Brakes (?)
12-18-2011, 03:32 PM
#26
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mercedes CLK 320 W209
I figured it had to be something with the fuel consumption. The 320 is one thirsty engine and gas prices here are almost $9/gallon. In Sweden we pay over 60% tax on gas.
12-18-2011, 08:23 PM
#28
MBworld Guru
Thanks that diagram, Glyn - it says it all and it's why the 2.6l feels strong starting around 3,000rpm. My biggest complaint is probably fuel economy. In fact, my CLK550 gets better mileage driving around town than the C240.
12-19-2011, 04:09 AM
#29
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLK 240 - 2003
i am getting around 150Km/20L as a daily average driving having 50% City, 50% highway. sometimes on long run on the highway i can actually see a 9.0L/100KM on my cluster
... the prices of gas here is around 1.02$/1L.
we also pay tax around 40% of the price
12-19-2011, 08:43 AM
#30
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: A Canadian in Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Posts: 4,748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'05 C200K SS, '05 Kleemann CLK500K, '08 Hummer H3 & '92 Z34 5sp (track car in Canada)
I got 6.9L/100km average over a 4 hour drive from Dubai to Muscat (lots of stop and go in there) in my '05 C200K. It's still my favorite car I've ever owned.
I guess it doesn't really matter when I'm only paying about $0.75 a gallon for premium (98)
I guess it doesn't really matter when I'm only paying about $0.75 a gallon for premium (98)
12-19-2011, 09:21 AM
#31
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLK 240 - 2003
12-19-2011, 09:37 AM
#32
Super Moderator
Yes - I'm surprised that my 350 easily matches my C240's consumption. The 240 always did about 9l/100Km once warm and on a short open run. Best I ever saw was 8.8 on the open road. 14l/100Km was easily achieved in town.
12-19-2011, 11:03 AM
#33
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLK 240 - 2003
guys,
i was wondering the pre-facelift w209 has 1 Or 2 Piston on the calipers?
i tried searching yet nothing comes out that technical related to such stuff...
the thing is that if i go to a dealer to get either OEM calipers or C230K 2005 sport calipers, how can i know that i am getting the same piston number on both?
sorry but i`m a bit of new to such stuff so learning as we go...
i was wondering the pre-facelift w209 has 1 Or 2 Piston on the calipers?
i tried searching yet nothing comes out that technical related to such stuff...
the thing is that if i go to a dealer to get either OEM calipers or C230K 2005 sport calipers, how can i know that i am getting the same piston number on both?
sorry but i`m a bit of new to such stuff so learning as we go...
12-19-2011, 11:39 AM
#34
MBWorld Fanatic!
guys,
i was wondering the pre-facelift w209 has 1 Or 2 Piston on the calipers?
i tried searching yet nothing comes out that technical related to such stuff...
the thing is that if i go to a dealer to get either OEM calipers or C230K 2005 sport calipers, how can i know that i am getting the same piston number on both?
sorry but i`m a bit of new to such stuff so learning as we go...
i was wondering the pre-facelift w209 has 1 Or 2 Piston on the calipers?
i tried searching yet nothing comes out that technical related to such stuff...
the thing is that if i go to a dealer to get either OEM calipers or C230K 2005 sport calipers, how can i know that i am getting the same piston number on both?
sorry but i`m a bit of new to such stuff so learning as we go...
honestly i just upgraded my fronts to c32 brakes for a 4/2 set up. my stock was 2/2.
OEM clk 500 is 4/2 and i think C230K should be 4/2 as well...
12-19-2011, 12:08 PM
#35
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLK 240 - 2003
i believe the prefacelift should be a 4/2 set...the post facelift is a 6/4....and if you go aftermarket(brembo) you should be getting 8/6 but thats unnecessary.
honestly i just upgraded my fronts to c32 brakes for a 4/2 set up. my stock was 2/2.
OEM clk 500 is 4/2 and i think C230K should be 4/2 as well...
honestly i just upgraded my fronts to c32 brakes for a 4/2 set up. my stock was 2/2.
OEM clk 500 is 4/2 and i think C230K should be 4/2 as well...
12-19-2011, 01:57 PM
#36
Super Moderator
The pre facelift CLK240 front caliper is a single cylinder sliding caliper.
12-20-2011, 04:42 AM
#38
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLK 240 - 2003
Thanks Glyn... seems my result would be set of calipers from a C230 Komp 2005 series (the brembo ones) with slotted/drilled rotors 300mm front & 290mm back...
thank you everyone for the help
thank you everyone for the help
12-20-2011, 04:46 AM
#39
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLK 240 - 2003
Thanks Glyn... seems my result would be set of calipers from a C230 Komp 2005 series (the brembo ones) with slotted/drilled rotors 300mm front & 290mm back...
thank you everyone for the help
thank you everyone for the help
12-20-2011, 09:05 PM
#40
MBworld Guru
ur serious abt the 550?
i am getting around 150Km/20L as a daily average driving having 50% City, 50% highway. sometimes on long run on the highway i can actually see a 9.0L/100KM on my cluster ...
the prices of gas here is around 1.02$/1L.
we also pay tax around 40% of the price
i am getting around 150Km/20L as a daily average driving having 50% City, 50% highway. sometimes on long run on the highway i can actually see a 9.0L/100KM on my cluster
... the prices of gas here is around 1.02$/1L.
we also pay tax around 40% of the price
Let's see, 150Km/20L = 17.6 MPG and 9.0L/100Km = 26.1 MPG. Unless I really "enjoy" it, my CLK550 gets about 19MPG driving to work and back. When I was driving the C240, I was getting only about 17 MPG. I took a trip in the CLK over the summer (to Savannah, GA) and was getting around 28 MPG, but it was a long flat, straight highway with little traffic. The best I've seen on the C240 is about 25 MPG on the highway, but that was with some typical hills and traffic.
Of course the C240 has the 722.6 transmission and the CLK has the 722.9. Unless I'm accelerating to merge in traffic, the CLK rarely sees anything about 2K RPM where the C240 is rarely below 2K RPM.
12-20-2011, 09:12 PM
#41
Newbie
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mitsa
Being Europe I suspect that fuel consumption was the largest criticism & complaints on 2000-2002 models which were horrendous. Complaints were never engine related. Rather quality & build. M112 engine was great!
12-21-2011, 05:02 AM
#42
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLK 240 - 2003
LOL i had the same feeling when i changed by mistake my dashboard readings from KM to Miles!!!
i agree that fuel economy is not the best feature for the 240 engine, yet it does OK in comparison with a 320 (considering both r 6 cylinders).
i do have around 26MPG on long highway runs.. but most of the time i am jammed in traffic or driving up-hill to enjoy the snow...
i had the same feeling when i changed by mistake my dashboard readings from KM to Miles!!!Let's see, 150Km/20L = 17.6 MPG and 9.0L/100Km = 26.1 MPG. Unless I really "enjoy" it, my CLK550 gets about 19MPG driving to work and back. When I was driving the C240, I was getting only about 17 MPG. I took a trip in the CLK over the summer (to Savannah, GA) and was getting around 28 MPG, but it was a long flat, straight highway with little traffic. The best I've seen on the C240 is about 25 MPG on the highway, but that was with some typical hills and traffic.
Of course the C240 has the 722.6 transmission and the CLK has the 722.9. Unless I'm accelerating to merge in traffic, the CLK rarely sees anything about 2K RPM where the C240 is rarely below 2K RPM
Of course the C240 has the 722.6 transmission and the CLK has the 722.9. Unless I'm accelerating to merge in traffic, the CLK rarely sees anything about 2K RPM where the C240 is rarely below 2K RPM
i do have around 26MPG on long highway runs.. but most of the time i am jammed in traffic or driving up-hill to enjoy the snow...
12-22-2011, 08:31 AM
#45
Super Moderator
The US really needs to get into the metric, ISO world.
Having worked all my life for a US oil giant you can imagine the crap it causes.
Having to do all final reporting in Barrels
so that some management can get their heads around it. Positively archaic.
Having worked all my life for a US oil giant you can imagine the crap it causes.
Having to do all final reporting in Barrels
so that some management can get their heads around it. Positively archaic.
12-22-2011, 10:03 AM
#47
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: A Canadian in Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Posts: 4,748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'05 C200K SS, '05 Kleemann CLK500K, '08 Hummer H3 & '92 Z34 5sp (track car in Canada)
12-23-2011, 01:03 AM
#48
MBworld Guru
I've got no problems with the metric system - it's definitely easier to calculate with, but having spent half a century measuring things in inches, feet, miles, gallons and pounds, well, it's hard to teach an old dog new tricks. Thank god for computers, Androids and iPads with their conversion calculators! Now, can we just metricize time?
12-23-2011, 07:27 AM
#49
Super Moderator
