R129 questons...

[Hatterasguy]

Just a few R129 questons. Next fall I am thinking about getting one, I am young and tired of 4 door sedans. I want something cool to cruise campus with. Anyway a local car dealer I know has a sweet SL500 on the lot for $16k. Flawless 904 blue(my favorite color!). I'm not sure of the exact year, I think its a 1994-96, mileage unsure I'd guess 70k-100k. But its real clean and in excellent cosmetic shape.

Anyway what would be a good SL to buy for under $20k that would be a good daily driver? This would be a 365/7 car so it would see snow, but I don't usualy get caught out. I'm not to worried, I figure a set of all seasons and some diligent driving should be fine for the snow. (18in AMG's on it the rest of the year of course. )

I just need a car that I can run about 10k miles a year, mostly around town but a bunch of trips. I'm a RE agent so lots of around town, thats why I am kind of thinking about a 320.

So are there any R129 models that are better than others? What about a 320 vs a 500? I want a fast car but to be honest this will be an around town work car so an M104 would be fine.

What specific areas should one look for when inspecting an R129? The top concerns me never having owned a convertible before. The driveline itself seems like standard MB, I'm pretty family with it already. Any suspension or electronic issues?

[Hatterasguy]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/1998-MERCEDES-BENZ-SL500-CONVERTIBLE-WOOD-RIMS-NO-RSRVE_W0QQitemZ200054048661QQihZ010QQcategoryZ6338QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

This one looks decent except for those wheels, but nothing a set of 18in AMG's can't correct!

[suginami]

I think the fuel economy difference between the 6 and 8 cylinders is basically nill.

Just like on the E420 and E320 (W124 chassis), there is only a 1-2 difference in mpg.

As far as the SL500, in 1997 (at least on the 1997 E420), the M119 engines went to a coil pack with each cylinder having its own coil wire, so you wouldn't need to replace spark plug wires and distributor cap and rotors every 30,000 miles, which is a big savings in maintenance cost.

[Michael K]

I researched that topic extensively and did many test drives. I concluded that, for the R129, the 1998 SL500 and 1997 SL320 are best. It's a combination of being the last years for the M119 and M104, respectively, plus the right combination of updated transmission and climate control.

When I was SL shopping, I found the R129 too similar to the W202 (which I already had) for my liking. Clearly the SL is the pinnacle of the grand touring world and the C is a humble economy sedan, but the two are clearly cousins. For me personally, it was the automatic transmission that forced me to recognize the relationship. Don't get me wrong, the R129 is a fantastic roadster. It's just that, when I think SL, I think standard transmission.

Drive both the 119 and 104. Both are world class engines. I personally don't buy into the M119 V-8 obsession and think the M104 I-6 is cooler. Both deliver more than adequate power. It's just that the M119 gives so much more. The added power changes the car's character, and, depending on your perspective, that could be a deciding factor.

P.S. 904 blue IS the best color ever!

[Pete Geither]

I have heard that the 5 speed is the way to go in the 500, but to be sure, you wouldn't be dissappointed with the 4 speed. The 320's have always intrigued me also and I would love to have one just because. My 500 has been a wonderful troublefree car and would recommend a 129 to any one.

[Hatterasguy]

When did the SL's get the 5sp 722.6? 1997 with all the other cars? As much as people hate that trans I like it my friends E300D has it and the extra gear sure is nice on the highway.

Now onto engines, the kept producing the R129 up till 2002 I think. When did they get rid of the M119, and what did they replace it with? A bored M113 I assume? I would prefer the M119.

Same with the M104, when did they get rid of that?

I have never seen a manual SL, afaik they only imported a handfull of manual 300SL's back in the early 90's.

What about traction control options?

[Pete Geither]

Hat,,, this should answer most of your questions.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/sl/history.htm
enjoy. Go right to the 1990's.
I'm a big deal now,,,, 1600 posts,,, whoopeee !!

[snowbilt]

Hatteras,
My extensive research also came up with the 98 500 which we purchased. The same reasons you gave are the EXACT reason we went with the 98.

[Hatterasguy]

Thanks for the posts guys! Looks like a 1997-98 SL500 is the one to get. Of course I think they scream for a set of 18in AMG wheels, but I'm 21 year old kid so I would.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/MERCEDES-BENZ-SL500-SL-500-TRIPLE-BLACK-VIDEO_W0QQitemZ130054582363QQihZ003QQcategoryZ6338QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

Thats pretty much what I want, man I love those wheels! Except three years older and $10k cheaper!

Now I need to sell some houses! Man that would look so cool cruising campus and the clubs.

[stats007]

Personally (and I've had two) I would buy an M113 '99 - '01 facelift model (the US got all models a year after Europe - so the 5 speed 722.6 was introduced in '96 over here - coil packs came in late '95 for the M119 etc).

To my eyes the facelift is better looking, the standard level of equipment went up and the the M113 is lighter and has a broader peak torque band than the M119 due to it's 3-valve nature and variable length intake manifold.

A '98 car would be the best of the M119 bunch however.

[Michael K]

For 1998 the 500 came standard with the rear hydraulic suspension. Our wagon has it. It's a brilliant system and well worth the extra upkeep. My theory is, over the long haul, it actually saves money on suspension upkeep. It also gives far superior ride and handling under all conditions.

1997 is the last year for the M104. If you wrench it yourself, you'd greatly appreciate the relatively open engine bay and lighter weight over the front end (and it's long term impact on the suspension). Compared to the 500, significantly fewer 320's were brought to the U.S., though.

The Xenon headlight system was optional those years. I think they perform and look better (especially since they don't have those ridiculous wipers attached to them).

The panorama roof was optional those years. It seriously enhances the car's aesthetic stance.

Also, if the SL is your daily driver in real world conditions, could I suggest that the sport suspension package is a bad idea. The standard suspension comes with sixteen inch, relatively narrow wheels connected to 225 rubber all around. Any narrower aspect, and the already tight set up gets harsh quickly.

[iwrock]

Hat, The R129 is a great car. IMHO the 500 is probibally the best for money to fun ratio... The M119 is a bulletproof motor, as many have said before. And AFAIK, the 500 was equipped with the 5 speed autobox in 1996. I have had the pleasure of driving both a 500 with 4 speed and a 500 with a 5 speed, and I must say that they are both fun and fast. However, the 5 speed has a cripser downshift, and smoother up shifts. However the 4 speed has been around forever and is probibally more dependable than the 5 speed. If I were you, I would look around for something 1996 or newer, as it has the updated body styling. Definitely try and get a car that has Xenons, as they are much superior than the regular lamps.

And if you really want to have some fun, get one with the ADS system. Although it can be $$ to maintain, it helps out alot when handling on the freeway!

[stats007]

Originally Posted by Michael Kerley

For 1998 the 500 came standard with the rear hydraulic suspension. Our wagon has it. It's a brilliant system and well worth the extra upkeep. My theory is, over the long haul, it actually saves money on suspension upkeep. It also gives far superior ride and handling under all conditions.

1997 is the last year for the M104. If you wrench it yourself, you'd greatly appreciate the relatively open engine bay and lighter weight over the front end (and it's long term impact on the suspension). Compared to the 500, significantly fewer 320's were brought to the U.S., though.

The Xenon headlight system was optional those years. I think they perform and look better (especially since they don't have those ridiculous wipers attached to them).

The panorama roof was optional those years. It seriously enhances the car's aesthetic stance.

Also, if the SL is your daily driver in real world conditions, could I suggest that the sport suspension package is a bad idea. The standard suspension comes with sixteen inch, relatively narrow wheels connected to 225 rubber all around. Any narrower aspect, and the already tight set up gets harsh quickly.

Only the SL600 came with ADS as standard. I have no idea how you come to the conclusion that in the long haul it's cheaper than springs and dampers! ADS is hideously expensive to fix when (not if) it goes wrong.

The Panoramic roof was an option from '96 again standard on the SL600.

The M104 remained in the SL320 until '99 model year available late '98 in Europe.

[Gilly]

When I'm ready to buy, I'm going to try to find a 300SL, first few years of production, with the CIS motor. Insurance is also a consideration, 6 will be much less than the 8, and mileage I believe should be lower by more than the 1-2 mpg quoted, although I'm sure the person who posted that is true in his own experiences, but should be more different than that. But nice cars either way, I love the 500 too, not gonna say it wouldn't be nice to have the 500. In regrads to the 129, I want one.
Gilly

[Hatterasguy]

Well I want an R129, but we shall see how much money I have to spend next fall, this shall determine the model I will get.

IE an $8k SL320 or an $18k, SL500.