I continue to assume here that this is the same tranny and shifter as in the SLK. If not, fair to assume there is similar lineage. Here are three more SLK320 review excerpts:
From Frank Aukofer, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, Mar. 3, 2001:
Unfortunately, especially for folks who don't spend a lot of time shifting for themselves, the SLK six-speed is not an easy car to drive. Because of the amount of power on tap in the lower gears, as well as a need for expert slippage of the clutch, it takes time and concentration to drive the SLK smoothly.
The shifter gets the job done, but it is both sloppy in feel and a bit crunchy through the gears, especially when you want to shift rapidly.
Full review @
http://www.jsonline.com/wheels/test/...lk02030101.asp
From Krisiti Bannen, The C.A.R. Show:
The 2001 SLK 320 comes standard with a six-speed manual transmission that felt quite powerful and had some definite kick to it as you shifted into higher gears. However, it was difficult at first to find the perfect balance shifting between gears and getting used to the clutch - it was a bit touchy.
Full article @
http://www.thecarshow.com/review110200slk320.htm
and finally, this blast from edmunds.com, 12/27/2000:
What caused the powertrain to ultimately disappoint our evaluators was the crappy six-speed manual transmission charged with routing power to the rear wheels. In fact, the balky clutch take-up, floppy shifter, vague feel, murky gates and lousy heel-and-toe pedal arrangement are to blame for almost dragging the Benz to third place after all was said and done. Jerky around town and generally unpleasant to operate, the SLK's manual gearbox garnered only one positive comment in the logbook
Ouch!
While autowriters sometimes seem to know as little about cars as sportswriters do about throwing a curveball, these folks drive a lot more cars than most of us and when THEY are saying this is a difficult clutch, I think hey! maybe it ain't me! I have a theory on the shifting but it'll take a few more miles to test this out...