Car Comparo- 02 Z3 vs. 98 MB SLK Help?

Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives

As the title alludes to.

The parents are looking at getting one of these two as a "new" used vehicle. If I could get some wisdom from the resident gurus/aficionados/haters.

Car one:

2002 BMW Z3 2.5i Roadster 2D Convertible
Exterior: Blue
Interior: Black Leather
Mileage: 42K
5 Spd Manual
2.5L/4cyl
EPA: 20/27
175tq@3500rpm
184hp@6000rpm
Remaining warranty: Balance of 4 years/50K (this year or 8K)
Price: $21,998

Options:
A/C, leather,AM/FM/CD, Pwr locks/mirrors/windows/seats/steering, cruise, heated seats, Convertible, alloy wheels, rear defroster

Car TWO:

1998 Mercedes Benz SLK230 Kompressor 2D Convertible
Exterior: Red
Interior: Grey Leather
Mileage: 41K
Automatic
2.3L/4cyl
EPA:22/30
200tq@4800rpm
185hp@5300rpm
30 day limited warranty from dealer.
Price: $20,599

Options:
A/C, leather, pwr seats/locks/windows/mirrors/steering, cruise, heated seats, convertible, alloy wheels, rear defroster.

Okay. the battle begins. From a performance standpoint, but with maintenance cost averages, ease of DIY work, and track record of longevitiy coming in to play.

Pros? Cons? Options to look at on either one? ANY and ALL help is APPRECIATED THOROUGHLY!

Biggest Pro is that the MBZ has a hardtop convertible which is a huge step up from a cloth top with a hazy plastic rear window.

At highway speeds and in inclement weather the HT will be greatly appreciated.

wasnt their a problem with the oil passeges on the early z3's?

The early Z3 had a completely different engine, probably the 1.9 litre.

My mom has a Z3 2.8 and it is a far more satisfying car and a better sporting convertible than the SLK. The SLK hardtop does give it a better 4-season ability, but a convertible should stored winters anyway.

The plastic rear window is a significant design flaw, but not a fatal one.

Any reason you're looking at these used vs. a new Mazdaspeed Miata or 2006 MX-5?

Okay..
All good comments, and helpful!

So, if the "wintery-est" weather it will see is South Central Texas (OCCASIONAL 30's for a brief period but no snow in 8 years), then what's left to compare them?

Anyone else have anything to support either as a "better" car, like Zoom?

BMW: newer by 4 years, greater warranty, higher 'cool' quotient as opposed to the MB Fuddy-Duddy theme, CD player, Beter looking IMHO, and Hey, it's what Bond drove in Goldeneye...

You're joking, right? Z3 all the way. Manual for starters, and even if the SLK were the three pedal variety based on everything I've read the Bimmer is tons more fun. Also, while Mercedes used to make Toyota look like Fiat in terms of reliability they've gone to hell in a handbasket in the last several years; I wouldn't trust a 2002.

But hey, tell your parents to test drive both and see what they think...

--T.J.

For what my two shiny pennies are worth, I had a friend with that EXACT MBZ. The roof was broken. Like, ALL the time. There was something wrong with the hinging mechanism... he couldn't put it down, because he was sure if it would go back up. That said, it was VERY comfy inside.

Ray, that SLK seems overpriced from the prices I've seen.

http://dallas.craigslist.org/car/136284972.html

If they are willing to come up a little bit on the price have they thought about a preowned Crossfire? Newer, fewer miles and a 7yr 70K warranty. Lots of HP from the 3.2L V6 as well and damn it, the car just looks cool.

XFire 1

XFire 2

XFire 3

The Z3 has always seemed like more of a sports car to me.

And as someone pointed out, manual and 4 years newer.

Originally posted by Fmr12B:
If they are willing to come up a little bit on the price have they thought about a preowned Crossfire? Newer, fewer miles and a 7yr 70K warranty. Lots of HP from the 3.2L V6 as well and damn it, the car just looks cool.

It's also worth pointing out that the Crossfire is built on the SLK platform, so the basic underpinnings should be comparable.

Have they considered a Volvo C70? I'm guessing that they're not looking for a tire-scorcher, but more for a top-down Euro cruiser, so this certainly fits that bill.

New 2005 Crossfires are going for $12-15k off MSRP. Hmm, Base Xfire vert $35kMSRP = $20k brand new. Or, Limited vert auto $40k -15 = $25k, brand new.

www.overstock.com has some screamin' Crossfire deals.

Link?

the z is nice, but it's REALLY small. I'd probably take the benz since I could throw a couple of people in the back if i had to.

Originally posted by TGO:
the z is nice, but it's REALLY small. I'd probably take the benz since I could throw a couple of people in the back if i had to.

No you can't a Mercedes-Benz SLK is a small two seater car, no bigger than a Z3 for any pratical purpose. You are thinking of the Mercedes-Benz SL line, which was a four seat car in 1998. The price difference between these cars would be huge because the 1998 SL500 started at 89K, while the 1998 SLK 230 started at 35K.

I say go for the BMW, the Mercedes-Benz has a troublesome top mechanism in the 1998-2000 cars. The BMW's plastic window shouldn't be a problem in Texas, you'll just need to replace it every so often. Also, the BMW will almost certainly be more fun to drive. The MB is also a 230 Kompressor, which means it is the "stripped down" model of the SLK line.

my bad, i get the clk and slk confused for some reason.

each car has its issues. i seriously shopped both modes before getting the MX5.

the Z3 has issues up intil about 2000 or 2001 with the rear subframe assembly welds separating from the main part of the frame. very bad problem to have and BMW denies it's a problem at all. you can actually see the cracks in the welds in some cars. if they are visible have them welded by an expert immediately (and be careful of the gas tank!).

the SLK has its own problems, but mostly dealing with the movable hard top. i think the chances are 50/50 you'll get a 1998 that leaks, chances become more favorable for a dry top as you get newer. some cars have the tendency to not seal correctly if the tops weren't treated with kid gloves. be warry of a car previously owned by a non-car-person, if you know what i mean.

the MX5 had none of these problems, a turbo, and solid reliability for 15 years, cheaper parts, etc...so i got that instead.

save yourself the hassle and get one:

2004 Mazda Speed MX5 - eBay - $18,500 - 22k+ miles - TX

The Z3 in question is a 2002, so it appears to be newer than the weld issues spoken of.

I also have not seen or heard of the weld issues being more than a rare isolated situation.

Having owned our SLK since 99 and been active in the MB community, this is the first I've heard of leaking problems on these cars. That's not to say there aren't other problems with the car, but a leaking roof isn't one of them.

We just had to replace the supercharger (at a cost of around $3K), and the car only has 36K miles on it. We've had work done on the passenger door/window 6 times before they finally got it right. There's a known problem that plagues the brake lights on all SLKs before 2003, where one of them will intermittently stop working. MBNA hasn't found a fix as of yet, so we carry a print out showing the documented issue, in case police decide to pull us over.

Great stuff on a $50K+ car.

If you're going the SLK route, get a 2000+ model with the V6. Prices have come down considerably, and you should be able to find one in the same price range.

BMW, my uncle leased a 2000 Benz SUV, and he hated it, he could not wait for the lease to end, he traded his 94 Ranger in on a Toyota Avalon he likes it. Lease ended on the Benz and he got a 03 Ranger XLT Fx4, he is so happy to be rid of the Benz. So go for the BMW, plus its newer and just 1K more in price with factory warrenty.