why is no1 buying the clk63 ?
Thread Starter
Super Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 543
Likes: 0
02ml500sport/maxima06-6speed
why is no1 buying the clk63 ?
is that because their convertble and its winter ? or what is it ? i mean its a sick looking car , is it slow ? or whats the problem i havnt seen any 1 on the forum with one , lol just curios. 
Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles
2003 CLK430 Cabriolet
i drove one. great car.
seriously overpriced though, in my opinion
also drove the CLK550 cab, which I will probably get.
i personally can't justify the $25,000 difference to get the clk63.
seriously overpriced though, in my opinion
also drove the CLK550 cab, which I will probably get.
i personally can't justify the $25,000 difference to get the clk63.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 1
From: Boston
CLK500/Range Rover HSE/E55 AMG/Bmw 328Xi coupe/BMW 4.8x/Bmw 335i/GS350/Audi S5/E350
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
I would never drop that much on a CLK, I have a 55, and I traded my older 55 for it, and it still didn't come near to 100k. That is surely a rip, and I don't think there is much of a difference speed wise between a 55 and 63 in this case, the convertible being slower. Hard top 55 is the way to go
Out Of Control!!
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 13,489
Likes: 96
haters crazy
I would never drop that much on a CLK, I have a 55, and I traded my older 55 for it, and it still didn't come near to 100k. That is surely a rip, and I don't think there is much of a difference speed wise between a 55 and 63 in this case, the convertible being slower. Hard top 55 is the way to go
Trending Topics
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
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
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Out Of Control!!
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 13,489
Likes: 96
haters crazy
I assume you're talking about 0-60mph. The 63 has ~100hp advantage over the 55. Is it worth 30k? Thats a subjective question. Personally, no. But if I had money to waste: Yes.
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
From: Las Vegas
2005 SL600 by SPEEDRIVEN
I believe the 6.3 CLK was tested in the 0-60 around 4.5 or less. A W208 CLK55 0-60 time is 4.9. Realistically, that is 0.4 to 0.5 second difference in the 0-60, which is significant to say the least. However, for the price they are asking, I agree there are other appealing choices one might consider. And, I would only consider a coupe for performance- IMHO.
Almost a Member!
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
From: South Orange County
CLK 63 AMG
Don't knock them!
I personally love mine! Fot that kind of power in a 4 seater convertible, which is what I want, it is great.
Yeah, they are pricey, but the M6 is about 15K + more and if you want a high performance 4 seater convertible I would definately pick the CLK63 over the M6, IMO.
Anyway they are fast and a grat looking car. That is my two cents.
Yeah, they are pricey, but the M6 is about 15K + more and if you want a high performance 4 seater convertible I would definately pick the CLK63 over the M6, IMO.
Anyway they are fast and a grat looking car. That is my two cents.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 4
From: Indiana
2003 AMG SL55, 2002 AMG CLK55, 2002 AMG ML55, 2005 ML350, 1995 S320 LWB - totaled
I over looked 3 of them in my local Benz dealer parking lot. For $96,000 they had better have WOW factor and they just don't. Plus I am a coupe fan. No cabrios please.
Sorry.
Sorry.
Super Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 659
Likes: 0
From: Miami, FL
E55 AMG + Mustang GT
I personally don't think its worth that much money, and I hate softtop convertibles. Yes it has a 100 extra hp compared to the 55, but if I was spending a $100K on a performance car, I would get something much faster and more upgradeable performance wise. Now if they had a coupe, or a hardtop convertible CLK, and I had loads of extra money laying around, then I might consider the CLK63 (very unlikely though, I still think there's better options in that price range).
However, I do respect the CLK63 for what it is, and do think its a great car.
However, I do respect the CLK63 for what it is, and do think its a great car.
Last edited by Jaki; Feb 12, 2007 at 09:47 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,665
Likes: 4
From: Boston
2004 C32 ///AMG
I personally love mine! Fot that kind of power in a 4 seater convertible, which is what I want, it is great.
Yeah, they are pricey, but the M6 is about 15K + more and if you want a high performance 4 seater convertible I would definately pick the CLK63 over the M6, IMO.
Anyway they are fast and a grat looking car. That is my two cents.
Yeah, they are pricey, but the M6 is about 15K + more and if you want a high performance 4 seater convertible I would definately pick the CLK63 over the M6, IMO.
Anyway they are fast and a grat looking car. That is my two cents.
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 348
Likes: 1
I believe the 6.3 CLK was tested in the 0-60 around 4.5 or less. A W208 CLK55 0-60 time is 4.9. Realistically, that is 0.4 to 0.5 second difference in the 0-60, which is significant to say the least. However, for the price they are asking, I agree there are other appealing choices one might consider. And, I would only consider a coupe for performance- IMHO.
Last edited by Tuskir; Feb 12, 2007 at 11:13 PM.
Slight chance for the E63
Thread Starter
Super Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 543
Likes: 0
02ml500sport/maxima06-6speed
I personally love mine! Fot that kind of power in a 4 seater convertible, which is what I want, it is great.
Yeah, they are pricey, but the M6 is about 15K + more and if you want a high performance 4 seater convertible I would definately pick the CLK63 over the M6, IMO.
Anyway they are fast and a grat looking car. That is my two cents.
Yeah, they are pricey, but the M6 is about 15K + more and if you want a high performance 4 seater convertible I would definately pick the CLK63 over the M6, IMO.
Anyway they are fast and a grat looking car. That is my two cents.
and yea Mercedes is so retarted for not having a coupe in the US
Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
From: Australia
Unfortunatly Not A Silver Star
I personally love mine! Fot that kind of power in a 4 seater convertible, which is what I want, it is great.
Yeah, they are pricey, but the M6 is about 15K + more and if you want a high performance 4 seater convertible I would definately pick the CLK63 over the M6, IMO.
Anyway they are fast and a grat looking car. That is my two cents.
Yeah, they are pricey, but the M6 is about 15K + more and if you want a high performance 4 seater convertible I would definately pick the CLK63 over the M6, IMO.
Anyway they are fast and a grat looking car. That is my two cents.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,846
Likes: 291
From: Dallas TX
2013 650i Coupe, 2010 IS250 AWD, 1999 S500
I think the "it is overpriced" theory has it! Yeah 90K is too much for a CLK of any type and its starting to get a little dated. It isn't of the same new found quality as the CLS, S, CL and even facelifted E/SL models. I think the CLK63 is a stunning car though, the numbers C&D got out of it are ridiculous, but even they said that it didn't strike them as a 90K car.
M
M
Last edited by Germancar1; Feb 13, 2007 at 07:37 AM.
Super Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
From: Manhattan Beach, Ca
C219 CLS / W220 † / W211† / W210 E55 † / W210 Brabus † / Hamann 540i † /
no offense but maybe because the CLK is seen as a chick car, and especially a convertible. I know myself and others see the C, SLK, & CLK as a very feminine models. Yea I would drive a CLK63 but I would never buy a clk63 nor a c55 or slk55. For the money (100K) you could get soooooo much more, 100k is a Used 360!!!! 100K is a E55, E63, S55, CL55, M5, M3, M6 (with like 2k mi).
But thats just me, i would never spend 100k on a car either. I only buy used, i rather spend 40-50k and get a used 03/04 CL55 or E55. ****, 1-2 years from now 40-50k will be a an 06 CLS55.
But thats just me, i would never spend 100k on a car either. I only buy used, i rather spend 40-50k and get a used 03/04 CL55 or E55. ****, 1-2 years from now 40-50k will be a an 06 CLS55.
Super Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 800
Likes: 0
2005 SL65
having driven the CLK63 coupe quite a bit at speed and in slalom, i can say that the rear tires don't stick to the pavement so well, the rear end wiggles too much and undermines the front end.
i believe there'll be a brawny DTM-looking CLK headed to the US within a model year. THAT car should be awesome.
i believe there'll be a brawny DTM-looking CLK headed to the US within a model year. THAT car should be awesome.
