A Choice, C32 or CLK500? What would you choose
-My challenge is that you get so much value with the C32 for 54K or so with Nav, Nappa leather etc....
-But I really love the look of the Coupe, although I'm struggling with the fact that it basically a C-Class for 60K, with a V8
Opinions welcome, Please................
btw, we all have high grade headaches on these types of decisions...so believe me I feel lucky to have this headache.
My sis has a W208 and I have a C32, does that explain anything to you.
CLK is for girls...lol j/pI would get the C32 just because it is a AMG & MB, instead of the CLK500 just being a MB.
The W209 CLK looks like the spawn of a C230k and an Acura CL. Not that there is anything wrong with those two cars, it's just I wouldn't want to spend 60k on a car that looks nearly identical to an Acura!
The C32 AMG is a lot faster, a lot sexier, more comfortable, looks so much better, and finally; it is an AMG. The W209 CLK just has a cheap feeling and look to it.
People who I talk to tell me they would have gotten the CLK500 because it has a V8, well I tell them my puny V6 can kill their V8
. The C32 AMG will hold it's value better than the CLK500 aswell.While you may put a Kleemann Supercharger on the CLK500, Evosport and many other companies already offer and are developing modifications for the C32 AMG.
The exterior of the CLK is still very much like the E-class.The only thing i agree with you is that the center console of the new CLK really made it looks cheap.
The C32 AMG also looks a lot more aggressive than the W209 CLK.
Last edited by Accord; Oct 4, 2002 at 04:01 AM.
Volvo C70:
2003 Honda Accord Coupe:
I think the rear of the Accord looks more like an SL.
W209 CLK:
MB Lineup:
Trending Topics
I made the decision, silver C32 with black interior, and Nav, gotta have the Nav!!I think car design has really departed from a single mfg. having it's own originality/trademark. It's sad to see such a great brand (MB) get so lost in it's design efforts.
I like the CLK and the 'look' is growing on me, in fact I saw the Brabus 6.1 and it looked ready for a fight. In the end though I agree the C32 has more going for it, and it will be a shame when MB wrecks that car and makes it look just like all the other 'fishes' in the sea.
Thanks for all the feedback, to the dealer I go to start the 'waiting process'
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
besides, the performance of C32 is much more better !
if you're interested in mods, the V8 is then very potential......
Last edited by Shine; Oct 5, 2002 at 10:52 PM.
John, the new accord looks more like the CL-class. and as for the C70, the rear does not look like the CLK at all.
As far as, E, CLK, SL, C, etc...they all look a like....
That's just the trend MB is going with the styling of their cars. From that rear shot of the E and the CLK, you can tell it's a sedan with it's coupe counter part.
dont forget that amg body kit and wheels come standard with the clk 500 so the clk500 is not just an ordinary mb, it is partially an amg as well
.
dont forget that amg body kit and wheels come standard with the clk 500 so the clk500 is not just an ordinary mb, it is partially an amg as well
It's not an AMG without the engine
.
that's only true for the US market. MBUSA want to differentiate CLK320 and CLK500/430, so that people will feel better when they bought a more expensive model. lol
and what is ur point for bringing this up anwyays frank?
excuse me? i think that is also valid for the canadian market, clk500 comes with amg kits as standard also.
and what is ur point for bringing this up anwyays frank?
Back on topic though, the CLK500 isn't slow, it's just no hot-rod. Let me describe it to you this way. The CLK500 can have the AMG bodykit, wheels, and even interior. When you depress the throttle, you'll know it's not the "real" deal, but still a nice car. Tango, saying that it is "partially" AMG is simply for nostalgic value.
You can consider the CLK500 an AMG if it was built at the AMG factory, however it was not, therefore it is not an AMG. It's like saying a CLK430 is an AMG. The CLK55 is an AMG, the CLK500 is not.
Accord, I saw a C320 with AMG badge (no mods) last Saturday. He was drving pretty fast on the freeway, until i got next to him and give him a friendly nod and drove past him. I was just doing 85 mph, and he just slowed downed. My friends was laughing, but i was not.
You can consider the CLK500 an AMG if it was built at the AMG factory, however it was not, therefore it is not an AMG. It's like saying a CLK430 is an AMG. The CLK55 is an AMG, the CLK500 is not.






