|
I have been hankering after buying a Merc SLK in my dotage and am sadly seeing myself as the old guy in the sportscar-flat hat- scarf etc . I was thinking of 12 to 15k and keeping it adinfinitum as sort of a present for a lifetime of graft. What are the pitfalls?
|
>>What are the pitfalls? >>
Very few is the simple answer. Motoring journalists decry the rough 4 cylinder engine and poor manual gearbox, but in reality there is little wrong with the drive train at all IMHO.
Despite M. Benz recent dip in manufacturing reliability, the SLK has an excellent reliability record and having driven one at some considerable pace, along with their low depreciation, I would not hesitate to recommend this practical and attractively designed model.
|
|
Very few people who buy a Merc get one with a manual gearbox and the road tests were almost universally dismissive of the manual box. That said, the 6 speed manual box seems to be OK. I have owned 4 Mercs (all auto I admit!) and the changes are smooth and seamless and the fuel consumption is hardly affected at all, vis a vis the manual box.
|
You've read HJ's account in the Car-by-Car Breakdown, I imagine. I have heard and read adverse comments about the driving experience -- "handles like a wardrobe" was one of the more colourful quotes -- and I note HJ's observation about an offset driving position. Shouldn't be any build-quality problems as these models do not seem to have suffered as the first-generation W210 E-class did, in spite of being contemporaneous.
I'd be more inclined to go for an older MB and be prepared to spend a bit on it. I saw a peach of a 380 (or 450, was it?) W107 SL in Haven Motors (Horsham) recently for about £13k -- a premium price, but it really was in good nick.
|
|
|
Not many pitfalls so long as you buy one that has been looked after and not 'thrashed n' crashed'.
I think the manuals are fine. If you buy a secondhand one, take it to a dealer and get them to change out the transmission oil and put the 'proper' oil to MB spec. No end of MB's are running around with the wrong oil in the manual 'box - this leads to awkward changes, especially when cold. In my experience even some of the dealers don't know the correct oil spec!
|
We looked at these, prior to Mrs V getting her Mx5.
I'm not the bigest Merc fan, anyway, but was surprised to see how badly worn the interiors were, on most of the examples we viewed.
Not standing the test of time, like some of the older Merc taxis did/do!
VB
|
The SLK (and the Chryser Crossfire for that matter) are not really sports cars in the mould of a Boxster or even an MX-5. It's more a small GT car. As long as you accept that that's what it is trying to be it handles just fine. The SLK can be driven very fast - it's just not "fun" in a sports car sort of way. The steering is the main issue. It's a very good long distance car.
Problems are likely to mirror the last generation C-Class as that's what is underneath. Obvously check the roof carefully as they can be expensive to diagnose and fix. Personally I'd recommend the auto - the manuals are OK but the auto just suits the car better.
Try and find a "summer" car if possible - quite a few SLK's are 2nd or 3rd cars and used quite gently. The 320 version is significantly better than the 230 (and probably doesn't use any moer fuel) and is the model to go for if you can find one at the right price/condition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The main disadvantage is the fact that it now looks very plain and out of date compared to the new SLK. It's a nice enough car, but it doesn't have that "sense of occasion" that some of the bigger Benzes have when you drive them.
Could you be tempted by an older SL? (and bigger bills)
|
|
Probably the only pitfall is the Mercedes dealer network. They don't have the best reputation.
|
|
|
|
