New Jersey V8 Two-Doors: 1994 Mercedes SL 500 vs 2003 Ford Mustang GT

Good morning! Today’s choices both come from the same dealership in New Jersey. Both have two doors, eight cylinders and are driven by their rear wheels – but the difference, as always, is in the details.

Yesterday’s limos were pretty similar on paper too, but one emerged as a far better deal. I’m calling this one a little earlier in the day than usual, but it isn’t even close. The more formal six-door passenger limo from South Dakota is the clear winner. Sorry, party pit; you’ve got the wrong engine and too many questions.

For me, the ’92 wins just because it’s a ’92 instead of an ’87. Sometimes it pays to hold out for a car that’s later in the run, and that’s especially true for General Motors vehicles. First-year vehicles from GM have historically been more or less a test fleet; it takes a year or two for the production lines to figure out how to build them, and then another year or two for the engineers to undo the damage caused by budget-cutting. This last-year Brougham should be just about as good as they got.

Moving on: Those of you of a certain age may recall that once upon a time, Ford was brazen enough to directly compare one of its cars to a Mercedes-Benz in advertising, even going so far as to ask if we could tell the difference. (We could.) Nobody in their right mind was going to mistake a Ford Granada for a Mercedes-Benz S-Class, but I admire their bravado. Likewise, no one is going to mistake a Mustang GT for an R129-chassis SL roadster, but today’s cars do have some odd parallels: both overhead-cam V8s, both rear-wheel-drive, both automatics, both, um… four-spoke steering wheels. (I knew there was something else.) But more importantly, they’re a hell of a lot closer in price than they once were. In fact, the prices have flip-flopped. Is the car with more depreciation a better deal, though? Let’s look and see.

1994 Mercedes-Benz SL 500 – $3,500

Engine/drivetrain: 5.0-liter dual overhead cam V8, four-speed automatic, RWD

Location: Burlington, NJ

Odometer reading: 111,000 miles

Operational status: Obviously runs and drives, but how well is unknown

How do you follow a legend? If you’re Mercedes, you cram the new car full of every bit of technology you can get your hands on, wrap it in fresh styling to match your current lineup, and give buyers the option of four more cylinders. The R107-chassis Mercedes SL, favorite of both record producers and their divorce lawyers, ran for eighteen years and gained a reputation for tank-like durability combined with instantly-recognizable styling. This car, the R129, is fancier, faster, and flashier, but whether or not those things are progress is still very much in question.

Yes, you could get an SL in 1994 with a V12 engine, but this one makes do with a four-cam 5.0 liter V8, making a mere 322 horsepower. (How will you manage?) That power is sent to the rear wheels through a 4G-Tronic four-speed automatic; you could get a stickshift in the six-cylinder R129, but this is not really the sort of car in which one shifts one’s own gears. This V8 has a reputation for being exceptionally reliable and durable, as does the transmission – as long as you keep up the maintenance, of course. We don’t know whether this one was maintained well or not. It obviously runs and drives well enough to make it from the dealership to this grassy area for photos, but as with any car bought from a dealer, a good going-over is warranted.

It certainly looks good, with nice shiny paint and a clean interior. The convertible top looks nice, but I get the feeling that this car doesn’t include its original removable hardtop. Can you find one? Probably. Can you find one in red to match? That’s a trickier question.

I’m also concerned about a few wonky trim pieces, and I don’t understand why the wheels are red inside. Did someone add those brake dust shields, and paint them red? And if so, why?

2003 Ford Mustang GT – $4,850

Engine/drivetrain: 4.6 liter overhead cam V8, four-speed automatic, RWD

Location: Burlington, NJ

Odometer reading: 119,000 miles

Operational status: Again, runs and drives, but specifics unknown

I go back and forth on the SN-95/New Edge Mustangs. On the one hand, they’re cheap, good-performing (even the six-cylinder ones aren’t dog-slow), and surprisingly reliable. And they’re clearly Mustangs, with enough model-specific styling cues to let you know what it is without being heavy-handed Boomer-bait retro, like the generation after. On the other hand, they have always felt cheap and tacky to me, like they’ve been biding their time until they were old and cheap enough to be the beaters they were always meant to be.

This 2003 model is sort of “default Mustang configuration”: V8, automatic, hardtop. The V8 in question is Ford’s overhead-cam Modular engine, as also seen in a bazillion Crown Victorias and F-150s. Here it makes 260 horsepower, plenty to light up the rear tires and do antisocial things. The 4R70W overdrive automatic may not be as much fun as a five-speed manual would be, but it’s reliable. Again, we don’t get any specifics on how well this car runs, but reputation is on its side.

Inside, it looks pretty clean, actually a lot nicer than these usually end up looking. The low mileage helps, I imagine. The photos in this ad are a little hard to figure out; I still can’t tell if the seats in this car are leather or cloth. There seem to be two sets of photos; I suppose they might have two Mustangs for sale and mixed up the photos. But hey, whichever one it actually is, it’s in nice shape.

Outside, it’s a little ratty but presentable. There are a few blemishes in the paint, and a dent or two here and there; unfortunately flaws like that on black cars stick out like a sore thumb. And I don’t know why the hood scoop isn’t glossy.

No one would have cross-shopped these two when they were new, but now, they’re at the same dealership and within shouting distance price-wise. You could walk in there wanting a two-door V8, and either one would fit the bill. The Mercedes is cheaper, but its running costs will be significantly higher. The Mustang costs more outright, but it’ll be a cheap date if anything goes wrong later. So which one is the better deal?

(Image credits: Craigslist sellers)