If you own a Mercedes SLR, you are in well over your head. A Mercedes SL65 AMG, is just as sporty, just as appealing, lacks very little in performance compared to SLR (0-60mph in 3.8 versus 4.2 in the SL65), is twice as luxurious with an interior made of materials twice as expensive, and is a good 300,000 dollars cheaper.
The SL65 is a much better bang for the buck. Although the SL65 has a 155mph speed limiter, it would reach a top speed well over 200mph. Also the SL65 is a CONVERTIBLE, not a boring coupe. Minivans are more fun to drive than coupes.
If you are a serious driver than you go for the coupe. Coupes handle better, are lighter and certainly safer. If you want to cruise with the top down than that's different... but then of course you are in the minivan speed level.
I think buying a car of that much is stupid, I will take my turbo awd talon, put 4500 into it, and dust you in all performance catagories except top speed. And to me my car looks good, but looks don't get you down the track...
Hah Hah, I have to laugh at comments that start with "if you could afford..."
There is no doubt that lots of these reviews on the "exotics" are fake. But I'm sure there's the odd gem out there too which is genuine.
To my mind, most people who could genuinely afford an SLR would probably already have a collection of a few other exotics such as Enzo, Carerra GT etc.
If the SLR was going to be your ONLY car (highly unlikely), then there is no doubt there are better choices out there.
I also agree with a comment made that the SL65 probably represents better value in the Mercedes Benz range. The only problem being that the SL65 looks like the relatively common (and arguably better value) SL55, which in turn looks like your garden variety SL500. The thing about the SLR is that it LOOKS unique. And that's what makes it exclusive. Not just performance.
Having said all of the above, IF I had the money, I would still probably skip the SLR and buy a classic gullwing instead for that exclusive "wow" factor. And for times when I really wanted an exclusive adrenaline hit, I would look to my stable of 2 performance cars - the automatic Bugatti Veyron for cruising, and the McLaren F1 for track.
I believe that the original post is genuine. I have driven a McLaren SLR with no mercy, compliments of M-B N.A., and I must say, I was flabbergasted. Since Paris Hilton owns one, I thought that it was a car for poseurs until I drove it. The car is absolutely amazing. A car that you can commute in to the office, and on the weekend, go out and enter in LeMans! I have over 23 cars of all varieties and speed levels, but the McLaren is the first true "Jekyll and Hyde" car that I've ever encountered. Full throttle for the first time is an experience that you will never forget, as the car is so docile at normal road speeds, it's hard to grasp its ferocity when pressed. All of the performance one could ask for and a decent warranty that does not require the services of a flown-in F1 mechanic to maintain. I just saw the new 2008 McLaren SLR Roadster: same awesome performance, but semi-automatic fabric top down!
Well I guess after the classic Gullwing, Bugatti, Enzo, and other toys are bought, I guess this is when the SLR comes into play. Hell, it would get boring fast parking the Ferrari next to the lot full of Ferraris at the club. And damn sure ain't taking the Bugatti out there so some spoiled rich kid in his daddy's Porsche scratch the paint. Hey, I know, I'll take the SLR. It has the looks, even though the SL65 is a better bargain, but that is what I drive to the golf course and other places when I want to blend in unhindered.
When in the league of buying SLRs and etc, automobiles are not just merely something to get around in. They become more of what G.I. Joes and Barbies are (or were) to kids. Toys. You don't need them, but they're cool to have.
Although the writer states that he has problems involving the fuel-economy of the SLR, there may be a reason for that. He or she might not have bought the car, rather is leasing it. My cousin's family leased a Mercedes-Benz SLR, Lamborghini Gillardo and a Ferrari F430 and they pretty much complain about fuel-economy whenever they drive these cars.
Someone with the resources to purchase an SLR plus a raft of other supercars would not discuss running costs, it's hardly relevant to them is it?
I have a client who has an F430 for use on weekends. I asked him once what a service costs, and he said he did not know, his PA takes care of all that he said. As for knowing the MPG... you're kidding right?