FrankW

because my sister drives a CLK and I like the 4-door better after having experienced my 2000 328Ci I decide to get the 4-door for more praticality.

DUC916

F-O-U-R doors

drexappeal

I'm just saying that I'd prefer a C55 over a lower model CLK. As for your numbers, if you add options, that would still put the C55 only 9K more than a CLK. I'm not saying I would get a fully loaded C55 over a base CLK. I'm saying, if I were to have a choice of a stock CLK vs. a stock C55, I'd go with the C55.

I know the reason for difference in price, but the title of the thread is "Why did you get your C over a CLK?" Reasoning for me was that I couldn't afford a CLK.

Then, I am also saying that I would even prefer a base C55 over a base CLK 350 (even if the C55 is 9K more).

Tishers

As stated earlier, a four door sedan is much more functional than a two door "squeeze the passengers in the back" seating.

I am the driver in our carpool to work.

If you want an experience, be the back-seat passenger in your car. Try it at the dealership when looking at models. Bring along someone who you drive with frequently, so you know their driving style. On one of the swap-off's, ride in the back seat.

I found the CLK to be claustrophobic in the back seat. Also I did not like the idea of not having my own door to get out of (you know, in case your car is attacked by weasels or something).

CitronC230K_03

i am single, with no kids. i prefer a two door. since i dont haul strollers, baby ****, and senseless crap in my trunk, i dont need the extra trunk space in the sedan. the coupe came in citron, stick and was way cheaper. to me looks just as good. thought gauges arent as nice as the CLK, the centre console is the same.

Saprissa

never use the back seat....

CLK & C-Coupé looked the same to me.... but i think the C-Coupé had more modding potential, and even though there was talk of a CLK32 (that never happened), the C32 SportCoupé did come to life (albeit limited), and so my quest began....

Carlos

Saprissa@aol.com

formula1

Simple - price. A CLK 200 costs approximately RM 175,000 (USD 46,052) more than a C230K.

FrankW

now add that supercharger!!! Kleemann or Carlsson!!!

x-tian-230k

What are you smokin?

formula1

I'm not smoking anything. Need an education?

x-tian-230k

Your stating that a CLK200 is ~46,000 USD more than the C230? I guess i will have to take ur word for it since I am not from ur country....

drexappeal

I think he was saying that it's $46,000 USD, which is more than a C230 ~$30-40 K (USD) manufacturer list price (i.e. CLK200 is $16 - 6 k more than the C230).

That makes more sense than the CLK200 being 46k more than a C class (i.e. CLK200 at 76k-86k - Not likely).

x-tian-230k

Thanks for the clarification...i was alil bit confused...

drexappeal

No problem . Actually, at first, I was wonderin' why you were given him such a hard time and then I re-read the post and realized where the confusion might have been.

So unless a CLK body-type is enormously inflated in price (outside the U.S.), I'm hoping that my clarification was correct.

formula1

I actually meant the CLK costs USD 46,000 more than the C230K here in my country. I've posted this somewhere before - a new C230K over here is RM303,800, which is USD79,947.36 to be exact. A new CLK200 is about RM480,000, which is equivalent to USD126,315. Hence it is approximately USD46,000 more than the C230K.

I know it's inconceiveable to pay something like that for basic models in the US, but that's how it is in many Asian countries including Malaysia (where I'm at), Singapore and Hong Kong.

drexappeal

I stand corrected. Wow, that doesn't really make sense to me, but if you say it's that way in Asia, I believe you. My whole family is in the Philippines and I know they've imported cars from the U.S. just for the fact that the same model they wanted over there was twice as much as buying it here and shipping it over.

I guess, the CLK demands a "higher" profile regardless of the model. My bad, but if that's what it is, that is it.

formula1

Yeah, it's insane. Our import taxes are close to 200% of the car value. One of the reasons our government levies such excessive taxes is to protect our national car maker - Proton and Perodua. Anyhow, we need a special AP (Approved Permit) for importing cars.

fast_amg

Why spend 15K more when the C230 is just as good as the CLK320. Not to mention its even faster.

vraa

You're a ****ing idiot.

fast_amg

^Your an idiot.

vraa

I'm not the one looking for replica rims on a car that I bought as a status symbol.

x-tian-230k

You have obviously not driven a CLK.......

trench

I drove the CLK500, CLK320, C320 and C230 (1.8) back to back last year at the "Love Mercedes" tour.

The extra power of the 500 is sure sweet - but I didn't notice a difference between the CLK320 and C320 either in power or handling (which is unsurprising since they have the same motor in essentially the same chassis). And the C230 (1.8) wasn't that far behind the C320 in terms of power.

[I notice very little power difference between the C230 (2.3) and the C320 - probably because they have closer torque numbers (207 vs 221).]

mbny

looked at the CLK however i felt the CLK320 was a bit on the feminine side. i'd sport the 500, but wasn't looking to spend that much at this time. i'd prefer the M3 over the 500 anyway if i was gonna go that high, however i needed a car recognized more as a family car than sports car. 15 points on the license so i was looking to have as low of a premium as possible although i'm still paying $5,400 a year for the C. my 330Ci was $5,900 and M3 would've been about $8k a year. for my next car my license should be clean and i can spend more on my monthly payment rather than on my insurance. sucks that i had to downgrade my car due to insurance costs, but it's my own fault so i gotta suffer the consequences.

eatm3sdaily

I prefered to get the C32 bc it was cheaper and faster. Even though I bought mines used with 22K on it. Its all good. Anyways I eat M3's for LESS