2008 Best Car Series: Chevrolet Corvette vs Mercedes SL65 Black Series

  • Thread starter Thread starter YSSMAN
  • 178 comments
  • 8,609 views
They made the wheels an inch bigger. That was the extent of the changes made to a car they added 100hp to.


Irrelevant to this discussion. Besides, the Pontiac Grand Prix GXP was thoroughly reworked for more neutral handling and to eliminate torque steer, so that doesn't wash regardless. Every single other car ever put on that platform, dating back to 1988, has had power levels being the only change put into the performance model.

And in those same years all their true sports cars (Camaros, Corvettes, HSVs, Firebirds etc.) all had proper performance upgrades for higher performance models right?
 
So basically the Corvette feels like a race car (rattles, squeaks, wild to handle, not posh)?:sly:

No it feels cheap, but then again it is cheap. I don't know if I was going to buy a sports car I would want something that felt as good as it drove in terms of quality. I have no qualms about the performance of the Vette, it's impressive in it's own right, but I don't want a car that rattles.
 
That is also irrelevant. And actually, for the final generation of the Camaro quite a lot of parts were shared between the Camaro SS and Camaro Z28, with the main differences being tire sizes despite a spread between the two models that was at times 60 HP. Ditto the Firebird, despite a larger horsepower difference.
Don't get me started on the C4 Corvette, either.

Looking outside GM, one could make quite an argument that the Viper has done exactly what Reventon said as well.
 
I (obviously) voted for the SL65. There is not a chance in hell I'd take any post 1982 Corvette over ANY SL of ANY year. Corvettes have been the damn same for over 20 years. Its cheap enough or GM to change it up once and awhile-but they do not. At least the Merc has luxury as well as speed and good looks--something the Vette cannot do.

And, most importantly...the SL65 AMG Black just looks better than about any other 2dr car minus the DB9/Vanquish.
 
JCE
There is not a chance in hell I'd take any post 1982 Corvette over ANY SL of ANY year.
I'd rather have a C4 ZR-1 than any non-V12 SL.
 
I've never been a fan of them, actually. I recognize their beauty and greatness, but they just never clicked with me.
 
I'd rather have a C4 ZR-1 than any non-V12 SL.

I recently drove a C4 ZR-1 (as you may have read) and I wasn't impressed really. Granted I didn't give it the beans that I should have, but it still disappointed me. When I drive it again I'll give it everything it has to make my final judgement. But its still a C4--which is rubbish. I hated mine with every fibre of my being after a few months.

Including the old gullwings?

The old Gullwing is about the best Merc ever. I'd love to just touch one much less own one.
 
JCE
I recently drove a C4 ZR-1 (as you may have read) and I wasn't impressed really.
That is because we differ on one key issue:
JCE
But its still a C4--which is rubbish.
C4 'Vettes are my favorite, followed by the (early) C3 and then the (early) C1.
 
That is because we differ on one key issue:

C4 'Vettes are my favorite, followed by the (early) C3 and then the (early) C1.

My appologies, I don't hope to offend so I won't bring this up again. I just can't stand them as a whole. The engine is the only thing I like...and only if its in an Fbody or Impala SS. :sly:

Every Vette upto the C4 was and is my favorite. C3's are definately tops for me. The Shark is just an awsome look.
 
JCE
My appologies, I don't hope to offend so I won't bring this up again.
Don't worry about it. I recognize that they are nowhere near the best Vette made. I just like them far more than any other regardless.
 
More than the C3 and C1? Wow, I've never met someone who preferred it that way. :lol:
 
No it feels cheap, but then again it is cheap. I don't know if I was going to buy a sports car I would want something that felt as good as it drove in terms of quality

Have you been in one with the $8000 leather option? Its actually quite nice, I just wish they'd get around to changing the radio and that plastic trim around the center console and dash. It just doesn't look "right." That, and they still need to offer a different seat option, they're too flat and wide.

Nevertheless, for a car like that to come in at less than $50K, its still a feat within itself.
 
And Chevy didn't do that with the ZR1? I see new aero, better tyres, bigger brakes, better weight positioning (carbon fibre roof means lower COG), and last I checked, USA hasn't simply thrown more power at a car and leaved everything else un-touched for a decade or 2 now.
The US has done that for years, and GM is one of the folks who love to do it. And of course the brakes will be bigger as well as the better tires. Something has to help keep that power in control.

But that's it. That new aero is hardly something I call new & added. It looks like bits & pieces of vents & kits tacked on to the current body. Compared to the SL Black, the ZR1 hardly looks like anything has been done to it except adding 100Bhp+. Hence, Lotus & I used the term of Americans just throwing more power at it.
 
Voted for the SL65. Its German, so I don't expect anything less from it. ;)
 
Reventón;3139292
The US has done that for years, and GM is one of the folks who love to do it. And of course the brakes will be bigger as well as the better tires. Something has to help keep that power in control.

But that's it. That new aero is hardly something I call new & added. It looks like bits & pieces of vents & kits tacked on to the current body. Compared to the SL Black, the ZR1 hardly looks like anything has been done to it except adding 100Bhp+. Hence, Lotus & I used the term of Americans just throwing more power at it.

What do you think aero is? It's putting on bits and pieces, see the front spoiler, rear lip creates some downforce as well. If they were "just throwing power at it" it would have the same brakes and tyres as the base model, the same aero, the same materials and body, but it doesn't, everything has been changed, as well as adding more power which there is nothing wrong with.
 
I voted the merc. it is by far the most rad merc since 190E 2.5 Cosworths.
 
Have you been in one with the $8000 leather option? Its actually quite nice, I just wish they'd get around to changing the radio and that plastic trim around the center console and dash. It just doesn't look "right." That, and they still need to offer a different seat option, they're too flat and wide.

Nevertheless, for a car like that to come in at less than $50K, its still a feat within itself.

No I haven't, although anything that cost $8,000 must add something. I agree though for $50,000 you are getting quite a bit of performance.
 
The SL isn't doing to badly considering it's up against the entire Corvette range.
 
Because such an argument could be leveled at all of the cars the SL65 competes with, or indeed all cars that cost such large amounts of money. I can't honestly say a Bentley Arnage is a better value than 10 Honda Accords. Look at the Corvette, for that matter. For Z06 money, I could probably buy a Mazdaspeed 3, a Honda S2000 and a Mini Cooper S. Compared to some of its competitors, (Aston Martin DBS for example), the SL65 Black isn't particularly expensive anyways.
Besides, the Black Edition all but replaces a car in Mercedes' lineup that cost nearly 3 times as much.

I think price should always be under consideration. Especially when you are comparing two cars with wildly different price tags.

And your C6 Z06 vs. MS3, S2000 and MCS comparison is perfectly valid.

Here's the real crux of my argument: the law of diminishing returns apply when you start talking about really expensive anything.

$5,000 will buy you a junker. It may run fine and look okay, but you're not exactly 'living the dream'.

$15,000 will buy you a fairly average car. A four-year old Honda Accord with a four banger; a five-year old Mk IV Jetta with 65k on the clock ; maybe a tired S2000 or E36 M3 with high mileage or a salvage title. Are you getting three times the car for your money? Yeah, most probably.

Compared to, say an 1995 E36 M3 with 120,000 miles, is a brand new C6 Z06 FIVE times the car?? I think you can make a pretty fair argument that it is.

But is the 911 GT2 twice as good as a Z06? Is the SL Black or 430 Scuderia three times better? Those propositions are much harder to justify. Because there is a sliding scale. After a point, the amount of car you get back for your money starts to rapidly drop off.

The perception of where that sliding scale starts is completely dependent on whom you ask. If you're Kobe Bryant or Paris Hilton you probably don't give a rat's ass what an SL Black costs. But for most normal people, $225,000 is 50% to 100% the cost of their homes.

It's very easy to have a cavalier attitude about what a cool car costs when you're just voting on a car forum. But think about it realistically for a minute: is the SL Black really better than having a ZR1 (to crush anything you see on the road), PLUS an E63 Wagon (for a daily driver), PLUS a Lotus Elise (for a track toy)?

I'm gonna go with no, at least for now.


M
 
:odd: Did I miss something? Who said I would buy either? Even if I was rich. I thought the whole point for this was cars as they are not cars that we are going to buy?
 
Voted for the Mercedes. Good looking car, very strong performance and it looks very aggressive.
 
$5,000 will buy you a junker. It may run fine and look okay, but you're not exactly 'living the dream'.

This depends on the individule. $5,000 buys me plenty of dreams. Look at my Camaro. The original price I paid on 01-11-2000 was $2,700, that bought me my dream of owning a Camaro. And almost 9 years later I'm still driving it--and it has the same drive/powertrain. I'm living my dream for almost 50% of that $5,000 value. And when I get my Shelby Daytona on the road that car's price of admission is $200. I have an oppertunity to buy an early 80's Z28 for $100--there's another dream that'll cost me next to nothing. The last two beaters aside, I can get a legitimate "dream car" for $5,000 or less. $5,000 might even get you an early 80's running C4 Corvette if you've always wanted a Corvette. This is of course in the USA, because prices for these cars overseas are astronomically high due to several reasons. But, there are "dream cars" in every market for people to choose from.
 
To be perfectly honest I think there is no doubt which is the better car, the votes are more concentrated on which car you prefer.
 
Voted for the Corvette, as much as I love the Mercedes it's just too over the top for my liking.
 
To be perfectly honest I think there is no doubt which is the better car, the votes are more concentrated on which car you prefer.

As was said, the Mercedes hasn't even been tested yet.
 
Edit: Ignore me, I'm talking rubbish
 
What do you think aero is? It's putting on bits and pieces, see the front spoiler, rear lip creates some downforce as well. If they were "just throwing power at it" it would have the same brakes and tyres as the base model, the same aero, the same materials and body, but it doesn't, everything has been changed, as well as adding more power which there is nothing wrong with.
facepalm.jpeg

You missed the point by miles.
 
I love that pic. It should say, "epic fail".

*edit*
The big bad Merc is catching up. :D
 
Back