• The Forums are now open to new registrations, adverts are also being de-tuned.

SLK55 R172 - test drive report

C240Sport97

Hardcore MB Enthusiast
SUPPORTER
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Messages
10,057
Location
London E1
Car
SL400, VW California Coast and 911 GT3
I got an overnight loaner (non Performance Pack) from Mercedes Tonbridge (MBUK demo car) and did around 350 miles in it.

In my mind, this was the ideal replacement for my CLS55.

Initially, I was utterly seduced, and was sure I was going to order one.

By the next day, I had decided it was not for me. I had started off wanting one badly.

The engine is wonderful; sonorous, powerful, free revving and responsive. It sounds like a true naturally aspirated V8, rorty, honest and clear. Utter delight.

The gearbox much less so. It thunks on high speed/rev changes, and is reluctant to downshift at times. It felt dull witted to me when driving spiritedly. Not a patch on the MCT gearbox. Even when operating normally, speed of gear change is last century. I think the gearbox is the single weakest dynamic point of the car.

Handling is fine on smooth and even roads. However, once the road becomes bumpy and/or uneven, the chassis really struggles; it skips, jumps and is nervous and skittish when crossing diagonal lateral cracks on the road. The lack of composure and damping finesse is very obvious on badly maintained A and B roads. It feels distinctly hot rod in a way. A sports car, definitely not.

On corners driven enthusiastically, there is no feel from the steering wheel. The only real indicator of what the car is doing is body lean and suspension crashing into bumps and undulations.

It does not feel properly and exhaustively developed like other AMG cars I have owned (CLK55 and CLS55) and driven (SLS, SL55 and C63 coupe). For me, the SLK55 is an AMG only as far as the engine is concerned. It is terribly compromised, and does not deliver on AMG's traditional values.

At the end of the day, the short wheelbase and the huge weight on the front axle cannot cope with the dynamic demands place on them when driving to take advantage of the amazing engine.

It's like a person with a perfect body but a face that's best hidden with a brown paper bag.

Apologies to SLK55 owners, I don't mean to offend.

The above are my impressions and verdict on an SLK55 based on my requirements and my driving history.
 
Thanks for that. The MCT gearbox was one of the reasons I waited to buy mine. I must say I am surprised the SLK does not have it.
I am personally not bowled over by the F type. Does'nt stand out at all IMO.
 
F type way too expensive, and not sure I like it. Not seen in the metal though.

Been there, done that with Boxsters.

Apparently, reason why SLK55 does not have MCT is the ECO4 mode.
 
GT86/BRZ? Put aside its lack of power, you have that in your GT3.
 
, the chassis really struggles;
. It feels distinctly hot rod in a way. A sports car, definitely not.

On corners driven enthusiastically, there is no feel from the steering wheel. The only real indicator of what the car is doing is body lean

At the end of the day, the short wheelbase and the huge weight on the front axle cannot cope with the dynamic demands place on them when driving

the idea was a V8 convertible ...

Could you accept a V6? If so I doubt you'll find the same above faults with a Lotus Exige S Roadster (yes-you'll find plenty of other faults)

Exige S Roadster | Lotus Cars

or

Morgan Aero 8

http://www2.autotrader.co.uk/classi.../postcode/cv34fx/page/1/radius/1500?logcode=p
 
Last edited:
Lotus? I don't have much confidence in the long term future of the company.

And am not interested in a supercharged Toyota engine .. I had an Evora S for 24 hours, and the engine was completely soulless, the exhaust loud and boring.

V8 Morgan? possibly, the one I like, the Plus 8 is £80k .. much rather have an SL500 R231 at that price.
 
Could a Maserati Grancabrio V8 be a possibility or are these not reliable?
 
Could a Maserati Grancabrio V8 be a possibility or are these not reliable?

never been a fan of Maseratis .. not quite the real thing, Ferrari for paupers :)
 
never been a fan of Maseratis .. not quite the real thing, Ferrari for paupers :)

Isn't that the same as when people say that the Boxster is the poor mans Porsche, when in reality its a damn good mid engined sports car.
 
Isn't that the same as when people say that the Boxster is the poor mans Porsche, when in reality its a damn good mid engined sports car.

not at all, Boxster is a Porsche, Maserati is not a Ferrari :)
 
But nor is it proclaiming to be.

Do you have a list of alternatives that you will try next?
 
never been a fan of Maseratis .. not quite the real thing, Ferrari for paupers :)

Nonsense. Each company offers something different. The Gran Turismo is a car Ferrari wouldn't build and it's all the better for it. Having owned both I can tell you get nothing more from the Prancing Horse in terms of build quality over a Maserati or indeed a decent Alfa. The old adage of you pay for the engine and the rest of the car is free is true. You're missing a trick if you're discounting one for badge snobbery.
 
not a fan of Maserati's gormless open mouth front ..

M3 DCT convertible considered, but much too heavy at nearly 1900kgs.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom