My first time seeing it, comparing a Boxster s to a slk55...
what were they thinking?

the engines are in compleatly different categories
why not compare the 3.2l bx s to an slk32? or something similar?


even though one of my father's favorite quotes about his slk320 is "you will make those Boxster guys envious when you pull up at a light"
...we have hit 130mph... conservatively

 

2 Different Buyers In my opinion I saw the episode last night (Using a 3.2 Liter Boxster).I can tell you I really do not like his opinions and what the heck does avoiding the Irish Military shooting at the Boxster have to do with anything.It was Stupid and meaningless but entertaining.I would choose a Boxster over the SLK32 any day .I just watch it to hear them chat in their funny accent.Its more of a Comedy then anything .I will say one thing though those 3 guys have a pretty cool job BUT BOXSTER ALL THE WAY!!

 

Hating Porsches is part of Jeremy's schtick. Once you get to know their individual quirks the entertainment value makes more sense.

 

oh i love the show,
but their comparisons and test are at times a little bias,
i just would have rather they tested the slk320 because they have the same engine size.

i love how long it takes the slk to switch to revers, and then forward when he hides. Clarkson was angry yet he still loved it. mid engine all the way though i think the new/ current Boxsters look better to.

 

good job...

 

top model vs top model is fair - i just think that someone might have asked about the manual version slk compara - as there ISN'T one. that was lame but then again many of their decisions are based on driving them in London, where an auto makes a bit more sense.

the other one - long hair forgot his name - made fun of the other two's choice of the lessor car, particularly when they agreed the Boxster won on every criteria.

 

Nail -> Head
BTW, I'll trade my 01 boxster for your cayman

 

My brother had an SLK AMG a couple of years ago.....

He sold it and bought an Audi TT. When I asked why, he told me "The SLK was nothing more than a F-cking HP Monster, the Audit TT, on the other hand, is a Sports Car." Enough said.

Dave

 

nice shot

 

An Audi TT is somehow more a sports car than an AMG SLK55? Funny stuff. The '05 car stats (we'll use the softer suspentiones AMG car to "help" the TT...I threw in the Boxter S #s for fun as well):

1/4 Mile: 14.3 sec for the TT, 13.6 sec for the Boxter S, 12.8 sec for AMG
Braking from 70 mph: 164 ft for the TT, 153 ft for the Boxter S, 156 ft for the AMG
Skidpad: .87 for the TT, .97 for the Boxter S, .91 for the AMG
Slalom: 67.4 mph for the TT, 71.2 mph for the Boxter S, 68.7 mph for the AMG

Summary -
1) the Audi was a joke
2) the AMG not only smoked the Boxter in acceleration, but was pretty even in braking (the 030 package on the AMG drops braking to 151 ft...better than the Boxter but lets call it even - we are talking a few feet)
3) The Boxter was quicker through the slalom (it is indeed a world class handling car)

I'm not seein' how the AMG isn't a sport car. I've driven mine at Seca a few times & its a fun & pretty competant track car (no heating issues, ZERO brake fade, and turning off the tracking control allows for some drift).

All this talk about no manual when you have a steering wheel manual paddle shift makes me laugh though....One would suppose all the Ferraris (including F1 race cars) equipped with steering wheel paddle shifting technology aren't sports cars? - I'll mention that to Michael Schumacher next time I see him!
HINT: That technology came from the Ferarri & Mercedes/McLaren F1 cars & was introduced for initial road use for the first time with 360 Modena launch - it has been highly successful in it's adoption across multiple car manufactureres the world over (this is "why" companies race...so they can port proven race technologies to their road cars).

 

that slk has a standard auto tranny with a couple of toggles -not really a comparison to ANY of the double clutch or hydraulically activated manual clutch systems you are describing.

raw engine power - if that was your basis go for a vette

 

It's irrelavant "how" the paddle shift changes the gears as they ALL lack a foot activated clutch. I'd argue it is the result that matters (ie the changing of the gears which are steering wheel activated). My paddle gear shifting works just fine (people that argue it doesn't "blip" the throttle like some newer systems are splitting hairs IMO).

Curious why you only mentioned raw engine power? - read the post. Handling & braking in addition to power were critera & the SLK performs pretty well in all 3 categories. Also, why did you metion a Vette? Last time I checked those cars handled & braked extremely well. The ZR1 just placed 2nd behind an ACR Viper for the stock car track record with a 7:26 - that is world class sports car performance....even the stock $70k ZO6 ran a 7:42 ~ 3 yrs ago.

 

you have a torgue converter auto tranny - that is not on the same planet as the other systems you are referrencing. they just are completely different from any mechanical perspective whatsoever; so stop going there as you appear to not know what you are talking about

 

I know exactly what I'm talking about (see F1 racing technology mentioned earlier) but thanks. You keep focusing on the "how" (the gear change is executed) as opposed to the "result" , which is the only thing that matters. There is little difference in manually controlling 7 gears via paddle mount shifting in the SLK55 vs other systems ) including BMW's dual clutch system, for example). Is one slightly quicker than the other, sure. Is it significant enough to notice on the street or limited track use, no (I've driven a fellow driver's Modena at Laguna Seca so I have some time behind the wheel to compare - do you?)

 

i owned an SMG'd M3 for almost 2 years so i suspect i am qualified to comment.

anyway, back to the point - the Boxster is the only one with the manual tranny regardless of how you slice it. if you want to shift - the SLK is not on the radar as MB just doesn't like giving us a manual.