Mercedes SL65AMG vs. Mercedes SLR McLaren

[Gal_TT]

I would rather buy the SL65 AMG. I think the SL65 is beter value for money, and it has a engine that blows everything into the woods, including the SLR.

If I can pick one to take home, it is a no brainer. I'll take the SLR. Although it doesn't have as much power(torque) as the SL65 AMG, that which it has is used much more effectively. It is also much more beautiful than the SL.

[akram]

I'd prefer the SL65 AMG, simply because I hate the way the SLR looks.

which way do you look at car,from under it,,,,,,,,,,,

[Egg Nog]

I'd much rather have the SLR, because I'd get more back after I sold it.

[my porsche]

sl65, its a very elegant car, very nice, and deosnt have a plastic fascia (ahem, SLR) and can be coupe or cabrio, and did i mention its elegant?

[andy.muc]

I'd take the SLR without hesitation. It's just as practical as the SL65 and it beats the SL65 in performance.
SLR vs. CLK DTM AMG would be a better comparo IMO...

[IWantAnAudiRS6]

I prefer the SL65, because it's cheaper, and doesn't have completely stupid proportions (whos idea was it to put the passenger cab so far back on the SLR?).

It's as fast as it needs to be in the real world- the only way you can really exploit the SLR is by going to a track or Germany- both of those options don't appeal to me.

And- poofter alert- it's a cabrio. That gets the chicks more than a coupé. Although the noise of the SLR is awesome- like a Viking god gargling with nails.

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

i agree with eggnog, if we sold it we could buy 2 sl65s, tho we wouldn't :P

however if we wernt allowed to sell the sl65 is much more appealing, more comfort items and since neither of these cars is actually that performance oriented/engineered, the sl65 is a much more well rounded package.

[IWantAnAudiRS6]

neither of these cars is actually that performance oriented/engineered

I'm guessing you're talking about the fact that luxury takes precedent over speed?

Surely the SLR was kind of performance oriented- AMG, amazing engine, the brakes... but don't pull my head off again if you THINK I'm wrong

[250 GTO]

I'd go for the SLR, because of the top speed and the sheer sound of the engine.

[targa]

seems they are both AMG powered....so i will say teh AMG

[nist7]

I choose the SL 65 AMG. The SLR McLaren is arguably the ugliest supercar ever produced.

[quattro_20v]

The slr is way too expensive for a car in my opinion. The sl looks a lot better and its a CC, so SL for me easily.

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

I'm guessing you're talking about the fact that luxury takes precedent over speed?

Surely the SLR was kind of performance oriented- AMG, amazing engine, the brakes... but don't pull my head off again if you THINK I'm wrong

it wasnt designed ground up as a sports car, the engine was adapted from the one used in the E class, or C class i forgot which one

and a supercharger was used to up the power, its kinda a half assed approach to making a sports car

[KnifeEdge_2K1]

i guess you can say the same for many cars, but when im paying 300 grand for something ... id like to think eveyrthing about it is unique and purpose built, you get where im coming from?

[andy.muc]

...its kinda a half assed approach to making a sports car

I don't consider the SLR a pure sportscar. It's more a GT with supercar performance.
So it's still purpose built... as a GT.