CLK class is based on the E class not C class
 

Why do people think the CLK320 is based on C320. because it has the letter "C" in front of it? so does this mean the CL600 is based on C too? Hell no, I hate it when mercedes change the way they name their cars few years ago. People get confussed I heard people at the auto show looking at the CL500 and said "humm that look kinda big for a C class" or looking at CL600, "wow, $120K for a C class not worth it what a rip off etc.."

You know what I mean, the confusion people get with Mercedes's model designation.
I'm telling you the CLK is based on the E class except its got 2 door less different styling and slightly shorter wheel base. look at the interior,dash and ****pit it closer to the E class than the C class. The older CE (w124) was also based on E class (w124)
I don't want to hear people compare the CLK or CL to the entry model C class (equivelent to bmw 3 series)
So is SLK based on the S class? NO, so why people compare the CLK or CL to the C class then??? Get my point.

I for one would like to see Mercedes re-name CL500 to SC500,
CLK320 to EC320, C230 Sport Coupe to CC230, SLK230 to CLK230. it makes more sense and also less confusion for future MB buyers.

What are you talking about....
 

The CLK has always been based on the C class platform..The new one is no exception....If you can remember, the old CE body was based on the E class...It also had a price that was $ 60K back in 1995...By making a coupe out of the C class, they were able to bring out the CLK at $39,000....Please prove me wrong...I would love to see a E class based coupe...Just be prepared to pay 70-80 K for it if it comes out...

I'm confused then. Why do ALL the auto magazines say it's based on the C Class chassis? This includes 100% of those I subscribe to - Motor Trend, Automobile, Car and Driver, and AutoWeek. Are they wrong? Why do you say it's based on the E Class...because the headlights (in the past) and the taillights resemble the E?

Yes I was very confused too. The styling and engine of the CLK has followed the E class which is why most people think of the CLK as an E class coupe, which was never built because of cost. Anyways, the platform on the other hand is from the C class. Sad fact.

There is nothing confusing about it

The CLK the W203 for two reasons: size and weight which equals cost...
It does however use a significant number of parts from the W211...much more than did the w208 from the W210...

MB has always described the W209 as moving father upmarket than the W208 via the use of many W211 parts and features.

JCM5

What are you talking about??
We all know the CLK is based on C-class chassis... nothing to be confused about...

Regardless of the numbers of parts from whatever, from what I have seen in the photos of the dash of the new CLK, it resembles the cheesy 2002 C240 I was given as a loaner last week when my car was in for service. This includes those pitiful, smaller-than-thimble-size knobs that serve as the temperature selectors for the climate control.

:) Yes, everybody knows it well.
From Brabus C320 -> C32AMG -> CLK500, I'm only too familiar & appreciate
the "excellent" chassis of W203 (as well as W209)that totally change my image of old Mercedes when compared to the BMW.

As to the interior, combination of W203/W211/R230 helps
W209 a quick design and cost effective to the Market.
Aimed at uncertain BMW 6 series, Mercedes is prepared.:)

Correct!!

The CLK uses the C Class chassis, not the larger E Class.

The original forum writer is wrong.

I wonder of JCM5 will reply?

Hey, don't be ashamed JCM5 we all make mistakes on this board from time to time!! It maybe your first, but it more than likely won't be your last. Just don't let the headlights fool you, the W209 and W208 are & were based on the C-class chasis, a big give a way on the W208 is that the steering wheel does not tilt, only telescopes, just like the previous C-class (One of a few complaints I have with mine). Now, on the W209 just take a look at the center dash lay out, it is right out of a C320, if that don't convince you nothing will!!! LOL ;) ;) ;)

Thanks Marcus,

it's just hard to believe why would CLK based on the C, have similar E class head light, tail light and interior design.
I guess things change now. Back then W124 coupe was based on the E..
Anyway I love this board, people here are so civilized like www.bmwm5.com board. If this was posted on other message boards I'm sure they will beat the crap out of me for such mistake :D

Already bad day for me as a brick hit my car on the freeway while
going to work. Damaged the kidney grill (bmw), fan grill, a 7 inch wide and 1/2 inch deep dent. I hope it's not one of you guys that did a vodoo thing on me ....:p

JCM5,


Sound like a good reason to trade in for a MBZ!!!:D :D Just trying to put a good spin on a S**tty event, sorry to hear it happened.:( :(

Anyone ready for a third opinion here? In an article at richmondautomall.com, the writer says that actually the clk is "built on a unique platform that borrows from both the C-class and the E-class ranges." So, does this make sense to anybody? I saw this about two weeks ago and have been looking for it off and on today since I saw the thread. Hope this doesn't add to the confusion. Maybe it's a good compramise.

Yeah... sorry about that :).

The majority of the people who are writing these articles know not the first thing about the cars aside from the basic information found in the models catalogues.

Most of the time, the only people who truly know everything about the cars they have been reviewing are people who write for the specific enthusiast magazines such as BMW Enthusiast, The Star, Mercedes Enthusiast, etc.

You are right!

In an article by Tony Whitney about the 2002 CLK55 AMG cab, the writer links the CLK to the E class:

"My latest AMG test car was a CLK55 AMG Cabriolet, which is based on the range of stylish CLK coupes related to the Mercedes E-Class platform."

http://richmondautomall.com/reviews_...edes_CLK55.htm

In a more current article re the 2003 CLK Tony Whitney states:

"It's a common mistake for auto writers to assume that the CLK range of two-door coupes is based on the C-Class (entry-level) platform, but this is not the case. In fact, this stylish coupe is built on a unique platform that borrows from both the C-Class and E-class Mercedes-Benz ranges."

I tend to agree with Mr. Whitney: The CLK is a hybrid vehicle. The 2003 is more of a MB blend than the 208 series CLKs.

http://richmondautomall.com/reviews_...rcedes_CLK.htm

Karl, did you delete your post, and then repost it? I was wondering why my post suddenly shifted in front of yours.

yes.

I did a little more digging and found this latest 2003 review of the CLK, which I added to my original.

This gives much more credibility to Mr. Whitney's review and I do not think that it is a frivolous fabrication.


"In a more current article re the 2003 CLK Tony Whitney states:
It's a common mistake for auto writers to assume that the CLK range of
two-door coupes is based on the C-Class (entry-level) platform, but this is
not the case. In fact, this stylish coupe is built on a unique platform that
borrows from both the C-Class and E-class Mercedes-Benz ranges."

I tend to agree with Mr. Whitney: The CLK is a hybrid vehicle. The 2003 is
more of a MB blend than the 208 series CLKs."

http://richmondautomall.com/reviews_...rcedes_CLK.htm

Karl K,

Thanks for backing me up on the clk platform issue. I thought some might think I was crazy. I'm surprised, though, that nobody else saw this. (and yes, I did mispell compromise--silly, but it drove me crazy).

My pleasure and thank you for this new info.

This undoubtedly will send many MB scurrying, either discrediting or supporting Mr. Whitney, who clearly states:

quote:It's a common mistake for auto writers to assume that the CLK range of two-door coupes is based on the C-Class (entry-level) platform, but this is not the case.

In fact, this stylish coupe is built on a unique platform that borrows from both the C-Class and E-class Mercedes-Benz ranges. unquote

This makes JCM5 a prophet!

Tnx JCM5 for starting this thread with you incisive observations.

The only thing "unique" about the CLK is that it combines together features of both the w203 and w211...but the fact remains the car is built on the w203 sedan chassis...
...engineering fact...you can wish it away all you want...

Please note that both w203 and w209 have the exact same wheel base 2715 mm and front track 1493 mm...the w209 has slightly large rear track of 1474 vs 1464...Identical turning circles and nearly identical kerb weights 1630 vs 1645 kg.

You will find no features of the w211 chassis that match up with the CLK...other than the odd part here and there...this has nothing to do with opinions...it is a point of fact.

Maybe there is a misunderstanding in language here...in the industry when they say "platform" they usually mean "chassis" not necessarily "model"

It is also the main reason the v8 kompressor shows up in the CLK
the chassis is based on the v6 motor...it is a stretch to add the normal 5.5 v8...the kompressor would add a couple of hundred pounds to the front end...in order to rebalance the package a significant amount of chassis reengineering would be necessary..the result would be bouncing the AMG version up to a price point too close to the E55...all the power in the world is worthless if you do not have the chassis to back it up.

I sent an e-mail to Tony Whitley, automotive authority and journalist.

http://richmondautomall.com/reviews_columns/default.asp

Subject: Tony Whitney - Pls. comment on the CLK

To: info@richmondautomall.com

Dear Mr Whitley:

Would appreciate your response to this discussion on the MBWORLD.ORG forum re CLK platform:

E, C, or both??

https://mbworld.org/forums/showthrea...0&pagenumber=2

Thank you.

Karl K

jco-amg, no offense intended,

but you are repeating what I've heard gazillion times, which may or may not be correct.

I hope Mr. Whitney chimes in.

tnx

I mean no offense either...but MB has always stated that the CLK w209 was based on the w203 platform...the chassis dimensions speak for themselves...I think what Mr. Whitney appears to be addressing is the unique nature of the CLK in the MB line up something I quite agree with...which of course comes also directly from MB's own descriptions...and regarding: I have not seen anyone address the chassis dimension issue before on this board or for that matter in any publication...maybe I missed it...it seems very straight forward to me.

I will be amazed if Mr. Whitney can produce any evidence that the CLK is not built on the w203 sedan chassis.

Stating the fact of the chassis origins does not alter the hybrid nature of the car...I don't dispute that. Lord knows that if you plunk a pillarless coupe on a sedan chassis you will have to make some changes to it.

Further to my posts above, this is the e-mail response from Tony Whitley, automotive authority and journalist:

Subject: Re: Fw: Tony Whitney - Pls. comment on the CLK

Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2002 16:59:30 -0700

From: Tony Whitney

To: karl k

References: 1

Karl: My information on the CLK platform came directly from Mercedes engineering staff in Germany with whom I had face-to-face discussions.

I guess you can't believe everything you read on a
message board.

Tony W (end of e-mail)


My comment:

So, this is information, which came directly from the Mercedes engineering staff in Germany:

The CLK's unique platform borrows from both the C-Class and E-class Mercedes-Benz.