I recently picked up an SL500 and it's been years since I've driven anything with even remotely this much power.

Up to that point my daily driver was a 300E that we're holding on to (it's got 230,000 miles on it and I figure we can double that if we're careful).

I like the size of the E Class sedans, and I love the power in my SL - I am just wondering if the 500E would be even more gutsy than the SL.

I am sure that some of you have driven both. Can you give me any ideas on how they compare?

Thanks.

Seeing that the 1993 & later cars shared the same drive train BUT the SL500 weighs about 800lbs more, the 500E should always be faster. THE 1992 500E had even 10 more HP so it should be the fastest!!

__________________
MERCEDES Benz Master Guild Technician (6 TIMES)
ASE Master Technician
Mercedes Benz Star Technician (2 times)
44 years foreign automotive repair
27 Years M.B. Shop foreman (dealer)
MB technical information Specialist (15 years)
190E 2.3 16V ITS SCCA race car (sold)
1986 190E 2.3 16V 2.5 (sold)
Retired Moderator

Having had both (just sold the SL a week ago), I can say that the SL is a bit disappointing performance-wise compared the the 500E. While one would *think* that the SL would be more fun to drive, the opposite is true.

The SL500/500SL seems heavier, less nible, slower and lacks the rip-snorting take-off that the E500/500Es provide. It's probably due to the fact that the SLs are in fact heavier, despite its size (courtesy of additional reinforcements required due, in turn, to the lack of a roof). Add to that the E500/500Es different fuel injection systems, modified intake runners (iirc) plus the porsche specified suspension and the difference is almost night and day. I was expecting the 500E to approximate the performance of the SL500, but was pleasantly surprised that it exceeded it noticeably.

Don't miss the SL at all...



More pics of the 500SL available here: SL500 pics


Pics of the 500E can be found in the link provided in the sig.

Cheers!

__________________
Rainmaker
93 500E, 43k mi, Pics of upgrade parts
Evo II Wheels on Dunlop FM901 235/45x17s
94 Facelift
RennTech CF Airbox
RennTech ASR Defeat
RennTech Chip
1st Gear Start
97 Range Rover 4.6 HSE Vitesse, Yellow, "Tonka" (sold)

Ricky is right... maybe its the way Porsche made the intake runners longer that gives the car its incredible pull thru-out the rev-range...I do not own a 500SL but have driven one that my fiancee wanted (she'll settle for the 320SL though) and one would think by its smaller size and two less seats that it would be faster but the 500E just seems more brutishly powerful. MB has sure got a sweet motor with that M119...slap on a couple of turbos and you'll have something close to the 900 HP LeMans winner...

__________________
Jim

1992 500E
2007 CLK63
2003 Audi RS6
2001 Audi allroad

Hehehe....in a nutshell: it doesn't!

__________________
'94 W124.036 249/040 leder; 8.25x17 EvoIIs
'93 W124.036 199/040 leder; 8.25x17 EvoIIs, up in flames...LITERALLY!
'93 W124.036 481/040 leder; euro delivery; 8.25x17 EvoIIs
'88 R107.048 441/409 leder; Euro lights
'87 W201.034 199/040 leder; Euro lights; EvoII brakes; 8x16 EvoIs - soon: 500E rear brakes
'70 R113.044 050/526; factory alloys; Euro lights

since the SL500 and E500 were engineered with 2 distintly dfferent market philosphys in mind- the results will be uncommon

both- very nice- in their own way

-fad

Right. I own a '92 500E that's been pampered and cared for by racing personnel, Porsche and Mercedes aficionados, all it's life. I was on the hunt for a '02 Silver Arrow SL until I drove one. The "there wasn't there," compared to the 500E. While I might still get one, it's hard for me to drive anything more ponderous than the 500E, which -- compared to the S55 and M3 in the fleet -- is neither fast nor nimble. But it does hold its own. The Silver Arrow did not.

The '02 Silver arrow SL ( still a R129 ) was more of a tarting up of an old car than being an increased performance special edition. On the used car market I don't consider the silver arrows cars to be worth much more than a similar year standard or Sport spec car.

The SL 300 , 320 ( I 6 ) and 500 ( V8 ) are right around 4,100 Lb, the SL600 ( V12 ) is 200 ish lb more.

badly, very badly

__________________
ce 320 amg
widebody
tiwn turbo
Mutty 'der nail'
soon to be a six speed nail


"some mods improve your car and make it into something it never was, other mods, however, although essentially the same, are not, and make that car a ricer"

if your car isnt shiny, you dont know what you are talking about, remember; paint shine = knowledge. In order to be taken seriously, you should spend all your money on paint, (and get a dyno reading).
Dont forget to polish it often

500SL and SL500 are completely different cars.

MERCEDES 500SL 0-260km/h - YouTube

500SL is pretty fast with that 4-speed auto, ASD and KE-Jetronic.
Newer electronic SL500 are more efficient, smooth and etc. and also slower.

I used to drive '01 SL320 R129 final edition daily. Not even close to SL500, but it's really slow in 0-100 km/h (0-60 mph) range. It has somewhat 115 hp/ton rating, so it's not a big surprise. But really I do think that SL could be fun to drive with a V8 and a manual. I've seen one 300SL-24 with a manual for sale, should be a pretty funny car, if you can get out on some curvy roads, but slow and worthless for city driving.

__________________
1988 Mercedes-Benz 300TE
1984 Toyota Celica GT-R AA63 (JDM)
1989 Audi V8 3.6 quattro

Update here. I ended up replacing the transmission in the 500E, in an arduous search for first gear start and a driving experience that more rivaled the 722.6 transmission in the S55. Short answer is the car is no longer ponderous. A flick of your right ankle produces willing and ready, instantaneous downshifts, high revs, and firm, crisp upshifts. Ponderous, gone -- wolf in sheep's clothing, returned.

Cheers,

maw