C55 faster than CLK550, according to MBUSA
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 1
From: Canada
C55 AMG, 135i, 911 GT3, GLE43 AMG
C55 faster than CLK550, according to MBUSA
Well, the MBUSA website has some info now on the CLK550 with the new 5.5L V8 making 382HP and 391lb-ft torque.
We all knew the output of this new 4 valve engine many months ago, and I was fully expecting the new non-AMG CLK550 to be faster in a straighline than the C55 AMG (with the old 3 valve 5.4L V8 making 362HP and 376lb-ft torque).
Well, according to the MBUSA website, the 0-60mph time for the CLK550 is 5.1 seconds, while the C55's time is 4.9 seconds.
The CLK550 coupe is a bit heavier than the C55 AMG (3720lb vs 3540lb), and they have different transmissions (7G-tronic vs 5 speed AMG Speedshift).
What do you guys think? Is MBUSA deliberately downrating the 0-60mph times for the CLK550?....or is there a chance the C55 still is a bit faster in acceleration than the CLK550?
I know this is all speculation now, but I still find this point quite interesting.
We all knew the output of this new 4 valve engine many months ago, and I was fully expecting the new non-AMG CLK550 to be faster in a straighline than the C55 AMG (with the old 3 valve 5.4L V8 making 362HP and 376lb-ft torque).
Well, according to the MBUSA website, the 0-60mph time for the CLK550 is 5.1 seconds, while the C55's time is 4.9 seconds.
The CLK550 coupe is a bit heavier than the C55 AMG (3720lb vs 3540lb), and they have different transmissions (7G-tronic vs 5 speed AMG Speedshift).
What do you guys think? Is MBUSA deliberately downrating the 0-60mph times for the CLK550?....or is there a chance the C55 still is a bit faster in acceleration than the CLK550?
I know this is all speculation now, but I still find this point quite interesting.
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 1
From: Canada
C55 AMG, 135i, 911 GT3, GLE43 AMG
And here is another wrinkle. According the MBUSA website, the CLK55 AMG coupe (last sold in MY2005) weighs 3635 lbs and has a 0-60mph time of 5.0 seconds. In other words, it's weight and acceleration time fits neatly between the C55 and new CLK550.
Does this seem deliberately made up to keep C55 and CLK55 owners happy?
Does this seem deliberately made up to keep C55 and CLK55 owners happy?
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,848
Likes: 15
From: Orange County
2005 C Wagon (No snickering please!)
Mercedes for years has conservatively rated their cars. Partly to avoid truth in advertising issues, and partly to allow reviewers like Jeremy Clarkson to turn in better times.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 441
Likes: 1
From: SoCal
2008 CLK63 AMG Black Series, 2022 BMW X3 M40i
Yeah it seems like a marketing strategy. It's hard to believe that the CLK550 would be slower than the C55. I think I will try to test drive the new CLK550 to get first hand impressions. Does anyone know the MSRP for the CLK550?
Super Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 825
Likes: 3
2002 c32
Seems more likely that a couple tenths would be due to environmental factors, differences in engines, tires, stuff like that. On any given day, 5 different C55s with 5 different drivers would have much wilder swings in acceleration than 2-tenths?...which I guess begs the question - how are they arriving at these numbers?
Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
From: 858
2005 Brabus C55
Originally Posted by PC Valkyrie
they have different transmissions (7G-tronic vs 5 speed AMG Speedshift).
The old rule for the 1/4 mile for F-Bodies (Camaro/Firebirds) was each 100 lbs of weight increases you 1/4 mile time by .1 second ... don't believe this works for 0 to 60 times in this case.
Out Of Control!!
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 18,677
Likes: 9
From: OC
a quarter mile at a time
I find it odd that the CLK550 is 100lbs heavier than the CLK55 is. Another thing to consider is that they could have a 2-3 shift just before the car hits 60 and makes the 0-60 time artificially high, for example, the C350 is just as quick to 60 as the SLK350 because it dosen't have the 2-3 shift, but it weighs 200lbs more than the SLK350. I'd bet that the CLK550 is quicker over a quarter mile than the CLK55, unsure how it would fare against a C55 due to weight.
Trending Topics
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,466
Likes: 10
From: Southern Cali (Ontario)
to 60 it might not be as fast....
but 1/4 and trap speed the C55 won't be able to touch it..
2 more speeds and bit more hp and torque..
200lbs is significant difference, but not enough.
but 1/4 and trap speed the C55 won't be able to touch it..
2 more speeds and bit more hp and torque..
200lbs is significant difference, but not enough.
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Super Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 542
Likes: 1
Originally Posted by TopGun32
to 60 it might not be as fast....
but 1/4 and trap speed the C55 won't be able to touch it..
2 more speeds and bit more hp and torque..
200lbs is significant difference, but not enough.
but 1/4 and trap speed the C55 won't be able to touch it..
2 more speeds and bit more hp and torque..
200lbs is significant difference, but not enough.
I agree with you - but whenever I have even one normal ~170lb passenger in my car with me, I feel the difference!
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, CA
'05 C55 AMG
seems like a poor effort on the part of mercedes to disguise the fact that a normal CLK 550 will be faster than a currently offered C55 AMG, since they most likely won't be producing a C63 AMG (at least not in mass quantities)
if the CLK 550 is priced similar to the old CLK 500, even say a few thousand more, it'll still be cheaper than a C55. so in order for the C55 to stay attractive, they've got to say it's faster, even if by only .2 seconds.
still, it would be hard to decide between the 2 cars if you didn't care about coupe vs. sedan. CLK 550 has a sexy style, more HP/Torque, and also might be cheaper. the C55, on the other hand, has the extra AMG touches, more exclusive, and is ever so slightly faster (if only on paper).
if the CLK 550 is priced similar to the old CLK 500, even say a few thousand more, it'll still be cheaper than a C55. so in order for the C55 to stay attractive, they've got to say it's faster, even if by only .2 seconds.
still, it would be hard to decide between the 2 cars if you didn't care about coupe vs. sedan. CLK 550 has a sexy style, more HP/Torque, and also might be cheaper. the C55, on the other hand, has the extra AMG touches, more exclusive, and is ever so slightly faster (if only on paper).
MBworld Guru
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 22,058
Likes: 18
From: Diamond Bar, CA
W206 PHEV AMG
the CLS550 is $2000 more than the CLS500. You can probably expect the same for CLK and E.
For people that buys AMG they want exclusivity. You only see one once in a while.
But a normal MB quicker and faster than the AMGs...you can only blame technology. LOL. The new E550's more powerful than the old W210 E55. Imagine the faces of the W210 E55 owner when they get beat. It's just a fact, nothing much we can do. Remember the C43 AMG wasn't that much faster than the W208 CLK430 either.
thanks to the supercharger on the C32 we at least have a chance to mod ours to around 400hp without losing an arm&leg. lol
offtopic: unless EPA changed their rules...I really don't see how a 2007 C55 is going to be any different than the 2005-2006 other than few updated features. I think it's just MBusa's way of avoiding buyers bashing on how the C55 AMG is less powerful than the CLK550, so instead of maybe standard some AMG manufactur options like the LSD to the C55 they simply choose not to sell it at all.
For people that buys AMG they want exclusivity. You only see one once in a while.
But a normal MB quicker and faster than the AMGs...you can only blame technology. LOL. The new E550's more powerful than the old W210 E55. Imagine the faces of the W210 E55 owner when they get beat. It's just a fact, nothing much we can do. Remember the C43 AMG wasn't that much faster than the W208 CLK430 either.
thanks to the supercharger on the C32 we at least have a chance to mod ours to around 400hp without losing an arm&leg. lol
offtopic: unless EPA changed their rules...I really don't see how a 2007 C55 is going to be any different than the 2005-2006 other than few updated features. I think it's just MBusa's way of avoiding buyers bashing on how the C55 AMG is less powerful than the CLK550, so instead of maybe standard some AMG manufactur options like the LSD to the C55 they simply choose not to sell it at all.
Last edited by FrankW; Jul 7, 2006 at 04:16 AM.
Super Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
C43, SLK32, CLK63 Black Series
Originally Posted by FrankW
offtopic: unless EPA changed their rules...I really don't see how a 2007 C55 is going to be any different than the 2005-2006 other than few updated features
MBworld Guru
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 22,058
Likes: 18
From: Diamond Bar, CA
W206 PHEV AMG
Originally Posted by SteveL
According to a thread on the AMG Lounge which was replied to by AMG, there will be no 2007 C55 in North America.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,974
Likes: 5
From: Southern California
2017 W205 C43 AMG
The weight and 7-speed gearing of the CLK550 have some affect on the 0-60 speed in comparison to the C55 AMG, although the CLK550 has 20 more Hp and tq.
1/4 mile the CLK550 I think might be faster, but 0-60 it just might be dead even!
MBUSA puts the new 550 engine in the W209 as an effort to revive interest in the chassis as it goes into its swan song/last lap.
1/4 mile the CLK550 I think might be faster, but 0-60 it just might be dead even!
MBUSA puts the new 550 engine in the W209 as an effort to revive interest in the chassis as it goes into its swan song/last lap.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,239
Likes: 1
From: San Jose, CA
ML63
I drove both the same day.. an 06 C55 and an 07 CLK550.. The CLK550 definitely seemed faster and I could feel the difference in torque.. I was very impressed with the CLK550 but it only had 2 doors so got the 335.
Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
everything and anything
I think MBUSA still has a couple of these CLK55's to unload so it's not in there best interest that a lower priced car is faster then the amg model.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 267
From: Chicago
2025 AMG E 53; 2018 GLC300 4Matic; 2003 360 Modena
Of course it's faster - that's why there is no C550! No one would buy a C63. The C550 would be a bargain, and the speed difference... would be miniscule.
+1 for the E550 and CLK550 being the best deals. Incredible sleepers.
+1 for the E550 and CLK550 being the best deals. Incredible sleepers.
Super Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
From: Oakland, California
07 E550, 02 C32, 91 300E
I agree, my dad still swears my C32 "feels" faster than the E550, but I really can't say either way. And considering we paid almost the same for each car...I feel like the E might have been the better deal.
