Leicaflex SL Mot - compared to SL?

It is a great camera, built like a tank, although I prefer the SL2 for better metering.

I am wondering exactly what is the difference between the Leicafelx SL Mot and the original SL - apart from the obvious motor capability? I read that the SL Mot doesn't have a self-timer, and the meter switch is not on the wind lever - so how is it switched on and off?
Rather more broadly, is the SL Mot without a motor attached any less useable than a 'straight' SL? I have been offered a black paint (not black chrome) SL Mot for $300 in good condition (and a warranty) and it could make a useful addition to the 'heavy armor' part of the arsenal.

I have owned a Leicaflex SL2 Mot, two SLs, and two SL2s over the years and the only user difference from the SL2 Mot over both 'standard' versions was the lack of a self timer. AFAIK, the same is the case with the SL Mot.
The SL/SL2 Mot versions were built like a tank on steroids - virtually indestructible!

I have all 3 Leicaflexes -- though not the bulky "mot" versions. Of the three, the absolute 'tank' -- and the only with the 'like silk' winding is the original Leicaflex.

Well, just in case there is a 'run' on SL MOTs, I have emailed the seller, whom I know well, and provisionally reserved it. I know a top Leica restorer here in the UK - I'm sure he'll check it for any 'issues'.

• Stephen & Bill - I agree, the SL2 is a true gem. Mine has never failed me, even if I have moaned loudly about the weight.
• Paul - the original Leicaflex always reminds me of a pirate with an eye-patch!

I was concerned that the meter was only switched on/off via the motor drive unit - I have no intention of getting a hernia by using one of those. Thanks gents.

Aside from the missing self-timer, the SL MOT's meter doesn't turn off. Put a lens cap on to avoid draining the battery. The SL MOT also was normally made with a plain matte viewscreen instead of the usual microprism viewscreen.

Paul, I am not a regular SLR user (except for the Visoflex adaptation) and thus have not invested in bodies and lenses of this great series, but the original model has always interested me as it is a sort of hybrid that spans the gulf between RF and SLR photography. Its aerial viewfinder, considered a shortcoming by some, has always appealed to one who grew up with the RF camera and preferred the clear view it provides for image perception, with a central rangefinding patch, and could live with a non through the lens metering system.

Not sure where Alan is in regard to needing groundglass focusing or not, but he probably has considered the pros and cons of the one-eyed "eye patch" Leicaflex.

Thanks Doug - Mmmmmmm, I'm not keen on a plain groundglass screen, in conjunction with vari-focal spectacles it is a recipe for fuzzy pics. The SL2 viewfinder is perfect for me, and the SL one is a close second.

Arthur, I haven't contemplated an "eye-patch" Leicaflex: I'd have to see one in the flesh to see if there is any 'chemistry' there. However, the seller has 'lost' the SL Mot . . . when (if) it turns up, he'll check the finder.

Arthur, now, in my 69th year & with Cervical Stenosis, I find that all my magnificent Leicaflexes are more comfortable on my shelf than hanging from my neck, alas.

Paul, I see from that nice photo that you have the right priorities, notwithstanding your additional passion for the (albeit dense and heavy) reflex Leicas. Perhaps one of your progeny will carry on the tradition of picture making with one of them and with parental counsel. As one with some lower back spinal chord degeneration, I sympathise, but you might possibly think about a lightweight mirrorless camera that can take one or two smaller Leica lenses. I believe that Ansel Adams went from LF to MF cameras and possibly smaller ones as he put on the years.