Toog4me

The seats are completely different as well. The seats in the C feel like cardboard.

The ODO is different. The digital display on the instrument cluster between the speedo and rpm gauge is different as well.

The steering wheel is different. The C's consists of cheap looking buttons that are painted to look like they're metal.

The "titanium" look of the C class looks cheap and wears out easily.

The gear shifter on the C class is "titanium" looking as well...

The armrest on the C and the CLK is different.

The glovebox is different...

The cupholders are different...
And I could go on.

The C and the CLK are different cars as are the interiors. This is not a biased opinion as I would have purchased a C350 if I felt the two were really the same.

I encourage you to go to your local MB dealership and sit and drive a CLK350 and then drive a C350. There's a difference-- both in the drive and in the craftsmanship and details/equipment.

Predator

i remember when mb gave me a c240 loaner and let me tell you. what a difference. i was surprised how much of difference there is. The quality is definitely much better in the clk. I cant understand how anyone can say they look and feel the same?

clkcadet

I second that!

FrankW

so the brush aluminium trim in the CLK55 is cheap as well? they are the same trim used in the C55.

the steering wheel, seats, arm rest, etc Like I've said are necessary changes. The new luxury C280/350's seat is just as comfortable as the CLK350 seats I've sat in. Steering wheel is easily changeble. The C350's steering wheel is a sport steering wheel anywayz. and for the seats the one in the CLK is bulky for the latches so that you can move the seat forward to gain access to the back seat. The seat is bigger if you have not noticed and you have less back seat because of the coupe design.

with the non sport C280/350 you could get the same wood trim used in the CLK350 as well as the shiftknob. The standard shift-knob is all the same. and btw I've already said the speedo/tech is different, you think i don't know the ODO is different?

glovebox, arm rest, and what else...MR. OBVIOUS. Those things are just different designs to make the dashboard flow. They're obviously not gonna just stuff the W203 vents/glovebox/armrest into the W209. It doesn't make any difference in built quality. You listed all this yet ignore the REALLY obvious that the centerconsole on both are one and the same with all the switch gear using parts that look the same. btw, the centerconsole part numbers other than the Comand they all use the same part number. If they are the same how can you argue one is better quality than the other?

Based on what you are arguing you THINK the bulit quality is better in the CLK because it's designed differently? I can say this too then; my more expensive Rolex with diamond has better built quality than my less expensive Rolex without diamond while they have the similar design (not like I actually have Rolexes.)

no offense. as we are talking about built quality here. not design.

Toog4me

I can't believe this argument is actually taking place. You're trying to debate that a C class and a CLK are equivalent. So I advise you to go to your local MB dealership this weekend and actually test drive and sit in the two.

I not only test drove 3 before choosing, but I've had 2 as loaner cars for a total of 4 days and the C is a much cheaper feeling, looking, and driving car than my CLK.

All of these changes and differences that you say are "obvious" are actually large.

FrankW

I've never said they are equivalent. What I said was built quality is the same MB standard. I'm only debating on the built quality which you constantly knock on the W203, and which from what I read in your argument that because they are designed different the quality is better in the CLK? you sure knows your argument. All those things you said that are different doesn't make any difference on the built quality which the dash are made of the same material and they even share the same parts through out the center console.

btw, why for the last two post you simply ignored my question on where your argument is based?

and dude, I've drove the w208 CLK320, W209 CLK320/350, the CLK55 and the C55. other than the 55s. my car at 4 years old drives far better and look better than any of them. That was just from cars between friends and family members. I've drove the C350 at the dealership as well. The car was much more nimble and responsive than the CLK350.

Predator

man u really love the c class. hey fact of matter is, craftmanship and overall build quality clk is much better, hence the higher price. i agree with u that clk is based on c class but that doesnt mean its the same quality or less quality. Drive-wise c class and clk might be comparable, cant say which one drives better as far as clk350 and c350, they are probably similar since suspension is similar.
also what do u mean ur c32amg drives and looks better than w208 CLK320, W209 CLK320/350, the CLK55 and the C55? boy what u smoking? come on now clk55 and c55??

FrankW

the CLK is higher priced for few reasons.

1. W208 CLK was introduced to the market to officially replace the last W124 E-class coupe. Using the W202 chassi and adapt W210 design efficiently kept the cost down. That's why the engine options are the same as the W210 E-class.

2. The W209 kept the status built by the W208 and the price of course stayed where it's at. However design wise the w209 didn't follow the trend that made the CLK what it was which was adopting the design que from the E-class. Instead the w209 went with w203 switch gears on the center console and door panel and few other areas. The reason is to save cost.

I don't really favorite one over the other. If you give me a choice of C55 and CLK55. I would go with the C55 for praticality and the use of 4door and the next step would be the E55. I wouldn't pass on the CLK55 if a good deal came along for a second car, but the CLK63 would be a much better choice.

and I do mean by my C32 drives better and look better (IMO of course) than the listed cars with it's front 14" Brembo, fully adjustable coilover suspension, quad exhaust, evosport pulley kit, to go with full Carlsson RS bodykit. Of course, bodykit is all about personal preference.

Toog4me

My argument is based on sitting, driving, and looking at the two. The C is a cheaper car. It looks cheaper, it feels cheaper, it is cheaper. You're not going to convince anyone otherwise so I'm not going to argue with you about this anymore.

FrankW

yea...sure...looks cheaper while it has everything the same on the center console down to the part numbers.

just read my last post. based on your argument if a car is cheaper on price it'll be cheaper in quality is that right? The last I've checked my car brand new was more expensive than yours. there are also CLK models such as the CLK240, 200k that's cheaper than the C350/280, so are they cheap too?

I really find it funny that when someone can't think of any come back based on facts they just repeat themselves over and over. I've said it in the beginning and I'll say it again. Your argument is simply based on your biased opinion because you own the car from what you just said in the last post.

matsna

C Class and CLK class are built on the same production line. I've seen it happen. CLK is way better anyway - speaking as a CLK owner

Predator

hey just face it C class is C class, get it? And clk class is clk class. and SL is SL class, nice. get my drift. Theres a reason for classes, and C class is at the bottom for a reason its the cheapest model u can get. If u wanna talk about how much more ur amg cost vs a clk350 than why dont compare to a clk amg to ur car or better yet a clk-dtm which is a whole lot expensive than ur amg. u see how rediculous that sounds? well thats how rediculous u sound comparing a c class to clk.

FrankW

I was simply "re-phrasing" how he wanted to argue based on his argument from the beginning. Again, you and toog choose to ignore how both the w203 and w209 shares pretty much everything on the center console and argue that one is better than another on built quality? If they use the same parts, would you say their built quality is the same? and even built on the same assembly line.

Like I've said before I like the sedan for praticality. If I'm looking for a coupe than yes the CLK500/55 would be in consideration, but the M3 would have what I want in a sport coupe. w203 vs w209 it's simply sedan vs coupe for me. There are more to do with price rather than built quality as they are essentially the same.

Obviously you are arguing because you own a CLK. On the other hand I got both class sitting on the driveway. And only simply stating the fact about both car which the thread starter asked. You want to defend your car which is fine, but quit acting if you are speaking with a unbiased opinion.

btw, the A-class is the cheapest model in the MB line-up.

mike10980

Obviously (I just LOVE stating the obvious, haha) it's a matter of personal preference when it comes to both cars. Personally, I chose a CLK W209 because I feel that I want a sportier car with also enough to seat a couple people in the back. When I have a family a four-door car will be a must for me. Therefore, someone's argument for a W203 is that they need it for the functionality of four doors. The old W208 was undoubtedly an ever-lasting shape, and will always appeal to me as a finely crafted Mercedes; however, I do appreciate the modern look of the CLK. The pillarless design and the stanc of the car seems very dignified in my opinion. I can personally say that I can feel a difference between the 209 and the 203 (obviously)...whether it is real or psychological. These two vehicles, while built on the same platform, are different vehicles. The W209 with it's top down just looks plain gorgeous in my opinion.

However, back to my original point, there are countless variables when deciding between the C32 and CLK500. I personally don't buy my cars caring what other people think, but what I feel comfortable in; I could care less if someone is *feeling* my car (be it ANY kind of car/class). Personally, the W209 just felt right to me.

FrankW

can't put it any better than that. it's all about personal preference. instead of sound like an idiot and just attack other people's opinion this is far better.

that's exactly what I said from the start. If he wants a sedan get the C32 if he wants a coupe than get the CLK500 he has in mind.

Predator

I agree it is about personal preference. I am glad u are happy with ur c32 as i am happy with my clk500. now getting back to quality vs the two cars. But it is a fact that the build quality and overall layout inside the clk is better than c class. now while the c class and clk share some a few parts, there are a lot of parts that the two cars dont share. if u take a look at the SL, there are some parts the clk share like the steering wheel but that doesnt mean that build quality is similar to SL.

buzz888

i was thinking of buying a c32 amg too but i bought clk500 and i am happy

the c32 is small, older but more power
the clk is prestigious, and looks a lot nicer IMO.

Toog4me

Yeah, cuz it's not a C class. Good choice!