ours had some electrical problems, major rattles that could not be fixed and a problem with the supercharger.

 

I still have a lot of trouble figuring out why someone would buy the SL55 over the SL600 when the cost is not significantly different, but the performance of the SL600 crushes the SL55.

Does anyone know why?

 

because the SL600 does not crush the SL55 in any way and the 55 has a sportier suspension, no turbo lag, less weight, etc. Not to mention the AMG seats and stuff.

 

Every performance test I have seen has the SL600 equal the SL55 in the skid pad and slalom with the SL600 troucning the SL55 in acceleration with the huge torque advantage.

Here is an excerpt from the Car and Driver comparison....
.....Let's check the next notch on the elapsed-time yardstick. The 911 GT2 covered the quarter-mile in 12 seconds flat, the Viper in 12.1, the GT3 and Stradale in 12.3 and 12.4, respectively. The SL600 did it in 11.9. That's not quite as quick as the Ford GT, but it would have put this elegant Benz in a tie for fifth place (out of 15 cars) in the quarter-mile elapsed-time competition in our September 2002 "Supercar Challenge."

Yet another contrast: The SL600 trumps the SL55 AMG, even though the AMG edition weighs in a tad lighter (4411 pounds), packs the same horsepower (493), and is the designated SL family hot rod. But in our November '02 test, the SL55 managed only�only!�4.5 seconds to 60, and cruised through the quarter in 13.0 seconds at 110 mph.

So what's up with that? Torque, that's what. It's not that the SL55 is deficient in this power commodity. Its supercharged 5.4-liter V-8 produces 516 pound-feet across a broad plateau of grunt that ranges from 2750 to 4000 rpm. Our test characterized its thrust as prodigious, and we stand by that assertion. But if the SL55's torque is prodigious, the SL600's is�what? monumental? heroic? elephantine?

Fed by twin turbos with twin intercoolers, the SL600's SOHC 36-valve, 60-degree aluminum V-12 spools up 590 pound-feet of torque, maintaining that mountainous level from 1800 rpm to 3500 rpm. The five-speed automatic offers a three-mode manumatic function, just as it does in the SL55, but with such an abundance of muscle, augmented by quick throttle response, it seems superfluous. When the driver wishes to summon haste, he has only to tramp on the pedal and the V-12 will mash him against the seatback in a flash.

I just don't think the SL55 can hold its own against the SL600....that's all.

 

test drive them both and make a choice.... i've driven them both, love them equally depending on the mood...

 

Firstly if you want to go quick in a straight line get the Sl's,if you wantfun get t he tt.
The m6 is deffo coming with at least 500bhp and performance reckoned to be competitive with the tt,0-200 kmh in 12.7 secs has been referred to.There are pictures of the m6 being tested on m5 messageboard.

 

SL55 is better than SL600.. never buy a V12 Benz, especially with a Turbo installed, they still have problems with that engine.. from 1995 till now.. and my dad hasnt learned that.. he got a 1996 S600 then a 2001 S600, then a 2003 S600.. all the engines had problems after a few months.. SL55 is a V8.. sportier.. better looks.. AMG.. and a simple STAGE 1 Kleemann would kick the SL600 ***!.. and if still stock.. its still better