Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Mercedes-Benz Cars / March 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

SLK200 Kompressor

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
tim - 13 Mar 2005 00:22 GMT
Are there any sites out there that have reviews of the SLKs, specifically
the 200 Kompressor pse?

tia
tim
jackbadger - 13 Mar 2005 04:20 GMT
New or old shape?
tim - 13 Mar 2005 15:11 GMT
> New or old shape?

Sri, the new shape  ;o)
tim
Michael - 15 Mar 2005 20:40 GMT
> Are there any sites out there that have reviews of the SLKs, specifically
> the 200 Kompressor pse?

Previews seem fairly common, but not reviews by someone who has driven
one.
try
http://cars.msn.co.uk/researchcentre/roadtests/rt059/Default.asp

Michael
tim - 15 Mar 2005 23:22 GMT
> http://cars.msn.co.uk/researchcentre/roadtests/rt059/Default.asp

Many thanks. This guy states "The interior is much less fussy than before:
classy, cohesive and of high quality." - I'm reading posts in this group
about the apparent inferior quality of Mercedes cars these days, so this
seems to contradict? Or is the inferior quality referring to other 'bits' of
the cars?
tim
Dori A Schmetterling - 15 Mar 2005 23:41 GMT
There is also a lot of whingeing here...:-)

I am very happy (so far) with my 2001 CLK 320 Cab, incl its interior, even
tho' I sometimes glance 'enviously' at the current generation of interiors,
which look nicer (but I prefer my W208 shape over the replacement model).

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

>> http://cars.msn.co.uk/researchcentre/roadtests/rt059/Default.asp
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> of the cars?
> tim
Michael - 16 Mar 2005 13:40 GMT
> > http://cars.msn.co.uk/researchcentre/roadtests/rt059/Default.asp
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> seems to contradict? Or is the inferior quality referring to other 'bits' of
> the cars?

We bought a new SLK-200 a fortnight ago, but it is our first Mercedes.
I tried an older SLK last year, but did not like it. I do not really
remember what it was like inside.

I think the interior layout and dash of our new SLK are very good. My
wife says she would have liked a veneer surface (my reaction being to
privately thank God that there wasn't one available). I like the
restraint of the colouring and, if "cohesive" means well laid out and
everything falls easily to hand, then I would agree. If it means there
are no loose, flapping pieces, then it is correct. But of course,
there shouldn't be at the price.

As regards "inferior quality", we have not had our SLK long enough for
anything to have gone wrong. I have made a few criticisms elsewhere
(see "New SLK350 Opinions/Experiences Please" in this ng). As I say
there, I do find the interior rear view mirror very unpleasant to use
after dark, and potentially a driving hazard.

As regards your "inferior quality ... these days", I did notice (after
we had bought our SLK) a newspaper article claiming recalls by
Mercedes over the last year or so, and lower sales. No details given,
and I have forgotten the paper (a Sunday paper?).

Michael
Dori A Schmetterling - 16 Mar 2005 14:47 GMT
Congrats on your new car!  The current SLK looks much better to me than its
predecessor, which I already liked.  I also prefer the current generation of
interiors which, of course, resemble each other across many/all? models.

In what way is the rear-view mirror unpleasant to use?

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

[...]
> I do find the interior rear view mirror very unpleasant to use
> after dark, and potentially a driving hazard.
[...]
Michael - 18 Mar 2005 23:22 GMT
...snipped...

> In what way is the rear-view mirror unpleasant to use?

...snip...

Copied from my post elsewhere:

"But my main complaint is about the inside rear view mirror. Because
of
the car's wedge shape, the rear view is not good even in daylight:
vehicles behind can creep up so you do not see their lower part at all
well, and I find I cannot judge distances at a glance but need to
think.

At night time it is a lot worse. If street lights are on, then you get
a very marked light from them in the mirror, which can swamp and hide
the fainter image of the headlights of a car behind you. I think
Mercedes have made a real mess of this. To me it is on balance bad
enough to be an accident hazard at night. I hope I can get used to
working around it, but I do not think that Mercedes should be asking
me to."

Michael
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.