Mercedes-Benz SLK 55 AMG 400 HP
 

:D

http://img289.imageshack.us/img289/4609/pic012vy.th.jpg

Text and photos courtesy of Daimler Chrysler AG

http://img289.imageshack.us/img289/6325/pic022se.th.jpg

http://img289.imageshack.us/img289/9939/pic031zx.th.jpg

Very nice!! bye bye z4 m!

non-retractable roof.. whats the point of the having an SLK with no drop top? ;)

I wonder just how much lighter this car is.. and of course it still has the 7speed automatic..

Lets just hope MB allows you to turn off the driving aids..

:love: :love: :drool: :drool:
Awesome!

I don't really mind about the non retractable roof.

all that power and "race" technology and still an auto gearbox, ill never understand mercedes

Seems like Mercedes realizes the extra torsional rigidity an FRC (Fixed Roof Coupe) design provides... I am not saying anything here, but it seems like they are copying a cheap plastic Amercian sports car with this move :P ;)

No not really, the Mercedes roof won't come off at 10 mph.

I didn't know the BMW Z3 was a cheap american sportscar ;)

In some instances, Carlsson has made a "race" version of the older and newer SLK's, by sometimes removing the roof mechanism.

http://www.carlsson.de/de/race/race/race.php

The roof hydraulic system with roof weighs about a 100kilos, and I suspect this is just one of those quick and dirty ways for AMG to drop the weight of the car down.

The SLK is already one of the most rigid convertibles one can get, and it is hardly "now" that MB realises that having a fixed roof system adds extra tortional rigidity to a car. The very reason why the SLR never made it into a convertible, was due to the hexagonal CF structure which was done to build a very rigid overall structure for the vehicle, required for a car which breaks the 200mph barrier with a sh1tload of torque.

Since the SLK roof is disjointed in several spots (the C pillars being one piece, and the roof being another one), it would require some serious welding to make the "fixed" roof of this SLK provide a significant extra amount of tortional rigidity. The 400hp and 520nm of torque will not tax the current rigidity of the car, and owners of Kleemann SLK's with around 600hp have not experienced any problems whilst driving over 300kph or taking bumpy roads at speed...

I think the roof was fixed in place for two reasons:

1) shave off a lot of weight.
2) having a fixed roof can be the equivalent of having a roll cage, and thus renders this car "legal" for certain types of drag races or auto-x races, because MB will be able to go around some of the legal paparasse by having a "solid" roof.

Great car for sure :D But isn´t this version already available for quite a while in some countries? I´ve read that in another thread some time ago. AMG offered that as a special kit for all SLK55s if i´m not wrong :roll:

And your point? The C6 Z is not a Fixed Roof Coupe - but merely a bolted in roof panel.

The C5 Z on the other hand is a complete structural intergral roof component -- Chum , if you want to appear smart, you need to first be smart.

research and knowledge are your friend - try it some time.

Wel thats really odd... I have personally experienced the SL500 and the SLK230 roof show flex and not be as "solid" as you make it out to be.

Unless we get the special "weaker to be sold in amerika" version.

Uhm - thats a given - doesn't even seem worth mentioning it's so obvious ;) :P

Uhm - you just got through suggesting that you would need to weld all the pieces together to offer any form of extra rigidity yet now you suggest fixing the roof is "as good as a roll cage".. ;)

Not quite - I doubt the "roof" meets the requirements for "roll cage rule fulfillment" ;)

It could in no way ever be "equivalent" to a roll cage, but may simply mean a cage is not needed because the roof cannot open... but those are 2 different things :P ;)

http://www.seriouswheels.com/top-200...ial-Series.htm

more

too expensive to compete against anything. Being MERC its still going to be heaaaaaaaavyyy

SLK 230? That'd be the older version SLK.

The new one has 46% more tortional rigidity then the old model.

The SL on the other hand is a fair bit longer, which can make it harder to keep as rigid as the SLK due to the shorter wheel base.

But still, they are convertibles, built for a certain type of driving. I don't know how well a standard 'Vette behaves in relation to a convertible one, but once again I would expect the coupé version to be tougher then the open top one.

Although one could argue the new Z06 was made non-convertible due to the massive power of the engine, I'm pretty sure convertible 'Vette's exist where the owners have pushed out hundreds of extra ponies, and have experienced no problems with their rides.

The manufacturers place quite a bit of leeway into their cars if they're built right, and 600hp Kleemann mods on the SLK show that it doesn't rip apart even though it's a convertible (unlike the Z3 which apparently does shred when pushed too hard, especially with the M versions...).

*shrug*

I don't doubt it that I am smarter than you, I'm just not 'cheap american sports car' smart :wink:

I am a harcore Merc fan and I still would go for the GT3, the Merc is tons of fun but les able on a track, depends on what you are going to use it for.

I think the first post left out the intro paragraphs...I think it's from here:

http://www.autoblog.com/2006/06/12/m...ion-announced/

Yes, i agree with the others that its expensive but in the other hand its better from its rival in any category!!!It would outrun easily the boxters,Z4ms, TTs and you name it easily in the straight line and i think with the reduced weight, aerodynamics, new 7 speed gearbox and the other updates would be faster around the twists!!!Also, this special edition SLK is a looker and have all the luxury and the usual toys from mother Mercedes!!What else could you ask for :!: :D

Really nice car...