What year & which model CLK should I buy?
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Model T
What year & which model CLK should I buy?
First, I'd like to say hi to everyone on this forum. Now onto my question...my wife and I are looking to purchase a 2003 or 04 or 05 CLK, probably the 320 model with the v6 engine.
I have started doing some research and it looks like the 2005+ models have a slightly different looking front end. Do they have any other features that the 2003 and 4 cars do not have? Was any year better/ less problematic then the others?
Also do these cars only come with an automatic transmission? Do any of them have a tiptronic transmission?
Basically we are looking for the most reliable daily driver.
Thanks in advance for your feedback.
-Adrian
I have started doing some research and it looks like the 2005+ models have a slightly different looking front end. Do they have any other features that the 2003 and 4 cars do not have? Was any year better/ less problematic then the others?
Also do these cars only come with an automatic transmission? Do any of them have a tiptronic transmission?
Basically we are looking for the most reliable daily driver.
Thanks in advance for your feedback.
-Adrian
Super Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 678
Likes: 22
CLK 55 AMG 2005 and CLK 63 AMG cab.2007 - 2009 EVO - 2013 ML63 AMG - 2018 G63 AMG
Can't tell you about the V6,
but for the 55 AMG, 2005 is the best year! (coupe)
Because of all the little changes they made: Brake, Center console,
Bumper, Harmon Kardon sound system, quad exhaust and the MOST system
not sure: Suspension
but for the 55 AMG, 2005 is the best year! (coupe)
Because of all the little changes they made: Brake, Center console,
Bumper, Harmon Kardon sound system, quad exhaust and the MOST system
not sure: Suspension
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 405
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, CA
07' IS 350, 08' E550
First, I'd like to say hi to everyone on this forum. Now onto my question...my wife and I are looking to purchase a 2003 or 04 or 05 CLK, probably the 320 model with the v6 engine.
I have started doing some research and it looks like the 2005+ models have a slightly different looking front end. Do they have any other features that the 2003 and 4 cars do not have? Was any year better/ less problematic then the others?
Also do these cars only come with an automatic transmission? Do any of them have a tiptronic transmission?
Basically we are looking for the most reliable daily driver.
Thanks in advance for your feedback.
-Adrian
I have started doing some research and it looks like the 2005+ models have a slightly different looking front end. Do they have any other features that the 2003 and 4 cars do not have? Was any year better/ less problematic then the others?
Also do these cars only come with an automatic transmission? Do any of them have a tiptronic transmission?
Basically we are looking for the most reliable daily driver.
Thanks in advance for your feedback.
-Adrian
Uhhh did you say reliable?
Mercedes Benz cars are some of the most unreliable luxury cars money can buy.....sorry I had to be so blunt about it 
If money is no option and you really want a MB because of the logo then get yourself an AMG. Otherwise, any Chrysler car such as the Crossfire is basically a MB without the logo and would save you some thousands less 
I own both a Lexus IS 350 and a 2004 CLK 55 and my Lexus is by far more reliable. Just my 2 cents. Welcome aboard and good luck with your decision!
Super Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 659
Likes: 0
From: Miami, FL
E55 AMG + Mustang GT
Just in case you do decide to go with the AMG route, I'm selling mine... here's the link to the sale thread:
https://mbworld.org/forums/mercedes-vehicles/251266-fs-2003-clk55-modded-very-clean-low-miles.html
https://mbworld.org/forums/mercedes-vehicles/251266-fs-2003-clk55-modded-very-clean-low-miles.html
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 7,136
Likes: 5
Corrolla
Uhhh did you say reliable? Mercedes Benz cars are some of the most unreliable luxury cars money can buy.....sorry I had to be so blunt about it If money is no option and you really want a MB because of the logo then get yourself an AMG. Otherwise, any Chrysler car such as the Crossfire is basically a MB without the logo and would save you some thousands less I own both a Lexus IS 350 and a 2004 CLK 55 and my Lexus is by far more reliable. Just my 2 cents. Welcome aboard and good luck with your decision!
Mercedes Benz cars are some of the most unreliable luxury cars money can buy.....sorry I had to be so blunt about it If money is no option and you really want a MB because of the logo then get yourself an AMG. Otherwise, any Chrysler car such as the Crossfire is basically a MB without the logo and would save you some thousands less I own both a Lexus IS 350 and a 2004 CLK 55 and my Lexus is by far more reliable. Just my 2 cents. Welcome aboard and good luck with your decision! I agree....anyway the only difference that I can think right now from 03,04(CLK320) compare to 05 was the 05 has the NAV. system and the digital temp. control I guess...
Trending Topics
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
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Model T
Uhhh did you say reliable? Mercedes Benz cars are some of the most unreliable luxury cars money can buy.....sorry I had to be so blunt about it If money is no option and you really want a MB because of the logo then get yourself an AMG. Otherwise, any Chrysler car such as the Crossfire is basically a MB without the logo and would save you some thousands less I own both a Lexus IS 350 and a 2004 CLK 55 and my Lexus is by far more reliable. Just my 2 cents. Welcome aboard and good luck with your decision!
Mercedes Benz cars are some of the most unreliable luxury cars money can buy.....sorry I had to be so blunt about it If money is no option and you really want a MB because of the logo then get yourself an AMG. Otherwise, any Chrysler car such as the Crossfire is basically a MB without the logo and would save you some thousands less I own both a Lexus IS 350 and a 2004 CLK 55 and my Lexus is by far more reliable. Just my 2 cents. Welcome aboard and good luck with your decision! I may have to rethinking my decision about buying a MB perhaps. As far as issues these cars have, are they the kind of things that will leave you stranded or just silly things that break?
Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
From: Houston, TX
04 CLK 320, 04 BMW 530I, and 09 HD FLTR
I bought a 04 clk320 in May wtih 34K miles. I was originally looking at 05 and 06 models, but the 04 had a price I couldn't refuse. From my investigation the 05 differences are:
Stereo is different in 04 1/2 - From Bose to HK
Either in 05 or 06 they changed the transmission to 7spd
Front end change in 06
I also have a car by the other German automaker and a Chevy SUV. None of my cars are probably as reliable as your Japanese vehicles. But I've never been stranded. So reliability is relative. I've taken the MB in once to replace one catalytic converter.
There have been owners of certain MBs that have explained pretty significant issues on this forum. So, do your homework and consider an extended warranty. Especially if it will be a daily driver like mine...
Good Luck
Stereo is different in 04 1/2 - From Bose to HK
Either in 05 or 06 they changed the transmission to 7spd
Front end change in 06
I also have a car by the other German automaker and a Chevy SUV. None of my cars are probably as reliable as your Japanese vehicles. But I've never been stranded. So reliability is relative. I've taken the MB in once to replace one catalytic converter.
There have been owners of certain MBs that have explained pretty significant issues on this forum. So, do your homework and consider an extended warranty. Especially if it will be a daily driver like mine...
Good Luck
Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles
2014 GL450
I believe there were some changes to the dashboard in 2005. The 2006 six-cylinder changed to the 350 engine with a 7-speed transmission. It's usually better to get the newest year you can afford because there are improvements from year to year.
In the US it only comes with an automatic. The gears can be changed like a tiptronic by moving the gear lever left or right. Neither the 5 speed (pre-2006) nor the 7 speed are particularily sporting, but it is entertaining to downshift gears on occasion.
In the 35,000 miles I have been driving my '06 it has never stranded me and I only went in once for an unscheduled visit due to a noisy fanbelt spring. The CLK is reliable enough to be a daily driver.
In the US it only comes with an automatic. The gears can be changed like a tiptronic by moving the gear lever left or right. Neither the 5 speed (pre-2006) nor the 7 speed are particularily sporting, but it is entertaining to downshift gears on occasion.
In the 35,000 miles I have been driving my '06 it has never stranded me and I only went in once for an unscheduled visit due to a noisy fanbelt spring. The CLK is reliable enough to be a daily driver.
Senior Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 363
Likes: 1
From: San Francisco
Sold - CLK500
Just use common sense.. set yourself a maximum price you want to spend and go and find the newset car you can with low miles. For example i just bought a certified clk500 from mb with 35k for $26,000. It's not highly spec'd i.e doenst have sat nav or push button start. But it has bose sound, xenons leather obviously not that crap immitation stuff mb are now using.. Also being a 500 it has the amg pack which is standard on all 500's.
There are deal's to be had, but after riding in my dad's sl500 there is defiantely a difference in quality between the clk's and the higher end mercs.. But it shows why you pay so much for the high end cars.
Clk's seem to suffer with electrical niggles, Already my car had a glitch with the passenger seat controls. Being under warranty mb replaced the computer chip and now its working fine.
That said, i am having a lot of fun with the new car.
It handles very well around corners and i feel very confident in the cars performance and handling.
If you can find a cheap amg then go for it.. but bare in mind why people buy amg's its probably been on a track or thrashed most of its life. But the amg's do sound mean and have a lot of presence...
Hope this helps
There are deal's to be had, but after riding in my dad's sl500 there is defiantely a difference in quality between the clk's and the higher end mercs.. But it shows why you pay so much for the high end cars.
Clk's seem to suffer with electrical niggles, Already my car had a glitch with the passenger seat controls. Being under warranty mb replaced the computer chip and now its working fine.
That said, i am having a lot of fun with the new car.
It handles very well around corners and i feel very confident in the cars performance and handling.If you can find a cheap amg then go for it.. but bare in mind why people buy amg's its probably been on a track or thrashed most of its life. But the amg's do sound mean and have a lot of presence...
Hope this helps
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
2004 Mercedes Benz CLK320
Thought you should know that since I bought my CLK320 less than two months ago... its gotten nearly 28 MPG! city and highway driving too 
Last edited by djumblatt; Jul 10, 2008 at 11:53 AM. Reason: typo
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
2004 Mercedes Benz CLK320
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Model T
Thank you for the feedback.
It looks like the 2003 or 2004 CLK 320 is what the budget will allow for. I actually prefer the V6 as gas prices are, well…
Naturally I'm leaning towards the 04 car since 1) it's newer and 2) it's not the first year of the new chassis.
What is everyone's opinion on the 3.2l V6 engine? Problems, recalls, any special maintenance, etc.
What about the transmission? Do these hold up well as the miles rack up?
It looks like the 2003 or 2004 CLK 320 is what the budget will allow for. I actually prefer the V6 as gas prices are, well…
Naturally I'm leaning towards the 04 car since 1) it's newer and 2) it's not the first year of the new chassis.
What is everyone's opinion on the 3.2l V6 engine? Problems, recalls, any special maintenance, etc.
What about the transmission? Do these hold up well as the miles rack up?
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
2004 Mercedes Benz CLK320
The 320's are definitely fuel efficient considering that it is not really a slow car. Also, you said your budget makes you lean to the 320...the 500's are nearly identical in price right now...probably having to do with the gas mileage. I was deciding between 3 CLK's in the same price range, two were 500's. Dealers (especially wholesalers) seem quite eager to be giving them away. Gluck !
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Model T
The 320's are definitely fuel efficient considering that it is not really a slow car. Also, you said your budget makes you lean to the 320...the 500's are nearly identical in price right now...probably having to do with the gas mileage. I was deciding between 3 CLK's in the same price range, two were 500's. Dealers (especially wholesalers) seem quite eager to be giving them away. Gluck !
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 223
Likes: 3
From: Orlando, Florida, USA
09CLK550Cab 61k miles
>Have you had any issues with it so far?
Yeah, the CLK500 eats tires because it's so much FUN!
Seriously, though, he's right about 500s being cheaper. My CLK500 (admitedly, it had high mileage) was cheaper than the CLK350s available for the same year.
Also, a CLK500 will cost more to maintain - more tires, more expensive 17" tires, plus more gas, and theoretically it should wear on the tranny more than the 350 since it has more torque.
Plus you might get whiplash easier since it's so fast, and you might attract more girls in bikinis than your wife allows.
But if I was going to go practical, I would have gotten a Toyota Solara. If it were me, I would never get a 320 because the Solara is almost as much car, but cheaper. The 500 costs more to maintain, but is more fun. Trade offs.
Yeah, the CLK500 eats tires because it's so much FUN!
Seriously, though, he's right about 500s being cheaper. My CLK500 (admitedly, it had high mileage) was cheaper than the CLK350s available for the same year.
Also, a CLK500 will cost more to maintain - more tires, more expensive 17" tires, plus more gas, and theoretically it should wear on the tranny more than the 350 since it has more torque.
Plus you might get whiplash easier since it's so fast, and you might attract more girls in bikinis than your wife allows.
But if I was going to go practical, I would have gotten a Toyota Solara. If it were me, I would never get a 320 because the Solara is almost as much car, but cheaper. The 500 costs more to maintain, but is more fun. Trade offs.
Last edited by trikoid; Jul 10, 2008 at 06:18 PM.
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
2004 Mercedes Benz CLK320
Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
From: Houston, TX
04 CLK 320, 04 BMW 530I, and 09 HD FLTR
When considering the total cost of ownership. Eventhough the 500s are going for the same price as the 320, one must consider gas prices and maintenance costs. You also have to consider how you plan to use the vehicle.
If I was buying a weekend only vehicle, then gas prices and maintenance will not be a big of a factor. But when you are using is as a daily driver, then those factors may play a bigger role in your decisions....
If I was buying a weekend only vehicle, then gas prices and maintenance will not be a big of a factor. But when you are using is as a daily driver, then those factors may play a bigger role in your decisions....
Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
From: Houston, TX
04 CLK 320, 04 BMW 530I, and 09 HD FLTR
>Have you had any issues with it so far?
Yeah, the CLK500 eats tires because it's so much FUN!
Seriously, though, he's right about 500s being cheaper. My CLK500 (admitedly, it had high mileage) was cheaper than the CLK350s available for the same year.
Also, a CLK500 will cost more to maintain - more tires, more expensive 17" tires, plus more gas, and theoretically it should wear on the tranny more than the 350 since it has more torque.
Plus you might get whiplash easier since it's so fast, and you might attract more girls in bikinis than your wife allows.
But if I was going to go practical, I would have gotten a Toyota Solara. If it were me, I would never get a 320 because the Solara is almost as much car, but cheaper. The 500 costs more to maintain, but is more fun. Trade offs.
Yeah, the CLK500 eats tires because it's so much FUN!
Seriously, though, he's right about 500s being cheaper. My CLK500 (admitedly, it had high mileage) was cheaper than the CLK350s available for the same year.
Also, a CLK500 will cost more to maintain - more tires, more expensive 17" tires, plus more gas, and theoretically it should wear on the tranny more than the 350 since it has more torque.
Plus you might get whiplash easier since it's so fast, and you might attract more girls in bikinis than your wife allows.
But if I was going to go practical, I would have gotten a Toyota Solara. If it were me, I would never get a 320 because the Solara is almost as much car, but cheaper. The 500 costs more to maintain, but is more fun. Trade offs.
Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
2004 Mercedes Benz CLK320
Are you for real. Well to each it's own. The Solara may be a good car being a toyota and all, but with it being a front wheel drive car, the experience would never be as fun. Plus the styling is bland to me. I've driven one and they don't appeal to me at all. They don't age as well as the MBs.....
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 391
Likes: 2
From: Northern Virginia
2010 ML350 GAS 4Matic
If you can trust the computer's mpg calculation, I regularly get 19-20 mpg in the "city" with my '04 CLK 500 - as long as I'm not hammering the throttle. I live in a relatively flat part of Northern Virginia, so I'm not going up a lot of hills.
On the highway between Northern Virginia and Western Pennsylvania to visit my parents, I typically get 25-26 mpg. Seems like there should be a bigger difference between the CLK500 and the CLK320 in terms of gas mileage.
I'm sure a bigger difference would be seen if both cars were driven with the gas pedal to the floor. But still, just a few mpg difference under normal driving conditions would not help convince me to purchase a 320 vs a 500.
Are any MB's doing displacement on demand - where a few cylinders can be shut down when they aren't needed ? I'd like to see what kind of difference that could make with fuel economy.
On the highway between Northern Virginia and Western Pennsylvania to visit my parents, I typically get 25-26 mpg. Seems like there should be a bigger difference between the CLK500 and the CLK320 in terms of gas mileage.
I'm sure a bigger difference would be seen if both cars were driven with the gas pedal to the floor. But still, just a few mpg difference under normal driving conditions would not help convince me to purchase a 320 vs a 500.
Are any MB's doing displacement on demand - where a few cylinders can be shut down when they aren't needed ? I'd like to see what kind of difference that could make with fuel economy.
Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
From: Houston, TX
04 CLK 320, 04 BMW 530I, and 09 HD FLTR
The other thing to consider when looking at total cost is insurance rates. I'm not sure if there is any significant difference, but it may be something to investigate.
I think that you would be happy with either the 500 or the 320. If ultimately, you're looking for the sound and torque of a V8, then you should go on a get the 500. If that isn't as important as styling, then look at the difference between the AMG style on the 500 and the non-AMG style on the 320. Of course you can get the AMG kit for the 320, but that is extra work that you have to have done.
Do labor over it. Sometimes it is better to go with your first thoughts or what your gut is saying.
I think that you would be happy with either the 500 or the 320. If ultimately, you're looking for the sound and torque of a V8, then you should go on a get the 500. If that isn't as important as styling, then look at the difference between the AMG style on the 500 and the non-AMG style on the 320. Of course you can get the AMG kit for the 320, but that is extra work that you have to have done.
Do labor over it. Sometimes it is better to go with your first thoughts or what your gut is saying.
