Cayman VS SLK
#1
09-12-2007, 11:09 PM
Cayman VS SLK
I think nowadays this 2 sports car has been so popular
Cayman VS SLK 200 K
Cayman S VS SLK350
Cayman ???
VS SLK55 AMG
From the looks, ride, and performance,
Which is the best ?
Cayman VS SLK 200 K
Cayman S VS SLK350
Cayman ???
VS SLK55 AMGFrom the looks, ride, and performance,
Which is the best ?
#5
09-13-2007, 02:09 AM
Hardtop convertible is definitely more practical, but at the expense of added weight.
I sold my old Boxster S because the top was giving out. Not worth keeping since my version had the plastic window.
That being said, this would be the very first time I'd pick a BMW as an alternative to both: BMW 335i hardtop convertible
But to stay on topic: Cayman
I sold my old Boxster S because the top was giving out. Not worth keeping since my version had the plastic window.
That being said, this would be the very first time I'd pick a BMW as an alternative to both: BMW 335i hardtop convertible
But to stay on topic: Cayman
#6
09-13-2007, 03:13 AM
Hardtop convertible is definitely more practical, but at the expense of added weight.
I sold my old Boxster S because the top was giving out. Not worth keeping since my version had the plastic window.
That being said, this would be the very first time I'd pick a BMW as an alternative to both: BMW 335i hardtop convertible
But to stay on topic: Cayman
I sold my old Boxster S because the top was giving out. Not worth keeping since my version had the plastic window.
That being said, this would be the very first time I'd pick a BMW as an alternative to both: BMW 335i hardtop convertible
But to stay on topic: Cayman
#7
09-13-2007, 07:23 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pescara, Italy
Age: 37
Posts: 3,493
Rep Power: 162 
Trending Topics
#8
09-13-2007, 08:05 AM
Is this serious??? There is no comparison form a performance standpoint. Only for people that cant drive. Straight line you can compare them. The Boxster S according to every publication on the globe is FASTER around a track than the SLK 55. No magazine has liked the SLK better. Drive them both to find out why. AND THE CAYMAN IS A BETTER HANDLER THAN THE BOXSTER!!! : ) Case closed. Hope that helps : )
#9
09-14-2007, 12:49 AM
drive both and find out
my gf drives an slk350 and me the cayman s
to be absolutely honest with you, i enjoy driving the slk more on the streets since it's an automatic and is an absolute blast to drive. it has just enough torque and the exhaust note is pretty pleasing. it's also quite nimble. test drive one and you'll understand.
the cayman is 10x better performance and would smoke any slk, including a 55, on the track, but you have to care for it too much. it's definitely not something that you can park at grocery store with all those shopping carts and forget about it... you know what i mean?
also a used slk350 costs about 1/2 of a used cayman s
my gf drives an slk350 and me the cayman s
to be absolutely honest with you, i enjoy driving the slk more on the streets since it's an automatic and is an absolute blast to drive. it has just enough torque and the exhaust note is pretty pleasing. it's also quite nimble. test drive one and you'll understand.
the cayman is 10x better performance and would smoke any slk, including a 55, on the track, but you have to care for it too much. it's definitely not something that you can park at grocery store with all those shopping carts and forget about it... you know what i mean?
also a used slk350 costs about 1/2 of a used cayman s
#10
09-14-2007, 06:25 AM
No comparison. Two different animals.
SLK is more of a grand tourer, loses composure at the limit. Rear wheel drive, slushbox, front mounted engine. Until MB/AMG comes out with some form of DSG or SMG, they're going to continue to have trouble to compete with the enthusiast crowd, although from what I read on another thread they're working on something like it for '08/'09?
Whereas the Cayman S is an all-around performer, amazing to drive, rear wheel drive, mid-engine 295 hp, 6sp MT. One of my fondest driving experiences is in a Cayman S.
Depends what you want to do with it. If you want an all-around practical 2 seater with the possibility of making it a drop-top, it's the MB. If you're looking for driving excitement and maybe a little more exclusivity, the Porsche.
SLK is more of a grand tourer, loses composure at the limit. Rear wheel drive, slushbox, front mounted engine. Until MB/AMG comes out with some form of DSG or SMG, they're going to continue to have trouble to compete with the enthusiast crowd, although from what I read on another thread they're working on something like it for '08/'09?
Whereas the Cayman S is an all-around performer, amazing to drive, rear wheel drive, mid-engine 295 hp, 6sp MT. One of my fondest driving experiences is in a Cayman S.
Depends what you want to do with it. If you want an all-around practical 2 seater with the possibility of making it a drop-top, it's the MB. If you're looking for driving excitement and maybe a little more exclusivity, the Porsche.
#12
09-14-2007, 10:24 AM
No comparison. Two different animals.
SLK is more of a grand tourer, loses composure at the limit. Rear wheel drive, slushbox, front mounted engine. Until MB/AMG comes out with some form of DSG or SMG, they're going to continue to have trouble to compete with the enthusiast crowd, although from what I read on another thread they're working on something like it for '08/'09?
Whereas the Cayman S is an all-around performer, amazing to drive, rear wheel drive, mid-engine 295 hp, 6sp MT. One of my fondest driving experiences is in a Cayman S.
Depends what you want to do with it. If you want an all-around practical 2 seater with the possibility of making it a drop-top, it's the MB. If you're looking for driving excitement and maybe a little more exclusivity, the Porsche.
SLK is more of a grand tourer, loses composure at the limit. Rear wheel drive, slushbox, front mounted engine. Until MB/AMG comes out with some form of DSG or SMG, they're going to continue to have trouble to compete with the enthusiast crowd, although from what I read on another thread they're working on something like it for '08/'09?
Whereas the Cayman S is an all-around performer, amazing to drive, rear wheel drive, mid-engine 295 hp, 6sp MT. One of my fondest driving experiences is in a Cayman S.
Depends what you want to do with it. If you want an all-around practical 2 seater with the possibility of making it a drop-top, it's the MB. If you're looking for driving excitement and maybe a little more exclusivity, the Porsche.
But check out what TRI post
Cayman S smoke every SLK even SLK55 AMG
I Owned SLK55, i think he kidding too far man
#13
09-14-2007, 10:29 AM
I dont think hes kidding and I agree 100% The SLK would only be faster in a straight line and not by much. This is fact. Like I said earlier every magazine comparo puts the BOXSTER S ahead on track. And this is the Boxster S with 280 Horsepower not 295 and its half as stiff as the cayman and 25lbs(not like that matters) heavier. SLK is a cool CRUISER. Drive the Cayman and push it then you'll know.
#14
09-14-2007, 01:28 PM
i didn't mean to bash on the slk55 since it's one of my fav cars. however the two cars have their own purpose. Slk55 is a nice cruiser with tons of torque. It may be a little faster in the 1/4 or 0-60, but that depends on who's driving the cayman s. take both to the tracks, and the difference is staggering.
#15
09-15-2007, 02:10 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Silicon Valley
Age: 58
Posts: 86
Rep Power: 0 I dont think hes kidding and I agree 100% The SLK would only be faster in a straight line and not by much. This is fact. Like I said earlier every magazine comparo puts the BOXSTER S ahead on track. And this is the Boxster S with 280 Horsepower not 295 and its half as stiff as the cayman and 25lbs(not like that matters) heavier. SLK is a cool CRUISER. Drive the Cayman and push it then you'll know.
1) Acceleration:
SLK55 runs a 12.7 @112 mph. The Cayman S runs a 13.4 @ 105 mph. Advantage AMG.
2) Handling (transient weight shifting - ie slalom)
The SLK55 runs the slalom at 68 mph (the Caymen at 70 mph). Caveat - the SLK tested was soft suspensioned/non Nurburgring option so the 2 mph gap is likley closer (and the Boxter S DESTROYED the Cayman @ 73.9 mph - so much for the Boxter being a poorer handler than the Cayman). Advantage - Cayman (not against the Boxter S though - that thing kicks azz)
3) Braking
SLK55 stops in 113 ft. Caymen S in 116 ft. Close, but...Advantage SLK
4) Nurburgring (track ;o) http://www.supercars.net/PitLane?vie...ID=0&tID=10073
SLK55: 8:24
Caymen S: 8:25
Advantage: SLK55
5) Cost: Dead even ~ $60k (optioned up though & the Caymen gets pricey in a hurry, but hey - let's call it even since both have about the same MSRP give or take $1k)
Soooo, all this talk about the Cayman outperforming the SLK55 is false. The Cayman barely edged out the softest suspensioned SLK55 by 2 mph in the slalom. The Cayman lost in braking, it lost in acceleration, and it lost on the Nurbergring track (against the aforementioned soft suspsensioned equipped SLK55). W also didn't mention that Caymans are at every stop light - like Boxters....SLK55 production is limited to 1k/year - significantly more scarce.
I'm not trying to be nasty. I'm just pointing out the SLK55 may not get much press, but it performs very well (and the manual paddle shift mechansim - or manual gear select works fine - especially for street driving). It's also a hard top convertible which also has Airscarf - adjustable hot air blowing on the back of your neck/shoulders which keeps you warm & comfortable even when it's 35 degrees outside at highway speeds - that invention rocks.
-Matt