Opinions Please Slk280 Or Porsche Boxster

[taumaan]

I do realise that this is a MB forum and that opinions may well be biassed...but would love to hear your opinions to help me decide between a SLK and a Boxster...

Particularly interested in running costs, consumption, resale values etc....trying to think with my head here....budget around £15 000

Any Porsche owners?

cheers

 

[jeremytaylor]

I had a Boxster S (986) and have driven an SLK200 extensively. A Boxster is a far better and more involving drive, but will cost you more in running costs.

 

[wemorgan]

My opinion doesn't count as I've not driven either, but I'd vote for the SLK due to the folding hardtop.

I also imagine serving/repairs of the Boxster would be more, as access is difficult.

 

[BTB 500]

Every test I've seen puts the Boxster ahead as being a better drive. Depends if you can live with the push me/pull you looks and "wannbe 911" image. I couldn't.

 

[A210AMG]

Depending where you live / park the folding roof could sway this.

I have had colleagues with the 2.5, 2.7 and 3.2 Boxsters, off course the 3.2 was nicer (noise / quicker). I would think on a bendy road you will have much more fun in the Boxster.


I do however think they are looking a little dated now, as the shape is pretty much the same as a 1998 model. They can also be VERY basic as option were pricey. As mentioned above image of the poor mans porsche?


The SLK is a far fresher newer car, in the real world probably almost as quick. Even some 350's cheap now.

I would probably choose the Merc as newer car / newer shape, more likely a better spec and still pleanty of fun when you want

 

[Rovinghawk]

I've driven both extensively and concur with the guys above- the boxster is a more involved/rewarding drive but risks envious scratches & has a greater risk due to the soft roof.

The SLK has a massively better boot & more spacious cabin, ie better for road trips. The suspension is also softer.In addition, the SLK has an easy roof control whereas with the Boxster you have to get out when putting the roof down or risk damaging the rear screen.

For manual gearboxes the porsche is streets ahead of the Benz, for auto the Benz is better by miles.

My SLK does 34.8mpg (really), my ex's Boxster S did 28mpg on similar roads. Work on the SLK engine is much easier due to access and should therefore be cheaper.

I debated both cars & decided on the SLK.

RH

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

Boxster for me

<ducks and runs>

 

[Meldrew2]

As an SLK owner, I may be biased, but my opinion is that the choice is

... If you are a Merchant Banker, or indeed if you work anywhere in financial services, buy a Porsche

... If you have taste and discretion, buy the Mercedes


(like the 1980's choice - if you wear a shellsuit buy an XR3 / if you live in Chelsea, buy a Golf GTi)

 

[BaldGuy]

I've also had a Boxster S and its a great drive, Some say its one of the best Porsches for handing being mid-engined... servicing is not too dear compared to a Benz if you use a good indie.... I used Ray Northway near Reading.. I've also driven a SLK 320 and I wasnt taken at all... no offence to anyone but I thought it was a bit of a girls car....If you were asking me I'd go with the Boxster every day...

 

[BTB 500]

no offence to anyone but I thought it was a bit of a girls car

Unfortunately that image affects most small convertibles - Boxster included.

 

[C240Sport97]

I had a R170 and now I have the 987 (current shape) Boxster.

Boxster if you want driving pleasure, and engine howl of a flat six -- there really is nothing like it. Handling is leagues ahead of an SLK.

Also, a Boxster has 2 boots (front and back) which is unaffected by whether the roof is up or down.

SLK is more a cruiser, more refined and is seriously compromised for touring in summer .. where your luggage space for is massively reduced for top down motoring.

Boxsters also have known problems with IMS and RMS failures, which can be expensive. More here: www.boxa.net

Styling wise, the Boxster, like all Porsches is an evolution. The basic shape goes back decades, and there is no other car that looks like a Porsche, with a front with 2 raised flanks on either side.

I like the lines of the Boxster .. it is timeless, and not fashion conscious. If you like your design 'bang up to date', the Boxster won't suit.

2 very different cars. The Boxster requires much more 'commitment' and driver input, while the SLK is a pert little roadster which is actually a small Mercedes saloon with decent handling.

 

[Skintia99]

Porsche would perhaps be more exclusive but SLK would be a bit more discreet, depends what you value most I suppose. Better Drive - Porsche / More comfort - Merc

 

[The Boss]

Go for the SLK.. their style holds truer value than Porsche and also, the Porsches seem to change face very regularly, thus the benz will hold its value better and for longer due to the constant same face appearance... a new one or a 3 yr old looks very similar, whilst the boxter, pre, post, 2nd post and 3rd post facelifts have the tweeks as tell tale signs of whats new and whats old etc

 

[Dryce]

For manual gearboxes the porsche is streets ahead of the Benz, for auto the Benz is better by miles.

I would say if you want an auto go for the SLK. If you want a manual go for the Boxster if you can afford it.

I have a friend with a Boxster. He likes it. His servicing costs over a couple of years ownership make MB ownership look cheap (maybe he's been unlucky). He has a hard top which is a twice per year planned logistical exercise to fit and remove/store safely.

I'd go for the SLK based on the the fact I'd want an auto and I'd not go for a soft top convertible.

 

[Adam230K]

I've also had a Boxster S and its a great drive, Some say its one of the best Porsches for handing being mid-engined... servicing is not too dear compared to a Benz if you use a good indie.... I used Ray Northway near Reading.. I've also driven a SLK 320 and I wasnt taken at all... no offence to anyone but I thought it was a bit of a girls car....If you were asking me I'd go with the Boxster every day...

He took the words right out of my mouth... er keyboard

 

[Spartacus]

I bought a 99 plate 2.5 Boxster after considering an SLK.

I upgraded from a Clio 182 which was mental but the Boxster despite being a faster car made driving far more enjoyable.

Drive both and choose depending upon your driving style.

I had to sell my Boxster 2 years ago and I still miss it. A fabulous car and yes I had the dreaded RMS but needed a new clutch anyway so cost was £800 all in. Servicing was done by a local independant. His advice was to stick £300 under the mattress for repairs.

www.boxa.net is great for advice. Buy carefully though, lots of dogs out there.

Both are great cars but if you buy the SLK you will never keep up with a Boxster and you will never have owned a ' Porsha !'

If you are in the mood for blast and you meet a Boxster in your SLK you will regret your decision.

 

[Dryce]

you will never have owned a ' Porsha !'

Sadly I think this statement applies to anyone who has never owned a 911.

The Boxster may be a Porsche but such is the power of the 911 as an integral part of the brand that anything that isn't in the 911 family isn't a 'real' Porsche. It's an almost but not quite sort of situation for the Boxster.

 

[Adam230K]

Sadly I think this statement applies to anyone who has never owned a 911.

The Boxster may be a Porsche but such is the power of the 911 as an integral part of the brand that anything that isn't in the 911 family isn't a 'real' Porsche. It's an almost but not quite sort of situation for the Boxster.

I really dont understand statements like these. The boxster is clearly made by 'PORSCHE', therefore if he buys it, he will have owned a porsche. Who cares if it isn't as powerful as a 911, it handles very well and does the job as an entry level to porsche.

Same goes for when people say the C class isn't a real merc or its entry level, none-the-less its still branded and built by MERCEDES. Then you look at the C63 and realise its the benchmark that mercedes have been looking for.

my 2p worth

 

[crockers]

Sadly I think this statement applies to anyone who has never owned a 911.

The Boxster may be a Porsche but such is the power of the 911 as an integral part of the brand that anything that isn't in the 911 family isn't a 'real' Porsche. It's an almost but not quite sort of situation for the Boxster.

Hmmm the Cayman (boxster with a steel top) is deliberately kept underpowered because if it was powered to its full potential no-one would pay the extra for a 911. I don't see the Boxster as a poor man's Porsche...I think it is a great car. Having driven Boxster, Boxster S and a SLK 200 - I would put the Boxster S as the one I would want. The other two felt underpowered. Then I haven't tried the SLK 350 - all things being equal I would go for the SLK as I prefer its looks, cabin and hard top.

 

[Matt32AMG]

I've also had a Boxster S and its a great drive, Some say its one of the best Porsches for handing being mid-engined... servicing is not too dear compared to a Benz if you use a good indie.... I used Ray Northway near Reading.. I've also driven a SLK 320 and I wasnt taken at all... no offence to anyone but I thought it was a bit of a girls car....If you were asking me I'd go with the Boxster every day...

Should've driven a 32amg! not quite the same deal