Mercedes-Benz SL (R129) · Facelift 1995
Car comparison
Mercedes-Benz SL (R129) · Facelift 1995 SL 600 V12vsChrysler Viper RT/10 8.0 V10
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonChrysler Viper RT/10
8.0 V10
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Chrysler Viper RT/10 8.0 V10
- Quickest 0-100 km/h4.5 s
- Highest torque620 Nm457 lb-ft
- Lightest1,595 kg3,516 lb
- Best power-to-weight247 hp/t184 kW/t4.0 kg/hp
- Largest trunk334 L
- Best overall score67/100
- Best performance score79/100
- Best practicality score42/100
Mercedes-Benz SL (R129) Facelift 1995 SL 600 V12
- Fastest top speed270 km/h168 mph Unrestricted250 km/h155 mph Restricted
- Most powerful394 hp294 kW
- Lowest combined fuel consumption11.2 L/100 km21.0 mpg US25.2 mpg UK
- Best estimated range714 km444 mi
- Best economy score77/100
Specification comparison
| Model | Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 | ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 394hp294kW | 394hp294kW |
| Torque | 570Nm420lb-ft | 620Nm457lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,975kg4,354lb | 1,595kg3,516lb |
| Gross weight | 2,320kg5,115lb | 1,805kg3,979lb |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 270 km/h168 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Calculated | 266 km/h 165 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 86.1s99% target: 267 km/h / 166 mph Calculated | 53.4s99% target: 263 km/h / 164 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 6.1s | 4.5s |
| 0-200 km/h | 20.9s Calculated | 14.6s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 5.8s Calculated | 4.3s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 11.2L/100 km21mpg US25.2mpg UK | 14L/100 km16.8mpg US20.2mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 19.8L/100 km11.9mpg US14.3mpg UK | - |
| Fuel consumption highway | 9.3L/100 km25.3mpg US30.4mpg UK | - |
| Quarter mile | 14.1s Calculated | 12.5s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 199hp/t149kW/t90hp/1000 lb Calculated | 247hp/t184kW/t112hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 289Nm/t193lb-ft/ton Calculated | 389Nm/t260lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 714km444mi Calculated | 593km368mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 5,987cc365cu in | 7,990cc488cu in |
| Length | 4,499mm177in | 4,448mm175in |
| Width | 1,812mm71in | 1,924mm76in |
| Height | 1,296mm51in | 1,117mm44in |
| Wheelbase | 2,515mm99in | 2,444mm96in |
| Front track | 1,532mm60in | 1,514mm60in |
| Rear track | 1,521mm60in | 1,538mm61in |
| Trunk volume | 265L | 334L |
| Doors | 2 | 2 |
| Seats | 2 | 2 |
| Fuel tank | 80L | 83L |
Performance charts
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Dyno simulation
Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.
- Mercedes-Benz SL (R129) Facelift 1995 SL 600 V12: Power / Torque
- Chrysler Viper RT/10 8.0 V10: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 | 5,200 rpm | 3,800 rpm | 5,450 rpm |
| ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 | 5,150 rpm | 3,600 rpm | 5,400 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 | ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 5.8 s | 4.3 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 6.1 s | 4.5 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 20.9 s | 14.6 s |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 270 km/h168 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Limited | 266 km/h 165 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.4 s | 2.1 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.2 s | 5.5 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 9.3 s | 8.2 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 11.9 s | 10.6 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 14.1 s | 12.5 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 167 km/h 104 mph | 187 km/h 116 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 | 394 hp 294 kW |
| ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 | 394 hp 294 kW |
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 | 570 Nm 420 lb-ft |
| ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 | 620 Nm 457 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 | 1,975 kg 4,354 lb |
| ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 | 1,595 kg 3,516 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 | Unrestricted 270 km/h168 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
| ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 | 266 km/h 165 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 | 6.1 s |
| ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 | 4.5 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Chrysler Viper RT/10 8.0 V10 and Mercedes-Benz SL (R129) Facelift 1995 SL 600 V12: 1.6 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 | 11.2 L/100 km 21.0 mpg US 25.2 mpg UK |
| ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 | 14.0 L/100 km 16.8 mpg US 20.2 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Mercedes-Benz SL (R129) Facelift 1995 SL 600 V12 and Chrysler Viper RT/10 8.0 V10: 2.8 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 | 199 hp/t 149 kW/t 5.0 kg/hp |
| ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 | 247 hp/t 184 kW/t 4.0 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 | 714 km 444 mi |
| ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 | 593 km 368 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 | 394 hp 294 kW | 6.1 s | Unrestricted 270 km/h168 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
| ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 | 394 hp 294 kW | 4.5 s | 266 km/h 165 mph |
Most attractive quadrant
Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Performance vs fuel economy
Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Fuel economy score | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 |
| 11.2 L/100 km 21.0 mpg US 25.2 mpg UK | ||||||
| ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 |
| 14.0 L/100 km 16.8 mpg US 20.2 mpg UK | ||||||
Mercedes-Benz SL (R129) Facelift 1995 SL 600 V12 is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.
Acceleration vs fuel consumption
Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 | 11.2 L/100 km 21.0 mpg US 25.2 mpg UK | 6.1 s |
| ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 | 14.0 L/100 km 16.8 mpg US 20.2 mpg UK | 4.5 s |
Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption
The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Power-to-weight, hp/t | Fuel consumption, L/100 km |
|---|---|---|
| Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 | 199 hp/t 149 kW/t 5.0 kg/hp | 11.2 L/100 km 21.0 mpg US 25.2 mpg UK |
| ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 | 247 hp/t 184 kW/t 4.0 kg/hp | 14.0 L/100 km 16.8 mpg US 20.2 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | Mercedes-BenzSL (R129)Facelift 1995SL 600 V12 | ChryslerViper RT/108.0 V10 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 394 hp 294 kW | 394 hp 294 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 570 Nm 420 lb-ft | 620 Nm 457 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 6.1 s | 4.5 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | Unrestricted 270 km/h168 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph | 266 km/h 165 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,975 kg 4,354 lb | 1,595 kg 3,516 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 11.2 L/100 km 21.0 mpg US 25.2 mpg UK | 14.0 L/100 km 16.8 mpg US 20.2 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 714 km 444 mi | 593 km 368 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 265 L 9.4 cu ft | 334 L 11.8 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 199 hp/t 149 kW/t 5.0 kg/hp | 247 hp/t 184 kW/t 4.0 kg/hp | ||||||||||||||||
| Overall | Fixed score | Fixed score |
Fuel cost and annual usage
Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.
Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.
LC = Local Currency
| Vehicle | Mercedes-Benz SL (R129) Facelift 1995 SL 600 V12 | Chrysler Viper RT/10 8.0 V10 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 11.2 L/100 km21 mpg US25.2 mpg UK | 14 L/100 km16.8 mpg US20.2 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 19.60 LC100 km | 24.50 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 31.54 LC100 mi | 39.43 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,680 L444 US gal370 UK gal | 2,100 L555 US gal462 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,940 LC/year | 3,675 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Mercedes-Benz SL (R129) Facelift 1995 SL 600 V12
- Has 4 km/h (2 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 2.8 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 121 km (75 mi) more estimated range
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Heaviest
- Smallest trunk
Chrysler Viper RT/10 8.0 V10
- Has 50 Nm more
- Is 380 kg lighter
- Is 1.6 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 48 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 69 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest torque
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























