CLK 320... Mistake?
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
CLK 320... Mistake?
I just traded in my 99 E320 for an '03 CLK 320 and I think I may have made a mistake.
My E felt really strong off the line and even at midrange hwy speeds, it was excellent. Well, after driving my new CLK for about 1000 miles and now I'm starting to rev it hard, I'm very disappointed in the power or lack thereof.
Can any of you guys shed some light here and let me know why this car feels slower and why I got beat by a 99 Audi A4 2.8???
It doesn't make any sense to me that this CLK320 feels somewhat "sluggish" compared to my big-ole E!
I'm thinking I should have got the CLK500, and I've talked to the dealer but I'm looking at taking a $6k hit on the trade-in... no thanks.
My E felt really strong off the line and even at midrange hwy speeds, it was excellent. Well, after driving my new CLK for about 1000 miles and now I'm starting to rev it hard, I'm very disappointed in the power or lack thereof.
Can any of you guys shed some light here and let me know why this car feels slower and why I got beat by a 99 Audi A4 2.8???
It doesn't make any sense to me that this CLK320 feels somewhat "sluggish" compared to my big-ole E!
I'm thinking I should have got the CLK500, and I've talked to the dealer but I'm looking at taking a $6k hit on the trade-in... no thanks.
Almost a Member!
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
From: Sunny California
CLK320
I felt the same till it got broken in.
On my test drive, I felt that the car was sluggish. When it was brand new, I felt that way too and was disappointed with the "off the block" acceleration. After 800 miles, it was a different story. Let it break in a little more and you'll see the difference.
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
The CLK is a very smooth and refined car, and I think it remove some of the performance sensation. I did read an E55 test report, undisputedly a very fast car, where the tester said it didn’t at all feel as fast is the numbers. Same story. Having said that, the CLK is heavy (solid) for it size, and it sure doesn’t help when accelerating. Great high speed cruiser though.
Cheers,
Cheers,
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Originally posted by calboy
I felt the same way too when I started driving it but the performance really improves after a couple thousand miles if you push it hard.
I felt the same way too when I started driving it but the performance really improves after a couple thousand miles if you push it hard.
I don't want to trade for a 500 b/c I hate losing money, but maybe I should consider some serious upgrades... any suggestions??
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Originally posted by Harris
I think you would have made an even bigger mistake if you bought a Bimmer!!!!
I think you would have made an even bigger mistake if you bought a Bimmer!!!!
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
New Mercedes-AMG SUVs Arrive With NEW V8 Engine: 12 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
8 Oddball Mercedes Ideas That Actually Made it to Production
Verdad Gallardo
Dubai Tuner Gives the Mercedes G-Class An Entirely New Look
Verdad Gallardo
Six Gift Ideas Your AMG Loving Dad or Grad Will Cherish
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
Super Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
break it in a little
mine was very slow at firs....actually its not slow, but there's a lag of 2-3 seconds before the car actually accelerate when I push it hard...i lost to my friend's civic because of this...
but now its better ...its much more responsive although sometimes it still lags...
i agree it has something to do with the transimission
after break-in , i drive harder and more a gressively, and it improves a lot
mine was very slow at firs....actually its not slow, but there's a lag of 2-3 seconds before the car actually accelerate when I push it hard...i lost to my friend's civic because of this...
but now its better ...its much more responsive although sometimes it still lags...
i agree it has something to do with the transimission
after break-in , i drive harder and more a gressively, and it improves a lot
Super Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 935
Likes: 0
sl and M-class E320 4Matic SLK350
Hey, if your dealer will let you trade it in for a CLK500 Cabriolet I'd do it if all you are loosing is five grand since that is half what the no wait dealer mark-up on the new cabriolet is anyway. Apparently the 500 is so much better than the 430 that it replaces that it is hard to tell the difference between the new 500 and the AMG CLK.
(Just be thankful you aren't trying to unload a CLK430. I see multiple ads in Autoweek trying to get rid of those now that the 500 is here.)
Another solution worth considering is taking your 320 into a tuning shop and adding a couple thousand dollars worth of performance enhancements though you would probably be voiding the warranty on the engine to go that route.
I guess a third solution is to convince yourself that you really wanted a boulevard cruiser in the first place as opposed to a boy racer. Next time you are paired up with a BMW, Porshe and Corvette at the stoplight just grin and offer to be the pace car rather than the race car.
(Just be thankful you aren't trying to unload a CLK430. I see multiple ads in Autoweek trying to get rid of those now that the 500 is here.)
Another solution worth considering is taking your 320 into a tuning shop and adding a couple thousand dollars worth of performance enhancements though you would probably be voiding the warranty on the engine to go that route.
I guess a third solution is to convince yourself that you really wanted a boulevard cruiser in the first place as opposed to a boy racer. Next time you are paired up with a BMW, Porshe and Corvette at the stoplight just grin and offer to be the pace car rather than the race car.
Last edited by northbenz; Jul 25, 2003 at 04:19 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,436
Likes: 6
300ce
..........Don't mean to cause a problem since I own a w208 Clk320, albeit with a Kleeman s/c. I am suprised no oone has mentioned the obvious. The W209 CLk 320 is infact slower and it not an issue of improper break in. Published data shows the 0-60 time somewhere between 7.4 to 7.9 secs. This is compared to 6.9 secs for the W208 and it places the W209 Clk in same category as 4cylinder cars. This partly explauns why there is going to be a CLK350. Rumor has it that Mb is waiting for the current stock of 320's to be depleted before introduction of the 350's.
Ted
Ted
Super Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 935
Likes: 0
sl and M-class E320 4Matic SLK350
Ted - any chance he could add a Kleeman s/c to his CLK320 and get it up to at least what the 350 is expected to do? I've been toying between a 320 and a 500 myself on the even heavier cabriolet but in light of what you note I think I may insist on at least waiting for the 350 as an alternative to just going with the CLK500.
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Ted, thanks for your feedback and for your honesty. Now I have a question... does this mean that MB will phase out the 3.2L from all their cars like they did with the 4.3L from last year? If so, wouldn't I be better off trading it now for a 500 instead of waiting till it's discontinued and lose much more money on the trade-in?
On the other hand, I've already talked with Brandon at Kleemann about shipping the car there next week for an s/c with the smaller pulley for 350hp. That may solve my problem!
But b4 I do that, I want to make sure that MB will not do away with that engine in luei of the 3.5L.
On the other hand, I've already talked with Brandon at Kleemann about shipping the car there next week for an s/c with the smaller pulley for 350hp. That may solve my problem!
But b4 I do that, I want to make sure that MB will not do away with that engine in luei of the 3.5L.
Super Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Originally posted by dallas_clk
Ted, thanks for your feedback and for your honesty. Now I have a question... does this mean that MB will phase out the 3.2L from all their cars like they did with the 4.3L from last year? If so, wouldn't I be better off trading it now for a 500 instead of waiting till it's discontinued and lose much more money on the trade-in?
On the other hand, I've already talked with Brandon at Kleemann about shipping the car there next week for an s/c with the smaller pulley for 350hp. That may solve my problem!
But b4 I do that, I want to make sure that MB will not do away with that engine in luei of the 3.5L.
Ted, thanks for your feedback and for your honesty. Now I have a question... does this mean that MB will phase out the 3.2L from all their cars like they did with the 4.3L from last year? If so, wouldn't I be better off trading it now for a 500 instead of waiting till it's discontinued and lose much more money on the trade-in?
On the other hand, I've already talked with Brandon at Kleemann about shipping the car there next week for an s/c with the smaller pulley for 350hp. That may solve my problem!
But b4 I do that, I want to make sure that MB will not do away with that engine in luei of the 3.5L.
the ML 350 has 232 hp which is only about 17hp increase
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 3,436
Likes: 6
300ce
...............My understanding is that the 350 engine will produce about 235HP and bring the car to the same performance level as a W208 CLK320. The reason is that the current CLK weighs more than the W209. For the CLk500, the air intake system was changed to improve HP from 275 to 302. So, the CLk350 will by no means be a performance car but will be on par with its W208 predecessor.
.............As for Kleeman s/c. Placing a /c in a CLk320 of either the w208 or W209 variety will give you over 330HP and performance that beats the CLk500. So a good bargain is to buy a CLk320 and for $10K, you can add a Kleeman. You get a car that in my opinion aprochesstock CLK55 performance at a relatively cheap price. You don't get the AMG name but you get the performance.
Ted
.............As for Kleeman s/c. Placing a /c in a CLk320 of either the w208 or W209 variety will give you over 330HP and performance that beats the CLk500. So a good bargain is to buy a CLk320 and for $10K, you can add a Kleeman. You get a car that in my opinion aprochesstock CLK55 performance at a relatively cheap price. You don't get the AMG name but you get the performance.
Ted
Member
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
From: LA, California
03 silver C32 AMG
actually... when u add a Kleemann S/C to the 320 engine, it probably still will not be as fast as a 500. Im not even sure the 0-6 time till be under 6 secs. Even though you will have 30 more horsepower than the 500... the Kleemann320 lacks torque, WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN HORSEPOWER!! I believe the Kleemann320 only has about 300 torque while the 500 has 339.
Plus the 302hp of the 500 is naturally aspirated while the 330 of the 320 isnt, so their maybe some lag.
Plus the 302hp of the 500 is naturally aspirated while the 330 of the 320 isnt, so their maybe some lag.
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Originally posted by KL316
actually... when u add a Kleemann S/C to the 320 engine, it probably still will not be as fast as a 500. Im not even sure the 0-6 time till be under 6 secs. Even though you will have 30 more horsepower than the 500... the Kleemann320 lacks torque, WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN HORSEPOWER!! I believe the Kleemann320 only has about 300 torque while the 500 has 339.
Plus the 302hp of the 500 is naturally aspirated while the 330 of the 320 isnt, so their maybe some lag.
actually... when u add a Kleemann S/C to the 320 engine, it probably still will not be as fast as a 500. Im not even sure the 0-6 time till be under 6 secs. Even though you will have 30 more horsepower than the 500... the Kleemann320 lacks torque, WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN HORSEPOWER!! I believe the Kleemann320 only has about 300 torque while the 500 has 339.
Plus the 302hp of the 500 is naturally aspirated while the 330 of the 320 isnt, so their maybe some lag.
One last thing, I talked to Brandon at Kleemann and he'll do the install with the smaller pulley which should give about 20 more hp and tq.
So, I've come up with two advantages and two disadvantages:
Advantages of s/c:
1. quicker
2. better gas mileage under "normal" driving than V8
Disadvantages of 320
1. doesn't have the large brakes of the 500
2. Won't have the resale value of the 500 (but the s/c can be sold on ebay later)
I think I'm going with the s/c... someone please let me know if there is a reason why I shouldn't. Thanks guys for all your help.
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Originally posted by KL316
i see.... but evosport lists the torque wit the KLEEMANN 32K at 330hp/309Torque
i see.... but evosport lists the torque wit the KLEEMANN 32K at 330hp/309Torque
But in any case, should be much better than what I got now, right!
Thanks alot guys for all your help and feedback. I know I did the right thing when I joined this forum... it has been very helpful so far and I'm sure it will continue to be. I'll give an update when it's done. Can't wait!
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Re: renntech
Originally posted by cgmike10
i see renntech supercharges can get a 320 up to 410hp?
i see renntech supercharges can get a 320 up to 410hp?
Member
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
From: Philadelphia
2003 CLK320, Sliver, Ash Leather, Command System, Xeon lights, K3, K4
mine moves!
Not sure how you guys are driving your cars, but my clk320 moves! No bmw, audio or honda passes mine when i drop the pedal. I haven't added third party parts to it yet, and I don't think if I did I will be added to the engine. Just wheels and shocks for better handling.
