I have owned my 1997 original launch version SLK 2.3 for two years now and it is my daily driver. It is plenty fast enough and does corner very well. However, I usually drive along with the normal flow of traffic and am no longer thrill seeking. Having the top down is a real pleasure and that, to me, is the best thing about it. I also have the cold reluctance to change gear thing, and the auto gearbox oil (and all the fluids) were changed two years ago and I do less than 3000 miles per year. The engine temperature is always spot-on but I still get to see the radiator warning light from time to time despite the level being correct. Probably a faulty sensor. The combined indicator/high beam stalk was horribly loose for a year but I eventually tightened it up (after having to remove the steering wheel, airbag and clock spring). The airbag light then had to be reset by a garage. Mine is under 80K miles by the way on an R plate. I find the interior controls very basic for what was a £70k car when new. But by far the worse problem is the dashboard. I had to remove the drivers side dash to investigate a wiring fault and it absolutely ruined it. Pieces off dashboard break off in your hand like an Easter egg no matter how careful you are. Age has made it hyper brittle and other owners have reported this too. Unfortunately, any replacements on Ebay are going to suffer the same fate and that is if you can source one let alone afford it. There is a hidden dash hanger bracket on the right hand side which supports most of the weight in that location and it is made of the same stuff. And where dash screws bite into the material causes oversized holes of no further use. My roof has been faultless, and I treat the rubbers with Sonax from Germany to keep them soft and sealed. When it squeaks over bumps you know it is time. Mine is the same colour as yours Steven and here is one of the reasons I think they are so cheap. There were so many silver grey ones produced they just don't 'pop'. I was in the budget market so I could hardly choose a colour (I paid £1100) but I would have much preferred red - or even yellow or blue! But those colours seem ultra rare. My saving grace is the lovely red and black interior which I love. Apart from that it has never let me down and drives really well. It is not the most comfortable over the potholes and the standard headlights are so bad they are dangerous in my opinion, whether on dip or high beam (and i have polished the lenses).
@@stuarttaylor6038 I’m glad to hear that you’re enjoying your SLK. They do seem to suffer with little issues which I suppose is down to age. I’d never thought about colour being an issue as most seem to be silver but I do think this is a good point. Brighter colours and designs colours do seem to be in a minority. Thanks for watching Stuart and I hope you have many more happy miles in your SLK!
I`ve recently bought an SLK 230 R170 as well. I think they are cheap because there are a lot of small problems with them. The radiator light that magically turns on sometimes. Gave me an absolute shocker. Thought the head gasket was blown. The roof is leaking during rain. It just drips on the passenger side. New rubbers costs a fortune. Heater fan has a life on its own. No big deals if you`re handy yourself otherwise it will get expensive quick if a garage has to fix all the tiny issues. It`s an absolute blast to drive to be honest. Slow enough to manage it well on the busy roads.
@ That’s a good point. My own SLK had a lot of little niggles which is probably a reason why the previous owner part exchanged it. I’m glad to hear that you’re enjoying SLK ownership. Thanks for watching, Steven.
I am in Australia and my wife has a 1999 yellow 230. Paying 1.000 pounds (Circa A$1,800) for this type of car in Australia is impossible. Worth way more here. Nothing available here that runs OK for less than 4,000 pounds. My wife is always getting compliments, usually from women who love it. I love it also. With the low speed limits here it is still quite a fast car, more so than my 1994 W124 E220 cabrio. It had the usual plastic interior paint shrivelling up, which we touched up, and a rattle from the cupholders was annoying. It is such a cute looking design, way nicer than the long nosed R171. They were relatively common here (especially in silver and black) , but numbers are thinning out and values will rise. It is at the bottom of its value cycle, so now is the time to buy.
Thanks for watching Peter. Sounds like a lovely SLK that your wife has. Interesting how different markets have different valuations. We seem to be lucky in the UK that these cars are so cheap even if they are worth so much more. I agree that they are on the bottom end of the cycle so prices can only go up. Glad you got the interior sorted, seems most SLK’s suffer with this issue.
I’ve enjoyed my year 2000 slk 320 for 7 years as a Summer top down wind in the hair job😀. Very easy to work on, parts cheap and has passed every MOT first go.
Are they really so cheap? Yes,one can buy a cheap old thing from the late 90s for pennies. But a well sorted R171 in good condition is going to cost a good few thousands. In Europe they cost a lot more. My R171 cost me £4k - and that was perhaps 20% below similar cars. In Europe, a similar car will cost at least €10k up toward toward €15k. One reason why prices of older high-milage ones,in the UK are as soft as they are is because the cost of ownership is relatively high. For the 'potless person', the hit on tax and insurance will tend to be dissuasive. It's not so easy to justify a purchase when RFL for the year is half the purchase price. add in insurance and you're getting close to the purchase price in annual costs. Here in Europe, insurance just cost me half what it did in the UK. Road tax is about 30% of the cost in the UK. But for folks who can afford to spend the money, in the UK, they buy a good example and pay much more than the bottom end prices.
Thanks for watching. It’s great to see a perspective from the European market. I’ve can only really speak from my experience as the cost to tax and insure my SLK was more than the actual purchase price.
@@stevensfourwheels Yes, before I bought my 280 - in the UK, I wondered how come such a mint example at such a low price (even by UK standards was Not snapped up in a pretty affluent area. When I checked the cost of tax and insurance, I had an inkling of what was happening. I bet folks were taking the thing for a spin, saying to themselves 'I want, I want' and then changing their mind when they saw the cost of taxing and insuring it. It's enough to change one's perspective. An older, cheaper one is still costly to get on the road.
Thanks for watching Andrew. That is an interesting point. Running costs can be high. Buying a cheaper car and fixing it up can cost more than buying a good example in the first place.
Why! They rust. The interior plastic is fragile. It is becoming difficult to find shops capable of doing proper repairs. Some critical parts are NLA. Soldering on circuit boards is poor. It's not a difficult car to maintain provided you own proper diagnostics. These ain't cheap to buy. I own a 1997 and the diagnostics. It's a great little car but rust really was a major issue. The roof is likely to be problematic with age . To fix it properly is not cheap but it can be done in a couple of days.
All I heard was ‘great little car’. My dude. You’ve missed the point, I have the R170 200 komp manual and simply put, it’s not a sports car like the TT, Z3 or MX5 (you forgot the Italians too, Barchetta for example). The R170 is a GREAT car, in the ‘compact coupe’ segment. In that respect is quite unique. Handling, vague. Quick, not especially. Style, shrunk Merc and from the 3/4 it’s lovely looking, headlights let it down. The clutch is 2 position and frustrating for it, and the gear change, isn’t like an MX5. I have an NB. It’s a great-little-compact-coupe for the money. They also rot like cheese on the arches but that’s almost a given. I really like my SLK because it’s more comfy than the MX5 but by comparison it handles like a blancmange; and that’s why it’s no fair comparison. Sporty, no. Compact, yes. Light, hmm have you held that bonnet? My tip, get one as it’s a real design classic which is fun, a lot of decent engineering, some over engineered (vario dies? Time to toss it) but don’t expect it to thrill you, it won’t. Great channel, love your enthusiasm but the answer to your video is this: because it’s not any of the cars you compare it. A more curious question would be what can rival it in the compact coupe/luxury roadster segment, I can’t think of one right now! Hammond from yesteryear did a good review of the R170. Also check out the video ‘SLK R170 from the service angle’, it’s just a delight. And finally. More women than men bought the SLK. She’s a feminine design, and it’s aged pretty well with a little wedge nod.
@@kevj7427 thanks for watching. I do think that the SLK is a great little car and I love it for what it is which is why I’m not selling mine anytime soon. I think the SLK is a sports car by Mercedes standards. My R107 SL is a great tourer but by no means sporty. Compared to its bigger brother, the SLK is somewhat a sports car but still maintaining some the qualities of its bigger sibling. Later generations of the SLK got better but it had to start somewhere. This is why the early SLKs stand apart from the competition. You have to compare it to other mainstream sports cars to understand what the SLK is really about. I’m yet to be convinced about the ‘compact coupe’ part. I just need to understand more about the definition of a ‘compact coupe’ class car and what other car sit in this class.
I have owned my 1997 original launch version SLK 2.3 for two years now and it is my daily driver. It is plenty fast enough and does corner very well. However, I usually drive along with the normal flow of traffic and am no longer thrill seeking. Having the top down is a real pleasure and that, to me, is the best thing about it. I also have the cold reluctance to change gear thing, and the auto gearbox oil (and all the fluids) were changed two years ago and I do less than 3000 miles per year.
The engine temperature is always spot-on but I still get to see the radiator warning light from time to time despite the level being correct. Probably a faulty sensor. The combined indicator/high beam stalk was horribly loose for a year but I eventually tightened it up (after having to remove the steering wheel, airbag and clock spring). The airbag light then had to be reset by a garage. Mine is under 80K miles by the way on an R plate.
I find the interior controls very basic for what was a £70k car when new. But by far the worse problem is the dashboard. I had to remove the drivers side dash to investigate a wiring fault and it absolutely ruined it. Pieces off dashboard break off in your hand like an Easter egg no matter how careful you are. Age has made it hyper brittle and other owners have reported this too. Unfortunately, any replacements on Ebay are going to suffer the same fate and that is if you can source one let alone afford it. There is a hidden dash hanger bracket on the right hand side which supports most of the weight in that location and it is made of the same stuff. And where dash screws bite into the material causes oversized holes of no further use.
My roof has been faultless, and I treat the rubbers with Sonax from Germany to keep them soft and sealed. When it squeaks over bumps you know it is time.
Mine is the same colour as yours Steven and here is one of the reasons I think they are so cheap. There were so many silver grey ones produced they just don't 'pop'. I was in the budget market so I could hardly choose a colour (I paid £1100) but I would have much preferred red - or even yellow or blue! But those colours seem ultra rare. My saving grace is the lovely red and black interior which I love.
Apart from that it has never let me down and drives really well. It is not the most comfortable over the potholes and the standard headlights are so bad they are dangerous in my opinion, whether on dip or high beam (and i have polished the lenses).
@@stuarttaylor6038 I’m glad to hear that you’re enjoying your SLK. They do seem to suffer with little issues which I suppose is down to age. I’d never thought about colour being an issue as most seem to be silver but I do think this is a good point. Brighter colours and designs colours do seem to be in a minority. Thanks for watching Stuart and I hope you have many more happy miles in your SLK!
I`ve recently bought an SLK 230 R170 as well. I think they are cheap because there are a lot of small problems with them. The radiator light that magically turns on sometimes. Gave me an absolute shocker. Thought the head gasket was blown.
The roof is leaking during rain. It just drips on the passenger side. New rubbers costs a fortune.
Heater fan has a life on its own.
No big deals if you`re handy yourself otherwise it will get expensive quick if a garage has to fix all the tiny issues.
It`s an absolute blast to drive to be honest. Slow enough to manage it well on the busy roads.
@ That’s a good point. My own SLK had a lot of little niggles which is probably a reason why the previous owner part exchanged it. I’m glad to hear that you’re enjoying SLK ownership. Thanks for watching, Steven.
I am in Australia and my wife has a 1999 yellow 230. Paying 1.000 pounds (Circa A$1,800) for this type of car in Australia is impossible. Worth way more here. Nothing available here that runs OK for less than 4,000 pounds. My wife is always getting compliments, usually from women who love it. I love it also. With the low speed limits here it is still quite a fast car, more so than my 1994 W124 E220 cabrio.
It had the usual plastic interior paint shrivelling up, which we touched up, and a rattle from the cupholders was annoying.
It is such a cute looking design, way nicer than the long nosed R171. They were relatively common here (especially in silver and black) , but numbers are thinning out and values will rise.
It is at the bottom of its value cycle, so now is the time to buy.
Thanks for watching Peter. Sounds like a lovely SLK that your wife has. Interesting how different markets have different valuations. We seem to be lucky in the UK that these cars are so cheap even if they are worth so much more. I agree that they are on the bottom end of the cycle so prices can only go up.
Glad you got the interior sorted, seems most SLK’s suffer with this issue.
I totally agree, they are an understated fun car, hopefully in time they will be appreciated more..
@@FrancisManning-j2s couldn’t agree more 👍
Perceived cost of repairing the rather complex folding roof is also a factor. People buying >20 years old cars prefer them to be simple
@@arianeproton101 that is a good point, in addition people could think that any issues with complex parts could be expensive to repair.
I’ve enjoyed my year 2000 slk 320 for 7 years as a Summer top down wind in the hair job😀. Very easy to work on, parts cheap and has passed every MOT first go.
Glad to hear that you enjoyed your time with the SLK 👍
Are they really so cheap? Yes,one can buy a cheap old thing from the late 90s for pennies. But a well sorted R171 in good condition is going to cost a good few thousands.
In Europe they cost a lot more. My R171 cost me £4k - and that was perhaps 20% below similar cars. In Europe, a similar car will cost at least €10k up toward toward €15k.
One reason why prices of older high-milage ones,in the UK are as soft as they are is because the cost of ownership is relatively high. For the 'potless person', the hit on tax and insurance will tend to be dissuasive. It's not so easy to justify a purchase when RFL for the year is half the purchase price. add in insurance and you're getting close to the purchase price in annual costs.
Here in Europe, insurance just cost me half what it did in the UK. Road tax is about 30% of the cost in the UK.
But for folks who can afford to spend the money, in the UK, they buy a good example and pay much more than the bottom end prices.
Thanks for watching. It’s great to see a perspective from the European market.
I’ve can only really speak from my experience as the cost to tax and insure my SLK was more than the actual purchase price.
@@stevensfourwheels Yes, before I bought my 280 - in the UK, I wondered how come such a mint example at such a low price (even by UK standards was Not snapped up in a pretty affluent area. When I checked the cost of tax and insurance, I had an inkling of what was happening. I bet folks were taking the thing for a spin, saying to themselves 'I want, I want' and then changing their mind when they saw the cost of taxing and insuring it. It's enough to change one's perspective. An older, cheaper one is still costly to get on the road.
Thanks for watching Andrew. That is an interesting point. Running costs can be high. Buying a cheaper car and fixing it up can cost more than buying a good example in the first place.
Why! They rust. The interior plastic is fragile. It is becoming difficult to find shops capable of doing proper repairs. Some critical parts are NLA. Soldering on circuit boards is poor. It's not a difficult car to maintain provided you own proper diagnostics. These ain't cheap to buy. I own a 1997 and the diagnostics. It's a great little car but rust really was a major issue. The roof is likely to be problematic with age . To fix it properly is not cheap but it can be done in a couple of days.
@@Rofasta Very good points there. I can understand why these issues would put people off the R170! Thanks for watching and sharing your thoughts.
All I heard was ‘great little car’. My dude. You’ve missed the point, I have the R170 200 komp manual and simply put, it’s not a sports car like the TT, Z3 or MX5 (you forgot the Italians too, Barchetta for example). The R170 is a GREAT car, in the ‘compact coupe’ segment. In that respect is quite unique. Handling, vague. Quick, not especially. Style, shrunk Merc and from the 3/4 it’s lovely looking, headlights let it down. The clutch is 2 position and frustrating for it, and the gear change, isn’t like an MX5. I have an NB. It’s a great-little-compact-coupe for the money. They also rot like cheese on the arches but that’s almost a given. I really like my SLK because it’s more comfy than the MX5 but by comparison it handles like a blancmange; and that’s why it’s no fair comparison. Sporty, no. Compact, yes. Light, hmm have you held that bonnet? My tip, get one as it’s a real design classic which is fun, a lot of decent engineering, some over engineered (vario dies? Time to toss it) but don’t expect it to thrill you, it won’t. Great channel, love your enthusiasm but the answer to your video is this: because it’s not any of the cars you compare it. A more curious question would be what can rival it in the compact coupe/luxury roadster segment, I can’t think of one right now! Hammond from yesteryear did a good review of the R170. Also check out the video ‘SLK R170 from the service angle’, it’s just a delight. And finally. More women than men bought the SLK. She’s a feminine design, and it’s aged pretty well with a little wedge nod.
@@kevj7427 thanks for watching. I do think that the SLK is a great little car and I love it for what it is which is why I’m not selling mine anytime soon.
I think the SLK is a sports car by Mercedes standards. My R107 SL is a great tourer but by no means sporty. Compared to its bigger brother, the SLK is somewhat a sports car but still maintaining some the qualities of its bigger sibling. Later generations of the SLK got better but it had to start somewhere. This is why the early SLKs stand apart from the competition. You have to compare it to other mainstream sports cars to understand what the SLK is really about.
I’m yet to be convinced about the ‘compact coupe’ part. I just need to understand more about the definition of a ‘compact coupe’ class car and what other car sit in this class.
They are not cool.
@@johntease6782 I suppose what’s cool to one person will be uncool to another.