Which R129 model?

[epervier]

Mercedes-Benz 0-60 Times & Mercedes Quarter Mile Times | Mercedes SLK, E63, CLS, CL, SL 65, SLS AMG, new Mercedes S-Class 0 to 60 stats!

1996 Mercedes SL600 0-60 mph 5.8 Quarter mile 14.1

1997 Mercedes SL500 0-60 mph 6.1 Quarter mile 14.3

three tenths for the 0-60 time quicker, less over 1/4 mile

so yes you're right, three tenths probably equates to a bonnet length



they don't list the 73

But these do;- 1998 Mercedes-Benz SL 73 AMG (since mid-year 1998 for Europe ) specs review

4.5 seconds,

all 129 models limited to 155mph

1.6 seconds quicker than the 500 and 1.3 seconds quicker than the 60

 

[IanA2]

Mercedes-Benz 0-60 Times & Mercedes Quarter Mile Times | Mercedes SLK, E63, CLS, CL, SL 65, SLS AMG, new Mercedes S-Class 0 to 60 stats!

1996 Mercedes SL600 0-60 mph 5.8 Quarter mile 14.1

1997 Mercedes SL500 0-60 mph 6.1 Quarter mile 14.3

three tenths for the 0-60 time quicker, less over 1/4 mile

so yes you're right, three tenths probably equates to a bonnet length



they don't list the 73

But these do;- 1998 Mercedes-Benz SL 73 AMG (since mid-year 1998 for Europe ) specs review

4.5 seconds,

all 129 models limited to 155mph

1.6 seconds quicker than the 500 and 1.3 seconds quicker than the 60

You're comparing the wrong cars. At no point did I refer to the SL600. That's the V12.

The SL60AMG, the V8 6 litre is the car I referred to.

 

[epervier]

OK, this then,

1998 Mercedes-Benz AMG SL R129 Convertible full range specs

0-60 5.5, still a full second slower than the 73

 

[IanA2]

OK, this then,

1998 Mercedes-Benz AMG SL R129 Convertible full range specs

0-60 5.5, still a full second slower than the 73

Those are factory declared figures. Most folks know that they played down the figures in favour of the more expensive SL600 which they wanted to sell.
Iiirc the generally accepted figure is 4.8s

In any case, this is getting boring, as I said before I have owned both, and there's a big difference in the two models which was evident to me from the first time I drove an SL60. Have you actually driven one?

 

[epervier]

Those are factory declared figures. Most folks know that they played down the figures in favour of the more expensive SL600 which they wanted to sell.
Iiirc the generally accepted figure is 4.8s

In any case, this is getting boring, as I said before I have owned both, and there's a big difference in the two models which was evident to me from the first time I drove an SL60. Have you actually driven one?

It's probably getting boring because you don't like the results. my intention was not to piss on your chips, just an observation to the OP of my personal choice if I could afford it.

Even with your last reply you want the 60 to be faster than Mercedes say it is.

In answer to have I driven one?

Well yes, I've driven all of the 129's in the past, and more recently the brutal SLS, so do have an understanding of what quick is.

My apologies again, I did not wish to offend you.

 

[IanA2]

It's probably getting boring because you don't like the results. my intention was not to piss on your chips, just an observation to the OP of my personal choice if I could afford it.

Even with your last reply you want the 60 to be faster than Mercedes say it is.

In answer to have I driven one?

Well yes, I've driven all of the 129's in the past, and more recently the brutal SLS, so do have an understanding of what quick is.

My apologies again, I did not wish to offend you.

I really can't work out where your coming from. Everybody knows the story of the SL60 v SL600 figures. It's not a question of me wanting it to faster than Mercedes say it is. Frankly that's just puerile.

I know how fast it is and it's plenty fast, but more importantly, and this is where we differ, it's very different from the SL500. It is not the case as you claim, that:

"The difference between 500 and the 60 is nearly zero.."

I made the simple observation that I did not agree with you statement and you came back with statements/figures which seem to indicate that you didn't know which model I was referring to or indeed the existence of such a model.

You're not pissing on my chips as you so eloquently put it, but I do see signs of incontinence.

 

[RKC-benz]

It's the 600 that's the V12, the 60 is the AMG bored out V8 500 Lots of fun

Ah ha! Thanks for the reminder/prompt!

 

[BTB 500]

The SL60 is a lovely car but there are very few to choose from (AFAIK only 30-40 in total in the UK), so finding a good one for sale might be tough. When they do crop up they are also a LOT more expensive than an equivalent 500.

I was offered a beautiful SL60 by a forum member a few years back. Very similar to my 500 i.e. same year, same colour & interior, same wheels, similar (low) mileage, low previous owners. If money had been no object I'd have jumped at it, but in the real world I simply couldn't justify spending that much for a bit more performance and the rarity of the AMG version.

 

[buster651]

had 107 500 now 92 500 129 very few probs over 6 years roof must work and in good condition, never jump start(bu**s up roof controller) rust not a prob average mpg over 6 years 20mpg even at 2tons very quick oh and if you want the tyres to last get the tracking checked properly

 

[IanA2]

never jump start(bu**s up roof controller)

I've heard that several times so I imagine there must be some foundation. That said I've used a power pack on both my 129's without ill effect.

I did it after (years ago) I watched my indie do the same on my 500. Must have done it three of four times myself since in both cars without ill-effect.

Use a trickler these days so no need

ETA: It may be that using a power pack is different from jump starting Perhaps others might know.

 

[buster651]

used a power pack on the 107 but after all the warnings never would risk it on the 129 due to cost of roof module repair/replace

 

[IanA2]

used a power pack on the 107 but after all the warnings never would risk it on the 129 due to cost of roof module repair/replace

Yes, I don't know, I can only go on my experience, I wonder if others might know?

 

[BTB 500]

IMO

Connecting to a 12V supply (power pack or external battery) should be fine. I wouldn't connect to a battery under charge (e.g. another vehicle with the engine running) though.

I jumped mine from a spare 12V battery several times when I got it (before the battery was replaced under warranty) without any problems.

 

[IanA2]

IMO

Connecting to a 12V supply (power pack or external battery) should be fine. I wouldn't connect to a battery under charge (e.g. another vehicle with the engine running) though.

I jumped mine from a spare 12V battery several times when I got it (before the battery was replaced under warranty) without any problems.

Yes that's squares with my experience. Maybe it's just jump starting that should be avoided.

 

[DSB SL AMG]

Used a power pack on my R129 several times over the years with no issues...

 

[IanA2]

Used a power pack on my R129 several times over the years with no issues...

So it seems from that not very scientific (or large) sample that power packs are ok. Does anybody have any experiences of fried modules from jump starting ?

Maybe folks would be too embarrassed to put their hands up to that though

 

[V12]

I've jump started thousands of MBs by pack and by other vehicles and many R129s at that. Never had a fried module.

When a battery is removed or fitted it creates similar voltage spikes to junp starting and although some old timers will tell you to put your headlights on whilst changing the battery to smooth the voltage peaks, MB do not recommend this procedure at all.

 

[IanA2]

I've jump started thousands of MBs by pack and by other vehicles and many R129s at that. Never had a fried module.

When a battery is removed or fitted it creates similar voltage spikes to jump starting and although some old timers will tell you to put your headlights on whilst changing the battery to smooth the voltage peaks, MB do not recommend this procedure at all.

Interesting, so no fried modules yet.

Any idea what MB do recommend?

 

[V12]

Read your handbook

 

[RKC-benz]

Thanks all for your input. I have made some plans to see one early next week...

I have learnt the following from this thread:
- You want the 500 really. You don't want the 280 at all. I am settling on a 320 as 500 is offered at close to double the money.
- You don't want to surprise the car electrics with big surges.
- You check the roof works. And all the other bits.
- You are better off with certain years of the car.
- Panoramic roof is only so desired... But I want one.
- You want super service history.

I am going to see a reasonably specced SL 320 from late 1999 with just a few over 100k miles. Good service history and pan roof. What sort of price do people imagine for this? Car and seller seem totally honest.