|
|
|
|
|
#31
10-28-2016, 05:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Yes! it's got W115 front suspension 
__________________
With best regards Al 
|
|
#32
11-25-2016, 08:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
One same suspension can have different performance on two different cars (not quite binary but not identical eiter) all that said, 107, in my book, is "a sportier version of a GT car". I look at those large African women (or should I say African African) dancing and shaking their bums as if they are not as large as they are - and I think of 107. A giant that will impress but far from Lance Arsemtrong winning on drugs or Ben Johnson
|
|
#33
12-15-2016, 11:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
A 107 is about as close to a sports car as it's close to a classic car. In any case, it's neither.
They are a good choice for someone wanting a first time MB open car. They do everything well which is actually hard to do for most 70's and 80's cars which were often crap.
|
|
#34
12-16-2016, 01:57 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Having owned an 84 280SL for years, and currently have a 68 MGB roadster and a 99 BMW Z3 roadster, I know which one of the three doesn't belong........
The 107 SL is very much a sedan that has been shortened and decapitated. Witness it's chassis, derived intact from a W114. Not that there's anything wrong with that.... I loved the way my W114/W115 sedans drove. But.... and this is a big but (I like big butts), it's weight of the SL that differentiates it from the others. It comes down to physics. Mass and velocity. It's harder for mass to change direction as speed and mass increases. The MGB is the classic definition of a sports car. Perhaps only the Miata approaches this classic definition today. The MGB is a hair shirt compared to the BMW Z3. The Z3 keeps the dynamics of the MGB, layers on just enough modern conveniences that are expected (nee, demanded) on today's cars. The effect is to move the needle away from the classic sports car, and toward grand touring. In this way, the Z3 emulates the SL. Both the Z3 and the MGB remind me of a go cart WRT handling. Both cars react very quickly to steering and other inputs, I want say nervousness, but that's not the right word. That word suggests a twitchiness, it's more of an immediate response, a telegraphing of information through the steering wheel and chassis in a confidence inspiring way. The SL has the bones of a great handling sedan, and given it's roots, does well for itself. But it comes down to the weight. The weight makes the SL not as light on it's feet as the other two, bad for a sports car, but maybe more acceptable for a GT. To compare the SL to another MB...... We also have a 94 E320 cabriolet. This car is similar to the SL in that it also is a sedan that has been shortened and decapitated. Given that the E320 has 15 years of development over the SL chassis introduction (71 vs 86), the chassis dynamics of the cabriolet could be said to exceed those of the SL. Spiritually, the SL is much more aligned with the cabriolet, than either the MGB or the Z3. Different horses for different courses. I can say that you could pick an aspect of driving, and depending upon that pick any of the three two seaters had the potential to be the top dog. It's great to be able to have a choice of cars to drive, you can pick the right tool for the job of the day. It's also true that none of the choices are bad, each one stands out in different ways. We no longer have our 280SL, we let it go when health issues dictated a downsizing of the fleet. Two reasons contributed to the decision, first was my inability to get comfortable in the car. I could not get the seat/pedals/wheel relationship to work. I needed another 3 inches of seat travel backwards. Second was that the cabriolet was in competition and we preferred it. And.... and this is somewhat silly, we enjoy looking at the star hood ornament when we drive. Any way, that's my take on the W/R/C107 as an owner of one for 8 years. Jim
__________________
14 E250 BlueTEC black. 45k miles 95 E320 Cabriolet Emerald green 66k miles 94 E320 Cabriolet Emerald green 152k miles 85 300TD 4 spd man, euro bumpers and lights, 15" Pentas dark blue 274k miles
|
|
#35
12-16-2016, 08:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Along with @JimFreeh 's comments, it's probably worth taking a look where MB was headed with the SL. Comparing with the cabriolet, you might as well take a look at the r129, again, a "roadster" essentially built with the e-class chassis that came out just a few years prior. (1971 r/c107 on a 1968 w114/115 and then the 1990 r129 on the 1986 w124.) The interesting thing is that the coupes and sedans are much lighter and often offered with smaller engines that revved higher. If you wanted a Sportscar, you'd be better off in a coupe or even a sedan in each of those cases. The v8's weren't always offered, like in the w114, the largest engine was the m110 euro 185 hp engine that would make nearly as much is the much heavier US 4.5 (190hp at best). Then with the w124, you could only get the 500e in the sedan.
You can take a look at MB and see probably only one very consistent theme that applies to all models, "safety". If you look at the new design principles applied to the r/c107 you can see that the gas tank above the rear axle and crumple zones were some of the very important features. I am confident (maybe not correct, but confident) that the reasons these cars are heavier is because they are safer. The r129 is probably safer than the r107, and it gains some performance with the more powerful engines (that also take up far more room and probably generally weigh more). The 70's and early 80's were the time when most cars lost power due to emissions controls. Power and performance were not as important as style in that time (in my opinion). Lots were sold, and now we all benefit from lots of cheap ones available in the US. In Europe, they were more of a sportscar than here, which is why I believe their values are higher there and so many are being re-exported back to Europe. Sportscar? Yeah, not so much. But still a lot of car for your money.
__________________
Past mb: '73 450sl, '81 280slc stick, '71 250, '72 250c, '70 250c, '79 280sl, '73 450sl, parted: '75 240d stick, '69 280s, '73 450slc, '72 450sl,
|
|
#36
12-16-2016, 11:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I no longer have my 560SL but ....
I do miss it. My DD now is a 300CD and I also love it but for different reasons.
I have a part-time job as a driver on auction-days with Manheim Auto Auction. it is a great job for one who considers himself a gear-head. Yesterday I drove a 560SL and a Z3 back-to-back. It was all I could do to keep from turning left and driving out of sight with the Benz. Now for my assessment. The Benz was quiet, powerful and immaculately appointed with original red paint, new leather and uncracked dash wood and vinyl. It felt solid and dependable. This car had 112k miles on it and went unsold with the highest bid at $8500. This is a wholesale auction to licensed dealers only. It will be back next week. The Z3 was plastic. It felt as though it was faster and more planted than the Benz but there is no way it will be in as fine fettle as the Benz at 30 years old. It sold at $5600. I'm not sure what the Z3 sold for when new but I know the Benz went for about $61k when new in 1987. In present day Dog Dollars that was huge, probably $100k or more. My 560SL was totalled during a road trip in upstate New York and I decided I wanted a Diesel again. I miss the SL but it was getting increasingly hard to dismount as the years go by.
|
|
#37
12-16-2016, 03:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
R107 - really a sportscar?
You guys don't "roll out" of the car by putting a hand on the rocker as you get out? And "swing in" by hanging from the A-pillar? I am only 41 and find the acrobatics to be good upper-body exercise.
__________________
Past mb: '73 450sl, '81 280slc stick, '71 250, '72 250c, '70 250c, '79 280sl, '73 450sl, parted: '75 240d stick, '69 280s, '73 450slc, '72 450sl,
|
|
#38
12-16-2016, 08:25 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
My first MB was a 59 190SL, that I bought in 1973. That was my introduction to MB quality, I used to regularly get dusted off by friends with their British sports cars. Even though both our Z3 and MGB are not cut from the same cloth as the SL, quality wise, they both are still very nice cars, and certainly not of POOR quality.... Our 68 MGB is still in nice original shape, as is our 99 Z3. My observation is that the BMW is not up the standards I expect from MB, but it's still better than lots of other cars I've seen. I have no reason to expect our car to age any worse than concurrent MB cars. The quality (i.e.: weight) is what keeps the R107 out of the sports car field. It's really more of the two seat T-Bird kind of car. The SL can do well if pushed hard, but it's reluctant to play. The other two, step up and want to be your dance partner. In my previous post about these cars, I likened the SL to a GT car, not a sports car. And that's where the SL comes into it's own. It's a capable car, but is more comfortable with a kind hand on the wheel, treating it gently, but knowing that the capability is there, if needed. Jim
__________________
14 E250 BlueTEC black. 45k miles 95 E320 Cabriolet Emerald green 66k miles 94 E320 Cabriolet Emerald green 152k miles 85 300TD 4 spd man, euro bumpers and lights, 15" Pentas dark blue 274k miles
|
|
#39
12-17-2016, 08:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I have a Honda S2000 which in my estimation is a sports car. What makes that car fun is razor sharp handling and a 2 liter naturally aspirated engine that revs to 9000 rpm. I love taking it on the curvy roads of northern Georgia. I bought a 560SL because it is not a sports car. I think the only thing these two cars have in common is approx. the same horse power and being a convertible. The SL is a cruiser. My wife and I enjoy every minute we are driving it (she hates the S2000).
|
|
#40
12-19-2016, 10:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
My SL - Z comparo.
Jim, of course I understand that difference. There is also about 20 years of age and technology between those cars. I was comparing the build quality. I think the 80's SL is a lot better in quality than todays MB SL's and maybe even the sedans. My experience convinces me that the newer cars have only added electronic trickery and gee-whizness for the price differences.
The interior of almost any new car is a great place to sit (and be distracted from the basic job of driving) but for ultimate abstract quality it is hard to beat any 80's Mercedes. That's my opinion and I'm stickin' to it.
|
|
#41
12-19-2016, 11:57 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Rock, Quality is a subjective term..... As a long term MB owner (many cars), and only light experience with BMW, I naturally compared the two brands. It became clear that the BMW Z3 was not built to the same standards as older MB models. Many plastic parts were much more fragile, and electrical connectors for example were not designed to repeatably be separated without failure of the plastic. Even the tactile feel of the switchgear and door handles is superior on the Mercedes. But on the other hand, I don't see the Z3 bodies rusting with ferocity of 80'S Mercedes. And the HVAC is much more robust than the complicated SL version. Where the BMW shines is the driving itself. The SL is a somewhat aloof partner, while the BMW encourages you to ask for more. I suppose that's why the advertisements always stress the BMW as a driver's car. I liked my 280SL, and agree with your observations, it is better from a quality and execution standpoint. But it was not a better car dynamically. In large measure the downside to the vault like construction is weight, and weight is the #1 enemy of sports cars. You can increase power, which helps in a straight line, but doesn't help when turning or braking.... With prices for early SLs climbing rapidly, the odds of me getting another 190SL (or a pagoda) have dropped to zero. Bummer. I believe that if the SL bug bit me again, the R129 is where I'd be shopping today. Jim
__________________
14 E250 BlueTEC black. 45k miles 95 E320 Cabriolet Emerald green 66k miles 94 E320 Cabriolet Emerald green 152k miles 85 300TD 4 spd man, euro bumpers and lights, 15" Pentas dark blue 274k miles
|
|
#42
12-20-2016, 09:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Having owned many r107 and now one 1992 500sl (one of the simpler r129 cars), I think the r129 is a tremendous bargain of a LOT of car for your money. But it certainly is a lot more electronic than my r107 cars, and WAY heavier feeling. The prices will probably continue to fall as more and more fall into disrepair. R107 prices on the other hand, the train seems to be leaving the station.
__________________
Past mb: '73 450sl, '81 280slc stick, '71 250, '72 250c, '70 250c, '79 280sl, '73 450sl, parted: '75 240d stick, '69 280s, '73 450slc, '72 450sl,
|
|
#43
12-22-2016, 02:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
With best regards Al
|
|
#44
01-01-2017, 05:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Just caught up with this thread and was interested to see how the initial subject had widened. Lots of statements made about various different sports cars, GT's and cruisers but the first one I can't go along with is Jim Freeh's assertion of the MGB as the classic definition of a sports car. To me, the classic definition is typified by the British and some European sportsters of the 1930's. The Jaguar or should I say SS100 which is an ikon, together with the MG TB, Singer Le Mans, Triumph Dolomite, Healey and a couple of very pretty Alfas. These cars were all long and low with rakish lines. The Mercedes SSK was in there too but even then, who could afford one? Even the Americans had some pretty stuff although more dramatic, the Auburn Boat Tail and some Duesenbergs were sporty gorgeous and quick. Immediately post WW2 MG went with the TC (basically a rebadged TB) and then to the TD and the TF which just might be considered as the prettiest of them all. Jaguar XK 120, 140 &150 which eventually gave us the E type which Enzo Ferrari christened the most beautiful car ever built, while Austin Healey, Morgan, Triumph TR 2 & 3 went on to compete with the MGA and eventually the MGB. Yes, the MGB is nice, but not to compare with several of its predecessors. By the way, the above list is far from complete. Riley, Fiat, Citroen, Panhard, AC, Alvis etc. all had sports cars on sale, even Daimler.
Today's sports cars are far more sophisticated than the classics of yesterday and they have to be as so very much more is expected of them. I wonder if any of them will have the staying power to appeal to classic car lovers in 50 year's time? Going back to the original subject, I think the 107 is about as sporty as MB could make it and still have it fulfil the luxury function that its price point demanded. When I bought my 280SL it was partly because I liked it, partly because it was a Mercedes model that I'd always enjoyed looking at, and partly because it was enjoyable to drive. The other reason though, was because in comparison to true sports cars, I could actually get in and out of it without cramping up! It was also comfortable to drive long distances which is not the case with most "real sports cars.
|
|
#45
01-01-2017, 06:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
