Dilemma - SLK AMG vs E89

Hey guys,

So I've been having this internal conflict with myself for a while, and I really can't figure out what I want.

There is no doubt that the E89 is a looker, and I'd take it over the current SLK (R172) and the previous one too (R171). However, you have to admit that the AMG of the previous one (R171, the one that got discontinued in 2011) not only adds so much looks to it but also power.

So now my question is, should I get into a SLK AMG (2005-2008) or 2009 E89, most likely the 30i.

I think the E89 is very fierce and has a very modern look. I love the SLK AMG look as well, but my only concern is that it was introduced in 2005. It's been 7 years, and it is definitely aging. I still think it looks fierce while still being classy, but it is maturing. I plan on keeping this car for 8+ years, and figured that the E89 will age better (well, since it's newer!) However, the E89 is already half way through it's life cycle...

If both were priced equally, would you prefer an E89 30i or a SLK AMG, and why? Remember, 30i comes with inline 6 at 255HP (I believe) while the AMG has a whopping 5.4L v8 producing over 350HP!

Hmmm..., You do realize that all of us had the opportunity to buy an SLK.

As Z4golfer touched on, I personally considered a slightly used SLK 55 AMG myself but went with the new Z4 35i. Mostly because I like the looks better, could afford it brand new and I know and trust my local BMW dealer. It is your money and your choice I would say buy what YOU want. But due to the fact that this is a BMW forum, I would say most of us would prefer the Z4.

I understand that this is a BMW forum and therefore opinions may be biased. However, it is still good to hear opinion from both sides.

More importantly though, is that I am not considering an E89 vs a stock R171. If that were the case, I'd choose the Z4 in a heartbeat. However, it's the AMG that I am looking at.

I don't think many people cross shop the Z4 with the AMG. They are in different price brackets/performance.

JCM12 - Unfortunately, due to the prices of the Z4s, the only model I can get within my budget is a 30i. The 35i comes close to competing with an AMG, but that wouldn't matter because I am not looking at that.

Can you tell me what made you choose a Z4 over an SLK55? You know, asides from the fact that you can buy new vs. used etc. If they were both new, would that change anything? What about the ride/comfort etc. That would help me a lot.

Thanks

This is a terrible comparison. Yes the 35i comes close to competing with an AMG because THATS AN APPLES TO APPLES COMPARISON!

Let me put it to you this way - would you ever compare a brand new 2012 SLK 250 vs an e85 Z4M roadster? One is new, one is not. Not only have you crossed new vs old, you're now crossing generations. On top of that, you're crossing a base model compared to the top of the line factory performance tuned version. Bananas.

Well don't you see why it's a dilemma?

I clearly stated that I would prefer an E89 > R171 if they were bot stock. But that is obviously not the case. I am comparing a base model to an AMG. Not bananas, that is how the used market is right now, and they are both the same price.

Not to mention, I am not crossing generations at all. The e89 went into production in 09. The R171 ("old" SLK) was still in production 2011. Which means I'm sure many people had 2 years to be in the same exact position I am.

I am not asking you which out performs which - Then this would not be a fair comparison. Class crossing in terms of performance is just silly. I am just saying what are some pros and cons to either cars, since I'm sure people who have decided on a Z4 cross shopped with an SLK, and some the AMG, and vice versa.

Thanks for the very helpful post though <--- This is internet sarcasm at it's best.

Also, as much as you would like to think that the 35i is an "apples to apples" comparison with the AMG, you are so wrong. The 35i 2012 model with inline 6 biturbo does 60 a whole second slower than a 2005 SLK55 AMG. 7 years, and still slower. On top of that, it has about 300 horsepower. The '05 SLK has 355. The new SLK (r172) since "we don't want to cross generations" has 415 HP. Try again

Originally Posted by CedarZ4

Well don't you see why it's a dilemma?


Also, as much as you would like to think that the 35i is an "apples to apples" comparison with the AMG, you are so wrong. The 35i 2012 model with inline 6 biturbo does 60 a whole second slower than a 2005 SLK55 AMG. 7 years, and still slower. On top of that, it has about 300 horsepower. The '05 SLK has 355. The new SLK (r172) since "we don't want to cross generations" has 415 HP. Try again

NOPE!!!!
The 35i does 0-60 in 4.7, not the conservative 5.0 or 5.1 BMW claims. 4.7 was via a road tests by Road &Track and Motor Trend.

Motor Trend tested the 2005 SLK55 AMG at 4.5

The difference is ONLY .2 seconds
DCT and Launch Control !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

..and another NOPE!!!
The 35i has been dynoed at 332 HP and 332 ft/lb, not the conservative 300/300 figures BMW claims. It is a fact that from time to time for various reasons they underestimate HP and TQ.

...and yet another NOPE!!!
The 2009 SLK55 AMG is no faster than the 2005 and is the same age as my 2009 35i

It seems YOU need to try again, not us.

You brought your dilema to the wrong party. We're Z4 OWNERS, what do you expect?!

I do like the exterior of the previous generation SLK (AMG) a lot. But then I spend about 15 minutes in the cockpit playing with everything, touching everything ... maybe it was the color, but it was just outdated, old fashioned, ... can't quite put my finger on it. You can probably catch Top Gear on YouTube -- Jeremy Clarkson talking about the SLK AMG. He loved it, but he also had some gripes about the interior. Yeah, I know, he is more an entertainer than a car critic, but you may still find the clip of interest.

I test drove both a 2012 SLK and a 2012 35i back to back. Both cars have their pros and cons. I ended up ordering a 2012 35is and just took delivery.

My reason... the Z is just a much better looking car and the low end torque is wild. Just more of a sports car in my opinion.

I am extremely happy with my decision, no regrets.

Originally Posted by BlueZ4AZ

NOPE!!!!
The 35i does 0-60 in 4.7, not the conservative 5.0 or 5.1 BMW claims. 4.7 was via a road tests by Road &Track and Motor Trend.

Motor Trend tested the 2005 SLK55 AMG at 4.5

The difference is ONLY .2 seconds
DCT and Launch Control !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

..and another NOPE!!!
The 35i has been dynoed at 332 HP and 332 ft/lb, not the conservative 300/300 figures BMW claims. It is a fact that from time to time for various reasons they underestimate HP and TQ.

...and yet another NOPE!!!
The 2009 SLK55 AMG is no faster than the 2005 and is the same age as my 2009 35i

It seems YOU need to try again, not us.



You brought your dilema to the wrong party. We're Z4 OWNERS, what do you expect?!

True that!

Hi, I have owned an SLK AMG, it was a brilliant car superbly well built, as they strip the car down and basically rebuild them, so they are in a different quality league to the main brand. The ride is exceptionally hard but that is what you would expect, it is a bit of a beast and for that reason I prefer the Z4. Also I found that Mercedes aftermarket support was appalling, The reason I sold my AMG was because Mercedes damaged the roof whilst in for service, never said anything, and when i took it back they had it 2.5 months later, they still could not fix it, they even put a new roof on, it was worse...... so they agreed to buy it back..... I had another Mercedes after this and had nothing but trouble so gave in and went to BMW, bought a 645ci and just exchanged for my Z4, will never buy a Mercedes ever again............. The BMW has been excellent so that is my choice,
Ps wouldn't have a Porche either!!!

Originally Posted by NV Z

I test drove both a 2012 SLK and a 2012 35i back to back. Both cars have their pros and cons. I ended up ordering a 2012 35is and just took delivery.

My reason... the Z is just a much better looking car and the low end torque is wild. Just more of a sports car in my opinion.

I am extremely happy with my decision, no regrets.

That seems like a very appropriate comparison, a 2012 SLK vs. a 2012 z4

OP is comparing a current gen model vs a prior gen model. Whats more, he's comparing a normally aspirated 6 cyl vs. a tuned V8. One a sporty cruiser, one a extremely fast steroid version of a sporty cruiser. C'mon man.

Go out and test drive both, and figure out what you would rather have. Remember since your comparison is so different, you also have to factor in maintenance costs (z4 is still under bumper to bumper, and maybe even CPO another 2 years, 60k miles) while the slk is undoubtly out of warranty.

Originally Posted by CedarZ4

Well don't you see why it's a dilemma?

I clearly stated that I would prefer an E89 > R171 if they were bot stock. But that is obviously not the case. I am comparing a base model to an AMG. Not bananas, that is how the used market is right now, and they are both the same price.

Not to mention, I am not crossing generations at all. The e89 went into production in 09. The R171 ("old" SLK) was still in production 2011. Which means I'm sure many people had 2 years to be in the same exact position I am.

I am not asking you which out performs which - Then this would not be a fair comparison. Class crossing in terms of performance is just silly. I am just saying what are some pros and cons to either cars, since I'm sure people who have decided on a Z4 cross shopped with an SLK, and some the AMG, and vice versa.

Thanks for the very helpful post though <--- This is internet sarcasm at it's best.

Also, as much as you would like to think that the 35i is an "apples to apples" comparison with the AMG, you are so wrong. The 35i 2012 model with inline 6 biturbo does 60 a whole second slower than a 2005 SLK55 AMG. 7 years, and still slower. On top of that, it has about 300 horsepower. The '05 SLK has 355. The new SLK (r172) since "we don't want to cross generations" has 415 HP. Try again

Not gonna really get into the whole comparisons, because again, its irrelevant because you don't really know the power of these cars. I'm not talking as a BMW fanboy, I'm talking as someone who freaking OWNS one. The z4 35is shares the same engine as the 1M coupe, and in dyno tests has shown 331/362 at the wheels. Do your math and see how that compares to the crank numbers mercedes is saying for the new slk. Add in JB or Cobb or any aftermarket tuning with some other basic bolt ons, and who knows.

But again, why am I even talking about this stuff. You're bringing up arguments for the sake of arguing because you're not even in the market FOR WHAT YOU'RE DISCUSSING!

And yeah, sorry to tell you, I can't really think of many sane individuals who have "cross shopped" in the manner you have. It just doesn't make sense. It really doesn't. It's like, I'm going to cross shop an e89 z4 vs an ap2 S2000 comp package with a super charger kit and a mugen hardtop. You're just coming up with random crap at that point.

2008 SLK55AMG 14/20/16 EPA mpg


2010 30i 18/28/22 EPA mpg
2012 35i 19/26/21 EPA mpg
2012 28i 23/27/24 EPA mpg



Lowest priced premium fuel in my area £1.499/litre or $9.10/gal-US.
Insurance for a 55 AMG vs. 30i?
Cost of repairing an out of warranty SLK 55 AMG ?

I'll take the newer BMW. Wait, we did.