Need some info before buying a CLK55 W209
07-09-2014, 03:18 PM
#1
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: netherlands
Posts: 648
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Carlsson CM60 EX:C36AMG'96
Need some info before buying a CLK55 W209
Hallo guys,
I would like to ask you guys some questions about the CLK55 W209.
First of all why am I on the market for one?
I am looking to replace my C36 pretty soon. Hate to sell the car because I really love the car. Reason for selling it would be because it keeps braking down on me
The so called specialists on my location of the world keep disappointing me by not being able to diagnose the problems.Currently it has a gearbox problem that they just can't fix. At the moment I keep investing money into it without getting the car into a better condition. The fun is starting to get killed by this.
I want to use the car mostly for fun weekend drives. This consists of autobahn and drive in the German Eifel. I rarely use the car for daily drives. I dont need alot of space in the car. However I prefer the look of a CLK to a SLK. AMG cars aren`t very cheap over here. So my budget limits me to the 2003 model. Is that a bad year?
First of all how is the transmission? Is it reliable when its maintained like it should be? If I stand corrected it has the same transmission as in the C55. Or does it have the same transmission as in the C43/E55(w210)/CLk55(w208) models?
Handling: How does it handle stock? just as good as the C55 or different?
Radio: How is the stock system in the CLK55? do they come with stock bose systems like the w202 amg's?
Any reasons why I should pay extra for the C55? besides space/looks
Thanks in advance for taking the time to read this.
I would like to ask you guys some questions about the CLK55 W209.
First of all why am I on the market for one?
I am looking to replace my C36 pretty soon. Hate to sell the car because I really love the car. Reason for selling it would be because it keeps braking down on me
The so called specialists on my location of the world keep disappointing me by not being able to diagnose the problems.Currently it has a gearbox problem that they just can't fix. At the moment I keep investing money into it without getting the car into a better condition. The fun is starting to get killed by this.I want to use the car mostly for fun weekend drives. This consists of autobahn and drive in the German Eifel. I rarely use the car for daily drives. I dont need alot of space in the car. However I prefer the look of a CLK to a SLK. AMG cars aren`t very cheap over here. So my budget limits me to the 2003 model. Is that a bad year?
First of all how is the transmission? Is it reliable when its maintained like it should be? If I stand corrected it has the same transmission as in the C55. Or does it have the same transmission as in the C43/E55(w210)/CLk55(w208) models?
Handling: How does it handle stock? just as good as the C55 or different?
Radio: How is the stock system in the CLK55? do they come with stock bose systems like the w202 amg's?
Any reasons why I should pay extra for the C55? besides space/looks
Thanks in advance for taking the time to read this.
07-09-2014, 03:41 PM
#2
MBWorld Fanatic!
The transmission is bulletproof. Caveat - as long as it's not a 2003 with a Valeo radiator.
Handling is subjective (especially if I'm in the car with someone who can't drive). When the W209 was released, I thought it handled better than the W203. Although I have never driven a C55 and a CLK55 back to back, I have driven them individually and the CLK55 handled fine.
Neither car is going to be confused with an NSX (which handles great, it just needs a tad more motor)
Some CLK55's have Bose. If you like the Bose in any other Benz you'll like it in the CLK55. If you like HK better in any other Benz, you'll still think HK sounds better. Did I mention HiFi is very subjective?
As long as we're being subjective, pay extra for the C55? I like coupes. No way, no how would I buy a C55 over a CLK55. In fact, since you're an ROW guy (non-US for those who are unfamiliar with Rest Of the World), I would see if a non-BS CLK63 coupe was available where you live. Preferably one without exploding head bolts.
If you're havin' car problems I feel bad for you son, I've got 99 problems but the Benz ain't one. - JayZ
Handling is subjective (especially if I'm in the car with someone who can't drive). When the W209 was released, I thought it handled better than the W203. Although I have never driven a C55 and a CLK55 back to back, I have driven them individually and the CLK55 handled fine.
Neither car is going to be confused with an NSX (which handles great, it just needs a tad more motor)Some CLK55's have Bose. If you like the Bose in any other Benz you'll like it in the CLK55. If you like HK better in any other Benz, you'll still think HK sounds better. Did I mention HiFi is very subjective?
As long as we're being subjective, pay extra for the C55? I like coupes. No way, no how would I buy a C55 over a CLK55. In fact, since you're an ROW guy (non-US for those who are unfamiliar with Rest Of the World), I would see if a non-BS CLK63 coupe was available where you live. Preferably one without exploding head bolts.
If you're havin' car problems I feel bad for you son, I've got 99 problems but the Benz ain't one. - JayZ
07-09-2014, 04:41 PM
#3
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: netherlands
Posts: 648
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Carlsson CM60 EX:C36AMG'96
The transmission is bulletproof. Caveat - as long as it's not a 2003 with a Valeo radiator.
Handling is subjective (especially if I'm in the car with someone who can't drive). When the W209 was released, I thought it handled better than the W203. Although I have never driven a C55 and a CLK55 back to back, I have driven them individually and the CLK55 handled fine. Neither car is going to be confused with an NSX (which handles great, it just needs a tad more motor)
Some CLK55's have Bose. If you like the Bose in any other Benz you'll like it in the CLK55. If you like HK better in any other Benz, you'll still think HK sounds better. Did I mention HiFi is very subjective?
As long as we're being subjective, pay extra for the C55? I like coupes. No way, no how would I buy a C55 over a CLK55. In fact, since you're an ROW guy (non-US for those who are unfamiliar with Rest Of the World), I would see if a non-BS CLK63 coupe was available where you live. Preferably one without exploding head bolts.
If you're havin' car problems I feel bad for you son, I've got 99 problems but the Benz ain't one. - JayZ
Handling is subjective (especially if I'm in the car with someone who can't drive). When the W209 was released, I thought it handled better than the W203. Although I have never driven a C55 and a CLK55 back to back, I have driven them individually and the CLK55 handled fine.
Neither car is going to be confused with an NSX (which handles great, it just needs a tad more motor)Some CLK55's have Bose. If you like the Bose in any other Benz you'll like it in the CLK55. If you like HK better in any other Benz, you'll still think HK sounds better. Did I mention HiFi is very subjective?
As long as we're being subjective, pay extra for the C55? I like coupes. No way, no how would I buy a C55 over a CLK55. In fact, since you're an ROW guy (non-US for those who are unfamiliar with Rest Of the World), I would see if a non-BS CLK63 coupe was available where you live. Preferably one without exploding head bolts.
If you're havin' car problems I feel bad for you son, I've got 99 problems but the Benz ain't one. - JayZ
Now back on topic the CLK55 I can imagine it doesnt handle like a NSX. Neither does my c36 (vogtland/koni/H&R swaybars setup) Still I love it and is good enough for me
. Some say the CLK55 isn`t a drivers car. I can imagine you owners disagree with this right?About the sound system, they offered a bose and a HK system on the car. Both are high quality by my opinion. So I shouldnt worry on this subject anymore I think.
The CLK63 costs dubble of the 55
That is to costy for me at the moment.
Last edited by w202mylove; 07-09-2014 at 04:55 PM.
07-09-2014, 06:10 PM
#4
MBWorld Fanatic!
I'm glad you got the (attempt at) humor. According to my notes, the C36 used either a 722.328 or a 722.629. The 722.424 is a 1994 through 1996 C280 transmission. It sounds like the seller lied.
I've since cut back, but I used to drive close to 100 press cars per year. To this day, the NSX is the most forgiving car I have ever driven. A person could make almost any stupid error and the car would recover (although I did see someone lose it in one once - which is why I say almost any stupid error). The CLK doesn't handle like an NSX, but it is a good drivers car. It's a very good GT, not a sports car, but a GT. It doesn't have sports car like steering feel, but being GT, it's not supposed to. The same is true for handling, but it handles much better than many GTs. The traction levels are communicated with a CLK. There's none of this "it just let go". In addition, it doesn't plow. It does have VERY GOOD brakes. How good? With stock 17 inch tires, a 2002 CLK55 can stop from 60 MPH two feet shorter than a stock 2004 911 GT3. I wrote about both cars when new and can state that for a fact. The late W209s can stop even shorter. The CLK55 has a fantastic engine (for its time). Forget peak HP numbers and look at the linear delivery. There is power throughout the rev range. What some forget about when speaking of a drivers car is, can a person physically stand to be in a car for 4+ hours? Some cars are unbearable after 90 minutes. I can drive a CLK for long periods without experiencing fatigue.
The CLK55 and C55 are both good cars. You won't go wrong with either one. It really depends on what you want.
I've since cut back, but I used to drive close to 100 press cars per year. To this day, the NSX is the most forgiving car I have ever driven. A person could make almost any stupid error and the car would recover (although I did see someone lose it in one once - which is why I say almost any stupid error). The CLK doesn't handle like an NSX, but it is a good drivers car. It's a very good GT, not a sports car, but a GT. It doesn't have sports car like steering feel, but being GT, it's not supposed to. The same is true for handling, but it handles much better than many GTs. The traction levels are communicated with a CLK. There's none of this "it just let go". In addition, it doesn't plow. It does have VERY GOOD brakes. How good? With stock 17 inch tires, a 2002 CLK55 can stop from 60 MPH two feet shorter than a stock 2004 911 GT3. I wrote about both cars when new and can state that for a fact. The late W209s can stop even shorter. The CLK55 has a fantastic engine (for its time). Forget peak HP numbers and look at the linear delivery. There is power throughout the rev range. What some forget about when speaking of a drivers car is, can a person physically stand to be in a car for 4+ hours? Some cars are unbearable after 90 minutes. I can drive a CLK for long periods without experiencing fatigue.
The CLK55 and C55 are both good cars. You won't go wrong with either one. It really depends on what you want.
07-09-2014, 06:39 PM
#5
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: netherlands
Posts: 648
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Carlsson CM60 EX:C36AMG'96
I'm glad you got the (attempt at) humor. According to my notes, the C36 used either a 722.328 or a 722.629. The 722.424 is a 1994 through 1996 C280 transmission. It sounds like the seller lied.
I've since cut back, but I used to drive close to 100 press cars per year. To this day, the NSX is the most forgiving car I have ever driven. A person could make almost any stupid error and the car would recover (although I did see someone lose it in one once - which is why I say almost any stupid error). The CLK doesn't handle like an NSX, but it is a good drivers car. It's a very good GT, not a sports car, but a GT. It doesn't have sports car like steering feel, but being GT, it's not supposed to. The same is true for handling, but it handles much better than many GTs. The traction levels are communicated with a CLK. There's none of this "it just let go". In addition, it doesn't plow. It does have VERY GOOD brakes. How good? With stock 17 inch tires, a 2002 CLK55 can stop from 60 MPH two feet shorter than a stock 2004 911 GT3. I wrote about both cars when new and can state that for a fact. The late W209s can stop even shorter. The CLK55 has a fantastic engine (for its time). Forget peak HP numbers and look at the linear delivery. There is power throughout the rev range. What some forget about when speaking of a drivers car is, can a person physically stand to be in a car for 4+ hours? Some cars are unbearable after 90 minutes. I can drive a CLK for long periods without experiencing fatigue.
The CLK55 and C55 are both good cars. You won't go wrong with either one. It really depends on what you want.
I've since cut back, but I used to drive close to 100 press cars per year. To this day, the NSX is the most forgiving car I have ever driven. A person could make almost any stupid error and the car would recover (although I did see someone lose it in one once - which is why I say almost any stupid error). The CLK doesn't handle like an NSX, but it is a good drivers car. It's a very good GT, not a sports car, but a GT. It doesn't have sports car like steering feel, but being GT, it's not supposed to. The same is true for handling, but it handles much better than many GTs. The traction levels are communicated with a CLK. There's none of this "it just let go". In addition, it doesn't plow. It does have VERY GOOD brakes. How good? With stock 17 inch tires, a 2002 CLK55 can stop from 60 MPH two feet shorter than a stock 2004 911 GT3. I wrote about both cars when new and can state that for a fact. The late W209s can stop even shorter. The CLK55 has a fantastic engine (for its time). Forget peak HP numbers and look at the linear delivery. There is power throughout the rev range. What some forget about when speaking of a drivers car is, can a person physically stand to be in a car for 4+ hours? Some cars are unbearable after 90 minutes. I can drive a CLK for long periods without experiencing fatigue.
The CLK55 and C55 are both good cars. You won't go wrong with either one. It really depends on what you want.
lolReally happy to read you are satisfied with the CLK55. The driving characteristics that you describe are very much to my liking
07-10-2014, 01:05 AM
#6
Super Member
I have a 2003 CLK55 and I gotta say it handles pretty well -- I wish the steering was a bit tighter but its ok - as far as it being a drivers car - I think so - I spent 18.5 hrs in 2 days behind the wheel of this baby and I only made 3 times total! like mentioned the brakes are great! I say go for the clk instead of the c55 -- mine has the Bose and I'm happy with the sound although it makes for an impossible aftermarket audio upgrade
07-10-2014, 02:03 AM
#7
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: netherlands
Posts: 648
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Carlsson CM60 EX:C36AMG'96
thanks for the input, mguerrero! yesterday I heard they offered the CLK with an lsd as an option. Is this true? And do I need it to get the power down?
Trending Topics
07-10-2014, 06:51 AM
#8
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,589
Received 68 Likes
on
44 Posts
C63 507 AMG DA Car #19
Clk55
I've got an 04 clk55.
In stock firm it is a comfortable quick grand touring car. Great daily driver.
Suspension: Really good
Stock brakes: If serviced properly great. Good fluid and pads a must.
Trans/engine- I'm pushing close to 550 hp with no trouble on either after 53k miles. The last 30k modded.
I like the clk55 as you don't see them everywhere like say a 3 series.
In stock firm it is a comfortable quick grand touring car. Great daily driver.
Suspension: Really good
Stock brakes: If serviced properly great. Good fluid and pads a must.
Trans/engine- I'm pushing close to 550 hp with no trouble on either after 53k miles. The last 30k modded.
I like the clk55 as you don't see them everywhere like say a 3 series.
07-10-2014, 11:33 AM
#9
Super Member
07-10-2014, 11:34 AM
#10
Super Member
I've got an 04 clk55.
In stock firm it is a comfortable quick grand touring car. Great daily driver.
Suspension: Really good
Stock brakes: If serviced properly great. Good fluid and pads a must.
Trans/engine- I'm pushing close to 550 hp with no trouble on either after 53k miles. The last 30k modded.
I like the clk55 as you don't see them everywhere like say a 3 series.
In stock firm it is a comfortable quick grand touring car. Great daily driver.
Suspension: Really good
Stock brakes: If serviced properly great. Good fluid and pads a must.
Trans/engine- I'm pushing close to 550 hp with no trouble on either after 53k miles. The last 30k modded.
I like the clk55 as you don't see them everywhere like say a 3 series.
07-10-2014, 01:38 PM
#11
Super Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: netherlands
Posts: 648
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Carlsson CM60 EX:C36AMG'96
Good to read all these responses 
it does sound like the car for me! I donīt need a perfect racecar for the road lol a good GT car should do the trick! Anything more interesting I should know ?
it does sound like the car for me! I donīt need a perfect racecar for the road lol a good GT car should do the trick! Anything more interesting I should know ?
