Author Topic: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300  (Read 7322 times)

Offline Autos_Editor

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 8326
  • Carma: +91/-560
  • member
    • View Profile
Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« on: December 18, 2015, 06:28:59 am »

Can a bigger turbo engine and new nine-speed automatic transmission make up for a higher price-tag and the loss of the SLK's manual transmission?
Read More...

Offline KD

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 11402
  • Carma: +359/-263
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2017 Frontier Pro-4X, 2013 Lexus GS-350
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« Reply #1 on: December 18, 2015, 06:44:39 am »
I doubt whether the target market will lament the loss of the manual.  I just can't bring myself to like this car for some reason.  The first gen was a nice looking car, but this one looks too much like a truncated version of the SL, which is a stylistic mess IMO.

Offline JohnnyMac

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 10033
  • Carma: +112/-461
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2022 Honda CR-V Sport, 2022 Honda Civic Si, 2020 Toyota Rav4 Hybrid XLE (traded in), 2020 VW Jetta GLI (Traded in), 2010 Hyundai Santa Fe Limited (sold), 2016 VW Golf R (Sold)
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« Reply #2 on: December 18, 2015, 07:46:51 am »
" .07 seconds faster than the SLK 250 with the manual transmission and .08 seconds faster than the SLK 250 with automatic"

Do you mean the SLK 250 did the 0-60 run in 5.87 seconds or 6.5 seconds with the manual?  Cause the way I read this ".07 seconds faster" is very little indeed, but if it's .7 seconds faster that's noticable.

Offline Noto

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 13583
  • Carma: +774/-2132
  • This forum is making me almost as bitter as SirO
    • View Profile
  • Cars: '23 Mazda CX-50 Turbo; '24 Crosstrek Wilderness
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« Reply #3 on: December 18, 2015, 09:43:09 am »
I'm at a complete loss on this one.

I loved the Z4, to the point that it has become my lust for a 'fun' car.  I'd give up the driving enjoyment of the Miata for the luxury in this kind of vehicle, and wouldn't even blink about the $10-15k more I'd be spending to get it.

...but at twice the price of a Miata, and gouging for packages, and $70k pre-tax without a backup camera?!  FFS!

The roof in this is far more desirable than the one in the Z4, and the trunk looks equally awesome (it may be small, but it works for most of my needs - except skiing).

All said, if I move somewhere warm, I'll consider this, but RWD + low, low front just isn't conducive for a year-rounder 'round these parts.

Weather aside, the SLK's only redeeming feature to me is the roof.  Otherwise, I like the Z4 packages way better.  Shame the Z4 is slotted to be discontinued. :(

Offline aquadorhj

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 7610
  • Carma: +271/-265
    • View Profile
  • Cars: MB SLK 55, Lexus NX, E46 M3, Honda Fit, VW Jetta, VW Rabbit, Saturn SC, Nissan NX,
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« Reply #4 on: December 18, 2015, 09:57:16 am »
did anyone ever buy SLK with manual anyway?

the last gen slk 55 i drove was a wonderful car, too expensive for my blood.


Driving thrills makes my wallet lighter.. and therefore makes me faster because i'm shedding weight... :D

Offline EV-Light

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 8141
  • Carma: +125/-1490
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« Reply #5 on: December 18, 2015, 10:12:45 am »
did anyone ever buy SLK with manual anyway?

the last gen slk 55 i drove was a wonderful car, too expensive for my blood.

according to autotrader, 11 of them LOL....
http://www.autotrader.ca/cars/mercedes-benz/slk-class/?prx=-1&prv=Ontario&loc=Toronto%2c+ON&trans=Manual&sts=New-Used&hprc=True&wcp=True&inMarket=advancedSearch&srt=4

Offline pcsp

  • Enthusiast
  • **
  • Posts: 463
  • Carma: +38/-53
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2013 Nissan Juke AWD (current), 2008 HHR SS (current), 1974 Mazda 929, Triumph TR6, VW Diesel PU, 1981 VW Cabriolet, 1987 Dodge Raider, etc.
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« Reply #6 on: December 18, 2015, 10:20:35 am »
Interesting to see that MB is using SPD-SmartGlass technology in their MAGIC SKY CONTROL panoramic roof. This is the future my friends. It will evolve into "virtual sunroofs" utilizing multiple sensors providing all the benefits of a sunroof with none of the compromises. Warehouses will have few, if any, actual windows but will provide workers with a bright window filled environment, airplanes will have virtual, panoramic  windows and not need the actual windows that compromise structure and aerodynamics, homes can have huge windows providing a view of...whatever is desired, etc. In the automotive realm, I guess it is somewhat similar to the concept of piping in artificial sound to the cabin, versus the "pure" sound of the vehicle. Interesting times ahead.

Offline OliverD

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 18763
  • Carma: +257/-776
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2011 BMW 328i Touring, 1998 Jaguar XJR, 2024 Mini Cooper S
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« Reply #7 on: December 18, 2015, 10:48:51 am »
From the article: "A completely redesigned SLK – probably renamed SLC – is rumoured to arrive for 2017."

That car has already been announced.



http://www.autoblog.com/2015/12/15/2017-mercedes-benz-slc-features-amg-version-with-turbo-v6/

Offline Firm

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 8028
  • Carma: +232/-1073
  • Gender: Male
  • Urban Hick
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2010 XKR, 2007 DTS, 2006 Escalade, 2000 Sonoma ZQ8,1996 Firebird, 1996 Firebird Formula, 1985 Trans Am, 1984 Camaro, 1978 MGB x2
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« Reply #8 on: December 18, 2015, 11:49:26 am »
Styling really kills this car for me. I liked the first gen (obviously), and even the second gen styling, but the new ones just looks awkward (as does the SL).

Offline evil_twin

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 2423
  • Carma: +253/-253
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2023 Cadillac CT5-V Blackwing, 2018 Audi Q7 3.0T
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« Reply #9 on: December 18, 2015, 11:57:00 am »
Styling really kills this car for me. I liked the first gen (obviously), and even the second gen styling, but the new ones just looks awkward (as does the SL).

Agreed.  Mercedes really killed the SL and SLK with the current styling.  It's all out of proportion with a big fat nose on a sleek body.

My folks still own a 2003 SL500 and it looks much better to my eyes.




Offline Firm

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 8028
  • Carma: +232/-1073
  • Gender: Male
  • Urban Hick
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2010 XKR, 2007 DTS, 2006 Escalade, 2000 Sonoma ZQ8,1996 Firebird, 1996 Firebird Formula, 1985 Trans Am, 1984 Camaro, 1978 MGB x2
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« Reply #10 on: December 18, 2015, 01:26:45 pm »
That Generation SL (03 to ~06?) before they started squaring things off is one of my all-time favorite Benz's, still such an elegant looking car.

I've been very tempted to swap my SLK for one, and if I found a good one I probably would. I bought my car trying to be somewhat practical, but now that it's become strictly a weekend car I could justify an SL of this generation....It'll happen one day.

« Last Edit: December 18, 2015, 01:29:28 pm by Firm »

Offline gwilson

  • Learner's Permit
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Carma: +0/-3
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: Sunbeam Alpine, Volvo P1800, Triumph TR6, Datsun 510, Pontiac Grand Prix, Dodge Ram Camper, VW Golf, Dodge Neon, Mazda Miata, VW Westfalia, Honda Fit, Mazda2, Mercedes E550
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« Reply #11 on: December 18, 2015, 08:23:48 pm »
" .07 seconds faster than the SLK 250 with the manual transmission and .08 seconds faster than the SLK 250 with automatic"

Do you mean the SLK 250 did the 0-60 run in 5.87 seconds or 6.5 seconds with the manual?  Cause the way I read this ".07 seconds faster" is very little indeed, but if it's .7 seconds faster that's noticable.

Good catch!  Yes, I meant 0.7 seconds and 0.8 seconds, not 0.07 and 0.08 seconds faster.  Greg

Offline johngenx

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 33323
  • Carma: +758/-938
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2009 Toyota Corolla, 2004 Toyota Highlander V-6 4WD, 2001 Subaru Forester, 1994 Mazda Miata
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« Reply #12 on: December 18, 2015, 11:33:46 pm »
1990- SL Mercedes are the "ultimate" in terms of the F in FGC.  Great to look at, sublime to drive and horrific to own.

Offline evil_twin

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 2423
  • Carma: +253/-253
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2023 Cadillac CT5-V Blackwing, 2018 Audi Q7 3.0T
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« Reply #13 on: December 19, 2015, 07:26:50 am »
1990- SL Mercedes are the "ultimate" in terms of the F in FGC.  Great to look at, sublime to drive and horrific to own.

My folks' '03 (like the one pictured but in silver) definitely meets the F criteria in FGC.   Part of the problem is it's a bit of a garage queen.  I believe it still only has something like 50k km on it after 13 years.  And sits all winter.

Car has been fine mechanically, but all sorts of electrical fun.  The car has 2 batteries mostly because of the power top and they always seem to have issues with holding charge, various sensors malfunctioning, etc.    So not terrible to own (no MAJOR failures), just lots of little pain in @ss stuff.   

But it looks good!  :rofl2:

Offline johngenx

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 33323
  • Carma: +758/-938
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2009 Toyota Corolla, 2004 Toyota Highlander V-6 4WD, 2001 Subaru Forester, 1994 Mazda Miata
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« Reply #14 on: December 19, 2015, 10:57:49 am »

various sensors malfunctioning, etc.    So not terrible to own (no MAJOR failures), just lots of little pain in @ss stuff.   


I knew quite a few SL owners when I was in the club, and whoa, the money they spent on them was staggering.  The tops are incredibly complex and have seemingly-countless sensors and actuators.  They'd all spent thousands keeping the tops operational - ugh.  One poor guy had bills totally nearly $10K alone for top servicing.  In the R129s the AC evaporator is a failure prone part - last time I'd talked to a poor owner that was facing replacement, the book was 45 hours for labour alone.  FORTY FIVE hours!!  The SL600s are unreal - I'm not sure I've seen a more crowded engine bay.  Servicing anything is nearly impossible.  That said, I got to drive an R129 SL600 and whoa, what a machine.  I want my best friend to own one that he lets me drive but he takes care of the bills.

The SLK is many ways is a pretty decent alternative to an SL - MB really upped their game with the SLK, adding performance and more aggressive styling.

Offline OliverD

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 18763
  • Carma: +257/-776
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2011 BMW 328i Touring, 1998 Jaguar XJR, 2024 Mini Cooper S
Re: Test Drive: 2016 Mercedes-Benz SLK 300
« Reply #15 on: December 20, 2015, 03:57:08 pm »
The R129 is a modern classic. It has perfect lines.