Mercedes-Benz Forum banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Premium Member
1999 S600 Sedan, 1999 S600 w/ 4-pl seating, 1995 S600 Coupe, 2-1992 600SEL's, 2002 ML55, 1998 SL600
Joined
·
2,425 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm looking at getting a 170-body vs a 171, I just think the styling on the 170 is better.

Any thoughts on which is better all around? Unless I'm missing some dramatic changes in the engineering, the 170 just looks better to me.

SLK32? Not a bad way to go??

What's the consensus? Anybody?
 

·
Registered
2003 SLK230
Joined
·
653 Posts
I don't think there's a consensus when it comes to aesthetics. Personally, I prefer the 170's body style (the 171 looks a bit cartoonish, reminding me of Pro. Fate's car from the front, and like alot of other cars from the rear). However, the 171's interior is better appointed, the non-AMG cars have more power and, if you can get a car with the Air Scarf feature, you'll be able to enjoy top-down driving further into the fall/winter, which is a notable bonus.
 

·
Registered
2004 230SLK
Joined
·
222 Posts
I don't think there's a consensus when it comes to aesthetics. Personally, I prefer the 170's body style (the 171 looks a bit cartoonish, reminding me of Pro. Fate's car from the front, and like alot of other cars from the rear). However, the 171's interior is better appointed, the non-AMG cars have more power and, if you can get a car with the Air Scarf feature, you'll be able to enjoy top-down driving further into the fall/winter, which is a notable bonus.
I agree. Those of us who have stuck with our 170's like them for their chunky Mercedes styling The twin power bulges on the hood links us to the iconic 300SL. Many of my friends (non M-B drivers) love the retro styling also.
The interior is rather stark but easy to care for. Personally I'm not enamored with the butt-numbing seats on a long drive but what the hell, you can't have everything! The 171 is appealing in a different way. Any SLK is better than none.
 

·
Registered
'07 GL320CDI
Joined
·
5,112 Posts
With Mercedes, newer is always better.

Nicer engines in the R171 for sure, but watch out for the early ones, as the M272 didn't get a good start.

R171 have the 7-speed auto trans, which is better than the 5-speed.

R172 is coming for 2012 with all-new looks and new engines.
 

·
Registered
2002 SLK 32 AMG 1965 Mustang V-8 Convertible
Joined
·
146 Posts
The SLK32 is a great choice (of course I am biased since I own one). It is crazy fast and isn't very expensive on a relative basis.

It is all personal opinion on looks, mine is: R171 front view and interior looks better than R170. R170 side and rear view looks better than R171.

Also, SLK32 seats are much nicer and more comfortable than other R170 seats. I have driven up to 5 hours straight in mine and found them comfortable.
 

·
Registered
PROUD OWNER! 2002 slk32 AMG
Joined
·
1,505 Posts
r171 got they front end looks from squidward didnt they? (spongebob squarepants!!) as for being faster i would debate that. unless they s/c their engine the n/a slk55 isnt any faster than a 32.
the only thing i see better on a r171 is the dual quad tips on the rear. just my .02


interior on the r170 isnt high tech but not costly to maintain either. if the s/c 3.2 litre isnt enough for you i know a guy who can slide a m/b 5.5 s/c v8 engine into the r170 and it will outrun most anything it encounters!
 

·
Premium Member
2007 SLK 280
Joined
·
66 Posts
Comment from someone who's owned both: Though my friend, dynhm6, thinks my current 2007 280 looks like a Star Wars defector, I love it. I owned a 2000 230 Limited Edition model before and I loved that, too. There's no question that the R170 is a classic shape and always will be. I anticipate that my R171 will seem to age more rapidly when MB returns to the less-dramatic new SLK styling, but it's ageless in my book.

Beyond looks, though, the comparison gets more substantial. The new one is bigger (inside where it counts) and far more comfortable. It's quicker even with the smallest engine available, and has many more creature comforts. It's my everyday driver and I appreciate the enhancements every day. Yes, I can still look at every 170 I pass and tell myself that I could have kept the 230, but...

Simple fact is that you can't go too far wrong with either one from a style, fun and pure enjoyment factor. Neither one will attract super models to you; both will break you with traffic tickets if you want to play the role the vehicle is made to play.

In the end, here's the difference that will make you settle on the 171: the visor swings out to block the sun over the header. The 170 never did. And the SmartTop module is pure genius for either one.

If I could figure out how to do it, I' leave you with a direct comparison of both models in the same driveway (sadly, not at the same time). But let us know where you end up.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top