While you weren’t paying attention, Mercedes-Benz revealed a Final Edition of their SLC (nèe SLK) roadster. After three generations, the axe appears to have finally fallen on the folding-hardtop convertible that inspired so many imitators.
The SLC is one victim in what may be a cull of Mercedes’ slower-selling models, with some of their other convertibles and possibly coupes also falling victim. Likewise, BMW is thinning their herd, with reports the newly redesigned Z4 won’t survive another generation. At least BMW’s planned cull also includes less desirable models like the 2-Series Active Tourer and 3-Series GT.
Fiscally speaking, it’s hard to argue with Mercedes’ decision to axe the SLC. In the US, the SLK was never a huge seller; in its first (R170) generation, it typically sold around 10k units annually while in its third, it manages less than half that. The decline has been even more precipitous in Europe. For the first few years of the first-generation model, sales were over 30k per year. In the past few years, Mercedes has been lucky to reach a third of that tally.
At the time of the first-generation’s launch, a retractable hardtop convertible was a novel if not entirely original concept. The format had been done before – as long ago as 40 years before – but the SLK was designed specifically to be a retractable hardtop convertible. It first debuted in thinly-disguised concept form in 1994 and entered production in late 1996.
At the time, the only convertibles with power folding hardtops were the moribund Mitsubishi 3000GT/GTO Spyder and some Japanese-market versions of the Honda del Sol. Once they were gone, Mercedes had the niche cornered until the new century rolled around. Then came a deluge of cars with trick roofs, from luxury brands (BMW, Cadillac, Infiniti, Lexus, Volvo) to mainstream ones (Ford, Mitsubishi, Peugeot, to name a few). And why not? For all the extra weight and complexity, the concept had merit. You had all the benefits of a convertible with the extra security of a metal top, as well as potentially more structural rigidity and greater refinement.
Many of those imitators were poorly proportioned, with giant, bulging butts to make room for the roof panels. The SLK, however, showed how it was done. It was neatly proportioned and looked equally good top up or down. While the second-generation model aped the Mercedes-McLaren SLR and the third-generation was a 7/10ths copy of the SL, the first SLK had a distinctive style of its own and, in my eyes, has aged better than many other Mercedes models of this era.
Critics were immediately enamoured with it. It won North American Car of the Year for 1997 and immediately landed on Car & Driver’s 10Best list. It was lauded for its top, which took just 25 seconds to retract. Its adroit handling was similarly praised, the SLK riding the same platform as the C-Class albeit with a shortened floorpan. Nevertheless, contemporary reviews stopped short of saying the SLK was truly sporty.
A common refrain was that its steering was sharp but lacked feel and that the steering wheel was too big, while the gutsy Kompressor fours weren’t exactly mellifluous and the comfortable ride came at the expense of some road feel. Overall, however, critics the world over were impressed with how comfortable and solid the little Benz felt and it could still be hustled, even if a Porsche Boxster had the edge in thrills. In the US, too, the Benz and the Boxster were priced almost identically in the late 90s at around $40k; the BMW Z3 range, conversely, started a significant $10k lower.
Although it was similar in size to the Mazda Miata/MX-5, the SLK weighed upwards of 800 pounds more (though the roof itself weighed only 70). The SLK did, however, come with a raft of more powerful engines than the cheaper Mazda. Depending on the market, there was a naturally-aspirated 2.0 four (134 hp, 140 ft-lbs), as well as supercharged Kompressor 2.0 and 2.3 mills. Both produced almost exactly the same horsepower (189 vs. 190 hp) but the 2.3 had the edge in torque (199 vs. 207 ft-lbs). There was a choice of five- and six-speed manuals and a five-speed automatic.
Those seeking more power had to wait until the dawn of the new century. The SLK320 brought the first six-cylinder engine to the line, producing 215 hp and 229 ft-lbs. Shortly thereafter came the first AMG-fettled SLK, the SLK32 AMG. It used the same V6 engine but with the addition of a supercharger, bumping outputs up to 349 hp and 332 ft-lbs. That was a whopping 100 more horses than a Porsche Boxster S and 107 more pound-feet of torque.
Though these bigger engines weren’t available with a manual transmission, they came standard with a five-speed automatic with a then-novel manual-shift function. By the time the SLK32 launched, however, the underlying platform was beginning to show its age. That was especially clear when it was driven back-to-back with the new C32 AMG, which used the same engine but a new platform.
The following generation of SLK would be more overtly sporty but it didn’t lose the poise and polish of the first generation. Shortly after its replacement, the first SLK was resurrected as the Chrysler Crossfire, though it wore new, polarizing sheetmetal and lost its folding metal hardtop for either a fixed one or a folding soft-top.
The first SLK took a different approach to the BMW Z3 but, in the end, both their successors have suffered at the hands of the market. The latest Z4 was co-developed with Toyota and, were it not for that tie-up, it likely never would have been introduced. When the market was more receptive to this kind of compact, premium convertible, however, the SLK stood tall. And it deserves credit for inspiring so, so many imitators, even if those imitators have mostly all disappeared.
Related Reading:
The Pontiac G6 comes to mind here.
Back when it came out, I SO wanted one to replace my aging Grand Prix GTP. My wife at the time, a tech at a Pontiac/GMC dealership, told me not to do it, comparing that folding hardtop to a Rube-Goldberg device. She saw a lot of these cars come in with problems, although in Pontiac’s defense, many were caused by owners who had forgotten items in the trunk when they engaged the mechanism to drop the top.
I went back to Ford and bought a Mustang instead.
“although in Pontiac’s defense, many were caused by owners who had forgotten items in the trunk when they engaged the mechanism to drop the top.”
As a counterpoint, my wife owns an MX-5 RF (Retractable Fastback), and I NEVER have to check the trunk for forgotten items. That’s because items in the trunk cannot affect the retracing mechanism.
So to my mind, checking for trunk clearance prior to top retraction should not be a step in the operating procedure.
Indeed, and I will admit I’ve never seen one of these mechanisms in operation.
I’m only basing this on what she told me at the time. She said that many of these cars came in for warranty concerns related to the operation of the retractable top, and advised me not to buy one, so I never even looked at a G6 trusting her opinion as a tech. I’ve always liked that concept though.
Oh boo hoo!, what will Suzy Sorority and Timmy Trust Fund drive now?
Well, given the sales numbers of these over the years, I doubt it will matter. Obviously not too many Suzies and Timmies of world – nor anyone else, for that matter – were driving one of these.
The only SLK model I rode was a 2011 SLK 250 CDI (R172) with 2.1-litre diesel workhorse and automatic gearbox. What impressed me the most was how roomy it was, especially my 205cm tall phyisque, and how gutsy the diesel engine was. It didn’t feel like diesel at all: not even that vibration associated with diesel engines.
The rarest and most extreme SLK offered would be SLK 55 AMG Black Series (R171) with 400-hp V8 engine stuffed into small engine bay. This engine has a lot of motivations to launch the car from standstill to 100 km/h in 4.3 seconds.
“Many of those imitators were poorly proportioned, with giant, bulging butts to make room for the roof panels.”
A perfect example would be the third (and final) generation of the once popular Chrysler Sebring convertible which, ironically, was built during Daimler’s reign.
Apparently, someone thought it would be a great idea to offer the last Sebring convertible in either soft or folding hardtop version. Unfortunately, as pointed out, this meant it would have to have an enormous, Kim Kardashian-sized butt, except it didn’t look nearly as good.
The Ford Focus CC was even more misproportioned
I saw some sort of awkward, misproportioned thing I can only guess must have been some breed of retractable hardtop yesterday, but it was too ugly for me to read the badge.
Peugeot had a folding hard top in 1937 so it isnt really a new idea, Ford in the 50s and the others revived it more recently VW, MB Peugeot and others now the trend is dormant untill the next time someone ‘invents’ it.
The article recognised that a metal folding roof had been done 40 years previously at the beginning.
Yes but it was more like 70 years.
If we’re going to be pedantic, the Peugeot wasn’t a folding hardtop, it was a 1-piece retractable hardtop.
And given the technology level of the time, that makes it all the more amazing to my mind.
I never cared for these SLKs, but there was one in the “Stacy’s Mom” music video, which came out when I was 12 and made quite an impression on me.
I find the first photo interesting. Luxury German car parked in front of discount German store.
I liked these when they were new, but never drove one. I’d now consider the right one if it popped up (but am not looking at all). I did drive the Crossfire at a Chrysler Event once and it was alright, the drive was too short to draw any real conclusions. As a cruiser I think the SLK would be good, but as you said, as competition for the Boxster and Z3/4 it was a bit overwhelmed. It was also often compared/contrasted with the Audi TT cabrio and in that comparo did alright, especially if the TT was a FWD one. The biggest problem as I recall was that it was only available as an automatic when intro’d with the Supercharged four. Well, a problem for the magazine people, not necessarily the public, I should hasten to add. It always had a mini SL vibe (obviously) and didn’t seem like one to necessarily be hustled about.
It was certainly fairly solid and the top was a very big deal when it was introduced. Cloth tops getting vandalized was an issue and this solved that as well as making it frankly a better all-weather car.
Nice write-up Will, good for this car to get its day in the sun here.
I daily drive an R170 SLK230 with a 5-speed manual and it’s absolutely glorious. My dad had an SLK320 when I was younger and that’s what inspired me to get my own. The article says the bigger engines weren’t available with a manual but I think that’s incorrect. I distinctly remember a yellow SLK32 AMG at the dealership we went to in 2003 that had a 6-speed manual. So it may have been rare but I’m pretty sure they’re out there. I’d love to drive one!
You have it phrased exactly right, William. All the imitators looked like Colombian fat bottomed ants, and not improved any when folded down. These are a superb design: they still look good now. They look best unadorned, and here I seem to recall the first ones even had plain-coloured bumpers, which worked well.
The journos were right to whinge about the engines, though. For the longest time, Mercedes fours were horrible things, these amongst them. Harsh, gaspy, vibey, often a bit overwhelmed by the task of hauling Mercedes-weight engineering about. To refer to just one competitor’s example, Mazda engines across the period were honeyed delights. Only THAT badge could allow a car so pricey to get away with such inadequacy.
I am rather gobsmacked by the US sales, assuming they’d have been much higher. Was it the size, I wonder?
That original SLK was unique and special in its day, and looked great, but it got more garish from generation to generation. Mercedes’ range is way too big now and the C-Class coupe and convertible along with the CLA have kinda made it redundant. I had forgotten it was still around, to be honest.
I bought mine on Facebook just over a year ago. A 1999 SLK230 originally purchased from Peterson Motorcars with 78,600 miles on it parked in a garage in Calabasas, California. Sat there largely undriven for the last 12 years — apparently the grandkids played in it parked in the garage. I paid $3500 for it. Everything works. Needed new tires, trunk lift shocks, a tensioner pulley and belts — the usual 20 year stuff. The lady registered it on my birthday, so I figured it was meant to be. Just turned 20 years old. Interior is flawless. I added the 6-disc changer to the Bose sound system using the fiber optics cables (cleverly the connectors were swapped in the factory so I used a flashlight to check the pairing). I get 32 mpg on the highway and about 25 in the city. I live in Long Beach so mostly it goes to Whole Foods or the dog beach but recently took it to Ensenada, Baja, Mexico, and it loved it. Passed smog with 0.00 emissions — guy was impressed (me too). I think it is a bit of a funny car to own. I agree that it lacks the 0-60 performance of other cars, but the supercharger growls plenty enough for me and this is LA so where can you drive fast anyway? I have also owned the 1993 Cadillac Allante with 4.6L Northstar, the BMW Z3 M Roadster, a restored Alfa Romeo Spider Veloce, and even the poorly received Australian built Ford Capri Convertible (which looked a bit similar in some ways) which I really liked when I was fresh out of college. I’m 57 now so this car is fine for me. Big trunk for groceries or hauling golf clubs and bags to Baja. I value the solid build, and it still turns a lot of heads. All original paint, everything. Even came with a binder loaded with all of the receipts for servicing over the last 20 years. Love this car. I will probably buy a used turbodiesel for long commutes to Baja for work, but when I am home it’s top down with the tunes blaring in my zippy SLK.
That looks pretty much perfect and exactly how I always envision these and for $3500 and a service history I’d have a very hard time turning it away from my driveway. Congratulations!
I still reckon the dis-integration of the hood line, window sill line and the side view mirror looks like the work of a drunken blacksmith rather than any species of designer. No attempt at making the lines appear to resolve in any way, just ‘lets plonk this mirror on here’. Ugh.
Ha! Never noticed that before. Thanks.
Actually, still doesn’t bother me, yet oddly, I remember being appalled by the even clumsier resolution of the same thing when I first saw the ’96-on W210 E-class, and still dislike it yet.