Discussion
Just taken an SLK350 MANUAL in part-exchange and am driving it for a moment until my new car arrives.
What a hoot! A most underrated track day weapon with a bit of fettling methinks. A plot is hatching in the back of my mind to buy it for myself and have a play in the summer, as it absolutely flies.
I have had the pleasure of SLK55 AMG but I am beginning to think that this is actually more fun. It is of course 85kg lighter but is only 1/2 second slower to 60.
This will do until my new E320 Sport arrives, followed by the C63 AMG
later this year!
'Kin huge tax bill of course but one of the advantages of working at a main dealer!!!
What a hoot! A most underrated track day weapon with a bit of fettling methinks. A plot is hatching in the back of my mind to buy it for myself and have a play in the summer, as it absolutely flies.
I have had the pleasure of SLK55 AMG but I am beginning to think that this is actually more fun. It is of course 85kg lighter but is only 1/2 second slower to 60.
This will do until my new E320 Sport arrives, followed by the C63 AMG
later this year! 'Kin huge tax bill of course but one of the advantages of working at a main dealer!!!
Tazza said:
Mastiff,
Care to expand on the differences between the AMG and the 350? I'm very keen of the AMG, but don't like the gearbox, but loved the sound of the motor. The fact that you can get the 350 with a decent gearbox is rather tempting. But, would you miss the go and the noise?
The AMG is faster, but not as much as a V8 and another 1500ccs would suggest. The 7 speed auto is OK, but much improved with the paddle change option( different ECU software which makes it a little more , err, agressive in S or manual mode.) AMG is £20k more than the 350. AMG is auto only, I think, with different software from the 350 - you can downshift at 10,000rpm, once. 350/280 is idiot proofed or manualCare to expand on the differences between the AMG and the 350? I'm very keen of the AMG, but don't like the gearbox, but loved the sound of the motor. The fact that you can get the 350 with a decent gearbox is rather tempting. But, would you miss the go and the noise?
Try an AMG, then a 350 and see what you think. Both excellent cars.
eldar said:
Tazza said:
Mastiff,
Care to expand on the differences between the AMG and the 350? I'm very keen of the AMG, but don't like the gearbox, but loved the sound of the motor. The fact that you can get the 350 with a decent gearbox is rather tempting. But, would you miss the go and the noise?
The AMG is faster, but not as much as a V8 and another 1500ccs would suggest. The 7 speed auto is OK, but much improved with the paddle change option( different ECU software which makes it a little more , err, agressive in S or manual mode.) AMG is £20k more than the 350. AMG is auto only, I think, with different software from the 350 - you can downshift at 10,000rpm, once. 350/280 is idiot proofed or manualCare to expand on the differences between the AMG and the 350? I'm very keen of the AMG, but don't like the gearbox, but loved the sound of the motor. The fact that you can get the 350 with a decent gearbox is rather tempting. But, would you miss the go and the noise?
Try an AMG, then a 350 and see what you think. Both excellent cars.
Tazza said:
Mastiff,
Care to expand on the differences between the AMG and the 350? I'm very keen of the AMG, but don't like the gearbox, but loved the sound of the motor. The fact that you can get the 350 with a decent gearbox is rather tempting. But, would you miss the go and the noise?
The V6 sounds really nice as is, but there are other pipe options available (Brabus) etc and the induction noise is great.Care to expand on the differences between the AMG and the 350? I'm very keen of the AMG, but don't like the gearbox, but loved the sound of the motor. The fact that you can get the 350 with a decent gearbox is rather tempting. But, would you miss the go and the noise?
As for performance, over the 350 the AMG does not really get it gloves off until speeds that are largely irrelevant.
Given the cost difference and allowing for running costs as well, I never thought I'd say it but this 350 is beginning to make more "sense" than the AMG.
It may not have the "occasion" of the AMG, but I cannot remember having this much fun for under £25K since the TVR days.
It really is that good.
garyhun said:
eldar said:
Tazza said:
Mastiff,
Care to expand on the differences between the AMG and the 350? I'm very keen of the AMG, but don't like the gearbox, but loved the sound of the motor. The fact that you can get the 350 with a decent gearbox is rather tempting. But, would you miss the go and the noise?
The AMG is faster, but not as much as a V8 and another 1500ccs would suggest. The 7 speed auto is OK, but much improved with the paddle change option( different ECU software which makes it a little more , err, agressive in S or manual mode.) AMG is £20k more than the 350. AMG is auto only, I think, with different software from the 350 - you can downshift at 10,000rpm, once. 350/280 is idiot proofed or manualCare to expand on the differences between the AMG and the 350? I'm very keen of the AMG, but don't like the gearbox, but loved the sound of the motor. The fact that you can get the 350 with a decent gearbox is rather tempting. But, would you miss the go and the noise?
Try an AMG, then a 350 and see what you think. Both excellent cars.
Turn the traction control off for a bit of fun. You can also put it in 'rolling road' mode, which turns everything off. Lunatic, but not on the road...Mastiff said:
As for performance, over the 350 the AMG does not really get it gloves off until speeds that are largely irrelevant. Given the cost difference and allowing for running costs as well, I never thought I'd say it but this 350 is beginning to make more "sense" than the AMG.
I've been thinking about getting a 55AMG but that makes me thing. I would prefer an automatic, so presumably the choice swings back to the 55AMG then.Also - any views on the SL500?
thanks
razbox said:
Mastiff said:
As for performance, over the 350 the AMG does not really get it gloves off until speeds that are largely irrelevant. Given the cost difference and allowing for running costs as well, I never thought I'd say it but this 350 is beginning to make more "sense" than the AMG.
I've been thinking about getting a 55AMG but that makes me thing. I would prefer an automatic, so presumably the choice swings back to the 55AMG then.Also - any views on the SL500?
thanks
razbox said:
Mastiff said:
As for performance, over the 350 the AMG does not really get it gloves off until speeds that are largely irrelevant. Given the cost difference and allowing for running costs as well, I never thought I'd say it but this 350 is beginning to make more "sense" than the AMG.
I've been thinking about getting a 55AMG but that makes me thing. I would prefer an automatic, so presumably the choice swings back to the 55AMG then.Also - any views on the SL500?
thanks
Mastiff said:
I have had the pleasure of SLK55 AMG but I am beginning to think that this is actually more fun. It is of course 85kg lighter but is only 1/2 second slower to 60.
Only if you are going on the figure printed in all the magazines which is conservative. In the US, Car and Driver did actually test both the SLK55 and the manual SLK350:http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/car_...
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/high...
0-60 is 4.3 seconds vs 5.3 seconds - a bit more than half a second
0-100 is 10.3 seconds vs 13.1 seconds
Standing 1/4 mile 12.7 seconds vs 13.8 seconds.
With about 90 bhp and 120 lb ft difference it's not really all that close
I guess that makes it a second difference - or close to 25%. Give the traction problems
steve-p said:
Olf said:
Quite a difference between the two in thirst BTW. The 350 is a pretty economical engine considering. The 55 is not.
Yes mine has only averaged 22 MPG overall, but it has done 29 a couple of times on a long motorway cruise which isn't so bad.steve-p said:
Olf said:
Quite a difference between the two in thirst BTW. The 350 is a pretty economical engine considering. The 55 is not.
Yes mine has only averaged 22 MPG overall, but it has done 29 a couple of times on a long motorway cruise which isn't so bad.Olf said:
steve-p said:
Olf said:
Quite a difference between the two in thirst BTW. The 350 is a pretty economical engine considering. The 55 is not.
Yes mine has only averaged 22 MPG overall, but it has done 29 a couple of times on a long motorway cruise which isn't so bad.Gassing Station | Mercedes | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff