1989 560 SL, a 2002 SL 500, or a 2006 SL 550????
2006-10-11 12:57:06 · 18 answers · asked by bob 1 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Car Makes ➔ Mercedes-Benz
The question you are asking is like asking a rose gardener to tell you which of his hybrids is the best when they all are a product of the previous one.
The 450 was supposed to be an improvement over the 230/250/280's. (MB went in an entirely different direction with the 450 than the 230/250/280 sport coupe predecessors.) The 560 is an improvement over the 450. The 500 is an improvement over the 560. The 550 well that remains to be seen. I think we will quickly find out if the 550 is an improvement over the 500.
You see each generation adds to the knowledge of the previous generation. My personal feeling is that the manufactures are going to find out quickly that adding all the electronics and the technology will come back and haunt them in the near future.
For me I'll stick with my simple and beautiful 1972 280SL with both tops and a five speed manual transmission. Simple on or off air conditioning, mechanical fuel injection, simple AM/FM stereo radio with CD (had to get a cd), and a map pocket for the maps to navigate.
OR
My faithful daily driver a 1967 200D with over 800000 miles on it.
Again simple AC, 4 speed manual, AM/FM radio (no cd here) and map pockets for the maps to navigate.
2006-10-14 06:26:58 · answer #1 · answered by .*. 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
2006 SL 550
2006-10-12 15:48:59 · answer #2 · answered by southernreaper 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There is no such thing as a SL 550 in 2006. At least in America.
The 2002 SL's feel a slight bit more responsive than the 2006's
2006-10-12 19:46:25 · answer #3 · answered by Slappin 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
2002 SL 500
2006-10-11 20:26:11 · answer #4 · answered by Slim 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
For the money they cost, I'd buy a few diferent cars. But if I had to go with one of these MB's I'd go with the 2006 SL 550(bugs have been worked out). The '02 has electical issues and the '89's suspension would be starting to go.
2006-10-14 09:36:50 · answer #5 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
2006 Sl 550. thing is sweet
2006-10-12 10:36:45 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It should be 2006 SL 550.
Cars that are younger usually have more technologies.
2006-10-12 09:17:14 · answer #7 · answered by Nickname 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
a 2006 sl 550 tou really mean is a sl 55 amg and there is no comparison
2006-10-14 03:40:03 · answer #8 · answered by 1oxymoron@sbcglobal.net 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
560 is a rock solid car but the 107 chassis was never much for handling and if you over 6 feet tall its not very comfortable to drive.
500 is probable the best all around car. Handles well not to many problems motor is not as simple as the 560 but still very reliable. The 550 is to new to tell that chassis has had some electronics problems as well as hydraulics. However it is the best looking. Time will tell if they have improved the rest.
2006-10-12 11:31:01 · answer #9 · answered by uthockey32 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i own a repair shop,and i think the 2002 sl 500 is a better car because i have a neighbor who has one and i service it all the time,and its been a really good and dependable car so far,and just hasn't given any major trouble at all,,i cant say too much for the 2006 model, i haven't done any work on them yet,so all i can tell you about it the 02 model,but there good cars,good luck i hope this help,s.
2006-10-11 20:04:08 · answer #10 · answered by dodge man 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋