Anyone with an SLK350

[It costs how much]

Currently drive a TTC 3.2, but looking for a change.

Not a great deal of options available though.

Cayman is a bit pricey

Have test driven a 3.0 Z4. Not very impressed.

Not keen on the TT roadster so I thought I'd give MB a try.

Test drove a 200, which although lacking power felt very nice on the road.

Anyway, I think I've fallen for the car and intend ordering a 350.

I have ticked *gulp*the following options boxes : AMG 18" wheels, 7G, Dusky Red leather, Iridium Silver, Xenons and Luxury Climate.

However, before clicking on accept, I was wondering if anyone who owns a 350 can summerise their experience of the car.

I am also looking for comment on the 7G transmission.

Many thanks in anticipation.

 

[john_boy]

Hi How Much,

i had (an orange) TTC 3.2 DSG a couple of cars ago and now have an SLK 350 7G auto......

Mine's Obsidian black with black leather and:

Command System
7G Tronic
Harmon/Kardon Logic 7 surround sound system
CD changer in glove box (6 disc)
19” Brabus Monoblock “VI” style wheels (9.5” rears and 8.5” fronts)
Luxury climate control
Metallic paint
Bi-xenon headlamps with cornering function
Sports suspension
Folding exterior mirrors
Remote control for roof operation integrated into key
parktronic
Heated seats
Tracker
Air scarf
Parameter Speed sensitive steering
Tyre pressure loss warning system
Telephone pre-wiring with hands-free facility and aerial on roof
Nokia 6230 phone cradle
Electric mirrors/steering column with memory - Standard on SLK 350
Electric driver's & passenger seats, both with memory - Standard on SLK 350.

gearbox wise, there isn't much in it, nor is there much in performance/handling.....

The main drawback of the TT is that its looking too old hat now - the SLK looks, by contrast very fresh and sexy.

The Roof on the SLK did it for me - i like the idea of a drop top, but canvas roof's don't do it for me.

Hard to know what spec to go for - But (imho), 7G auto, leather, metallic and air scarf (but then you have to have heated seats !!) are a must - mine's got lux climate but isn't worth the extra.

on the wheel front, the AMG's look a bit "samey" - i'd be inclined to save yer dosh, have the standard wheels and get a set of 19" Brabus Monobloc VI reps - Then flog the "old" one's on E Bay....

Worth considering the Command(and possibly the Harmon Kardon) - reccon it could help shift the car when you come to sell it and it.

If you let me have your e mail address and i'll mail you some piccy's......

 

[Tony]

Hi
gearbox wise, there isn't much in it, nor is there much in performance/handling.....


on the wheel front, the AMG's look a bit "samey" - i'd be inclined to save yer dosh, have the standard wheels and get a set of 19" Brabus Monobloc VI reps - Then flog the "old" one's on E Bay....

......

I'm surprised that you think there isn't much in it with the gearbox. DSG is the future. Torque converters are the past.

On the subject of changing wheels, remember that the minute you change it from original spec it's regarded as a modified car and the insurance company will load the premium - probably by about 20% for after-market wheels. Some companies won't insure you.

 

[SLinKyjoe]

I'm surprised that you think there isn't much in it with the gearbox. DSG is the future. Torque converters are the past.

you suggesting we should buy a TT over a Mercedes as it has a DSG gearbox?

VW/AUDI seem to be having trouble with the DSG 'boxes at the moment.

 

[Tony]

DSG is the best transmission around IMO - better than manual and better than torque converters. The trouble with all torque converters is that they're slow to do what you tell them and they slur changes. I'm just surprised that anyone would say that there's not much in it between the two.

From a styling point if view I'd also rate the TT higher and if it snows this winter I know which I'd rather be in!

On the subject of reliability the new SLK seems to be having a few problems. Look at the benzworld R171 forum - not happy campers.

 

[SLinKyjoe]

it strikes me that this forum is for mercedes owners and enthusiasts.

in this case we have a member who has set his mind on a mercedes SLK. the suggestion that buying a car equipped with DSG box (which mercedes do not yet offer) is not a valid reason to choose the TT over the SLK. It may be an opinion but also the fact is the DSG box is new and is having trouble. I am sure the TT will have other reliablity issues too, just like any other car has.

I certainly cannot agree that the TT is better looking than an SLK. it looks like a squashed VW beetle to me.

I cannot comment on the 350 7G tronic as the AMG has a tuned version of it and also has different steering wheel controls. but having driven a DSG equipt TT, altho it was a roadster, it does not compare with the SLK at all. and I would suggest the 350 is better than the TT 3.2 by a big margin.

 

[john_boy]

Tony,

i think your "20% extra for after market wheels" is pub talk (i have been in insurance for 28 years, so i know)....

Cost me no extra....

oh and on the subject of the gear boxes...

i've owned and driven both and there is feck all in it......

 

[Tony]

it strikes me that this forum is for mercedes owners and enthusiasts.

Total nonsense. It's a forum for the exchange of opinions and information - not an arm of DC marketing and PR. The guy, unlike some, can plainly see beyond the three-pointed star or he wouldn't have referred to the Z4 and Cayman. The days when Mercedes could lay claim to high quality and bullet-proof reliability have long gone. Audi and VW are better quality than Mercedes now and they're some way behind the best Japanese, like Toyota.

Styling is a matter of opinion of course.

 

[SLinKyjoe]

Total nonsense.
.

read www.mercedesclub.org.uk and tell me what it says about the forum

 

[Tony]

Tony,

i think your "20% extra for after market wheels" is pub talk (i have been in insurance for 28 years, so i know)....

Cost me no extra....
......

I have an SLK320 which had standard 16" wheels. I put 17" wheels on it (Mercedes wheels), told the insurance company (esure) and was hit with a 30% loading. After much argument I got it down to 20%. I tried several other companies and could not find ANY that didn't load the premium. Which company are you with - and have you told them about the wheels? If not, you're third party only.

 

[Brett]

If you really believe the TT is any better in the snow, do a search in the TT Forum www.tt-forum.co.uk and see what they say about it. If you really want to throw stones about reliability, do a search on there for window drop, dashpod, MAF, and coil pack failures/problems amongst others.

I have no axe to grind. I enjoyed my TT but the model is around seven years old now. It is a common sight on our roads and is being replaced soon. Personally I prefer the SLK350 and whilst I have only test driven it, not owned it, it would get my vote.

 

[Tony]

If you really believe the TT is any better in the snow, do a search in the TT Forum www.tt-forum.co.uk and see what they say about it. If you really want to throw stones about reliability, do a search on there for window drop, dashpod, MAF, and coil pack failures/problems amongst others.

.

I don't have to "throw stones". The consumer surveys do it for me. I've also owned an SLK320 for 5 years and have got to know a lot of dealerships better than I would like. This is not a quality car unfortunately.

I don't need to search a forum for info about how a TT is in the snow - I've driven one. It's very good, even with summer tyres. The SLK ? Well, if it snows much this winter the SLK350 won't be going anywhere - except downhill - unless it's got winter tyres on it. That's a fact, so don't bother to deny it.

 

[Brett]

I don't have to "throw stones". The consumer surveys do it for me. I've also owned an SLK320 for 5 years and have got to know a lot of dealerships better than I would like. This is not a quality car unfortunately.

I don't need to search a forum for info about how a TT is in the snow - I've driven one. It's very good, even with summer tyres. The SLK ? Well, if it snows much this winter the SLK350 won't be going anywhere - except downhill - unless it's got winter tyres on it. That's a fact, so don't bother to deny it.

Well each to their own. As I said, I have no axe to grind here. You clearly have an issue with your SLK and prefer TT's. Good for you, but it might be worth at least taking a balanced approach to the original question. Oh, and that wasn't my experience of a TT in the snow, and we get a fair amount of it up here in Scotland.

 

[Tony]

If you think the TT's bad in snow just try an SLK. The combination of front engine, rear wheel drive, fat tyres and intrusive traction control make for absolutely unbelievable lack of grip - and I mean unbelievable. Those who haven't driven an SLK in snow should take this very seriously, because I'm not exaggerating. If it snows you have two alternatives. Leave it in the garage or get winter tyres.

 

[Brett]

If you think the TT's bad in snow just try an SLK. The combination of front engine, rear wheel drive, fat tyres and intrusive traction control make for absolutely unbelievable lack of grip - and I mean unbelievable. Those who haven't driven an SLK in snow should take this very seriously, because I'm not exaggerating. If it snows you have two alternatives. Leave it in the garage or get winter tyres.

To be honest, I can say the same about my E-Class Estate. It is not great in the snow. Snow and powerful rear-wheel drive don't mix well and all the driver aids just compund the problem. When the white stuff comes down we just use the RAV4 - incidentally, we used to opt for it when I had the TT too.

 

[john_boy]

Tony,

if you read my post, i was an insurance broker for 28 years.....

if e sure wanted to incease the premiums - show your discontent with your feet.

I told my insurers about the wheels and like many i used to deal with, there was no prob) - perhaps if they had been 20" blingy spinners it might have been another story.....

 

[john_boy]

Snow go........

i've driven TT's in the snow - both a manual 225 and a dsg 3.2 and neither are much cop.

Many years ago i had a Sierra Cosworth 4/4 and that was poor in the snow too.

if you want good in the snow - get a Landrover - its looking like a **ck for the other 362 days that puts me off though.....

 

[SLinKyjoe]

Tony,

I am happy to accept a TT is better than a Merc in snow, but then most of them are proper sports cars with front wheel drive, obviously 4x4 quattro versions are better still. but no TT is classed as good in snow under any circumstances.

My WRX wasn't good in snow and that had 4x4. but it was equiped with low profile performanmce tryes, and thses are rubbish in snow anyway. and unless your TT has winter tyres on, it will still be rubbish in snow, it may be less rubbish in snow then an SLK but it is still rubbish. Bear in mind, Mercedes recommend winter tyres for driving in snow. this in one big hint!

however we do have more clear/sunny days than we do snowy, so the fact its metal roof comes off, and you have (with the new R171) at least something that is a good roadster then you will have more topless fun than any TT hardtop. And decent hardtop driving, other days as well.

But the TT does have 4 seats. None of the rest of the cars mentioned here do!

But i need to bring you back to the point in question. This thread was created by someone who is termpted to order a SLK. By all means put up any information about SLK R171 350's as asked, and maybes other versions of this model if it helps this person make a final decision.

but lets keep this mercedes talk enthusiatic instead of venting about your frustration regarding your duff SLK and, as you said in a previous post, you would never buy mercedes again. Others do not agree with your assesemnt of this marque and have an equally valid point of view and they have the right to point out thire views too. But they do not insist at any opportunity to mention the DSG or in fact AUDI TT model as preferential.

You are welcome to put up your views of your R170 if it will be of help, but please stop banging on about how torque converters, realiablity and snow ability of your favoured AUDI. it is starting to become tiresome and does not show a full perspective of any models that could be mentioned.

I think you need to move on. Your troubles have tainted your views to the level of being negative and one sided.

 

[john_boy]

Slinky,

the TT may have 4 seats, but if an average driver puts the driver's seat into a comfortable position, there is enough room behind for a 4 year old....

on the passenger side, if the passenger seat is pushed all the way forward, so the front seat passenger's head it painfully close to the windscreen, then you can get a 14 year old in the rear seats.

i've got the T shirt on this one - me, the wife and the two kids (then 8 & 10) struggled with it for a couple of months before dropping it in favour of a 4 door.

Being objective - with a £30,000 + budget today, the one thing is for sure a TT will loose a shed load more than an SLK when you want to dump them in 2 years time.

As i said, having owned both - there isn't that much in it......

and yes my DSG gear box broke twice !!

That said the SLK is off the road with an electrical problem.

Thank god for the reliability of the diesel Smart....

 

[angus falconer]

I certainly cannot agree that the TT is better looking than an SLK. it looks like a squashed VW beetle to me.

I have a Merc but like other marques.

I like the idea of a DSG gearbox tho have never had the chance to sample.

BUT I have passengered in TT's and SLK's and find the slot-like windscreen in TT's really unpleasant to peer out of. I guess that's what it would look like from inside a rolled beetle.