The $8,500 Question
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
From: NE OH-IO
2010 Buick Enclave
The $8,500 Question
Two used cars:
1. 2005 CLK500 convertible with 52,000 miles, excellent condition with AMG pkg, nav, htd/ventilation seats, warmer weather life, stored lately in winter, private party enthusiast.
2. 2008 CLK350 convertible with 32,000 miles, excellent condition with nav, htd/ventilated seats, keyless go, two tone interior and wood steering wheel, dealer bought at auction.
KBB has the price difference at $12,000 which, frankly, means nothing to me.
Both prices are fair to more than fair.
Based upon your knowledge of Mercedes in general and CLK in particular in regards mainly, but not limited to, maintenance and longevity, is the 2008 worth that much of premium?
I will probably drive 5-7,000 miles a year and store it 2-3 months during various types of Ohio winters.
I appreciate your opinions, thanks.
1. 2005 CLK500 convertible with 52,000 miles, excellent condition with AMG pkg, nav, htd/ventilation seats, warmer weather life, stored lately in winter, private party enthusiast.
2. 2008 CLK350 convertible with 32,000 miles, excellent condition with nav, htd/ventilated seats, keyless go, two tone interior and wood steering wheel, dealer bought at auction.
KBB has the price difference at $12,000 which, frankly, means nothing to me.
Both prices are fair to more than fair.
Based upon your knowledge of Mercedes in general and CLK in particular in regards mainly, but not limited to, maintenance and longevity, is the 2008 worth that much of premium?
I will probably drive 5-7,000 miles a year and store it 2-3 months during various types of Ohio winters.
I appreciate your opinions, thanks.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 4,748
Likes: 0
From: A Canadian in Dubai, United Arab Emirates
'05 C200K SS, '05 Kleemann CLK500K, '08 Hummer H3 & '92 Z34 5sp (track car in Canada)
Summer car? Get the V8. I must say I am jealous of the ventilated seats - somehow my GCC spec car came with heated and not ventilated 
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 5
From: Chicago
2015.5 Volvo V60 Polestar
The 500 without a doubt between the two. But, I'd go with this!
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.js...standard=false
Close to you too.
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.js...standard=false
Close to you too.
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
From: NE OH-IO
2010 Buick Enclave
The 500 without a doubt between the two. But, I'd go with this!
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.js...standard=false
Close to you too.
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.js...standard=false
Close to you too.
I'm glad to see all are picking the 500 so far as it makes the most to me. I am 62 and am looking for a car I can keep forever. That's the reason I was hedging toward the newer one. I guess I can make a lot of repairs/maintenance with the extra $8,500.
Anyone out there with a different opinion?
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,314
Likes: 2
From: Witness Protection Program
06 CLK350 -SOLD! 2010 Cadillac SRX Premium Turbo
I wouldn't say it's an opinion but, I have no regrets in purchasing my 350.
Great gas mileage, ample power for us older folks to be just enough dangerous, and basically the same look as the 500.
Oh, and I saved some dough buying it over a 2 year older 500 with more miles. Just sayin'
Great gas mileage, ample power for us older folks to be just enough dangerous, and basically the same look as the 500.
Oh, and I saved some dough buying it over a 2 year older 500 with more miles. Just sayin'
Trending Topics
MBworld Guru
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,782
Likes: 1,011
NO LONGER ACTIVE
It's a tough decision. At first, I'd say go with the V8. But then again, the performance differences are not night and day:
CLK500: HP = 302, TQ = 339, 0-60 = 6.0, MPG = 17/22
CLK350: HP = 268, TQ = 258, 0-60 = 6.7, MPG = 18/27
You will feel the extra torque on the V8, but the V6 is no slouch. From a practical perspective, I have concerns with both vehicles - the early 722.9 transmissions, such as used in the 2005 CLK500, were troublesome. By 2008, those early issues had been resolved. However, there are potential balance shaft issues with the 3.5 V6, but that's easy to rule out with a VIN check which we can cross-reference to affected engine serial numbers.
So, now assuming everything else is equal, you just have to decide - do you want the extra grunt of the V8, or the extra creature comforts in the V6? If it were me, I'd probably go with the V8 and save the $8,500.
CLK500: HP = 302, TQ = 339, 0-60 = 6.0, MPG = 17/22
CLK350: HP = 268, TQ = 258, 0-60 = 6.7, MPG = 18/27
You will feel the extra torque on the V8, but the V6 is no slouch. From a practical perspective, I have concerns with both vehicles - the early 722.9 transmissions, such as used in the 2005 CLK500, were troublesome. By 2008, those early issues had been resolved. However, there are potential balance shaft issues with the 3.5 V6, but that's easy to rule out with a VIN check which we can cross-reference to affected engine serial numbers.
So, now assuming everything else is equal, you just have to decide - do you want the extra grunt of the V8, or the extra creature comforts in the V6? If it were me, I'd probably go with the V8 and save the $8,500.
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
7 Craziest Things AMG Gas Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
New Electric Mercedes-AMG GT 4-Door Coupe Unveiled: 10 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
6 Mercedes Models That Did NOT Age Well (But Are Somehow Still Cool)
Verdad Gallardo
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
MBworld Guru
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,782
Likes: 1,011
NO LONGER ACTIVE
Member
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
From: New York
2009 CLK550 coupe
Without the AMG package the 350's looks is a bit too soft for my taste. I drove a fully loaded CLK350 for a few years. Very reliable car other than a couple of issues with keyless-go. e.g. few times it couldn't detect the key inside my briefcase left in the back seat - this happened while driving. Door on driver side would not unlock when approached. Door handle had to be replaced to fix it.
I asked the same question about 6 months ago and the overwhelming response was for the '05 500. I went with the crowd and am verry happy i got the V8.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,257
Likes: 5
From: Chicago
2015.5 Volvo V60 Polestar
Thanks for the tip. I'm more of a wood interior guy, but I do love the CLK55 look, though, so I saved it in auto trader to mull it over later.
I'm glad to see all are picking the 500 so far as it makes the most to me. I am 62 and am looking for a car I can keep forever. That's the reason I was hedging toward the newer one. I guess I can make a lot of repairs/maintenance with the extra $8,500.
Anyone out there with a different opinion?
I'm glad to see all are picking the 500 so far as it makes the most to me. I am 62 and am looking for a car I can keep forever. That's the reason I was hedging toward the newer one. I guess I can make a lot of repairs/maintenance with the extra $8,500.
Anyone out there with a different opinion?
Wish mine had it.
Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
From: Bihac, Bosnia and Herzegovina
CLK 220 CDI 2006 Avantgarde
No brainer, the 500 is the way to go. I guess you don't care for the fuel economy, so if they're in about the same condition the 500 in that spec is a no brainer for me.
Good luck!
Edit: Just remembered, my aunt has that same V8 in her CL500 if I'm not mistaken, and it has done over 150.000 miles problem-free.
Good luck!
Edit: Just remembered, my aunt has that same V8 in her CL500 if I'm not mistaken, and it has done over 150.000 miles problem-free.
Last edited by cavkic; Mar 16, 2012 at 09:11 PM.
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
From: NE OH-IO
2010 Buick Enclave
No brainer, the 500 is the way to go. I guess you don't care for the fuel economy, so if they're in about the same condition the 500 in that spec is a no brainer for me.
Good luck!
Edit: Just remembered, my aunt has that same V8 in her CL500 if I'm not mistaken, and it has done over 150.000 miles problem-free.
Good luck!
Edit: Just remembered, my aunt has that same V8 in her CL500 if I'm not mistaken, and it has done over 150.000 miles problem-free.
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
From: NE OH-IO
2010 Buick Enclave
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
From: NE OH-IO
2010 Buick Enclave
Thread Starter
Junior Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
From: NE OH-IO
2010 Buick Enclave
It's a tough decision. At first, I'd say go with the V8. But then again, the performance differences are not night and day:
CLK500: HP = 302, TQ = 339, 0-60 = 6.0, MPG = 17/22
CLK350: HP = 268, TQ = 258, 0-60 = 6.7, MPG = 18/27
You will feel the extra torque on the V8, but the V6 is no slouch. From a practical perspective, I have concerns with both vehicles - the early 722.9 transmissions, such as used in the 2005 CLK500, were troublesome. By 2008, those early issues had been resolved. However, there are potential balance shaft issues with the 3.5 V6, but that's easy to rule out with a VIN check which we can cross-reference to affected engine serial numbers.
So, now assuming everything else is equal, you just have to decide - do you want the extra grunt of the V8, or the extra creature comforts in the V6? If it were me, I'd probably go with the V8 and save the $8,500.
CLK500: HP = 302, TQ = 339, 0-60 = 6.0, MPG = 17/22
CLK350: HP = 268, TQ = 258, 0-60 = 6.7, MPG = 18/27
You will feel the extra torque on the V8, but the V6 is no slouch. From a practical perspective, I have concerns with both vehicles - the early 722.9 transmissions, such as used in the 2005 CLK500, were troublesome. By 2008, those early issues had been resolved. However, there are potential balance shaft issues with the 3.5 V6, but that's easy to rule out with a VIN check which we can cross-reference to affected engine serial numbers.
So, now assuming everything else is equal, you just have to decide - do you want the extra grunt of the V8, or the extra creature comforts in the V6? If it were me, I'd probably go with the V8 and save the $8,500.
edit: I read it was a valve body/control unit replacement for approx $1800 to rectify. Any newer options/cost?
Last edited by tallison24; Mar 17, 2012 at 10:29 AM.
Member
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
From: Ky
2005 CLK 500 cabriolet
