Crown
Board: AMG Mercedes
Language: English
Region: Worldwide
Close
CloseForum - Thread
Sep 27, 2005 9:44:31 AM
- easy_rider911
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: London , United Kingdom
- Posts: 22190, Gallery
- Registered on: Nov 8, 2004
- Reply to: Mike S
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
That will leave a line up of SL350, SL500, SL600, SL63 AMG and SL65 AMG.
I assume (pls correct me if I'm mistaken) that the SL63 AMG has a supercharged 6.3 litre V8 whereas the SL65 AMG has a 6.5 litre V12 bi turbo??
I think MB and AMG should focus on improving handling and reducing weight rather than merely increasing engine size and power output. There has to be a point when there is simply too much power going to the rear wheels for it to be worthwhile.
I haven't driven the SL55 or the SL65. I have only driven the SL500 and I found the handling dreadful. It felt like a 2 door, 2 seater S Class. There was so much body roll. They should fix that first!
I assume (pls correct me if I'm mistaken) that the SL63 AMG has a supercharged 6.3 litre V8 whereas the SL65 AMG has a 6.5 litre V12 bi turbo??
I think MB and AMG should focus on improving handling and reducing weight rather than merely increasing engine size and power output. There has to be a point when there is simply too much power going to the rear wheels for it to be worthwhile.
I haven't driven the SL55 or the SL65. I have only driven the SL500 and I found the handling dreadful. It felt like a 2 door, 2 seater S Class. There was so much body roll. They should fix that first!
Sep 27, 2005 9:44:31 AM
- easy_rider911
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: London , United Kingdom
- Posts: 22190, Gallery
- Registered on: Nov 8, 2004
- Reply to: Mike S
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
That will leave a line up of SL350, SL500, SL600, SL63 AMG and SL65 AMG.
I assume (pls correct me if I'm mistaken) that the SL63 AMG has a supercharged 6.3 litre V8 whereas the SL65 AMG has a 6.5 litre V12 bi turbo??
I think MB and AMG should focus on improving handling and reducing weight rather than merely increasing engine size and power output. There has to be a point when there is simply too much power going to the rear wheels for it to be worthwhile.
I haven't driven the SL55 or the SL65. I have only driven the SL500 and I found the handling dreadful. It felt like a 2 door, 2 seater S Class. There was so much body roll. They should fix that first!
I assume (pls correct me if I'm mistaken) that the SL63 AMG has a supercharged 6.3 litre V8 whereas the SL65 AMG has a 6.5 litre V12 bi turbo??
I think MB and AMG should focus on improving handling and reducing weight rather than merely increasing engine size and power output. There has to be a point when there is simply too much power going to the rear wheels for it to be worthwhile.
I haven't driven the SL55 or the SL65. I have only driven the SL500 and I found the handling dreadful. It felt like a 2 door, 2 seater S Class. There was so much body roll. They should fix that first!
Sep 27, 2005 1:05:58 PM
- AJVIP
- Expert
-
- Loc:
- Posts: 1862, Gallery
- Registered on: May 30, 2005
- Reply to: easy_rider911
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Quote:
easy_rider911 said:
I think MB and AMG should focus on improving handling and reducing weight rather than merely increasing engine size and power output. There has to be a point when there is simply too much power going to the rear wheels for it to be worthwhile.
I haven't driven the SL55 or the SL65. I have only driven the SL500 and I found the handling dreadful. It felt like a 2 door, 2 seater S Class. There was so much body roll. They should fix that first!
"It's a car for women" as my exotics dealer puts it.
Jaguar and BMW included.
Sep 27, 2005 1:05:58 PM
- AJVIP
- Expert
-
- Loc:
- Posts: 1862, Gallery
- Registered on: May 30, 2005
- Reply to: easy_rider911
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Quote:
easy_rider911 said:
I think MB and AMG should focus on improving handling and reducing weight rather than merely increasing engine size and power output. There has to be a point when there is simply too much power going to the rear wheels for it to be worthwhile.
I haven't driven the SL55 or the SL65. I have only driven the SL500 and I found the handling dreadful. It felt like a 2 door, 2 seater S Class. There was so much body roll. They should fix that first!
"It's a car for women" as my exotics dealer puts it.
Jaguar and BMW included.
Sep 27, 2005 5:08:47 PM
- Mike S
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Somewhere , Taiwan
- Posts: 7720, Gallery
- Registered on: Apr 3, 2005
- Reply to: easy_rider911
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Quote:
easy_rider911 said:
That will leave a line up of SL350, SL500, SL600, SL63 AMG and SL65 AMG.
I assume (pls correct me if I'm mistaken) that the SL63 AMG has a supercharged 6.3 litre V8 whereas the SL65 AMG has a 6.5 litre V12 bi turbo??
I think MB and AMG should focus on improving handling and reducing weight rather than merely increasing engine size and power output. There has to be a point when there is simply too much power going to the rear wheels for it to be worthwhile.
I haven't driven the SL55 or the SL65. I have only driven the SL500 and I found the handling dreadful. It felt like a 2 door, 2 seater S Class. There was so much body roll. They should fix that first!
the SL500 and the AMG models are WORLDS apart. the Suspension, brakes, performance are totally different. but the SL's were never meant to be a good handling car, they are cruisers
Sep 27, 2005 5:08:47 PM
- Mike S
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Somewhere , Taiwan
- Posts: 7720, Gallery
- Registered on: Apr 3, 2005
- Reply to: easy_rider911
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Quote:
easy_rider911 said:
That will leave a line up of SL350, SL500, SL600, SL63 AMG and SL65 AMG.
I assume (pls correct me if I'm mistaken) that the SL63 AMG has a supercharged 6.3 litre V8 whereas the SL65 AMG has a 6.5 litre V12 bi turbo??
I think MB and AMG should focus on improving handling and reducing weight rather than merely increasing engine size and power output. There has to be a point when there is simply too much power going to the rear wheels for it to be worthwhile.
I haven't driven the SL55 or the SL65. I have only driven the SL500 and I found the handling dreadful. It felt like a 2 door, 2 seater S Class. There was so much body roll. They should fix that first!
the SL500 and the AMG models are WORLDS apart. the Suspension, brakes, performance are totally different. but the SL's were never meant to be a good handling car, they are cruisers
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Quote:
Mike S said:Quote:
easy_rider911 said:
That will leave a line up of SL350, SL500, SL600, SL63 AMG and SL65 AMG.
I assume (pls correct me if I'm mistaken) that the SL63 AMG has a supercharged 6.3 litre V8 whereas the SL65 AMG has a 6.5 litre V12 bi turbo??
I think MB and AMG should focus on improving handling and reducing weight rather than merely increasing engine size and power output. There has to be a point when there is simply too much power going to the rear wheels for it to be worthwhile.
I haven't driven the SL55 or the SL65. I have only driven the SL500 and I found the handling dreadful. It felt like a 2 door, 2 seater S Class. There was so much body roll. They should fix that first!
the SL500 and the AMG models are WORLDS apart. the Suspension, brakes, performance are totally different. but the SL's were never meant to be a good handling car, they are cruisers
Also known as "BOATS"
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Quote:
Mike S said:Quote:
easy_rider911 said:
That will leave a line up of SL350, SL500, SL600, SL63 AMG and SL65 AMG.
I assume (pls correct me if I'm mistaken) that the SL63 AMG has a supercharged 6.3 litre V8 whereas the SL65 AMG has a 6.5 litre V12 bi turbo??
I think MB and AMG should focus on improving handling and reducing weight rather than merely increasing engine size and power output. There has to be a point when there is simply too much power going to the rear wheels for it to be worthwhile.
I haven't driven the SL55 or the SL65. I have only driven the SL500 and I found the handling dreadful. It felt like a 2 door, 2 seater S Class. There was so much body roll. They should fix that first!
the SL500 and the AMG models are WORLDS apart. the Suspension, brakes, performance are totally different. but the SL's were never meant to be a good handling car, they are cruisers
Also known as "BOATS"
Sep 27, 2005 6:30:16 PM
- easy_rider911
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: London , United Kingdom
- Posts: 22190, Gallery
- Registered on: Nov 8, 2004
- Reply to: AJVIP
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Mike S,
You're absolutely right that, in relation to power & performance, the SL500 and the AMGs models are VERY different. So, there's a big difference in straight line speed and acceleration. But, you have to accept that the size, weight, handling etc are almost equally poor compared to a sportscar.
You're absolutely right that, in relation to power & performance, the SL500 and the AMGs models are VERY different. So, there's a big difference in straight line speed and acceleration. But, you have to accept that the size, weight, handling etc are almost equally poor compared to a sportscar.
Sep 27, 2005 6:30:16 PM
- easy_rider911
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: London , United Kingdom
- Posts: 22190, Gallery
- Registered on: Nov 8, 2004
- Reply to: AJVIP
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Mike S,
You're absolutely right that, in relation to power & performance, the SL500 and the AMGs models are VERY different. So, there's a big difference in straight line speed and acceleration. But, you have to accept that the size, weight, handling etc are almost equally poor compared to a sportscar.
You're absolutely right that, in relation to power & performance, the SL500 and the AMGs models are VERY different. So, there's a big difference in straight line speed and acceleration. But, you have to accept that the size, weight, handling etc are almost equally poor compared to a sportscar.
Sep 27, 2005 6:35:38 PM
- Ferdie
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Europe , Germany
- Posts: 8234, Gallery
- Registered on: Jul 2, 2004
- Reply to: easy_rider911
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
There have been pictures floating around about an styling update - exterior diff. are the bumpers, taillights and grille. Indeed very subtle and shouldn't be the main reason to get a new one.
The 6.3 engine should be due at the same time, the AMG-V12 indeed should be followed by a 6.0-V8 with Biturbo and a similiar hp output as its predecessor.
The 6.3 engine should be due at the same time, the AMG-V12 indeed should be followed by a 6.0-V8 with Biturbo and a similiar hp output as its predecessor.
Sep 27, 2005 6:35:38 PM
- Ferdie
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Europe , Germany
- Posts: 8234, Gallery
- Registered on: Jul 2, 2004
- Reply to: easy_rider911
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
There have been pictures floating around about an styling update - exterior diff. are the bumpers, taillights and grille. Indeed very subtle and shouldn't be the main reason to get a new one.
The 6.3 engine should be due at the same time, the AMG-V12 indeed should be followed by a 6.0-V8 with Biturbo and a similiar hp output as its predecessor.
The 6.3 engine should be due at the same time, the AMG-V12 indeed should be followed by a 6.0-V8 with Biturbo and a similiar hp output as its predecessor.
Sep 28, 2005 6:09:45 PM
- WBH
- Expert
-
- Loc: CA
- Posts: 1963, Gallery
- Registered on: Jan 2, 2004
- Reply to: easy_rider911
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Quote:
easy_rider911 said:
Mike S,
You're absolutely right that, in relation to power & performance, the SL500 and the AMGs models are VERY different. So, there's a big difference in straight line speed and acceleration. But, you have to accept that the size, weight, handling etc are almost equally poor compared to a sportscar.
May want to take a look at the N-ring times of SL55 vs 360 vs new M5....hmmm, which cars are the "cruisers"?...
Sep 28, 2005 6:09:45 PM
- WBH
- Expert
-
- Loc: CA
- Posts: 1963, Gallery
- Registered on: Jan 2, 2004
- Reply to: easy_rider911
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Quote:
easy_rider911 said:
Mike S,
You're absolutely right that, in relation to power & performance, the SL500 and the AMGs models are VERY different. So, there's a big difference in straight line speed and acceleration. But, you have to accept that the size, weight, handling etc are almost equally poor compared to a sportscar.
May want to take a look at the N-ring times of SL55 vs 360 vs new M5....hmmm, which cars are the "cruisers"?...
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Quote:
VKSF said:Quote:
easy_rider911 said:
Mike S,
You're absolutely right that, in relation to power & performance, the SL500 and the AMGs models are VERY different. So, there's a big difference in straight line speed and acceleration. But, you have to accept that the size, weight, handling etc are almost equally poor compared to a sportscar.
May want to take a look at the N-ring times of SL55 vs 360 vs new M5....hmmm, which cars are the "cruisers"?...
Let's then compare it to the 911 ... it'll be clear which the cruiser is....and which is the true sports car
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Quote:
VKSF said:Quote:
easy_rider911 said:
Mike S,
You're absolutely right that, in relation to power & performance, the SL500 and the AMGs models are VERY different. So, there's a big difference in straight line speed and acceleration. But, you have to accept that the size, weight, handling etc are almost equally poor compared to a sportscar.
May want to take a look at the N-ring times of SL55 vs 360 vs new M5....hmmm, which cars are the "cruisers"?...
Let's then compare it to the 911 ... it'll be clear which the cruiser is....and which is the true sports car
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
I'm sure it's been said many times before, but unless those times were done by the same driver in very similar conditions, then they are really meaningless.
The SL55 is a blindingly fast grand tourer with almost acceptable handling, but it's definitely not a sports car.
The SL55 is a blindingly fast grand tourer with almost acceptable handling, but it's definitely not a sports car.
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
I'm sure it's been said many times before, but unless those times were done by the same driver in very similar conditions, then they are really meaningless.
The SL55 is a blindingly fast grand tourer with almost acceptable handling, but it's definitely not a sports car.
The SL55 is a blindingly fast grand tourer with almost acceptable handling, but it's definitely not a sports car.
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Quote:
DamienL said:
I'm sure it's been said many times before, but unless those times were done by the same driver in very similar conditions, then they are really meaningless.
The SL55 is a blindingly fast grand tourer with almost acceptable handling, but it's definitely not a sports car.
Definitely not.
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Quote:
DamienL said:
I'm sure it's been said many times before, but unless those times were done by the same driver in very similar conditions, then they are really meaningless.
The SL55 is a blindingly fast grand tourer with almost acceptable handling, but it's definitely not a sports car.
Definitely not.
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Insanely childish comments displayed here. So what if its not a sportscar? So what if it ain't a 911, is it crap then? We have the same recurrent theme in every post in this forum. TELL US SOMETHING NEW! If for any reason, someone from now on declares that an AMG with its 2 ton+ weight and automatic transmission is no sportscar, they're going to get a slap in the face by the obvious police.
I'm sorry, I forgot this board was infested by Porsche-blind members
I'm sorry, I forgot this board was infested by Porsche-blind members
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Insanely childish comments displayed here. So what if its not a sportscar? So what if it ain't a 911, is it crap then? We have the same recurrent theme in every post in this forum. TELL US SOMETHING NEW! If for any reason, someone from now on declares that an AMG with its 2 ton+ weight and automatic transmission is no sportscar, they're going to get a slap in the face by the obvious police.
I'm sorry, I forgot this board was infested by Porsche-blind members
I'm sorry, I forgot this board was infested by Porsche-blind members
Re: Sl facelift & 63Amg infos?????
Quote:
Bilal said:
Insanely childish comments displayed here. So what if its not a sportscar? So what if it ain't a 911, is it crap then? We have the same recurrent theme in every post in this forum. TELL US SOMETHING NEW! If for any reason, someone from now on declares that an AMG with its 2 ton+ weight and automatic transmission is no sportscar, they're going to get a slap in the face by the obvious police.
I'm sorry, I forgot this board was infested by Porsche-blind members
Considering the top of the screen says "The Sports Car Net Magazine" -- the Porsche following makes perfect sense...
Forum
About Rennteam | Help | Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Support | Contact | Imprint | Archive
Powered by
Community
and
