The SL55 cant be THIS bad??

  • Thread starter blademask
  • 133 comments
  • 12,078 views
Yeah, I concede, I had a re-read of old posts and thought the referrals to the Z06 were the '07 model versus the SL55. I don't place a lot of faith in Ring times as of late. They make very good publicity stunts these days, hehe!

I still don't think the SL55 is a pig though, it certainly has it's merits. Saving grace is that awesome gearbox, it's a pity the front-end geometry and garbage suspension setup is no good.

It's a great looking roadster though... but then again, when doesn't a roadster look any good?
 
And Neema-t, you're telling me your dad had a CL600 Merc and you can't remember what sort of engine it had in it?! My dad has a lawnmower and I know that it's got a 60cc engine in it, hehe!


If you read what I said again carefully, I said His SL (as in not, I repeat NOT a CL, unless you mean the CL500 he had before the SL but I'd be surprised as I never mentioned that!) 600 had the 5.5 V12 biturbo. I was getting confused about the 55 AMG's engine, and I was therefore saying I can't remember if it had a V10 supercharged or V12 supercharged.

neema_t
My Dad used to have an SL600 with AMG suspension off the 55, so thats a twin biturbo V12 instead of the supercharged V10, if I remember correctly (or was the 55 AMG (note: 55 AMG doesn't mean 'my Dad's 600') a V12 S/C, and the 500 the V10?), maybe not as fast but with comparable weight and the same suspension. It was really, really, really, really fast
 
Last edited:
Have we not already discussed it in this thread? The C5 Z06 beats the SL55 AMG on both the Ring and Top Gear test track, and the M3 is probably quicker.
And? Those 2 tracks are not god. They don't get to fairly determine who beats who everywhere else.
 
Reventón;3136048
And? Those 2 tracks are not god. They don't get to fairly determine who beats who everywhere else.

I don't really know why people are talking about tracks and lap times, personally. For me, the only thing the Top Gear hot lap proved was the fact the SL loves understeer, and its not hard to see or understand why, thats just how it is. It's not a track car, but its been featured in GT5p because its a Mercedes Benz and it's quite fast. You might as well start a thread asking why the Suzuki Cervo is so bad, really, both cars are taken out of their element and then people complain that it can't take corners.

Of course it can't take corners, its a 2500kg luxury autobahn cruiser, not a 1000kg stripped out DTM racer!

Like I said before, look at what cars that can corner properly have, and then compare that to the SL.

There's a reason why SL owners don't turn up to track days alongside the Imprezas, Elises (i'm sure there's a more elegant plural for that), Ferraris and so on, and I've already stated why that is so I'm going to stop now before I give myself a hernia. If you don't like how the SL handles in GT5p, use an Elise. If you DO, get your brain checked...
 
The AMG SL55 is not really a luxury autobahn cruiser. The S55 or CL55 is. The S- stands for Sport, hence the SL is meant to be the best sports car that Merc have got, save for the Mac.

It doesn't weigh 2500 kilos, it weighs a shade under 2000 kilos.

Yes there is a problem with the SL55, but the real question is, is the handling as represented in GT5P REALLY that bad?

I say no. A lot of grand tourers these days are tipping the 1800-1900 kilo mark and a lot of them can handle very nicely. I can't see why a hand-fettled AMG appears to be such a barge in GT5P. The front-end skitter must be overpronounced.

Speaking of the front end, anyone found a way to settle the bounce? Holden? You're our tuning meister, surely you've tried some tricks on it?
 
The AMG SL55 is not really a luxury autobahn cruiser. The S55 or CL55 is. The S- stands for Sport, hence the SL is meant to be the best sports car that Merc have got, save for the Mac.

It doesn't weigh 2500 kilos, it weighs a shade under 2000 kilos.

Yes there is a problem with the SL55, but the real question is, is the handling as represented in GT5P REALLY that bad?

I say no. A lot of grand tourers these days are tipping the 1800-1900 kilo mark and a lot of them can handle very nicely. I can't see why a hand-fettled AMG appears to be such a barge in GT5P. The front-end skitter must be overpronounced.

Speaking of the front end, anyone found a way to settle the bounce? Holden? You're our tuning meister, surely you've tried some tricks on it?

Hey, just stop this finally, just breathe easily and deal with fact that this heavy autobahn pig heavier than most sporty sedans is hardly comparable with for example Vette Z06, which weighs just half a ton less. No real sports car weighs two tons, sorry. I remember one Best Motoring video, in which they complained about that car handling and softness.
 
The AMG SL55 is not really a luxury autobahn cruiser. The S55 or CL55 is. The S- stands for Sport, hence the SL is meant to be the best sports car that Merc have got, save for the Mac.

It doesn't weigh 2500 kilos, it weighs a shade under 2000 kilos.

Yes there is a problem with the SL55, but the real question is, is the handling as represented in GT5P REALLY that bad?

I say no. A lot of grand tourers these days are tipping the 1800-1900 kilo mark and a lot of them can handle very nicely. I can't see why a hand-fettled AMG appears to be such a barge in GT5P. The front-end skitter must be overpronounced.

Speaking of the front end, anyone found a way to settle the bounce? Holden? You're our tuning meister, surely you've tried some tricks on it?

Yeah, absolutely. I don't remember if I've updated the tune since the update, but making the springs really hard (9-10) at the front and maybe 5-7 at the rear yields good results almost eliminating the bounce, but not hiding the fact she is still heavy.

Edit: Just realised I never released the tune for the SL 55, but certainly stiff springs like that make the world of difference.
 
Last edited:
The AMG SL55 is not really a luxury autobahn cruiser. The S55 or CL55 is. The S- stands for Sport, hence the SL is meant to be the best sports car that Merc have got, save for the Mac.

It doesn't weigh 2500 kilos, it weighs a shade under 2000 kilos.

Yes there is a problem with the SL55, but the real question is, is the handling as represented in GT5P REALLY that bad?

I say no. A lot of grand tourers these days are tipping the 1800-1900 kilo mark and a lot of them can handle very nicely. I can't see why a hand-fettled AMG appears to be such a barge in GT5P. The front-end skitter must be overpronounced.

Speaking of the front end, anyone found a way to settle the bounce? Holden? You're our tuning meister, surely you've tried some tricks on it?

While I would agree with you on the weight side of things, the AMG SL55 weighs in at 1,960 kilos, that is still a lot of weight for a car to handle. After all the E63 AMG Estate car weighs less (1,955 kilos).

Simple physics, weight kills performance. While AMG can counter this with 517 bhp and 720 Nm for the straight-line stuff; it becomes a whole other ball game to control that degree of mass moving around.

Every review of the AMG SL55 has commented on how it struggles once you hit the track (an environment that this car was not designed for), while it is indeed a potent car in engine terms (arguably AMG's strongest area) it was designed to be at its best on the open road. That very factor dictates its suspension set-up, which has to be compromised to allow comfort given the mass it has to support. Stiffen up the suspension to the required degree to control some of that load transfer speed and you would end up with a car that would rapidly shake teeth loose (and Merc customers don't go in for that kind of thing).

You mention other Grand Tourers that handle "very nicely", and they do, on the road. Grand Tourers again suffer from handling issues when on track, the limits pushed to in this environment are quite different to those of the road.


The old M3? Great car, awesome car even. Much better chassis, but the M3 will get left for dead in a straight line and I'm not convinced that the BMW has that much of an advantage through corners to make up for a 130hp engine deficit.
Misleading. The the last M3 may loose out to the AMG SL55 by 179 bhp (not 130 bhp - AMG SL55 = 517 bhp, M3 = 338 bhp), but its also 390 kilos lighter than the AMG SL55.

So both these factors need to be taken into account, so comparing Power to weight ratios would be far more useful, and the are as follows.

AMG SL55 - 1,960 kilos & 517 bhp = 263 bhp per tonne

M3 - 1,570 kilos & 338 bhp = 215 bhp per tonne

Which gives the AMG SL55 a Power to weight advantage of 48 bhp per tonne, a lot less of an advantage that you implied and one that the massive advantage an M3 gains around the corners would more than claw back.

What has also not be yet mentioned (that I have seen), is the problems the AMG SL55 has in laying power down, the stupid levels of torque it produces (720Nm or 531 ft/lbs in real money). As torque is multiplied by gearing this increases directly in relation to the gear ratios, final drive ratio and wheel/tyre size. I've been in a AMG SL55 (many thanks to Daimler in Stuttgart for that) and its practically impossible on road tyres to use the entire engine range in first or second without the TC kicking in constantly. The AMG SL55 (and to a greater degree the SL65 and to a varying degree most modern high torque AMG's) has a know reputation for being almost impossible to use all the engines power in lower gears.

Now don't get me wrong on any of this, I love the AMG range, working with Daimler over the years I've come across a lot of them, my dad has also owned a fair number of Merc's over the years. I am however also very aware of the target audience behind this car and the environment it was developed for, and that environment certainly wasn't a track.

Quite frankly a hell of a lot of less powerful, lighter cars from that era will had the AMG SL55 its backside on a plate around the vast majority of tracks, and that most certainly includes the last M3.


Regards

Scaff
 
Last edited:
My Dad used to have an SL600 with AMG suspension off the 55, so thats a twin biturbo V12 instead of the supercharged V10, if I remember correctly (or was the 55 AMG a V12 S/C, and the 500 the V10?)

The SL600 is a bi-turbo V12, but the SL55 AMG used a supercharged V8.

The only V10 Mercedes has ever built sat in the back of a Formula 1 car.

Oh yeah, and there's no such thing as an SL55 AMG Black or an SL63 Black. The only Black SL that's been made is an SL65 and you can hardly compare that to the standard car!
 
Last edited:
They have spy shots of the new 2009 SL63 Black. No formal announcement as of yet, but only a matter of time?

Good to hear someone slap down the V10 Merc comment, there never has been a V10 Merc. Nicely spoken Mr Kip!
 
My understanding was that the 2002 SL55 has 493bhp, not 517bhp so technically the AMG only has 251bhp per tonne which equates to a much lesser 36bhp per tonne.... hmmmm.

It's still a great power deficit though. By reasoning for each tonne the SL has 15% power advantage over the BMW, horse for horse, kilo for kilo. The question is, does the SL55 have sufficient grip through a wider tyre contact patch over the M3 to negate it's weight disadvantage?

A properly shod and optioned M3 has 235mm rubber on the front tyres with 265mm rubber on the rear.

I can't be certain about the SL55 but the figures I remember were 245mm fronts and 285mm rears?

I have no idea what sort of lateral G each car can pull through a corner.
 
My understanding was that the 2002 SL55 has 493bhp, not 517bhp so technically the AMG only has 251bhp per tonne which equates to a much lesser 36bhp per tonne.... hmmmm.

It's still a great power deficit though. By reasoning for each tonne the SL has 15% power advantage over the BMW, horse for horse, kilo for kilo. The question is, does the SL55 have sufficient grip through a wider tyre contact patch over the M3 to negate it's weight disadvantage?

A properly shod and optioned M3 has 235mm rubber on the front tyres with 265mm rubber on the rear.

I can't be certain about the SL55 but the figures I remember were 245mm fronts and 285mm rears?

I have no idea what sort of lateral G each car can pull through a corner.

The Autocar data I have for both cars gives the following

BMW M3 = 1.01g
SL55 AMG = 0.92g


Keep in mind that lateral g is more than simply the product of contact patch size. Tyre compound, COG and PMI all play a part.

Simply put the M3 is a more singulalry focused car than the SL55 AMG, its far better balance front to rear, and I would strongly suspect has a lower COG as well.

Simply put these factors will give it a massive edge around a track in comparison to the small power-to-weight advantage that the SL55 AMG has.


Regards

Scaff
 
I have a question: Is this apparent badness (I haven't played GT5:P) due to PD screwing up the brakes again? Or is it because in the game is handles like the rather gooey GT car that it handles like in real life?
 
Anyone has news on new SL63 AMG? I wonder how they stuck up to competitions and other car classes.
 
I am going to get Top Time from LONDON course from all the cars on the ranking page. I would like to see how SL55 stocks up.
 
My Dad used to have an SL600 with AMG suspension off the 55, so thats a twin biturbo V12 instead of the supercharged V10, if I remember correctly (or was the 55 AMG a V12 S/C, and the 500 the V10?)

The 600 series mercedes get the n/a v12, the 65 series cars (sl65) get the bi-turbo v12, the sl55 gets a s/c v8, and the 500 gets an n/a v8.
 
Anyone has news on new SL63 AMG? I wonder how they stuck up to competitions and other car classes.

It ties on Hockenheim Short with the Ferrari....













F355. The SL65 Black is def. a more interesting car, and Mercedes might want to take some cues from it, and put those in the current SLs. The 65 Black on the 'Ring along is running next to a Scuderia.
 
I have a question: Is this apparent badness (I haven't played GT5:P) due to PD screwing up the brakes again? Or is it because in the game is handles like the rather gooey GT car that it handles like in real life?

Handles like a big fat gooey GT car.
 
The Autocar data I have for both cars gives the following

BMW M3 = 1.01g
SL55 AMG = 0.92g


Keep in mind that lateral g is more than simply the product of contact patch size. Tyre compound, COG and PMI all play a part.

Simply put the M3 is a more singulalry focused car than the SL55 AMG, its far better balance front to rear, and I would strongly suspect has a lower COG as well.

Simply put these factors will give it a massive edge around a track in comparison to the small power-to-weight advantage that the SL55 AMG has.


Regards

Scaff

Scaff, you are a veritable library of knowledge, hehe. I've done some other research into the SL55 and EVO tested the car a while ago - they use the West Bedford Autodrome as their test circuit what they managed to pull in the SL55 AMG was dismal to say the least.

Mercedes SL55 AMG - 1'30.05
BMW 330i M Sport - 1'30.00

There is no question about the M3 then. I was shocked to see that they could get a Ford Mustang GT around the same circuit only half a second slower than those above times. I'm a bit iffy about their lap times because they're all done by different drivers of clearly different skills. They did manage to get a standard SL600 around the track a tenth quicker and pulled a 1'29.95...

:dunce:
 
OK few minutes ago I went on GT5P Rankings and took some #1 Spot times from few cars. I do not know if they cheated or not, but I think all should be accurate.
Notice some cars have few years making in advance.. overall SL55 2002 is pretty amazing sports car and head to head with today M3


Fuji F
1'47.034 '06 Z06
1'48.842 '07 R8
1'49.151 '06 F-430
1'51.972 '07 M3
1'52.283 '02 SL55
1'52.461 '00 Speed SIX
1'57.345 '05 Evo IX


Suzuka
2'10.527 '06 F-430
2'12.613 '06 Z06
2'13.442 '07 R8
2'16.474 '07 M3
2'17.377 '02 SL55
2'17.919 '00 Speed SIX
2'23.526 '05 Evo IX

Daytona Oval
0'49.087 '06 Z06
0'50.201 '06 F-430
0'51.005 '02 SL55
0'51.184 '07 R8
0'52.041 '00 Speed SIX
0'52.227 '07 M3
0'56.896 '05 Evo IX
 
Last edited:
I think you just showed how slightly off the physics might be. Today's current M3 has been much faster. On Bedford & Hockenheim Short, it puts the SL55 away by 4 seconds. On the 'Ring, you're looking at 7 second gap. And the ol' SL55 is nowhere near edging out the R8. The R8's looking at a 6 second gap on Hockenheim Short, 8 seconds at Bedford & the 'Ring.
 
Reventón;3153217
I think you just showed how slightly off the physics might be. Today's current M3 has been much faster. On Bedford & Hockenheim Short, it puts the SL55 away by 4 seconds. On the 'Ring, you're looking at 7 second gap. And the ol' SL55 is nowhere near edging out the R8. The R8's looking at a 6 second gap on Hockenheim Short, 8 seconds at Bedford & the 'Ring.

Those tracks are different then in game..
 
Since people think that the SL55 is fast, why don't we have a little look at this shall we
A race between the SL55, RX-8, MX-5, Elise, S2000, and M3 CSL at Tsukuba
 
Last edited:
Back