1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Mercedes SLK's

Discussion in 'Motors' started by AmDaMan, 13 Sep 2009.

  1. AmDaMan

    Mobster

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 3,975

    Location: Wellington, NZ

    What do people think of these then? Been looking at various cars (S2000 and TT mainly) for around the 8k bracket and just noticed these. Look quite nice although the lights look a bit dated, nice interior etc.

    I can imagine some big bills come with this type of car though? What are the different engine specs, anyone had any experiences with one. Seems like a good choice if I don't go down the raw S2000 route.
     
  2. cdcopyman

    Hitman

    Joined: 19 Oct 2002

    Posts: 944

    i think they do look 'dated' , even an older mx5 looks nicer :D:) wait...and save up and then get a SL500 ;)
     
  3. Morba

    Caporegime

    Joined: 7 Mar 2003

    Posts: 28,189

    Location: Krispy Kreme drive thru

    the newer slk's look lovely. the old ones look crap tbh.
     
  4. [TW]Fox

    Man of Honour

    Joined: 17 Oct 2002

    Posts: 156,654

    It's strictly the sort of car you buy your girlfriend. The first gen SLK is not a drivers car in the slightest and has a range of boring engines until the V6 came out.

    New ones great, however. But the old one? TT and S2000 are both better cars.
     
  5. [DOD]Asprilla

    Capodecina

    Joined: 10 Nov 2003

    Posts: 14,034

    Location: Surrey, by the river

    The newer SLKs are excellent, particularly the 350, which is really the one worth having if you want to 'enjoy' driving it.

    The olders ones are not very good at all.

    If i were buying an SLK and want at least £15k to make it a decent car.
     
  6. Spuderoony

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 15 Jan 2004

    Posts: 1,379

    Location: Doncaster

    SLKs look awful. Can't comment on the drive, however.

    8k on a car in that sort of bracket, though, and you really should be looking at old shape TTs or an 03 plate Z4 (in addition to the S2000). The cheapest 3.0i Z4 I've seen was just over 9 grand, I think, so you could up your budget marginally or comfortably get a 2.5i for 8k.

    Curve ball: old shape Boxster?

    With regard to the service billing, all these things will be beyond their 3-5 year warranties by some distance. So long as you get it done at reputable independents it shouldn't affect value at really, especially not when you offset the (marginal) difference in re-sale value against the money saved at the garage.
     
  7. [TW]Fox

    Man of Honour

    Joined: 17 Oct 2002

    Posts: 156,654

    £8k isn't enough for a really nice Z4, you'll get a better TT with £8k than you will Z4. Sure, the Z4 is a better car but not at £8k.
     
  8. Morba

    Caporegime

    Joined: 7 Mar 2003

    Posts: 28,189

    Location: Krispy Kreme drive thru

    For £8k?
    More silly an idea than an £8k Z4 :p
     
  9. kai

    Mobster

    Joined: 15 Oct 2007

    Posts: 2,911

    Location: Wales.

    I have a TT, and have access to my dads SLK on weekends; personally the TT is so much better, However mams car wins hands down a new 120D BMW.
     
  10. fizzle-187

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 28 Jul 2009

    Posts: 1,550

    I would go with a S2000.
     
  11. Capt Doufos

    Mobster

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 2,605

    Location: Nr Colchester, Essex

    Is it the same even with the V6? The interiors are very nice and the folding hardtop is a very nice feature, they look rubbish stock, but I think the AMG bodykit makes them look alot better.

    I was toying with the idea of a 320 just as a change, would like a different style of engine I currently have and more refined drive whilst keeping it a roadster.

    What about the SLK32 AMG? They have an impressive spec, but I assume the running costs are astronomical being an AMG?
     
  12. AmDaMan

    Mobster

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 3,975

    Location: Wellington, NZ

    I thought it looked ok with the AMG kit on, but if it's going to be a rubbish drive then there's no point looking into it any further.

    I considered a Z4 but I've dropped the budget as i've moved out now so as said no chance for 8k.

    Looks like it's between the TT and S2000 then, quite different types of cars but the main thing letting the S2000 down is the interior for me, I know that's not what it's about but i'd still like a fairly nice place to sit.
     
  13. [DOD]Asprilla

    Capodecina

    Joined: 10 Nov 2003

    Posts: 14,034

    Location: Surrey, by the river

    The problem with the older SLKs isn't what they look like or the engine (although they aren't particularly good either) it's they the steering and the ride are just awful. There is absolutely no dynamisism to them.
     
  14. mjt

    Capodecina

    Joined: 31 Aug 2007

    Posts: 18,422

    Last edited: 13 Sep 2009
  15. Spuderoony

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 15 Jan 2004

    Posts: 1,379

    Location: Doncaster

    Considering what you've posted, I think the only choice for you is the TT.
     
  16. AmDaMan

    Mobster

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 3,975

    Location: Wellington, NZ

    well if the drive isn't too bland I may well go for it. Not driven one yet though. The S2000 was excellent.
     
  17. Tute

    Capodecina

    Joined: 24 Jul 2004

    Posts: 22,312

    Location: Devon, UK

    £8K would get you a Focus ST if you look around? :)
     
  18. K.C. Leblanc

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 13 Sep 2003

    Posts: 8,081

    Location: Glocestershire

    I've been a passenger in a series 1 SLK. The first thing that struck me was how awful the quality of the interior was. I drive a Chysler, so I should be easily impressed.
     
  19. [TW]Fox

    Man of Honour

    Joined: 17 Oct 2002

    Posts: 156,654

    Errr yea because a Focus hatch is just like a TT or an S2000 :confused:
     
  20. Tute

    Capodecina

    Joined: 24 Jul 2004

    Posts: 22,312

    Location: Devon, UK

    It's only a suggestion.

    Why is anger always your first response?