rob1

Iam currently the owner of a 2002 911 twin turbo and lease a 2002 M5 which will be completed in about 1.5 years.I am doing research to determine which vehicle to purchase next,a preowned E55 or Cl55.I test drove a 2005 Cl55 but have never driven a E55.I will probably not pursue a new M5 because of the styling.How much does the handling differ between the E55 and the Cl55?Obviously the size and weight of the two vehicles is significant,however,the looks of the Cl55 are hard to pass up.Is there anyway one can eliminate the Mercedes hood emblem on the E55 and fill in the opening?Also what about the reliability issues between the Cl and the E55?Thank you!A sincere car enthusiast.

awiner

I have driven both the CL55 and E55. The ABC suspension is head and shoulders about the E's airmatic suspension. I beleive the CL will handle better even though it is a heavier vehicle, however, that is only a guess since I have not tracked both cars.

Maybe CynCarvn32 can add his input here as he has driven both classes.

CynCarvin32

Well for what it is worth hers is my opinion on the topic. For the record I have an aggressive driving style, which goes beyond that of most MB drivers. I consider good ride quality to be a car with perfect rebound control not a smooth ride. If the car floats at all it gets big demerits on my book :

I have an E55k and an SL55 in the garage so I will use those two cars as the basis for my debate - Airmatic in the E55 and ABC in the SL55. I have spent some time in a CL55 (Adams car) and I also had a 2001 S55 (all ABC cars).

The E55 is a great 4-door car but it is not an E39 M5 in any way. The E55 has an issue where the car resists turning into a corner at all cost. The car requires large hand motions to change direction and these motions are not follow with a keen sense of what is going on. In the first two suspension settings the car floats over all bumps and gets confused when pushed hard. The Airmatic system has a way of bouncing over bumps and it never feels well glued to the ground. A mid corner undulation will make the car compress and then jump back up in an abrupt fashion. The level of body roll is very pronounced (worse than an E39 M5 or W210 E55). In a simple phrase the E55 is a car with a great motor looking for a chassis with which to pair up. Grip in the E55 is low (.82 or s some have been around .84 but an E320 no sport manages an insulting .85g and goes through the slalom course at a staggering .5 mph slower than the E55 - as per Motor Trend tests). Take out for a hard drive the E55 will scrub the front tires down and wear the side walls off in grand fashion. The car simply wants to understeer (even with ultra careful use of the throttle). If driven just right, the E55 will tango but it takes so much effort to do so that it eliminates most of the fun before you get going. In sport II the car will drive far better than in comfort mode but at that point the ride becomes very firm and you hear interior trim pieces take a beating.

In comparison, all the cars I have driven with ABC were worlds different. The SL55 and CL55 both are heavy beasts but both will out maneuver an E55 any day of the week in any condition. These cars are “nimble” for their size and encourage a brisk pace when driven. The SL55 and CL55 both have a supple ride that only becomes harsh on the worst of roads. Expansion joints and quick bumps can send a shudder through the chassis but this is the price you pay for zero body roll. The ABC cars are far more neutral than the E55 and the SL actually turns in more quickly that I often expect. On the streets, I find myself turning into corners to quickly in the SL for I am used to the lethargic steering of the E55. Where the E55 understeers all day long the SL and CL will oversteer very quickly with minimal use of the throttle. In reality the SL will actually lift off oversteer in some situations. As far as grip goes the ABC cars pull between .90 and .93 and this feels worlds better than the E55. An S55 will pull .92g on a skidpad but it give some up in the slalom due to its long wheelbase and sizeable mass. The SL55 does have a negative trait (but not found in CL55's - from my testing at least - can I drive your car adam?). Where my S55 had huge amounts of suspension travel, the SL55 will “bottom” out the rear suspension very easily when at speed uneven road. When the car compresses, it feels as if you hit bump stops and then jump back up to attention. In sport mode this problem gets even worse which leads me to believe it is more of an issue with short wheelbase cars and the programming of ABC. In comfort mode, the SL will compress further without the abrupt rebound that makes the car unstable. EVO found a similar problem in a recent test and its easy to see why when you look at the quality of the UK's back roads. To top all this off, the ride of the CL is far better than the E55 in any setting. When selecting the sport mode of the CL55, the ride does not get any stiffer than normal because the system does not stiffen the suspension and only dials out 99.6% of the normal body roll (vs 88 or so reduction of body roll in normal comfort mode).

Overall, I would say a CL55 is the sportier car and its higher level of luxury makes it the clear winner. The seats in the CL are so nice that I long to have such seats in the E55. The trouble here is that the CL is due for a total overhaul in 8 months so I would be fearful of buying the current version. Maybe waiting for the next generation car could be wise but I hear ABC bites the dust after the current SL, S, and CL cars go out of production (to costly to keep this feature…they all use a advanced version of Airmatic in the next series).

If you have any questions let me know. This was not meant as a slam on the E55 so E55 owners please don't turn this into a flame war.

Bilal

A very detailed and informative review, thank you very much.

I must say, judging by your review, the only significant attribute of the E55 vs. other cars is its huge power reserves, the E55 vs the SL/CL and possibly S, is an inferior car in most respects. This could be atrributed to the price differences between the E and the "top classes".

Could it be a possibility that Mercedes saloons are more keyed in for understeer as a natural trait for reasons of exceptional safety? If this is the case, then all Mercedes cars should have this trait. But as you have said that is not the case.

I have heard that ABC is going to be improved further in future cars. You must remember, even though Airmatic is standard on all S-classes, bar the 600 and 55, its a very superior system when it comes to ride quality, however the ABC is not that behind in this department as well. But the airmatic system on the E55 is only "semi active", therefore it cannot either reproduce the fine ride of the S-class or the nimble responses of a hydraulic and steel based system, like ABC. Its pretty hard to decide, why Mercedes chose to implement a semic active system for the E, possibly cost?

I am big fan of the SL55, I think its AMG's best car for sound quality, looks and price.

Anyways, cyncarvin, could you explain the differences in ride quality of the CL55 vs SL55? I know you are more "hardcore" and attribute ride quality with sport suspension finesse, but in terms of smoothness, which is the smoother car, the SL or the CL?

CynCarvin32

Ride in the CL is better than the SL. The SL may be set a tad more firm but I tend to think the short wheelbase of the SL causes it to wiggle and jiggle around on bumpy surfaces more than a CL. Part of the rear suspension bottoming out issue must be due to the short wheel base of the SL.

Here is a pic of an E55 after track use at Willow Springs (my guess from which tire is destroyed). I saw this at a dealership getting new brake rotors. Car was brand new too . Can you say UNDERSTEER? Repeat after me... The E55 is prone to UNDERSTEER... LOL

Regards.

shoes

I will add my 2 cents. I have owned 2 CL's (500 and 600), 4- E55's (2001,2002,2003,2004), 3 SL's (2003 and 2004 SL500, 2003 SL55).

Agree that the handling of the E55 is the worst of the group. Even worse though is the ride quality of the E55, which I found too stiff on the softest setting. The steering is also dull and lifeless. Lastly, I could do without the electronic brakes. On the plus side, I think the seats of the E55 are the most comfortable.

The SL has the best performance handling of these three cars, but the shorter wheelbase does make for a choppier ride. You could make this ride plush by substituting 17 inch wheels for the stock 18's. I don't like the seats in the SL and could not ride more than an hour in the car because of this.

The CL has the plushest ride of the three. The CL handles extremely well for its size and mass, but you won't mistake it for a sports car. There are some occasional sharp reports from the suspension.

victoryroad

In addition to the suspension differences between the CL55 and E55, the brakes of the CL55 are better, although I cannot quote stopping distances. My experience with the Sensotronic brakes system was with our 03 SL500 Sport, so the E55 may be a bit different due to its 8 piston front calipers, but the difference between my 03 CL55 brakes and the Sensotronic system is huge. The SL55 also has Sensotronic, but the excellent comparison of the suspension characteristics above was silent on braking. For a 4300 pound car, the CL55 has never dissappointed me in braking.

corgiman

My 2 cents after having a CL600 and an E55 - The suspension in the E55 is a big disappointment. Bottoms easily and has nowhere near the control of ABC in the CL. I'm just gonna drive it till the price of a used CL600 is in reach - took too much of a beating on the first 600 to buy new again.

awiner

When I drove CynCravin's E55, I almost steered us into a ditch due to the E's artificial like steering. I was expecting it to be more like the CL's I guess. The suspension on the E55 was a huge disappointment too in comparison to the CL's ABC.

CynCarvin32

its good to see i am not alone in thinking the E55 leaves something on the table when you take it for a drive. It should be the best 55 Kompressor but in all reality I would rate it the worst. My S55 was more fun to drive (but far slower -- a 2001).

I would say however the SL55 is a really great car. For its mass it still puts one heck of a grin on your face when the road turns. It is no 996 TT but it sure does a great job of controling what it has. You never find yourself wondering if the car can keep up with itself when you mash the gas..but I wonder that everytime I push the E55.

Care to trade cars Awiner?

CynCarvin32

600's never fair well on the used market. I have seen the 2003 S600's dip into the mid 80's for a car with 25k miles. That is simply sad. S55's were 10k less new and now sell for 10k more than the same age S600. Oh well....

You are correct a used S600 is the deal of the decade.

rob1

Thanks for the great feedback!AS a novice in the world of Mercedes but an experienced Porsche and BMW owner ,I foud your advice very informative.I know how I have enjoyed my 02 M5 for the handling and responsiveness.I previously owned a 1999 740I sport and did not like the bulky size and dulling of perception (engine noise,awareness of how fast) that I experienced.Although the CL 55 and 740I sport are in different leagues,I wonder about how soft the ride and quietness would frustrate me.Does driving the Cl55 still invoke those same feelings of enjoyment?I enjoy a really resposive and hard drive as evidenced by my current vehicles(996 tt and 02 M5).Would greatly appreciate any additional info. and am enjoying being a new member to this site!Thanks