Mercedes-AMG SL 63 vs Audi RS e-tron GT
Compare the Mercedes-AMG SL 63 vs Audi RS e-tron GT. The Audi RS e-tron GT is £40,000 cheaper. The Audi RS e-tron GT is 0.4s quicker to 60mph. The Audi RS e-tron GT is more fuel efficient. Full performance, cost & ownership breakdown.
The Mercedes-AMG SL 63 is priced from £165,000, powered by a 4.0L Twin-Turbo V8, producing 577 hp, with 800 Nm of torque, reaching 0-60 mph in 3.5s, a top speed of 196 mph, sent to the road via all-wheel drive. The Audi RS e-tron GT is priced from £125,000, powered by a Dual Electric Motors, producing 637 hp, with 830 Nm of torque, reaching 0-60 mph in 3.1s, a top speed of 155 mph, sent to the road via all-wheel drive.
The Mercedes-AMG SL 63 offers a 213-litre boot, runs on petrol, returns around 24 mpg, is covered by a 3yr / unlimited mi warranty. The Audi RS e-tron GT offers a 405-litre boot, a usable front boot, runs on electric, returns around 76 mpg, is covered by a 4yr / 50k mi warranty.
On cost of ownership, the Audi RS e-tron GT is £40,000 cheaper than its rival, the Audi RS e-tron GT costs less in annual maintenance (£1,500 versus £1,000), the Audi RS e-tron GT is the more fuel-efficient choice, a full tank costs around £90 for the Mercedes-AMG SL 63 and £15 for the Audi RS e-tron GT.
Driving Character: Mercedes-AMG SL 63 vs Audi RS e-tron GT
The Mercedes-AMG SL 63 transitions the lineage toward a sophisticated grand tourer profile, prioritising compliance over the surgical precision of its predecessor. The 4.0-litre twin-turbo V8 delivers a relentless surge of torque, managed by an all-wheel-drive system that ensures composure in challenging UK conditions. While the AMG Active Ride Control suspension offers remarkable poise for a heavy convertible, the steering feel remains somewhat insulated compared to pure sports cars. It excels as a high-speed cruiser rather than a track-day weapon, favouring long-distance refinement and effortless pace over the frantic, razor-sharp feedback once associated with the AMG brand.
The RS e-tron GT leverages 637 hp and instant electric torque to deliver breathtaking acceleration, pinning occupants to their seats with brutal efficiency. The low centre of gravity provided by the battery pack ensures the car remains impressively flat through corners, though the sheer weight of 5139 lbs is occasionally felt in tighter, technical transitions. It lacks the raw, emotive soundtrack of a combustion-engined rival, but compensates with a refined, futuristic chassis that makes covering ground effortless. The two-speed rear gearbox provides a unique mechanical feel, bridging the gap between electric immediacy and high-speed stability.
Head-to-head, the division is clear: the Mercedes-AMG SL 63 takes our 0-100 driving character grading, 78 against 78. Characteristic of the Mercedes-AMG SL 63: Composed, quattro-like AWD grip with genuine open-top GT character. For the Audi RS e-tron GT: Immense, silent electric acceleration with quattro-assured composure. In outright terms it is 577 hp against 637 — a 60 hp gap — and the Audi RS e-tron GT reaches 60 mph 0.4s sooner.
Interior & Cabin: Mercedes-AMG SL 63 vs Audi RS e-tron GT
Inside, the SL 63 feels thoroughly modern, dominated by a portrait-oriented MUX interface that dictates the cabin aesthetic. The digital cockpit is crisp, though the heavy reliance on touch-sensitive surfaces can feel counterintuitive when pressing on. Material quality is excellent, with high-grade leathers and metals, yet the ergonomics are compromised by the vestigial rear seats, which serve more as shelf space than viable seating. It lacks the intimate, driver-focused cocoon of the previous AMG GT, opting instead for a broad, open-air cockpit design that prioritises perceived luxury and connectivity over raw, tactile immersion.
The interior is a high-tech sanctuary, dominated by a driver-focused dashboard and the crisp Audi Virtual Cockpit. Sustainable materials are used throughout, reflecting a modern approach to luxury without compromising on build quality or feel. The digital interfaces are intuitive, though the reliance on touch-sensitive controls for certain functions can be less tactile than physical buttons while on the move. Space is ample for four adults, and the dual-screen setup creates a sophisticated, connected environment that feels perfectly suited for a high-performance electric tourer. It is a cabin that successfully blends traditional Audi craftsmanship with progressive, forward-thinking technology.
Head-to-head, the division is clear: the Audi RS e-tron GT takes our 0-100 interior & cabin grading, 85 against 86. Characteristic of the Mercedes-AMG SL 63: Luxurious, modern cabin with excellent build quality. For the Audi RS e-tron GT: Premium, minimalist cabin with excellent tech integration.
Daily Usability: Mercedes-AMG SL 63 vs Audi RS e-tron GT
Daily utility is remarkably improved, largely due to the transition to a fully variable fabric roof that saves significant boot space and lowers the centre of gravity. The 213-litre capacity remains tight, though it accommodates soft luggage better than the old hard-top systems. Parking remains a chore; the wide, low-slung bodywork requires cautious navigation through tight urban gaps, and the extensive bonnet length demands foresight. Nevertheless, the sophisticated suspension tuning allows it to soak up poorly maintained road surfaces with grace, making it a viable, albeit thirsty, companion for regular motorway commutes and long-distance touring.
Practicality is a strong suit for the RS e-tron GT, offering a 405L boot plus additional storage in the front trunk, making it an excellent daily prospect. The ride is firm in Dynamic mode but remains composed enough for long-distance cruising, absorbing motorway imperfections with ease. Charging is a simple affair, with fast-charging capabilities allowing for 80% replenishment in just over twenty minutes, significantly increasing the vehicle's real-world usability. It is a highly capable machine for routine errands and long-distance touring, provided the driver is aware of the low stance and the necessity of managing battery capacity on longer jaunts.
Head-to-head, the division is clear: the Audi RS e-tron GT takes our 0-100 daily usability grading, 68 against 80. Characteristic of the Mercedes-AMG SL 63: Comfortable, capable long-distance convertible for daily use. For the Audi RS e-tron GT: Comfortable, quiet, effortless daily EV with real usability. that means 213 litres of boot space against 405, plus a usable front boot in the Audi RS e-tron GT, and everyday running costs that favour the Audi RS e-tron GT at the pumps.
Ownership: Mercedes-AMG SL 63 vs Audi RS e-tron GT
Ownership is bolstered by the vast, well-integrated Mercedes-Benz dealer network, which provides consistent support for the complex AMG powertrain. Maintenance costs are steep, with annual services reflecting the performance-oriented nature of the twin-turbo V8, and the intricate soft-top mechanism introduces a long-term servicing variable that owners must anticipate. While depreciation is generally mitigated by the enduring prestige of the SL moniker, the market is competitive. Reliability is generally predictable, provided the rigid servicing intervals are respected, ensuring the complex electronics and drivetrain remain within optimal operating parameters throughout the ownership period.
Ownership of this EV is relatively straightforward, as the simplicity of the electric drivetrain results in lower annual maintenance costs than its internal combustion rivals. The four-year, 50k mile warranty provides a solid foundation for peace of mind, though long-term battery health remains a key consideration for high-mileage users. The RS e-tron GT benefits from the extensive Audi dealer and charging network, making it one of the most accessible high-performance EVs on the market. While residual values for luxury EVs remain volatile, the model’s performance and build quality help maintain a solid market position among modern, tech-focused buyers.
Head-to-head, the division is clear: the Audi RS e-tron GT takes our 0-100 ownership grading, 68 against 82. Characteristic of the Mercedes-AMG SL 63: Backed by Mercedes-AMG's established reliability record. For the Audi RS e-tron GT: Low running costs typical of an EV, strong warranty coverage. On the wallet the two diverge at £165,000 versus £125,000 — a £40,000 difference, with annual maintenance of £1,500 against £1,000, and warranty cover of 3yr / unlimited mi versus 4yr / 50k mi.