Have been wondering if any one of you has ever driven the new SLK. I am curious if there really is all that much difference between the SLK chassis the Crossfire uses, and the chassis the current SLK uses. I get tired of reading car critics use the word "old" when describing the Crossfire chassis - I bet there really isn't all that much difference between the two. My car rides and handles great!

Bill

 

Our chassis is the last generation (R170) SLK chassis, so yeah the critics use "old" because technically it is. Now if it had the new R171 chassis that'd be awesome (along with the powerplant).

 

Just remember car reviewers work for magazines whose main ad revenue comes from companies trying to sell NEW CARS. Whatever is "new" is automatically better. In real life good engineering does not have an "expiration date" ! But reliable long term performance is boring and does not sell new product. When the W170 SLK320 first appeared the same magazines called it "powerful and torquey" and the chassis "sophisticated and competent". Three or four years latter and the same car is "old tech", "dated" and "underpowered". I'm so tired of these flacks who write for the car mags. They all parrot each other and regurgitate ad copy dressed up as car reviews.

Slim

 

Message Deleted

 

Message Deleted

 

R171 is too heavy for me. R170 for the win.

PS The Crossfire is built on the R170 chassis, shared with the SLK230, SLK320, and SLK32.

 

Message Deleted

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_R170

Even my brother, a Master Mechanic for Mercedes-Benz, acknowledges it is the R170 chassis, but w/e.

 

Message Deleted

 

its just as much an slk as your is an amg.

 

Would LOVE to read that article, but machine won't handle it...any suggestions?

 

Does anyone think the newest article stating its NOT an SLK could be inaccurate?

I have found sites listing the Xfire as FWD.

Kinda funny after all these years an article from 2003 pops up and everyone just agrees.

The article could be wrong, what do you guys think?


From a non mechanics POV it definitely seems like its an SLK.

 

pretty sure it's slk. i've parked next to one: same wheel base/width. nothing wrong with that, after all we have an award-winning motor - 2001.

 

Message Deleted

 

All the good parts of the crossfire are SLK, and that's about 50%, the rest is Chrysler and that's just some interior, wheels and the shell of the body, just keep calling it an SLK to spite the Benz owners, lol.

 

Message Deleted

 

i don't even have to open my mouth to **** off MB owners. they already get pissed enough when more people are looking at my car when i'm parked next to theirs.

 

I know they compared the rigidity to that of an Abrams Tank if i spelled that right. I can't seem to locate the article where they raved that the coupe crossfire has 50.1 Mhz body and the convt 28 or 29 Mhz. Also Yes there's lot of confusion because when people obtain their information they source articles and magazines that sometimes do not provide 100% accurate information or are not Chrysler sourced and then the word carries on incorrect from the beginning and when someone comes trying to show the truth no one cares to listen. The Crossfire is NOT just a reskinned SLK of yore. There were heavy modifications of the original SLK chassis to first create the coupe structure, fit the oversized rear tires and front tires etc etc. Its really a synergy of CLK, C and S class the latter being only in the rear suspension.

However the originally quoted percentage breakdown of mercedes parts used is HIGHLY incorrect. Its more 80% Mercedes and 20% American. Reason for such low numbers provided by Chrysler is that they had originally informed investors that with their marriage in 98 that they wouldn't load up Chrysler's with Mercedes parts... Well then here comes the Xfire with literally every damn component i would say 80% Mercedes and they cant state that on paper so they put something like 34% Mercedes yeah right. I mean scope out the car and look at all the parts that are BENZ do you guys honestly think they add up to 39% as announced??? I mean even the key for crying out loud is an older switchblade BENZ key down to the TOUCH START feature from Mercedes LOL.

I guess where the problem came into play was on the VISUAL side that knowing that Chryslers new model had shared parts with Mercedes the only Mercedes car that is similar in size and configuration was the SLK so thats where probably alot of the assumptions started. However the inner door panels are extremely similar and the dash is the same one used in the SLK down to the center console as are the seats and wipers and rear firewall which actually houses the fuel tank as in the SLK so there are lots of similarities but to simply say that a Crossfire is an SLK - that is not so.

 

Message Deleted

 

I never understood what the percent break down on MB v. non-MB parts meant. Are we talking about the actual number of components? Are we breaking down assemblies and sub-assemblies to count screws and washers? In other words does the engine count as one part of thousands?
For all I know they broke down the percent by the weight of MB v. non-MB parts.
What I do know is that the engine, transmission, and suspension is MB. It doesn't have the cache of a MB, true, and I can't impress the neighbors, but I really don't care. This car should run reliably for a couple of hundred thousand miles. Very few Chryslers have done that.