credibility? Can you HONESTLY say sfter reading hat article that they were IMPRESSED by the redesigned car? And you LOVE the vents on the hood and fender? It doesn't smack of "Pontiac-esque", tacked-on style? Should they ignore such a gaff on a car that is redesigned every three presidents? Are you willing to allow that someone else makes an appealing competitor? Your silence on these issues borders of cowardice. I'm showing proper respect for a legend. That certainly doesn't mean that the Lexus is "dust" or outclassed by any means. The integrity of the SL was definitely questioned in the article, do you deny that?...... If I was there, I would have picked the CLK too, as driving dynamics are of supreme inportance i these comparisons. All I'm saying is this issue is a PERFECT bass for discussion of the differences of the two cars (SL and SC). Both are flawed, both have some integrity issues, one has the seats and the drive of a Buick, while one has the interior of a $35k car, not an $85k car. That's my point. The issue clearly sowed that these cars are more alike than different. When you can show fair respect for the new competition, and admit the new car's flaws have been exposed, you let me know........ | |
You are here:
Forums
Coupes & Convertibles Mercedes-Benz SL/SLK-Class Mercedes-Benz SL and SLK (all models)
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2009 Mercedes-Benz SL-Class
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
