Ask the Car People.SM


Mercedes-Benz SL and SLK (all models)

786 messages,  Last post on Jul 24, 2012 at 10:07 AM

You are in the Mercedes-Benz SL/SLK-Class Forum.

What is this discussion about? Mercedes-Benz SL-Class, Convertible

Messages Page 68 of 79

#669 of 786 Re: 2005 MB SL500 [zeaman] by merc1

Mar 18, 2006 (7:24 am)

Replying to: zeaman (Mar 17, 2006 10:10 am)
Well I don't think it has as much to do with MB's recent bad press about reliability as it does age and supply/demand like the previous post says. The SL has more than a few younger competitors now and its a niche car to begin with. There are all sorts of cars playing in the space the SL literally had all to itself just a few years ago. You have Maserati's Spyder, Jaguar's new XK, a new 911 Cabrio and Bentley (though not a roadster) is on fire right now. There is even worthy competitor from Cadillac angling for a piece of the SL's market. Mercedes is being squeezed from all sides, and the reliability issues don't help. However with any car once production catches up with demand this is what happens. Unless the car is a Ferrari or some other model where they have a set number they're going to build and then that is it.
 
That said watch the sales numbers go up once the 07' model arrives. A base SL with 382hp should really be popular, it almost makes the 55/600/65 models irrelevant, IMO.
 
M

#670 of 786 Re: 2005 MB SL500 [zeaman] by habitat1

Mar 18, 2006 (11:15 am)

Replying to: zeaman (Mar 17, 2006 10:10 am)
As someone who bought a 2005 911S Cabriolet, my sense is that, as merc points out, the SL now has a lot more players in its space. And make no mistake, at 4,000+ lbs, it's no svelte sports car. There are a lot of other 2 seater and 2+2 GT cars that compete in the $100k territory. I would also put the new AM V8, the 650i and M6 on that list.
 
Personally - and obviously I am biased - I could never see getting the SL over the new 997 911 Cab. The old 911's were edgy (to the preference of purists) but the new 911 is both an extraordinary performing sports car and a pretty comfortable, well equiped highway cruiser. I have nearly 6,000 miles on ours in 6 months and a third of those have been with the kids in the back. Not to mention that the 911 has received high reliability ratings:
 
Most reliable luxury cars
 
I also think Mercedes is cannibalizing on the SL with its other models. It used to be that the SL was the only non-sedan in Mercedes lineup. Now you have the CL, CLS and SLK and CLK Cab all nicking away at the SL's market. It also used to be that the SL500 was the top dog in terms of Mercedes performance. Now, unfortunately, compared to the competition, it is just a dog. The added horsepower of the 2007 may help, but it could also go on a 1,000 lb diet and a (non AMG) suspension upgrade as well. In the long run, I am not sure how many "niche" models Mercedes can profitably maintain. One of my friends is a Mercedes fleet leasing specialist and he's indicated that there are "deals to be had" on every one of the aforementioned models, including every AMG variant.

#671 of 786 Re: 2005 MB SL500 [habitat1] by merc1

Mar 19, 2006 (2:22 pm)

Replying to: habitat1 (Mar 18, 2006 11:15 am)
I also think Mercedes is cannibalizing on the SL with its other models. It used to be that the SL was the only non-sedan in Mercedes lineup. Now you have the CL, CLS and SLK and CLK Cab all nicking away at the SL's market. It also used to be that the SL500 was the top dog in terms of Mercedes performance. Now, unfortunately, compared to the competition, it is just a dog. The added horsepower of the 2007 may help, but it could also go on a 1,000 lb diet and a (non AMG) suspension upgrade as well. In the long run, I am not sure how many "niche" models Mercedes can profitably maintain. One of my friends is a Mercedes fleet leasing specialist and he's indicated that there are "deals to be had" on every one of the aforementioned models, including every AMG variant.
 
Not true. The CL (S-Class Coupe before 1997) has been around for ages and the CLK has been around since 1998. The only victim of the SLK was the underpowered SL320 version of the previous R129 SL. The CLK, SLK and SL are all in different price ranges and though the SLK and SL are both 2-seaters they aren't even close in price. Yeah I know you don't consider the SLK a sports car either, but it is the sportier of the two and is no slouch. The SL is the luxury GT that is still entertaining to drive.
 
We've had this conversation before about the SL and its intended purpose which is not to compete with your car. I know you're just talking when saying that SL is a "dog" so I'll let that go.
 
M

#672 of 786 Re: 2005 MB SL500 [merc1] by habitat1

Mar 22, 2006 (12:11 pm)

Replying to: merc1 (Mar 19, 2006 2:22 pm)
"We've had this conversation before about the SL and its intended purpose which is not to compete with your car. I know you're just talking when saying that SL is a "dog" so I'll let that go."
 
Thanks for forgiving me that momentary indescretion. The SL500 is hardly a dog, but if it is due for an 80 horsepower upgrade, that should help push its 4,000 lb curb weight a bit more forcefully.
 
And I guess you are right about the other models being around in the past, but they have definitely gotten a bit more competitive recently. I know of someone that traded an old 500 SL for the redesigned SLK 55. Would never have done that with the old body style SLK.
 
It also seems that Mercedes is pushing AMG models in higher volumes. It seems like I see about 1 SL55 for every 2 SL500's here in the DC area.

#673 of 786 Re: 2005 MB SL500 [habitat1] by merc1

Mar 22, 2006 (10:39 pm)

Replying to: habitat1 (Mar 22, 2006 12:11 pm)
I know of someone that traded an old 500 SL for the redesigned SLK 55. Would never have done that with the old body style SLK.
 
True. I thought the first SLK was cute, but nothing more. This new one especially the SLK55 is really a great little roadster, all that is missing is the stick for some folks.
 
M

#674 of 786 Re: 2005 MB SL500 [merc1] by bosco42

Mar 28, 2006 (5:06 am)

Replying to: merc1 (Mar 22, 2006 10:39 pm)
There are plenty of good deals out there now. I just picked up a brand new 2006 SL500 for $12,000 off list.

#675 of 786 Re: 2005 MB SL500 [bosco42] by zeaman

Mar 28, 2006 (8:16 am)

Replying to: bosco42 (Mar 28, 2006 5:06 am)
You beat my deal by $1,000. Is your car loaded? Mine has Sports Package, Trim Package, Xenon and invisible bra. MZ

#676 of 786 Opening the trunk of a 450SL with a dead battery by theroadster

Apr 25, 2006 (4:09 pm)

Does anyone know how to get the trunk open on a 450SL when the battery, which is in the trunk, has died?. I've had to do it once before and can not for the life of me remember how I did it. The key opens the trunk but with the assistance of an electrically controlled release mechanism. I don't want to damage the chrome or paint. It's a '78 450SL. I just bought it a year or so ago and it did not come with an owners manual. They are out of print.

#677 of 786 Re: 2005 MB SL500 [bosco42] by carnut100

May 01, 2006 (10:35 am)

Replying to: bosco42 (Mar 28, 2006 5:06 am)
There are plenty of good deals out there. I just traded in my 04 SL500 for $67500 and got the 2006 SL500 for $11k off window (because 07 is coming early). I think the reason for the softness in the market is that there just are not a lot of buyers for this niche and interest rates are rising. The Porsche is really for a different buyer. My wife and I wanted to change this time (third SL in a row after a series of Jag XKs) and test drove the Porsche S with Tiptronic. A comparably performing and equipped Porsche was actually more expensive, but was a little to rough for us and had too much wind noise with the top up. The Cadillac is a toy, in that you cannot go away for the weekend with the top down and luggage ... or go to a golf course with your spouse. We like the SL because it is practical and with the hardtop, a good winter car. It is a driver for us so the extra room behind the seat and in the trunk (versus a cadillac) is important. The new Jag may be a competitor, but the front end looks like a Taurus and traditionally, does not hold its value as well as a Porsche or Mercedes.

#678 of 786 Re: Trunk Release for 1985 280 SL [dwilson2] by theroadster

May 01, 2006 (4:32 pm)

Replying to: dwilson2 (Feb 06, 2006 5:00 pm)
Dave, If you take a flat crowbar, slide it up )the end with the hook) above the trunk key button while you have the key inserted and turned counterclockwise and depressed to where it normally should open it will release like you effected it with a key ...my battery died as a result of leaving a parking light on overnight - after posting here and getting no response, I used the crow bar again...With the battery in the trunk dead and the activator of the trunk lid key opener non-functional because of the need for battery power, I do not believe that you have any alternative but to use a crowbar...Also, Important: make sure that you have unlocked the front door(s)before trying to unlock & open the trunk...If you know a better method I'd like to hear from you...I'm at peterabbaart.com. Circumvent this forum because it sent me an e-mail for the latest post, and I still can't figure out why I never got directed to your earlier Feb post using a search term which included the word "trunk" for basically the identical request, other than our models being different. Peter/theroadster

Messages Page 68 of 79

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement