Audi A4 B7 Cabrio vs W209 Looking for an utopical CLK 4MATIC Cabriolet or a SL 4MATIC
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
ML320CDI
Audi A4 B7 Cabrio vs W209 Looking for an utopical CLK 4MATIC Cabriolet or a SL 4MATIC
Hello!
I'm looking to buy a W209 CLK 4MATIC or a R230 SL 4MATIC.
OK, I know that does not exist.
For economical reasons I would chose the CLK, but I think the SL is more Sport oriented (maybe not huge difference). I would chose the one cheaper and more easy to maintain, but I will always chose the option more dynamic and more important security
Story goes like this.
I have my sailboat on the french riviera, and in the summer (and not only), a convertible would be highly appreciated.
My home is at around 120 km from my sailboat, but is in a valey into the mountains.
I do this road very often in the summer, and to leave the town at any moment of the year an go in any direction I need to drive around 80-120km (depends of direction) of curves on the mountain, before I can get on a straight road.
I also have a very heavy foot.
My other vehicles are 4MATIC with AMG performance packs. (Always maniac on maintainance and necessary repairs or equipment).
So looking for a convertible that has 4MATIC. :-D Sadly W209 or R230 with 4MATIC does not exist. :-(
The only vehicle interesting Convertible and with 4WD I found in this class is the 2006 Audi A4 cabriolet B7 S-Line with the diesel 3.0TDI quattro with 233 HP
I am a Mercedes fan and Audi is not Mercedes, but seems to be the only option.
Looking for people who had both of them. Audi Cabriolet quattro and Mercedes Convertible RWD in these abuse road conditions.
Audi A4 B7 Cabriolet quattro.
Mercedes CLK W209 gasoline CLK 350 272HP or the diesel CLK 320CDI with only 224 HP. Is there a huge difference between the CLK 350 and the CLK 320CDI?
Or for the same prices, the SL350 245HP
Is it better to have the 4WD or the RWD will be fine for my very heavy foot in these road conditions?
I'm looking to buy a W209 CLK 4MATIC or a R230 SL 4MATIC.
OK, I know that does not exist.
For economical reasons I would chose the CLK, but I think the SL is more Sport oriented (maybe not huge difference). I would chose the one cheaper and more easy to maintain, but I will always chose the option more dynamic and more important security
Story goes like this.
I have my sailboat on the french riviera, and in the summer (and not only), a convertible would be highly appreciated.
My home is at around 120 km from my sailboat, but is in a valey into the mountains.
I do this road very often in the summer, and to leave the town at any moment of the year an go in any direction I need to drive around 80-120km (depends of direction) of curves on the mountain, before I can get on a straight road.
I also have a very heavy foot.
My other vehicles are 4MATIC with AMG performance packs. (Always maniac on maintainance and necessary repairs or equipment).
So looking for a convertible that has 4MATIC. :-D Sadly W209 or R230 with 4MATIC does not exist. :-(
The only vehicle interesting Convertible and with 4WD I found in this class is the 2006 Audi A4 cabriolet B7 S-Line with the diesel 3.0TDI quattro with 233 HP
I am a Mercedes fan and Audi is not Mercedes, but seems to be the only option.
Looking for people who had both of them. Audi Cabriolet quattro and Mercedes Convertible RWD in these abuse road conditions.
Audi A4 B7 Cabriolet quattro.
Mercedes CLK W209 gasoline CLK 350 272HP or the diesel CLK 320CDI with only 224 HP. Is there a huge difference between the CLK 350 and the CLK 320CDI?
Or for the same prices, the SL350 245HP
Is it better to have the 4WD or the RWD will be fine for my very heavy foot in these road conditions?
MBworld Guru
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,782
Likes: 1,011
NO LONGER ACTIVE
I've not owned an Audi A4 cabriolet, but I have owned an A6 3.0 sedan, a W209 CLK550 cabriolet and now I have an R230 SL550. While the Audi was a great car, I much refer MBZ. Between the CLK and SL, there will not be much difference in performance given the same engines. Of course the CLK has a (barely usable) back seat, but a fabric top, where the SL has no back seat but a retractable hard top. We do not have the SL250 here in the USA, but I understand it does NOT have ABC (Active Body Control). ABC will require more maintenance, but the benefit is in handling. On rough roads, it ride smoother, but for taking curves, it keeps the car flat and also eliminates all "squat and dive" motions. For me, it's worth the extra maintenance headaches to have the sportier handling of ABC. I think even without ABC, the SL would handle a bit better than the CLK .
When comparing the Audi's AWD to the RWD of the MBZ's, consider that on the Audi, about 65% of the weight is on the front axle. On the MBZ's, it's close to a 50/50 distribution. While I don't think the SL would be very good in snow, I did once drive the CLK in snow and using the transmission in "comfort" more which start sin 2nd gear, and using the TouchShift to keep it in low gear going downhill, it did amazingly well.
When comparing the Audi's AWD to the RWD of the MBZ's, consider that on the Audi, about 65% of the weight is on the front axle. On the MBZ's, it's close to a 50/50 distribution. While I don't think the SL would be very good in snow, I did once drive the CLK in snow and using the transmission in "comfort" more which start sin 2nd gear, and using the TouchShift to keep it in low gear going downhill, it did amazingly well.
Super Member
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 784
Likes: 29
From: NYC
2004 CLK 500
I would go for a clk . First you get a lot more room for passengers and cargo . The audi on the other hand gets better gas mileage but it looks like a girl car (Sorry my view) . The SL is amazing but maintenance and issue like the suspension will ruin your summer . If you have a heavy foot and like power get a V8 CLK . I have a CLK 500 Convertible and power is no problem . If you really want power you can do the 55 or 63 convertible. But a clk350 will give you about the same as the audi . I have owned a few convertible and by far the clk is the best i ever had .
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
ML320CDI
I would honestly prefer de SL65 AMG, but that is a little bit too spicy for my wallet. And it still does not have the 4MATIC.
For all others (V8 M113 or M273 or the V12) except the 350, I have a superstition problem with the number 13. You may laugh but that won't change my expériences and problems I had with this number.
M113 is clear
M273 - In France the number 73 does not exist by itself. It's called 60 13.
M275 V12 has a cubic capacity of 5.513 cc
The SL63AMG is a V8 engine that gets his power and torque at very high revs compared to the 65AMG and if I have to pay that much, V12 is a must.
The only option left is the 5.980cc M275AMG on the 65AMG or the V6s M112 or M272 but 65AMG is too expensive. So only the 350 or 320CDI are left. (And the very heavy foot on the curved mountain roads).
I think that the look of the Audi is not a look for a cabriolet and it might be more acceptable for a sedan. Anyway I prefer Mercedes as looks, but the security question still remains. With my heavy foot and the curved mountain roads will the Mercedes RWD keep me on the road as well as the Quattro AWD?
For all others (V8 M113 or M273 or the V12) except the 350, I have a superstition problem with the number 13. You may laugh but that won't change my expériences and problems I had with this number.
M113 is clear
M273 - In France the number 73 does not exist by itself. It's called 60 13.
M275 V12 has a cubic capacity of 5.513 cc
The SL63AMG is a V8 engine that gets his power and torque at very high revs compared to the 65AMG and if I have to pay that much, V12 is a must.
The only option left is the 5.980cc M275AMG on the 65AMG or the V6s M112 or M272 but 65AMG is too expensive. So only the 350 or 320CDI are left. (And the very heavy foot on the curved mountain roads).
I think that the look of the Audi is not a look for a cabriolet and it might be more acceptable for a sedan. Anyway I prefer Mercedes as looks, but the security question still remains. With my heavy foot and the curved mountain roads will the Mercedes RWD keep me on the road as well as the Quattro AWD?
Last edited by dr.chitoi; Jan 2, 2018 at 03:54 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 434
Likes: 16
From: Midlands, UK
CLK W209
Your choice will be further limited, by the fact MB did not produce any diesel convertibles; only the petrol engines were available.
Having driven both CLKs with and without the sports suspension, if you are concerned at all about traction, you MUST go for a sports suspension equipped car. This was available with or without the AMG appearance package in Europe.
This provides you with much stiffer suspension, but still nicely damped, and also wider tyres all around. Even in damp conditions with the ESP on, she’s very sure footed, and quite predictable. You’d have to be doing something really silly. The one thing I hate a great deal about Audi’s, and this seems to be in their brand DNA, is the all or nothing brake feel. There’s no progression like there is in these CLKs. I drove my parents new biturbo A6 Avant, and i soon realised I had to be exceptionally gentle on the brakes.
Ive driven my CLK in the snow and it’s fine on mild gradients, but she does struggle a little. If there’s any chance you’ll need to use it in the snow, then get the quattro.
I also think the CLK feels a little more upmarket than the A4 of that era, particularly the convertible, although they’re now quite cheap and I do fancy a quattro convertible.
Having driven both CLKs with and without the sports suspension, if you are concerned at all about traction, you MUST go for a sports suspension equipped car. This was available with or without the AMG appearance package in Europe.
This provides you with much stiffer suspension, but still nicely damped, and also wider tyres all around. Even in damp conditions with the ESP on, she’s very sure footed, and quite predictable. You’d have to be doing something really silly. The one thing I hate a great deal about Audi’s, and this seems to be in their brand DNA, is the all or nothing brake feel. There’s no progression like there is in these CLKs. I drove my parents new biturbo A6 Avant, and i soon realised I had to be exceptionally gentle on the brakes.
Ive driven my CLK in the snow and it’s fine on mild gradients, but she does struggle a little. If there’s any chance you’ll need to use it in the snow, then get the quattro.
I also think the CLK feels a little more upmarket than the A4 of that era, particularly the convertible, although they’re now quite cheap and I do fancy a quattro convertible.
