CLK55 AMG, CLK63 AMG (W208, W209) 2000 - 2010 (Two Generations)

CLK 63 review

Old 08-29-2006, 04:01 PM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
shoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mercedes C400, BMW X3
CLK 63 review

There is a review of the CLK 63 up on thetruthaboutcars.com:

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=2100
Old 08-29-2006, 06:15 PM
  #2  
Senior Member
 
BiTurboBenz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: back in Jersey
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
360 Spider
I test drove a CLK63 last week at my dealer. MSRP $97K but no Xenons

Engine is drop dead gorgeous, exhaust note is amazing. In the end though, the 600 feels quicker so I will be keeping her for a while.
Old 08-29-2006, 10:00 PM
  #3  
Super Member
 
c55m8o's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: 40*-55'-44" N / 73*-24'-07" W
Posts: 816
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
'98 C43/55 AMG Speedybenz Susp. & MBenzNL On Board -- '88 560SL -- '09 JCW MINI -- '97 Jeep TJ Sport
I drove the CLK63 @ the AMG Challenge, both on the big track and small oval (kidney actually). I set fastest run of the day in it in the Advanced Vehicle Dynamics challenge. It -is- hands down my favorite benz at this time. That engine -refuses- to downshift once you drive it aggresively. I'm luv'n that car simply on handling and performance alone. To tell you the truth, I hardly remember the interior, but that also reminds me it wasn't all that special -- to me. But I don't care about that.

Give me a CLK63 wide-body coupe like the F1 Safety Car and I think I'm going to have to retire my trust C43/55 steed.
Old 08-31-2006, 02:41 AM
  #4  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Germancar1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Dallas TX
Posts: 4,846
Received 289 Likes on 202 Posts
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
Originally Posted by shoes
There is a review of the CLK 63 up on thetruthaboutcars.com:

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=2100
He is basically asking for them to do a Black Series version of the CLK63 and that is coming....

M
Old 08-31-2006, 10:25 AM
  #5  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
shoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mercedes C400, BMW X3
Coupe

Who decided that the CLK 63 should be offered in the US only as cabriolet? I think it should have been offered only as a coupe.
Old 08-31-2006, 10:29 AM
  #6  
Out Of Control!!
 
vraa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 28,933
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes on 7 Posts
thetruthaboutcars is such a great site. I love it.
Old 08-31-2006, 11:14 AM
  #7  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
BoBcanada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Toronto,ON
Posts: 2,793
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
AMG
no coupe no care!
Old 08-31-2006, 11:28 AM
  #8  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
whoover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: San Jose area
Posts: 4,112
Received 305 Likes on 224 Posts
'19 E63S sedan
Originally Posted by shoes
Who decided that the CLK 63 should be offered in the US only as cabriolet? I think it should have been offered only as a coupe.
My guess is concern that a CLK63 coupe would undercut CLS63 sales too much drove this decision. The CLK would be $10k cheaper and Mercedes insists on calling the CLS a coupe. Not having the supercharger to differentiate the CLS anymore creates a tough situation for the marketing folks. They couldn't detune the CLK63 too much anyway because of the CLK550 at almost 400 HP. I don't think they had a choice.
Old 08-31-2006, 11:57 AM
  #9  
Senior Member
 
PsssTkiD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bay.Area
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
'02 c230k coupe
why is the clk doesnt have the 500+ hp ?
Old 08-31-2006, 12:18 PM
  #10  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
whoover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: San Jose area
Posts: 4,112
Received 305 Likes on 224 Posts
'19 E63S sedan
That would make a CLK63 with 507 HP for $90k and a SL55 with 510 HP for $130k. More rocks and hard places with ragtops.
Old 08-31-2006, 04:54 PM
  #11  
Super Member
 
AdaMBombC32G's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: LI, NYC
Posts: 568
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
NEW 08' M6 CAB, 06' 997 911 CS CAB, 09' RX350 AWD, 10' E350 4M, 10' Range Rover; FS: 04' C32 AMG= FS
too damn expensive

i've never understood this about MB.

isn't the CLK, a two door BASED C-class?

Either way, i would take a handful of cars over the CLK63 (and im a benz *****) and still have LOTS money left over, for say AN EXTRA car.

If it had a retractable hardtop like the SL/SLK... it would sound a little better... but c'mon MSRP of about 89k for a CLK... over 100k loaded is PLAIN-DUMB - i rather buy an SLK-AMG and wipe my a** with the rest of the money, truthfully!
Old 09-01-2006, 02:50 AM
  #12  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Germancar1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Dallas TX
Posts: 4,846
Received 289 Likes on 202 Posts
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
Originally Posted by whoover
My guess is concern that a CLK63 coupe would undercut CLS63 sales too much drove this decision. The CLK would be $10k cheaper and Mercedes insists on calling the CLS a coupe. Not having the supercharger to differentiate the CLS anymore creates a tough situation for the marketing folks. They couldn't detune the CLK63 too much anyway because of the CLK550 at almost 400 HP. I don't think they had a choice.
Actually it was because the CLK55 Coupe was such a slow seller. There was no CLK55 Coupe last year either.

M
Old 09-01-2006, 12:15 PM
  #13  
Super Member
 
LETO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: central pennsylvania
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
12 CLS550, 09 CLS550, 04Cooper,10 Cooper S
i dont think the coupe would be a bad seller if it had the new bigger engine. Hopefully the US market will get the couple (amg version) back after the complete design overhaul
Old 09-01-2006, 12:29 PM
  #14  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
shoes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mercedes C400, BMW X3
CLK 550 is hot

This may be just anecdotal data but, I have been considering the CLK 63 and the CLK 550 over the past month and during that time, all the CLK550's have been sold at the local dealers while none of the CLK 63's have been. I think that paying $100K for a CLK is just a recipe for depreciation disaster.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:
You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.

Quick Reply: CLK 63 review



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:31 PM.