Galvanised Mercedes convertible: surely the recipe for a top used car, isn’t it?
Better still, prices for the model that meets this description, the R171-series SLK from 2004 to 2011, start from just £2500 for an early, entry-level version.
One such example is a 2004-reg SLK 200 auto with 111,000 miles on the clock and a year’s MOT. “Engine powerful and reliable, hood works,” claims the seller. Doubtless were you to traipse to Leicester to check it out, you’d find much to criticise. Still, it highlights how low prices for the second-generation SLK go. Even at the other end of the spectrum, they aren’t mad, with late ’n’ low cars starting at £11,000 or about where the cheapest SLK 55s (not covered here) begin. In the middle, at around £7500, you’ll find decent-mileage facelifted 200s from 2008, and even some slightly older 280s and 350s.
Find a used Mercedes-Benz SLK on PistonHeads
The R171 may have followed its forebear in being a two-seat convertible-coupeà with a folding metal roof but there the similarities end. Not only does the later model have a rust-resistant body but also far superior looks. It rides and handles better, too, although if those qualities are uppermost in your mind, try a 987-generation Porsche Boxster before pitching in.
The SLK arrived with a choice of two engines: a 159bhp supercharged 1.8 in the SLK 200 and a 264bhp 3.5-litre V6 in the SLK 350. A year later, a 225bhp 3.0-litre V6 sneaked in to make the SLK 280. Six-speedmanual gearboxes were standard but most SLKs were ordered in automatic form, the four-pot 1.8’s a five-speed ’box and the V6s’ a seven-speeder.
For the full-fat experience, go for the 350 or save your licence and buy a younger, lower-mileage 200. Because it arrived a touch later, there are fewer 280s to choose from and, in any case, they’re little cheaper than the 350.
Join the debate
Add your comment
Looks
A lot of people are still concerned about the perception of you by others based on the car you drive.
Many would assume that a man driving an SLK is either having a mid-life crisis or he works for EasyJet and is orange.
That being said, even at the ripe young age of 29 I've grown out of that mindset... a few months ago I was selling my partner's aunts Smart Roadster (she lives in rural Devon whereas I'm in Nottingham so more potential buyers in a 50 mile radius) and I drove it for a couple of weeks until it sold... I might've looked like a bit of a div but it was great fun to drive... blasting round the B-roads on a Sunday afternoon trip to the pub for some lunch I never stopped grinning.
All about how it makes you feel, not how it makes you look.
Far superior looks?
Entirely subjective, of course, but for my money, the original R170 SLK was by far the cleanest and prettiest of the series, which has become progressively more ugly and overwrought with each iteration. The R171's saggy tail and faux-F1 nose are particularly dissonant details.
The R170 was, of course, absolute rubbish, representing the nadir of Mercedes-Benz's late '90's cynical abandonment of quality engineering (and rustproofing). I know this because, unfortunately, I owned one.
I factory collected an SLK 350 in 2006
Nice exhaust sound with the top down, very good performance, good ride and reasonable handling.