After writing off my S2000, (insurance paying out this week) I have been offered a '99 SLK 230 (black/Black leather) with 5,000 miles on it, for the same price as a '00 S2000.

I know that the performance is in a whole different league in the S2000, but wondered if anyone has owned an SLK and got any comments to make?

My wife is unkeen on replacing the S2000 as she is concerned with the handling after I wrote the last one off in the wet, though we may still get one......

 

The SLK 230 or 320 isn't even close to the performance of the S2000, if you want staus and more luxury go with the benz, but it would take the SLK 32 to surpass the performance of the S2000.

 

Thanks xtc.

As I said, I know the S2000 is another league for performance, but I am trying to get some info on what the 230 is like....

I will be arranging for a test drive at the weekend, but am not really that keen on the idea of the 230.

 

One word, four letters in regards to the SLK:

Yuck.

 

I guess I should have expected these sort of replies, anyone ever owned/driven one????

 

You'll find the 230 to be more comfortable, with more of a luxury car feel; however, it won't hold a candle to the S2000 in terms of performance and handling (and fun).

 

I have driven an SLK 230.

One word: Lag.
Two words: Nice interior.
Three words: a lady's car.
Four words: Get another S2K, man!

 

It feels as fast as an S2K from 0-35, city driving. But from 65-120, it's just not as quick and fun as an S2K. Quieter, of course, but no more racing feeling. I think your wife would like it a lot better. If you love her, I guess you have to get the SLK 230.

 

Only in straight line...

 

Oh no!! I didn't want someone to say something like that I am trying to convince myself that it is not selfish to stick with the S2000!!