Mercedes-Benz Forum banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
is the new body style 2003 to present sl really that much better car than the 1990 through 2002? i know the retractable hard top is great but is it really worth the difference in money buying a good used sl.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35,769 Posts
Can't tell the gadgets on SL but in those years the technical progress was astronomical. Newer cars sip much less fuel than those 10 years ago while most of the time offering double horsepower.
Than you have ESP, more advanced brakes, more airbags, navigation and so on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
427 Posts
is the new body style 2003 to present sl really that much better car than the 1990 through 2002? i know the retractable hard top is great but is it really worth the difference in money buying a good used sl.
You ask tough questions. How do you define better? As to whether it's worth the difference in money, that's something only you can decide.

But, if you consider that the R129 was designed in the late 80s and the R230 was designed in the early part of the century, then you have about 15 years of advances in automobile engineering knowhow, electronics, materials, and design in the R230. Of course the R230 is a better car. Not to say that the R129 isn't a lovely and well engineered car and you may prefer the vintage charm of the car. It still makes a nice statement and turns heads. But let's face it, it's dated. So whether the R230 is worth the extra money is only something you can decide based on what's important to you.:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
60 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
i understand the tech side but an sl is not to be my everyday car, i am questioning if it is worth twice as much to have the new body style and improvments, i admit i do like the styling of the 03 up car and the idea of having not to store the hard top but there is also a point of a convertible having a soft top, i would really like to hear from somebody that has had both to compare, i have owned a 01 but only driven an 03 one time for about 60 miles and it had a bad set of tires on it so not a good compairison, thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,092 Posts
It's rather universally agreed that it is.

Before the R230 (and since the Gullwing 300SL), SLs were considered rather jokes as sports cars.

Not the R230, which is seen as a viable Porsche eater.

Of course if all you care about is the looks and the cool top, not so much.

Toughest thing about cars these days is that anything older than 2005 is hopelessly obsolete as far as telematics are concerned. Cell phones, sirius, iPod, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,098 Posts
is the new body style 2003 to present sl really that much better car than the 1990 through 2002? i know the retractable hard top is great but is it really worth the difference in money buying a good used sl.
Better is a matter of personal taste/opinion

The folding hardtop is imo the only advantage at a substantial premium along with navigation and some steering wheel controls, and other 'nice to have' electronics ( if I was to get one I'd look for a face lifted '05) I do like the Pewter color with charcoal interior, also Silver with Berry is nice.

The R129 is a little roomier and more comfortable to me. YMMV

At this time I vote for a low mile, well kept '98 with sport package, xenons, heated seats (best bang for buck year) or '02 Silver Arrow.

And have $20k - $30k left over


In a few years I may change my mind :)
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top