FR-S AT Versus SLK280

[Wayne]

Hey folks -

Okay, yeah, I know: some people looking at the title of this thread immediately thought 'Oh no-o-o-oh, yet another apples and oranges comparo...' But FWIW, in those early days of waiting for Toyota and Subaru to FINALLY(!) put up or shut up, we were seriously considering buying an SLK instead. Plus, if the two cars being compared are the same, it's really not going to be very captivating to read about. And hey, this one's not quite as kooky (or amusing?) as the BRZ versus AMC Gremlin thread...

Anyway, yesterday I drove a friend's 2008 SLK280 over the same curving coastal hillside roads that I've done in our FR-S. I'd test driven SLKs before, but never quite that 'frisky', and I found it very interesting to note the differences between the two cars. To partially, at least, justify this apple v whatever post, it's worth noting that we both bought our cars last year, both used, both under $25k all-up, out-the-door (with CA fees and taxes). The SLK is five years old, with 30k miles, but amazingly in virtually showroom pristine condition; it doesn't have the virtually forever warranty and free services that came along with our CPO car's 'age' of 6 months and 3k miles.

Basic similarities: these are both modern, civilized front engine RWD cars with a similar weight bias, and both would serve well for commuting or touring cross-country. They both have contemporary high tech electronics and safety equipment; they're similar in size and intended primarily for two passengers. They both handle well and are FUN to drive fast in SoCal's coastal hills (mountains to you folks in Florida).

Basic physical differences: The SLK's weathertight hardtop can be dropped for an open-air experience; there's no back seat and not much trunk space. Visibility with the SLK's top up is even worse than the Scion's. The SLK is a foot longer and 400 pounds heavier, with a higher COG. The 2008 SLK280 has a torquey three liter V6 (225HP, 220 ft-lb) and seven speed (auto) transmission with a conventional torque converter; it doesn't emulate the FR-S's LSD. Real world gas mileage is likely to be in the low 20s. The Mercedes interior is much more upscale than the Scion's, but with no more easily accessible storage space for wallets, handguns, coffee cups and such. I prefer our (2014) FR-S audio system.

Driving experience: The SLK feels bigger and heavier (not as inviting to flip around sharp corners) but provides a MUCH smoother, quieter ride. The suspension soaks up small bumps way better than our FR-S, and it feels like its spring and shock rates are better sorted out for brisk (but not full-bore) swooshing around hilly curves on marginal pavement. The SLK doesn't have much body roll and the steering feels fairly neutral; it's a bit more 'isolated' from the front tires than the Scion, in both the good and bad way.

The Mercedes engine feels 'faster', a lot more responsive at low and mid-range rpms, and it pulls smooth and strong all the way to redline. There's very little 'squat' or lightening of the front end under acceleration. The SLK is quieter in every way, and the engine makes much nicer music. However, VERY, VERY unlike the auto trans in our FR-S, the SLK's transimission is essentially unusable in normal Drive mode. I.e., when you back off into a curve it freewheels and shifts to a higher gear; it's very reluctant to re-engage and shift back down until you've pushed too hard on the accelerator pedal, at which point it does a jerky transition and you need to get off the gas quick. YECCH! For FUN driving, this car needs to be in Sport mode using manual gear selection, but that does work much more pleasantly and predictably. The SLK's shifts are still slower and 'slushier' than the FR-S's Aisin AZ6.

Braking? Seven speeds versus six? Drag race times? Heated power seats with speaker inserts? If you care and have meaningful input, please post a reply. IMHO ho-hum...

FWIW, probably the best of the SLK series is the 2009-2011 SLK350 with the sport option. These cars have much more grunt (300HP, 265 ft-lb), improved steering and paddle shifters. Realistically, back to that apples v oranges thing, as to the cost of ownership (aside from resale value, which IMHO is anybody's guess right now) I think it's safe to say that the Scion owner will spend a lot less on fuel, PM and repairs. But then again, hey, it's not a convertible...

[SCharged]

How's the cabin noise level with the top up? Does the roof crack and such?? To me, the only reason I'd look at the SLK as a potential replacement for the fr-s would be if I suddenly needed a very high level of comfort.. If it's there that is. Na yes, I'd look at the 350 rather than 280.

[Wayne]

Originally Posted by SCharged

How's the cabin noise level with the top up? Does the roof crack and such?

Low, at least compared to our FR-S. No. Almost all of my recent drive was top down [if you have to ask why, I probably can't make you understand...], but in previous test drives we noted that the Mercedes is well designed to minimize NVH -- maybe part of the reason for that extra 400 pounds?