Yes, the Mercedes SL occupied a niche of one in the market. There was no other roadster that was so solidly engineered and built; essentially a Mercedes sedan cut down to a two passenger convertible. And as such, it offered a combination of qualities that made it very desirable, and came to essentially to define a segment that was something different than the traditional sports car. R&T gave the new 2.8 L powered version a go.
R&T points out that the SL just got better with each iteration. The 230SL of 1963 was highly praised, but lacked torque from its peaky SOHC six, for a car that was none too light, thanks to its solid construction and target market. The 250SL in 1967, with its smoother 7 main bearing engine was a decided step in the right direction, but the 280SL, with its larger bore, upped torque from 174 lb.ft to 193 lb.ft. Maximum power increased too, but not as much proportionately: 180 hp instead of 170, at 5700 rpm. The European version got a hotter camshaft for 195 hp, but due to US emission standards, that was a no-no.
The tested car came with the older version of the 4-speed automatic that started in 2nd (some later ones did too), but once past the somewhat leisurely start, the engine pulled quite strongly. Part of that was the 4.08:1 final drive ratio, picked for the US market because Americans liked quick acceleration but generally didn’t drive much at higher speeds due to the speed limits. This made it a bit busy on the highway, and R&T said that they would have ordered the optional 3.69:1 ratio for their personal use.
A four speed manual was standard, and a five speed ZF box was optional, which was desirable due to its overdrive 5th gear.
Handling was praised, with excellent power steering and neutral handling. The low-pivot rear swing axles “don’t quite give the adhesion that a more up-to-date system would, so that it’s easy to tweak out the rear end”. And of course, the ride was fantastic, the body “absolutely rigid and rattle free”. The power assisted disc brakes were a bit touchy, but worked very well.
The upright driving position and tall glass gave a commanding view, unlike any other sports car. The seats were very comfortable, and controls are all in easy reach. The noise level was exceptionally low with either top. The paint, trim, and other components were all very high quality. There were a couple of improvements suggested, but overall the SL lived up to its reputation, which was earned the hard way.
Great picture of just a hint of rear axle jacking when driven hard. Ten-year-old me drooled over the pagoda roof on the coupes.
I got a 12 month subscription to R&T as a Christmas gift for the 1968 year. So I’m sure I read, re-read, and re-read this test. But other than the styling, not much appealed to 11 year old me, as I was more of a 911 kid back then. But I have no recollection that a 5 speed was offered. Was that the only 5 speed MB until the W201?
Perhaps in the US. But I’m pretty sure Europeans could get a 5-speed manual in W/C/S123 cars; Wikipedia agrees with me.
As an owner of a 1969 version (restored), what a delight it is to see this. Didn’t know this test existed. Thank you!
I can confirm that the rear axle does indeed jack up and get a little happy in even moderately spirited driving.
To the point of the gearing and high engine revs at speed (a real issue on these), my one non-original mechanical feature is a 6 speed manual that has the original ratios in the first 4 gears. The engine seems to ask for 5th at about a 45mph cruise…driving the interstates must have been quite a chore.
Probaly out of date for the late 60’s, but it has jewel-like build quality that has long since disappeared. A charming town cruiser it is, even if you get the occasional whiff of unburned hydro carbons that remind you how bad the air was when many of us were kids.
A proud owner is compelled to post a pic…
Beautiful!
I like that color on that car.
An impressive car then, still impressive Today. Seven grand was a lot of money, but the car possesses a certain kind of grace that made it worthwhile. It’s one of those rare cars that was so good that it didn’t need updating in the looks department. The parents of one of my high school classmates had one, and the daughter often drove the car to school. This was in ’72-’73 and the car was only four or five years old.
“The American Gigolo” model SL350-450 that replaced it was much beefier.
My only female teacher in HS had one of these in the mid 70s. She always kept her top on, so it might have been a fixed coupe. I can remember her face and short haircut but not her name except the Mrs. My Latin teacher, a crusty old Englishman, had a very loud first gen Corvair coupe. The cool young Biology teacher with a porn ‘stache had a 60s 911.
Not aware that they made a fixed coupe, though the hardtop is styled like a permanent fixture. It is also weighty…it needs two guys to lift and put it on a rack. Not exactly convenient so I can imagine a number of them stayed on if the buyer wasn’t so taken with having their coif ruffled.
They did not make a coupe version..
My first introduction to 280SL ownership was a silver version with blue leather interior and a factory lift-off hardtop. It was a European example with a KPH speedometer, manual gearbox, and European headlights that I thought were an improvement over the USA versions. I bought the car fairly cheaply, and on arriving back at my shop and conducting a closer inspection, I discovered another reason it was not as expensive as most 280SL cars.
The car had a full-width rear seat, suitable for a couple of kids, and the seat back folded down. While I had worked on several 280SL cars and driven a few, I wasn’t familiar with all of it’s different versions. After taking the top off the car with the help of a friend, I went looking for the convertible top, only to find it never had one. I had never heard of a 230-250-280SL without a folding top, or a fold-down rear seat. That rear seat took up the area where the folding top well would have been.
A couple of days later, with the top stored in my shop, and the weather nice and sunny after 2 days of rain, my girlfriend and I went for a nice ride in the country. While on a backroad, the right front tire hit a big water-filled pothole, and the wave of water that hit the inner fender [had it been there] pushed up the carpets on the right floor, inundating my girlfriend with street water. Yeah, it had some rust!
Of course she refused from that day on to ride in the SL, so I cleaned and detailed the car, and put it up for sale. A guy I knew only by reputation [he ran a shady used car lot], called and came out to see the 280SL. As he professed to know all about SL’s I just sat there and let him look it over, saying nothing. He bought the car with cash, and his helper drove it home.
About a week later he drops by my shop and said he was there to pick up the convertible top assembly for the 280SL. I tried to keep from laughing and replied “what top? It doesn’t have a folding top. It never did.” He was not a happy camper, but a deal is a deal. The SL sat on his lot for a couple of months before it finally disappeared.
I found out about a decade later it was actually a very rare SL variant, typically sold in locations with very little rain and lots of sunshine.
“California Coupe” – a W113 with a hardtop but without the convertible top mechanism is a “California Coupe”. The car was available this way from Mercedes in the 250SL and 280SL versions. It is correct, rare but, for obvious reasons, not a desirable variant.
How interesting. The famous Kangol hat company also made seatbelts. I guess it makes sense as they are weaving fabric.
Reportedly, only 882 of the W113 roadsters got the ZF five-speed — a very rare option, and not cheap. Something like 10 years ago, ZF offered a kit for creating a complete replica gearbox, but at rather harrowing prices.
My neighbor had a white one with a navy blue top and wheel covers. His had the four speed manual and a speedometer that didn’t work. Assuming he had the standard axle ratio, he was wrong about how fast he was going. He told me that he doubled the tach reading to determine his speed, which I believe was marked in hundreds of RPM. The test car only covered 17.5 miles per thousand engine revolutions, rather than the 20 that my neighbor stated. Maybe he had the highway final drive ratio. Sadly, his son ‘borrowed’ the 280SL one time. He sped out of the driveway, crossed the street, and drove straight into a stout tree that ended the 280SL’s time as transportation.
This was the car that my Dad, not a car guy, hoped to drive in his retirement. He and his wife spent 10-15 years in England/Europe in the late 60’s/70’s and they envisioned touring Europe in an SL in retirement. As a car guy myself I can’t say I find much wrong with that. Unfortunately sometimes life gets in the way of plans and that never came close to happening.
Assuming the pic works, I see this as what they might have liked, stateside at least. I caught them in Canyonlands National Park, IIRC, a few years back. While I’m an avowed BMW guy, and don’t like convertibles, this looks like it’s as good as it gets.
Over engineered. Quality,no doubt,but for that price it should be a quality car. Reminds me of RR, another company that boasts of its quality. It’s no big deal to build an expensive car with high quality. I prefer the Model T and the VW beetle. Value for the money,that’s where it’s at. “Luxury” cars suck,about as much as the brainless chumps who drive them and lust after them. Baloney cars for baloney heads.
I understand your opinion. I have always admired these things, even as a 10 year old as someone above commented. The styling is timeless and the build quality superb. However, now as a senior citizen I see trinkets like this as asshole signaling cars to proclaim your wealth. Hey, maybe fine for tooling around Monaco, but around here your just rubbing it in people’s faces.
Yes, the “peoples cars” you mention are more important to society and really more moral when you think about it.
So Eric,
Perhaps you can explain why a fully restored Volkswagen 23 window van will easily bring twice the money at auction, than a Rolls-Royce or Bentley of similar condition & years. Or why some Dodge Chargers or Chevelle’s bring more money than a similar condition Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow. Rich people are buying Volkswagens as investments now.
As for quality, A typical Model T needed an engine overhaul at about 30,000 miles. The average beetle engine didn’t make it to 70,000 miles. A large percentage of Silver Ghost engines are still running with the original engine and often have 500,000 miles on them. Those engines were often used in rural areas to pump well water for cattle farms, running non-stop for months at a time. There is a very real difference in quality. Yes, a beetle engine was built to a high standard for a production motor, but it simply cannot compare to the quality of a Rolls-Royce of similar age.
Many of the members of the Rolls-Royce Owner’s Club are far from wealthy. When it comes to the older cars, many of the members do their own restorations or repairs. I used to host RROC cook-outs where we served hot dogs and burgers, along with beer. Not champagne & caviar. They bought a Rolls-Royce or Bentley for the quality, not the prestige factor.
I’ve owned hundreds of vintage cars & trucks over the last 50+ years, including Beetles and Ford T’s. I’ve been displaying cars at car shows and meets, and the vast majority of visitors show the same amount of interest in a Beetle as a Rolls-Royce. They love to see the car, regardless of it’s perceived value or quality.
That said, when I’ve had a Rolls-Royce limo at shows, the reaction I get from kids when I encourage them to climb up into the limo, is far more interesting than when I ask them if they want to sit in a Beetle. I guess one can say the Rolls-Royce has a far greater “smile” quotient. I’ve had older kids come up to me and tell me how wonderful it was to sit in the limo many years ago. None of them have ever said the same about a Beetle I had on display.
Your comments remind me of the old saying; Everyone is entitled to their opinion, no matter how wrong they may be.
Look, I’m over 90 and fought in the Korean War at a place called Chosin. Nobody bullshits a Frozen Chosin boy. Properly maintained a VW aircooled engine would last 100 to 120 thousand miles. Luxury cars are bullshit. How you spend your money is up to you.That’s what we fought for in Korea. BTW if we lose the 2A we lose all the others. Another BTW we fought the wrong guys in WW2, just as Patton said.
You seem to know quite a lot about “baloney.”
I can’t figure out why.
I’m basically the same, same reason I find a 283 Corvette more impressive than a 300SL gullwing.
That said I believe time weeds out the exceptional cars. Mercedes (former)reputation for bank vault like overengineered cars was well earned, but it wasn’t tested by owners in Beverly Hills, it was tested in deserts, jungles, rough roads and areas across the world, both new and used. These cars and the people who first realized their qualities weren’t baloney.
I do enjoy and have driven many a VW Beetle so please don’t think less of me. That said, the irony of calling Mr. Hitler’s peoples car “more moral” does strain the sensibilities.
Hey, Mussolini got the trains to run on time.
Allegedly.
In 1978, I made the mistake of an impulse purchase of a 1961 MBZ 190SL, the predecessor to the 230-280 model. Quite possibly the worst automobile ever produced by Mercedes. Ivory with Green leather. It was underpowered and oversteered like a boat. It rivaled my 1984 BMW 633 CSI. Beautiful burgundy coupe with Pearl leather. Much like my first wife; gorgeous, but overhyped, overrated, and grossly overpriced! Transmission blew at 18K. By 58K miles I had replaced practically everything on it. At 60 K tuneup for $1700, I drove it to the Jeep dealership. 8 Grand Cherokees later I can say, Nichts Deutsch!