Do you really think they will make an SLK that will outgun an SL? Sort of shooting themselves in the foot? SL owners might be less than happy.Shinigami - 4/1/2005 3:49 PM
Drive them both and make up your mind then.
Barring that, each car has positive, and negative points. So take whichever has enough positive aspects for yourself.
The SLK is cheaper.
It is also simpler, less electronics that might go wrong.
It has less power and is slower, but not by much.
The interior has less leather, but strikes a good balance (in my opinion) for looks, use and feel.
The SLK has a more 'extreme' look, but it's no MB flagship car (like the SL is).
It might be a bit more nippy around corners.
Could be cheaper to insure and tax.
(the new 400hp model is speculated to arrive end of 2006... wait for that if you can, just might blow the socks off an SL55, who knows).
It's just speculation. But the SL is more then just about power. The interior is all leather, you have more gadjets, it's more of a status symbol too.jlangmd - 4/1/2005 7:50 PM
Do you really think they will make an SLK that will outgun an SL? Sort of shooting themselves in the foot? SL owners might be less than happy.