Z4m V Slk Amg

isurance insnt a problem really mate, i insure my focus St now at a good price. i have had a quote for the SLk at £12000 but i think i could get it for less... its the V8 that is tempting me but i would have to wait a bit to get one with the prices where as the z4 i could pick one up tomorrow if i wanted . i know the slk it auto , are they horrible in auto or is it not that bad .
 
To be honest, Merc auto's are very very good, but generally, you either like 'em or you prefer manual transmission. Purely personal preference. Often a marmite thing, I hate auto's with a passion, many others love them to bits.To try to compare the 2 cars is not really fair, they are very different.The SLK is a bit of a cruiser, ( albeit a bloody fast one), the Z4M is a proper sports tool,depends upon how much petrol is flowing in those veins. You'd absolutely love either of them, but we'll push you towards the Z4M,cos we're like that. :D
 
Hold on... If I read this right, Woots, you're paying £5000pa to insure a 2.0 Z4? And Adam, you've got a quote of £12,000pa to insure the SLK? You're both mad.

On another note, GA41, I'm exactly the same. Most of the time it's windows down with the stereo off!
 
IK. said:
On another note, GA41, I'm exactly the same. Most of the time it's windows down with the stereo off!
Click to expand...

The only way to drive! Downside is the interior gets awfully dusty awfully quickly! :P
 
arhhh imsurance purance, im 24, with a 09 GTR and z4m, both of them cost under 500 quid each, on my fleet policy.
me personally i would go with the ///m i had a sl55 amg which was cruise o matic just so boring.
 
sorry i meant £1200, i added an extra zero. the auto put me off at first as i do like a manual but its the V8 thing , you dont hear any thing like them .if they were evenly priced i wouldnt even be on here i would go straight out and get the slk but 6k is alot of money and is the slk really worth the extra , like every one has said its about the same as the slk speed wise.

does the slk kill the z4 once higher speeds are reached , maybe 30-100 etc ?
 
thomson_adam said:
isurance insnt a problem really mate, i insure my focus St now at a good price. i have had a quote for the SLk at £12000 but i think i could get it for less... its the V8 that is tempting me but i would have to wait a bit to get one with the prices where as the z4 i could pick one up tomorrow if i wanted . i know the slk it auto , are they horrible in auto or is it not that bad .
Click to expand...

If you like Auto's then the SLK is fine, in manual mode (the paddles) it is good. But in auto mode it is dull and slow. But i guess if you are hustling it down a B road you will have it in manual anyway, so all good.

As far as the difference in price goes, it's well worth it. The SLK is a much more special car imo.

I think of it like this, a Z4M is a model up from a 3.0 Z4, but the SLK55 is in a completely different league to any other small convertible. If it wasn't for it's generally familiar shape, it would nearly be up at supercar levels...it certainly sounds like one. Just my opinion.
 
I have just used confused.com and got a quote on a Noble M12 GTO (12k miles pa). It is only £533 with £250 excess (admiral), which is cheaper than Z4M (just 40 days to my 34th birthday). I want a mid-engined car. :D
 
chetalien said:
bigshurv said:
Easy, the SLK is a WOMAN'S car....................................Z4M is a proper MAN'S car, job done. Regardless of what engine you have in it fella, everyone will think your driving your Mum's car.
Click to expand...

I agree
Click to expand...
I don t . can t stand this gender specific crap
 
Hmmm resisting the "woman's car" comments then I would say it depends on how much you want to spend. I, like you, have hankered after both. The AMG is awesome, the 350 is to a lesser degree, the Z4M is a fab car too. The post-2008 350 with 300bhp is better than ever.

Have you heard an AMG yet? :sweetheart:
 
I think of it like this, a Z4M is a model up from a 3.0 Z4, but the SLK55 is in a completely different league to any other small convertible. If it wasn't for it's generally familiar shape, it would nearly be up at supercar levels...it certainly sounds like one. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...


i think this has sold it for me , when you look at it like that it makes true sense. as for B roads where i live is full of them , i dont know if you have ever seen top gear where clarkson takes his old escort rs round the moors, well i live close to there .

i may have to wait a little bit longer for the slk but in the end i think i wont regret it , i think if i bought the z4 i would always wish i had waited for the slk .
 
IK. said:
Hold on... If I read this right, Woots, you're paying £5000pa to insure a 2.0 Z4? And Adam, you've got a quote of £12,000pa to insure the SLK? You're both mad.

On another note, GA41, I'm exactly the same. Most of the time it's windows down with the stereo off!
Click to expand...

Hahaha yepyep...
mad but you only live once...why not live it having what you want rite now?
:D
 
dan_i, the Z4M simply a step above the 3lt? I'm sorry but it's so much more than that! Sure you might see it and notice only a slightly different front and rear bumper and those quad exhausts but that engine, that noise at 7.5k RPM, that snappy handling and feeling. You dont find that on the non-M's.

How about you look at it this way. The facelifted SLK350 has 300bhp and does 0-60 in 5.4sec. The AMG has just 50 more horsepower (ignoring the shitloads more of torque at the moment :D ) and does 0-60 half a second quicker. The 3.0si does a 5.7sec run whereas the M in 5 flat, so a bigger difference there plus it has around 70bhp more, a standard LSD and totally different steering rack and suspension settings (please correct me on the suspension if i am mistaken).

Both Mercs are auto's although the 350 can indeed be had as a manual, with pretty much the same interior. You can get a nearly identical AMG bodykit and fancy wheels on the 350 plus sporty suspension (i dont know how that compares to the AMG settings though) and a limited slip differential is a payed optional extra for the AMG.

I guess my point is that on paper the AMG is closer to an SLK350 than the M to a 3.0si.. But If you ask me i still think both cars are amazing.
 
I think both are great cars. My chief gripes against the SLK55 AMG are it's lack of LSD (it's got an electronic version, iirc), AMG's insistence on running only autos, and all Mercedes-Benz's products steadfast refusal to let you turn off the electronic nannies completely. I like the looks of the current SLK quite a bit though, and the folding hardtop was very appealing when I was deciding between this and the Z4 M Coupe. I have to say given a choice between the SLK55 AMG and the E89 Z4, I think I'd go with the Mercedes.
 
A real LSD is available with the AMG Performance Package but it should really be standard fit.. Also agree on the transmission bit.
 
Woots said:
Spud said:
At 21, unless you're a footballer or have someone bankrolling you, you can kiss goodbye to having either, to be honest. It'll be two and a half grand a year, easily.
Click to expand...

I reck it might possibly be more?
Im almost 20 and for my 2.0 its just over £5000...not sure how much that extra year or two would make a diff..
But if i can insure an M when im 21 for 2.5k...i will be very very very happy :D

But back to the point...hmmm
Not really sure either could be classed as a girls car more than the other...neither are really a butch car lets be honest...but im sure we dont need cars to prove our sexuality so who gives a sheeite?
I would probs go for an SL though... :P
Click to expand...


WHAT?!

I hope to god thats a typo.

I insured my 3.0i in my own name, 10k per year, with ZERO NCB, at 21 and 2 months for £1200.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom