Not according to Mercedes-Benz's website. They say 355.

http://www.mbusa.com/brand/container...5&class=05_SLK

Good find. I didn't see it on their site the first time, so I googled for an approximation.

Again, M-B's official web site only claims 4.9.

Especially with the crappy .35 coefficient of drag.

Somehow I doubt the laws of physics have been changed to favor Mercedes Benz.

The C6 in best-performance trim can be had for around $45,000. If the Mercedes is coming in with over $60,000 prices, then that certainly falls into the "tens of thousands" category.

 

IMO, the C6 is the best bang for the buck. Viper to C6 base, F55 or Z51 comparisons are a waste of time. Wait for the C6 Z car and then compare it to Viper.

 

I've bought two SLK AMG and currently own a SLK32. Paid MSRP for both of them. Bought them from two different dealers in North Carolina and both dealers told me that they could not sell a new Mercedes for more than MSRP. Now a used mercedes the sky is the limit. I've been on the lot where a used one sells for more than ordering a new one. Kinda "A bird in the hand" deal. But both the Corvette and the SLK32 or SLK55 are great cars in their own right. To each his own, so that's why I'm keeping my SLK32 as well as getting a C6. Did also order the coupe for the same reason as above. Also got the 6speed manual because I wanted to feel a little more in control than the SLK32's automatic.

 

.....let alone the 460-500hp monster, the 2006 Z06.....

I'm not saying the SLK55 isn't a terrific car - I'm sure it is....but I don't think it will compare well, performance-wise, with the Z06 when it comes out.....

 

At least then the prices will be closer.

Until then, the C6's price competitor is the SLK32.

 

Frenchie, like I said up top, I think you were playing a little fast and loose with the facts. In all honesty, I was too, but you pulled a quote from me, out of context, from an entirely different thread, to illustrate you had an axe to grind.

I'm neither delusional, nor am I a Corvette fanatic. I am a die-hard car fan, and completely brand agnostic. I've owned many BMW M-cars (no MBs), and appreciated them for what they were.

Time will tell whether the new SLK will become a "Corvette-killer" in the performance department....I rather doubt it, but I suppose anything's possible. But, your facts have been demonstrated by many to be rather suspect.

 

SLK55 compares much more favorably to a 1SB power topped C6 convertible. Option them the same and the "legendary value" (defined as price/performance) of the C6 is less than what it was. Of course, the quality and reliability are more than what they were, too...

People who want a 1SX Z51 aren't looking at an SLK anyway.

Corvette remains a tremendous value proposition. It stymies consideration of a lot of other cars, particularly those in its price range.

But Frenchie, it's one thing to say that other people in other threads may be getting a bit overenthusiastic with Corvette's "giant killer" reputation, and it's another to bring in performance and price numbers of the SLK55 and proclaim that the Corvette superiority complex is baseless. The facts say the SLK55 is slower and more expensive. You can read tea leaves and extrapolate all you like, but until a magazine does an instrumented head-to-head, you're just bench racing, and C6 remains at the top of its heap.

A heap which does not include Viper, and may not include the 997S.

.Jinx

 

We can "chest-beat" all we want. We're Corvette lovers on a Corvette site.

"Bang for the buck" isn't something that should get old. It's just a fact and one of the many selling points.

That's like saying "the C6 has 400hp" is getting old.

Some might have blinders on, but most of us don't. I'm not ragging on you, I just don't get the point of your post, unless it's that Foosh didn't make a good point.

 

Ignore List... sounds like Blinders!

 

Yep, I clearly blew it......rather than 2 times the price, I should have said 1.5 times plus or minus............

 

Also don't overlook the other half of Dale Earnhardt's times. He said he consistently turned the 1/4 in 12.7 seconds. That's only 0.2 seconds off the times GM put out.

 

Could it be that Frenchie = ....and if you truly are french..ie, Dit moi, il me semble que vous etes ici pour la seul raison do foutre la merde partout.

 

Had a bit of French back in high school, did ya?

"Dit moi" = dis-moi
"seul" = seule
"do" = de
And it should be "tu es" (not "vous etes") to agree with "dis."

And no, I'm no troll. If I understand correctly, I must be here to stir things up ("pour foutre la merde partout") because I had the audacity to compare a 60K MB to a 60K C6 vert, and to give the MB a probable edge (we'll see), thus questioning CF "most bang for buck" dogma. Quel culot!

 

Deer season opens up here pretty soon.

All we want in New Hampshire is more buck for the bang!

Stan

 

Two things.

You actually compared an optioned out C6 vert to a base (MSRP) MB, which isn't valid.

And just because another car has bang for the buck doesn't mean the C6 *doesn't.* More than one car can have this.

People say it because it's a great feature to an already great car.

It goes like stink?!
It has 400hp!?
AND it's fairly cheap [in comparison]?!!#

 

The SLK55 AMG is $61,220msrp. The C6 vert msrp is $52,245. The SLK55 has a 5.4 liter V-8 with 355hp and 376lb/ft of torque. The C6 vert has a 6.0 liter V-8 with 400hp, 400lb/ft of torque. The SLK is 200 pounds heavier. The SLK has a MB's version of tiptronic. C6 has a short shifting 6spd manual, along with 3.42 rearend on Z51. The C6 has wider and more performance minded rear tires. The C6 is wider, longer, lower, lighter, and more powerful. The SLK55 is just a slower car. Get over it. I can't wait for the rags to test the two right next to eachother. To each his own.

 

I am happy to seriously consider the opinion of any person willing to buy my next car.

 

Lazerwolf writes: "You actually compared an optioned out C6 vert to a base (MSRP) MB, which isn't valid."

Yup, I did (at least you got that part, unlike Dsob15 in recent post), and yup, it IS valid. Why? Because, as I explained before, THE TWO CARS ARE COMPARABLY EQUIPPED. Let me repeat: the BASE (B-A-S-E) MB SLK55 and the FULLY OPTIONED C6 vert are comparably equipped (not identically, of course, but similarly), because a lot of the C6's options are standard on the Benz. Lazerwolf, this isn't rocket science. Just go get the MB brochure and compare yourself.

And they're almost identically priced, as I wrote and rewrote earlier. (If you don't know where to get prices, I can direct you.)

Lazerwolf again: "And just because another car has bang for the buck doesn't mean the C6 *doesn't.* More than one car can have this."

Well... yeah, of course. (Why did you write that?) The traditional claim, and mine, have to do with MOST bang for the buck. That's a performance/price ratio. Sure, we can argue about the definition of performance, and it's surely a synthesis of many factors. The factor that I was specifically referring to was 0-60 times. My claim was and is that, based on the info that we have at present, it looks like the MB SLK55 will beat the C6 0-60. Time, and tests, will tell. A lot of CF-ers don't like hearing that and malign the messenger. So be it.

"It goes like stink?!" you write. Sure does.

"It has 400hp!?" Undeniable.

"AND it's fairly cheap [in comparison]?!!" In comparison to the SLK55? Nope. Just check it, instead of denying it.

As for Dsob15 ("The SLK55 is a slower car. Get over it")... You can't make that claim yet. We're all speculating at this point. (Earlier I gave the reasons underlying my speculation.) But if true, that's not something that I would have to... GET OVER (?!) What a weird notion.

 

Frenchie, you make fair points. I'm always willing to listen, but at this point, it is speculation on both sides. But, there's no reason for anyone to be so strident about it. That goes for both you and the defenders.....so let's just chill out, and the facts will play themselves out at some point.

I'm not attacking you, I'm actually thanking you for pointing out something I didn't know. I'm skeptical b/c I haven't seen any independent numbers for the SLK55, but you may well ultimately be right. I'd like to see the full set of numbers, including top-end and skidpad lateral G-force, but they will be available in time.

I'm a great believer in the facts, and I'm smart enough to objectively evaluate facts. We all make our choices for different reasons, and to each his or her own. That's the great thing about the automotive world we live in today.....so MANY great choices!

 

This whole thread is "splitting hairs" on points that have yet to be validated. If the cars are as close C6 vert vs. droptop MB we'll see tests to compare. But using mag tests that vary wildly, and automaker ratings doesn't prove anything...and is definitely not worth ranting to the level Frenchie is taking this. Is the vette the best "bang for the buck" pure sports car in the 50K range (track, 0-60, dragstrip), nothing will beat it at this range. Are others close as the vette creeps up in price??? YES -the gap is definitely shrinking!
The MB is a sweet looking car, and the performance numbers are hot for the AMG version, and close to the vert...but two different car segments. luxury sports vs sports. Hopefully we will see a mag test soon.