Here's a draft (I still want to rewrite some bits and clarify others) article I wrote recently. I thought I'd drop it out here to see what responses it raises. Maybe I'll also put it on the R171 forum sometime tho' I expect howls of criticism! [
] Any responses / criticisms most welcome!
"For those who are interested in such things I recently (05 March 2006) had an opportunity to compare an SLK55 AMG (2006 year model) with a SLK32AMG (2003 year model). This is a note of my impressions.
At the outset I must stress that this is simply a record of my perceptions driving the two cars. It is therefore subjective and holds true only for the two cars compared at the relevant time and place. Also, it is likely that there is some unconscious bias on my part as I own the SLK32 AMG in question while the SLK55 AMG is part of dealer stock. Also, the 55 had only around 2900km on and my 32 has 17,500 km on. It may be that the 55’s engine is therefore still somewhat “tight� although I am told that this is not a major factor in modern automobiles in the AMG class.
I am not going to comment on the relative aesthetics of the body styling of the two vehicles as reactions to the R171 shape seem to range from wondrous rapture to outright derision. Reaction to the older R170 shape is generally less extreme.
The first I noticed when getting into the 55 is how very different the interior is to the older R170 series. There are a lot more buttons, knobs, dials, switches, display panels and the like. A great deal of functionality is provided in the interior of the 55 which has any number of features (not least of which is the airscarf) that the 32 does not. The one that I appreciated most is the electrically operated steering wheel which is adjustable for both reach and tilt. The 32’s steering is mechanically adjustable for reach only and has no tilt function – something which has always struck me anomalous for a vehicle in that class. However I found the plethora of controls on the 55 dashboard and control panel cluttered and confusing; I had to be shown how to accomplish the simple task of switching off the aircon not because it is difficult to do but because it is difficult to locate the correct switch at a glance given the number of buttons, switches and dials. The 32 dash and control panel by comparison is classic Mercedes – a very clear and simple layout with a small number of switches and dials, although once one has properly read and understood the manual one appreciates that there is much more to it than meets the eye. Nevertheless the primary functions are easily achievable by even the most technically challenged owners. The 55 I suspect is an entirely different matter.
The clutter of controls in the 55 is one thing. The other thing is that all these various controls (or most of them anyway) are executed in matt silver coated plastic. The styling is intentionally “modern� and the result is that amongst other things the door handle is a little strangely shaped with a bulbous silver knob shaped end incorporating (dare I say it?) yet more function buttons. The excess of silver coated plastic was too much for my more conservative sensibilities. The other thing that concerned me was the durability of the surfaces. I have seen very similar looking silver coated surfaces in the Chrysler Crossfire and various other vehicles. Invariably with time they wear very poorly and one ends up with a very shabby looking interior – especially wherever rings, bracelets or watches tend to make contact. The dash itself I noticed appears to be made of a soft rubber covered material. Press it and it gives with about the same consistency as human flesh. Very good no doubt from a safety and injury perspective but I wondered again how it will wear. It does look good though. The door panels are made of the same material with a centre sheet that unfortunately appears covered in cheap vinyl. I preferred the stitched leather finish of the 32’s doors. All in all I preferred the more classic styling of the 32 interior and I also suspect that it will not only wear better in the long term but that it will also age better.
The seats in the 55 are far superior to those in the 32. The 32’s seats are intended to be sports seats and while you are held relatively well in them, the sense of fit and security in the 55 seats is simply far beyond those of the 32. Sitting in the car you are aware of the ribs at the top of the bonnet – an exciting constant visual reminder that you are in a true sports car. Fire up the motor and you are met with the expected throb of the ultimate art form of the automotive engine – the V8! Slip it in to gear (auto only), floor it and the 7 Gtronic box rockets you off the mark quickly enough. The first thing that struck me was just how much better the chassis is on the 55. It’s complete chalk and cheese. While the 32 feels a bit numb and heavy – a car you can never fully trust to do what you want it to do in the bends, the 55 satisfies fully; it behaves and responds like a sportscar should and the steering feedback is excellent. In part this is because Mercedes have wisely ditched the recirculating ball setup (something more suited to luxury sedans) in the steering of the R170 series. An interesting thing is that while developing the 32 AMG apparently gave consideration to using a V8 but decided that the lighter V6 in supercharged version would be better from a balance and handling perspective. The fact that the 5.5 V8 has found it’s way into the R171 may be an indicator of just how improved the chassis is.
Drive the 55 through traffic and “stick it� and it’s very quick to change down. The V8 pushes you effortlessly forward with a muted popping of the cylinders. There is a continual thrust of consistent power to the rev limiter again and again. The electronic gear shift on the steering is glorious. Unlike the tipshift on the 32 which is something you tend not to bother about, the steering shift on the 55 is something you use all the time. With the 32 the transmission occasionally doesn’t get the message for lowest gear and maximum rpm, especially if you don’t kick the throttle in fast enough. Usually by then you’ve run out of time to reach for the gear lever anyway. That’s not a problem you have with the 55 and I found myself really wishing my 32 had this feature. Somehow though the V8 engine falls short and seems a bit like it’s had its nuts cut off. It provides a constant stream of torque but lacks the growl and howl factor of a classic V8 and the edge of the 32. My past experience with V8 sportscars has been with cars like Cobras and the TVR Chimaera 5.0 V8’s. They roar and tell you that there’s as much there as you dare use. You feel the rhythm of that V8 right through the seat of your pants and you know that respect is required because if you are stupid with it you may just end up as a statistic. The acoustics of a V8 are one of the best reasons for the existence of the engine. The 55 just doesn’t do that. It sounds like a strangled V8. But maybe I’m being unfair – after all this is a luxury car and the average owner of a 55 doesn’t quite want his pride and joy to sound like a Harley at full cry on a Sunday morning. Also, it’s not as though the 32 isn’t tuned for a conservative ear as well; but somehow its more what you expect with a V6. Even so, compared to the 32 the 55 felt second best. The supercharged 32 engine is like a cat all coiled and ready to spring. When you kick it down hard and fast it responds with a sharpness and a shove in the rear that comes as a real surprise when you first drive it and the 55 just doesn’t deliver that. I was also very surprised at how tame the acceleration on the 55 felt. Maybe it’s because the chassis is so much better built that you don’t feel it, but I suspect other factors and walked away convinced the 32 is significantly faster where I drive it. The 55 is a naturally aspirated motor delivering 354 hp on paper. The 32 is a supercharged V6 delivering around 349 hp (some sources say 354, but I believe they are probably incorrect or confused). The difference I suspect is in the supercharging. Johannesburg where I live lies at high altitude and it is commonly accepted that there is an approximately 17% power loss (as compared to sea level) for naturally aspirated engines. If that factor is applied to the 55, in reality it is something closer to 294 hp. And therein may lie the rub. I suspect that the 32 also suffers some power loss due to altitude but probably less as a percentage. Also, the supercharger in the 32 is a Lysholm type which creates a pressurised air reservoir effect on the delivery side which in the 32 motor is up to an unbelievable 2.1 bar (or about 30 PSI). That means that when you “stick it� there is a virtually instantaneous pressure burst of air to the motor, which may account for the very sharp responsiveness of the 32 engine (perhaps it is worth remembering that when Mercedes launched the SLK32 AMG it was – leaving aside the Maclaren – the fastest accelerating car Mercedes had ever built, or so I’ve read). Kleemann (amongst others such as Carlsson) have solved this problem…..by supercharging the 55 motor to an incredible 600 hp (okay, 596 to be exact) and 770Nm of torque which makes for a mind boggling 0-100 of 3.7 seconds (Porsche GT3 owners may wish to pull over and look for parking). That’s an animal of a different kind altogether. If you’d like to buy one go take a peek at http://www.kleemann.dk/site/Main/thecars/slkr171 . The only condition is that when you sell it you have to offer it to me first! It seems though that AMG may have something more in mind – rumours are rife about a naturally aspirated 500 hp SLK63 AMG and I see lots of noise on the web about Mercedes taking out a trademark for “SLK65 AMG�, although I doubt that even the Stuttgart Teuton would be insane enough to put the bi-turbo V12 into something the size of a large breadbin. But if they don’t, someone like Kleemann will in any event fit a forced induction system to the 63 taking it into the 700hp plus league. In some ways it’s a frightening concept yet exciting exactly because the mere thought of it makes you sweat beads of fear. Depending upon who you are, a car that isn’t capable of frightening you probably isn’t a car worth having.
Returning to the discussion about the current model though, whether you buy an SLK55 AMG depends upon what you want and where you live. If you want the cachet of driving the latest model, it’s the choice for sure. If you want superior handling combined with reasonable levels of power, it’s for you. If you live at comparatively high altitude (remember that at sea level that the whole performance comparison will likely change significantly) and want something that’s closer to half the price and will give you more performance satisfaction, a good used SLK32 AMG may be a better choice. If you want more horses out of it, for a fairly nominal sum Kleemann, Carlsson or any one of a number of suppliers will supply you with a kit that will take it beyond 400hp, or Rob Green will do it for you. Usually this comprises a slightly bigger crank pulley so as to spin the supercharger a bit faster (well within limits), high-flow air filters and a chip. I haven’t found it necessary though; there’s not much out of the very exotic class that runs with the 32. Stock standard, I start to get frightened in mine when at 270km/h it’s still accelerating. It’s supposed to be limited to 250km/h but it isn’t. Maybe AMG dropped a catch. I suspect it’ll do 300km/h but I haven’t had the guts to find out and I probably never will. And no, it’s not chipped or modified in any way. If you do want more power though it’s much easier and cheaper to squeeze a bit more out of the 32 than the 55. But if you really want to go like hell and have loads of money, best you call Kleemann to ask about their 55.
In closing, I think that a good 32 bought in the second hand market is going to deliver the best long term value (if you plan on keeping it for a very long time). The 32 was built over the last three years of production (strictly speaking five, ten having been built in 2000 and 53 in 2004) in limited numbers. The SLK55 AMG on the other hand is being manufactured from the outset of the R171 production run and so final numbers are likely to be far higher (the 63 or 65, if it is ever made may also possibly be produced in small exclusive numbers) and given the relative newness of most of those on the market a considerable depreciation factor is still on the way for the owners. A total of 4333 SLK32 AMG’swere built and made available worldwide – very small numbers by today’s standards. A total of 975 went to the UK market, 979 to Germany and something probably just over 2000 to the US, leaving about 350 units of production for the entire rest of the planet. It’s already referred to by Mercedes Enthusiast as “thin on the ground, fast on the road� and some people are starting to buy them because of their relative rarity. It’s the last, best and rarest of the first of its kind, the R170 SLK. That bodes well for long term value. Already this is starting to be shown by a very stable second hand value in some places. The car I bought last August I can still easily sell for the same price. I also suspect (but can’t be sure) that the styling (interior and exterior) will have greater long term classic appeal than the R171."
] Any responses / criticisms most welcome!"For those who are interested in such things I recently (05 March 2006) had an opportunity to compare an SLK55 AMG (2006 year model) with a SLK32AMG (2003 year model). This is a note of my impressions.
At the outset I must stress that this is simply a record of my perceptions driving the two cars. It is therefore subjective and holds true only for the two cars compared at the relevant time and place. Also, it is likely that there is some unconscious bias on my part as I own the SLK32 AMG in question while the SLK55 AMG is part of dealer stock. Also, the 55 had only around 2900km on and my 32 has 17,500 km on. It may be that the 55’s engine is therefore still somewhat “tight� although I am told that this is not a major factor in modern automobiles in the AMG class.
I am not going to comment on the relative aesthetics of the body styling of the two vehicles as reactions to the R171 shape seem to range from wondrous rapture to outright derision. Reaction to the older R170 shape is generally less extreme.
The first I noticed when getting into the 55 is how very different the interior is to the older R170 series. There are a lot more buttons, knobs, dials, switches, display panels and the like. A great deal of functionality is provided in the interior of the 55 which has any number of features (not least of which is the airscarf) that the 32 does not. The one that I appreciated most is the electrically operated steering wheel which is adjustable for both reach and tilt. The 32’s steering is mechanically adjustable for reach only and has no tilt function – something which has always struck me anomalous for a vehicle in that class. However I found the plethora of controls on the 55 dashboard and control panel cluttered and confusing; I had to be shown how to accomplish the simple task of switching off the aircon not because it is difficult to do but because it is difficult to locate the correct switch at a glance given the number of buttons, switches and dials. The 32 dash and control panel by comparison is classic Mercedes – a very clear and simple layout with a small number of switches and dials, although once one has properly read and understood the manual one appreciates that there is much more to it than meets the eye. Nevertheless the primary functions are easily achievable by even the most technically challenged owners. The 55 I suspect is an entirely different matter.
The clutter of controls in the 55 is one thing. The other thing is that all these various controls (or most of them anyway) are executed in matt silver coated plastic. The styling is intentionally “modern� and the result is that amongst other things the door handle is a little strangely shaped with a bulbous silver knob shaped end incorporating (dare I say it?) yet more function buttons. The excess of silver coated plastic was too much for my more conservative sensibilities. The other thing that concerned me was the durability of the surfaces. I have seen very similar looking silver coated surfaces in the Chrysler Crossfire and various other vehicles. Invariably with time they wear very poorly and one ends up with a very shabby looking interior – especially wherever rings, bracelets or watches tend to make contact. The dash itself I noticed appears to be made of a soft rubber covered material. Press it and it gives with about the same consistency as human flesh. Very good no doubt from a safety and injury perspective but I wondered again how it will wear. It does look good though. The door panels are made of the same material with a centre sheet that unfortunately appears covered in cheap vinyl. I preferred the stitched leather finish of the 32’s doors. All in all I preferred the more classic styling of the 32 interior and I also suspect that it will not only wear better in the long term but that it will also age better.
The seats in the 55 are far superior to those in the 32. The 32’s seats are intended to be sports seats and while you are held relatively well in them, the sense of fit and security in the 55 seats is simply far beyond those of the 32. Sitting in the car you are aware of the ribs at the top of the bonnet – an exciting constant visual reminder that you are in a true sports car. Fire up the motor and you are met with the expected throb of the ultimate art form of the automotive engine – the V8! Slip it in to gear (auto only), floor it and the 7 Gtronic box rockets you off the mark quickly enough. The first thing that struck me was just how much better the chassis is on the 55. It’s complete chalk and cheese. While the 32 feels a bit numb and heavy – a car you can never fully trust to do what you want it to do in the bends, the 55 satisfies fully; it behaves and responds like a sportscar should and the steering feedback is excellent. In part this is because Mercedes have wisely ditched the recirculating ball setup (something more suited to luxury sedans) in the steering of the R170 series. An interesting thing is that while developing the 32 AMG apparently gave consideration to using a V8 but decided that the lighter V6 in supercharged version would be better from a balance and handling perspective. The fact that the 5.5 V8 has found it’s way into the R171 may be an indicator of just how improved the chassis is.
Drive the 55 through traffic and “stick it� and it’s very quick to change down. The V8 pushes you effortlessly forward with a muted popping of the cylinders. There is a continual thrust of consistent power to the rev limiter again and again. The electronic gear shift on the steering is glorious. Unlike the tipshift on the 32 which is something you tend not to bother about, the steering shift on the 55 is something you use all the time. With the 32 the transmission occasionally doesn’t get the message for lowest gear and maximum rpm, especially if you don’t kick the throttle in fast enough. Usually by then you’ve run out of time to reach for the gear lever anyway. That’s not a problem you have with the 55 and I found myself really wishing my 32 had this feature. Somehow though the V8 engine falls short and seems a bit like it’s had its nuts cut off. It provides a constant stream of torque but lacks the growl and howl factor of a classic V8 and the edge of the 32. My past experience with V8 sportscars has been with cars like Cobras and the TVR Chimaera 5.0 V8’s. They roar and tell you that there’s as much there as you dare use. You feel the rhythm of that V8 right through the seat of your pants and you know that respect is required because if you are stupid with it you may just end up as a statistic. The acoustics of a V8 are one of the best reasons for the existence of the engine. The 55 just doesn’t do that. It sounds like a strangled V8. But maybe I’m being unfair – after all this is a luxury car and the average owner of a 55 doesn’t quite want his pride and joy to sound like a Harley at full cry on a Sunday morning. Also, it’s not as though the 32 isn’t tuned for a conservative ear as well; but somehow its more what you expect with a V6. Even so, compared to the 32 the 55 felt second best. The supercharged 32 engine is like a cat all coiled and ready to spring. When you kick it down hard and fast it responds with a sharpness and a shove in the rear that comes as a real surprise when you first drive it and the 55 just doesn’t deliver that. I was also very surprised at how tame the acceleration on the 55 felt. Maybe it’s because the chassis is so much better built that you don’t feel it, but I suspect other factors and walked away convinced the 32 is significantly faster where I drive it. The 55 is a naturally aspirated motor delivering 354 hp on paper. The 32 is a supercharged V6 delivering around 349 hp (some sources say 354, but I believe they are probably incorrect or confused). The difference I suspect is in the supercharging. Johannesburg where I live lies at high altitude and it is commonly accepted that there is an approximately 17% power loss (as compared to sea level) for naturally aspirated engines. If that factor is applied to the 55, in reality it is something closer to 294 hp. And therein may lie the rub. I suspect that the 32 also suffers some power loss due to altitude but probably less as a percentage. Also, the supercharger in the 32 is a Lysholm type which creates a pressurised air reservoir effect on the delivery side which in the 32 motor is up to an unbelievable 2.1 bar (or about 30 PSI). That means that when you “stick it� there is a virtually instantaneous pressure burst of air to the motor, which may account for the very sharp responsiveness of the 32 engine (perhaps it is worth remembering that when Mercedes launched the SLK32 AMG it was – leaving aside the Maclaren – the fastest accelerating car Mercedes had ever built, or so I’ve read). Kleemann (amongst others such as Carlsson) have solved this problem…..by supercharging the 55 motor to an incredible 600 hp (okay, 596 to be exact) and 770Nm of torque which makes for a mind boggling 0-100 of 3.7 seconds (Porsche GT3 owners may wish to pull over and look for parking). That’s an animal of a different kind altogether. If you’d like to buy one go take a peek at http://www.kleemann.dk/site/Main/thecars/slkr171 . The only condition is that when you sell it you have to offer it to me first! It seems though that AMG may have something more in mind – rumours are rife about a naturally aspirated 500 hp SLK63 AMG and I see lots of noise on the web about Mercedes taking out a trademark for “SLK65 AMG�, although I doubt that even the Stuttgart Teuton would be insane enough to put the bi-turbo V12 into something the size of a large breadbin. But if they don’t, someone like Kleemann will in any event fit a forced induction system to the 63 taking it into the 700hp plus league. In some ways it’s a frightening concept yet exciting exactly because the mere thought of it makes you sweat beads of fear. Depending upon who you are, a car that isn’t capable of frightening you probably isn’t a car worth having.
Returning to the discussion about the current model though, whether you buy an SLK55 AMG depends upon what you want and where you live. If you want the cachet of driving the latest model, it’s the choice for sure. If you want superior handling combined with reasonable levels of power, it’s for you. If you live at comparatively high altitude (remember that at sea level that the whole performance comparison will likely change significantly) and want something that’s closer to half the price and will give you more performance satisfaction, a good used SLK32 AMG may be a better choice. If you want more horses out of it, for a fairly nominal sum Kleemann, Carlsson or any one of a number of suppliers will supply you with a kit that will take it beyond 400hp, or Rob Green will do it for you. Usually this comprises a slightly bigger crank pulley so as to spin the supercharger a bit faster (well within limits), high-flow air filters and a chip. I haven’t found it necessary though; there’s not much out of the very exotic class that runs with the 32. Stock standard, I start to get frightened in mine when at 270km/h it’s still accelerating. It’s supposed to be limited to 250km/h but it isn’t. Maybe AMG dropped a catch. I suspect it’ll do 300km/h but I haven’t had the guts to find out and I probably never will. And no, it’s not chipped or modified in any way. If you do want more power though it’s much easier and cheaper to squeeze a bit more out of the 32 than the 55. But if you really want to go like hell and have loads of money, best you call Kleemann to ask about their 55.
In closing, I think that a good 32 bought in the second hand market is going to deliver the best long term value (if you plan on keeping it for a very long time). The 32 was built over the last three years of production (strictly speaking five, ten having been built in 2000 and 53 in 2004) in limited numbers. The SLK55 AMG on the other hand is being manufactured from the outset of the R171 production run and so final numbers are likely to be far higher (the 63 or 65, if it is ever made may also possibly be produced in small exclusive numbers) and given the relative newness of most of those on the market a considerable depreciation factor is still on the way for the owners. A total of 4333 SLK32 AMG’swere built and made available worldwide – very small numbers by today’s standards. A total of 975 went to the UK market, 979 to Germany and something probably just over 2000 to the US, leaving about 350 units of production for the entire rest of the planet. It’s already referred to by Mercedes Enthusiast as “thin on the ground, fast on the road� and some people are starting to buy them because of their relative rarity. It’s the last, best and rarest of the first of its kind, the R170 SLK. That bodes well for long term value. Already this is starting to be shown by a very stable second hand value in some places. The car I bought last August I can still easily sell for the same price. I also suspect (but can’t be sure) that the styling (interior and exterior) will have greater long term classic appeal than the R171."
