Yahoo Autos 2009 Ferrari California vs. 2009 Mercedes-Benz SL63 AMG
For 54 years while Jaguars, BMWs, and Cadillacs have come and gone, the Mercedes-Benz SL has been the king of the trophy-car convertibles—the sort of car that not only says its owner has arrived but that he’s been around for a while.
Ferrari’s latest offering, the California, uses the template of the latest-generation SL: a folding-hardtop convertible and a transmission that does without a clutch pedal. Ferrari is positioning the California as a less expensive companion to the 599GTB and 612 Scaglietti grand tourers, leaving the mid-engined F430 to represent the harder-edged realm of Ferrari’s sports-car ambitions. So the overlap in price—the California’s base price of $197,350 is only $22,810 less than the convertible F430 Spider’s—isn’t supposed to be a problem, but some sales cannibalization is to be expected.
Also inevitable are comparisons with other cars in the segment, even if potential owners more likely cross-shop their purchases with helicopters or gold-plated hovercraft. This brings us to the Mercedes-Benz SL63, recently updated for 2009 with revised styling, a new (for the SL) 6.2-liter V-8, and a shift-time-hastening multiplate clutch (in place of a torque converter) between the engine and the seven-speed automatic transmission. The SL65 AMG, which starts at $198,175, might be closer in price to the Ferrari, but the maniacal power of its twin-turbo V-12 and the extra heft over the front wheels in the SL65 make the SL63 a more manageable and enjoyable car to drive. Plus, the SL63’s output of 518 horsepower is closer to the California’s 453 ponies.
On paper, it’s a pretty even matchup. And after two days of driving in Bavaria, neither car stood out as clearly superior. So, picking a winner was as difficult as giving back the keys at our test’s end.
This version of the SL debuted in 2002, and regular updates have kept it feeling fresh. After seven years, though, it’s looking very familiar, even with the aggressively face-lifted nose. And the scoops, spoilers, and fenders that distinguish the AMG model remind us of celebrity faces that have gone under the knife one time too many.
The SL63’s base price of $138,475 is the cheapest way to acquire one of the three available SL models (63, 65, Black Series) from AMG, which is Mercedes’ high-performance tuning office. This least powerful one produces 518 horsepower and 465 pound-feet of torque. Like other AMGs, the SL63 resonates with a deep guttural rumble through its exhaust.
This is the only Mercedes with launch control, activated by a NASA-level checklist: stability control in sport mode, brake pedal fully pressed, transmission-selector knob rotated one click clockwise from manual mode, right shift paddle triggered, mash the gas. The revs climb to 4000. Release the brake pedal, and the SL63 takes off with a light chirp of the rear tires. As long as the gas pedal remains floored, redline shifts are automated. The result is a 4.0-second 0-to-60 time and a quarter-mile in 12.5 seconds at 115 mph. It’s barely slower than the Ferrari—despite the Benz’s better power-to-weight ratio—most likely due to taller gearing. It’s also a lot quicker—60 mph comes 0.4 second sooner—than the last SL63 we tested. Chalk that up to a fully broken-in test car and the optional limited-slip differential.
A stopping distance of 158 feet from 70 mph is seven feet longer than the Ferrari’s, even with the upgraded brakes that come with the $12,500 AMG Performance package. The rest of that extra expense goes toward a 186-mph top-speed governor (up from 155 mph), a limited-slip differential, forged alloy wheels, and sportier tuning for the active suspension. The latter item contributes to the 0.90 g of grip on the skidpad, nearly equal to that of the California.
Looking only at the numbers, you’d be hard pressed to find much of a difference between the SL63 and the California, and the same goes for the transmission. From a driver’s standpoint, both cars offer quick and sharp changes in manual mode. The biggest difference lies in the steering-wheel-mounted shift paddles in the SL63 or the column-mounted flaps in the California. The Mercedes uses planetary gearsets, as in a conventional automatic, and either that or superior programming makes the SL’s transmission better at picking the best gear in full auto mode.
The 465 pound-feet of torque in the Mercedes produces more low-end grunt than in the California, and prodding the gas pedal will push you back into the seat with a force the Ferrari can’t match. The immediacy of the engine shows the SL’s more brutish side; the power comes on so quickly that it can be easy to dial in too much thrust. Brake feedback is also a Jekyll-and-Hyde situation: In normal conditions, the pedal is stiff and progressive, but under hard braking, the pedal throw goes long and the feel vanishes.
On high-speed autobahn chases, the SL63 offers the stability of a cruise missile. By the way the SL63 flings back and forth through lower-speed corners, you would scarcely believe the hefty, 4431-pound curb weight, but there are hints. The steering, nicely weighted, has some on-center play. And the ride is a little too harsh in dealing with bumps. It’s a matter of minutiae in both cases, but the Ferrari is slightly more refined in the details of its tuning.
Regarding conveniences, the SL63 handles details like a first-rate butler. If you want access to the shelf or the storage boxes behind the seats, just press a button, and the seat powers forward out of the way. Another press of the button returns the seat to where it started. That shelf, by the way, is nearly as big as the rear seats in the Ferrari, and this helps compensate for the trunk space the Benz is lacking. Should you need to access the trunk, that operation is powered as well; it even shuffles the folded top out of the way in convertible mode. The seats are heated and cooled, plus they can blow hot air onto the back of your neck on cold days. Most living rooms aren’t this cushy, although the soft seat bottom is a little too La-Z-Boy for our tastes.
The complaints are minor ones. The SL63 remains a very special car that would be high on our list if we had the means to purchase one. It’s just that the Ferrari is a little more special and slightly higher on that imaginary list.
There is one big problem with the Ferrari California, and it starts at the rear. The tall tail was required to provide room for all the hardware needed for the folding top, and this gives a classically beautiful shape to the California in side profile. The trouble begins when you look head-on at the car’s butt. The round taillights are placed well inboard of the fenders, and the swaths of sheetmetal extending to the edges increase the visual width of the rear. Plus, they serve very little function: The braking and turn-signal lights are in a triangular cluster closer to the bumper. The stacked rear tailpipes, like those of the Lexus IS F, are purely cosmetic and have no physical attachment to the ordinary exhaust pipes they conceal.
Of course, that didn’t stop the Ferrari from getting stares in every Bavarian village we blew through. Even the least elegant Ferrari attracts camera-phone photographers, it seems. And those gawkers missed the view under the hood, where two giant inlet tubes run up to the red valve covers. Everything but the engine is covered, and it’s a visual treat.
The 4.3-liter V-8 is similar to the F430’s powerplant, with the fundamental changes being direct injection and a lower, 8000-rpm redline. Power is down 30 horses, to 453, but torque increases 15 pound-feet, to 358. Ferrari claims 75 percent of that twist is on tap from 2250 rpm, but the only time the California lopes around at such low revs is in the dual-clutch transaxle’s conservative automatic mode. Shifting gears manually is more satisfying and provokes repeated runs through the rev range to hear the otherworldly wail of the flat-plane-crank V-8. At wide-open throttle, gearshifts crack off with a shotgun-like pop from the exhaust. Heard together, this makes the exhaust note of the SL seem far too muzzled. On the other end of the aural spectrum are the carbon-ceramic brakes that, when cold, squeal like pigs, which is especially annoying in city traffic.
As in the SL63, the Ferrari has a launch-control mode activated by a button on the center console, and like the Benz, shifting is automated as long as the throttle is wide open. Standing starts are best performed in sport mode, the middle of the three settings of the manettino selector on the steering wheel (the others being “comfort” and “stability off”). The Ferrari gets away with more wheelspin than the Benz and rockets to 60 mph in 3.9 seconds. At the quarter-mile, the California is 0.2 second ahead of the SL, and its lead extends to more than a half-second by 150 mph.
As we noted earlier, the numbers are close. Where the Ferrari really shows its advantage is in the details, such as how the gas pedal provides instant, precise responses from the engine. The brake pedal, too, is perfectly linear for meting out exact amounts of stopping power from the fade-free Brembos. Unlike other dual-clutch cars we’ve driven, there’s no hesitation from the gearbox when pulling away from a stop. Even the steering is millimeter precise, although it doesn’t feel that way at first—its weighting is light and feedback from the front wheels is scarce.
Our test car was equipped with optional, adaptive magnetorheological shocks (like GM’s MagneRide and Audi’s drive select), and they should be mandatory on any order form. In general, the Ferrari rides softer than the Mercedes and rolls more in corners, but it refuses to wallow and responds willingly to any input. The California’s dynamic dampers are less elaborate than the SL63’s active suspension, yet we found the Ferrari to adjust better to a broader range of road surfaces.
Inside, the California has luxuries that would make a Testarossa owner weep, although the power seats and cruise control are optional. Navigation is standard, but the California uses a head unit from the Chrysler parts bin instead of the bespoke Bose system from the 599GTB. Ferraris used to come without a radio, which might be less of an insult than providing one that’s also found in a Dodge Caravan.
The rest of the interior lives up to Ferrari-level expectations. Soft leather and hand stitching are everywhere, and the optional Daytona-style seats are solid and supportive. The footwells in the California are cavernous, and the steering wheel sits high to help accommodate the tallest of drivers. The rear seats, however, might be large enough to hold a kid’s booster but won’t accommodate adults. Ferrari offers the option of a rear storage shelf in lieu of the back seats, and it’s a good way to go. Both configurations have a trunk pass-through, and the trunklid extends down to the bumper for zero-liftover access to storage. Ferrari hints at offering a cup holder, but the round cutout under the center storage bin lacks a 360-degree lip.
Providing a place to hold a beverage is just too banal for Ferrari to worry about, but in all other respects, the California offers everyday ease, extravagant luxury, and stellar performance. Just what we’re looking for in the perfect trophy car.
You Might Also Like
