jtms

I have been looking hard at a couple low mileage 2002 CLK55 AMG's but haven't pulled the trigger yet. Cars are in the 24-25k range.

I saw a 2003 CL55 AMG online and fell in love with the look. Found a couple with around 50k miles for mid 30's.

I read that the 0-60 performance on the CL55 AMG (493 horses...wow)is around 4.5 but I am sure the handling with the CLK55 will be much better. What are your opinions???? I thought the CLK55 AMG was my car until I saw the CL55. I do not plan on doing any mods. I will keep it straight from the factory.

Decisions....Decisions...

Ted Baldwin

............2003 CL55 with the AMGV8K engine is a superior car. A different league. Like all things, there are compromises. It handless less well than a CLK55. The CLK55 is not a track car by any means either. I'm sure the CLK55 outhandles a CL65 also, but the two cars are not in the same planet.

Ted

Chappy

Get the CL if you have the budget for repairs out of warranty. The W215 is an expensive puppy and has much more technology packed into the car.

I've tracked both my CLK55 and taken the wheel for some hot laps in a friend's CL65 Kleemann.

The CLK55 will outhandle and easily outbrake is heavier cousin, but in terms of everything else (room, power, luxury), the CL is the one to get.

rsr911

Ditto for me. It is hard to compare the two. The CLK is a C class based car. The CL is an S class based car. Two very different animals.

IdriveFast

actually i read that the CL is based on an extended E-class platform rather than S.

blazinginder

CL55 all the way...higher class but more importantly a beastly 493hp compared to 367hp from the 02 CLK...BIG difference

Chappy

Actually, the 2001 and 2002 CLK55s only have 342hp.

neilbo75

No, the CL is based on the S class. While the CLK looks like an E class (especially the first gen 208) it is actually based on the C class.

Think about it : C is for Compact. S is for Sled. The CLK is much smaller and lighter than the CL so it is inherently more nimble, gets better gas mileage, is easier to park, etc. The CL has more room inside and a bigger trunk, but the difference is not very great. True, most CLs have a higher trim level, but top line designo CLKs close this gap. If you must have seats that cool and massage, get a CL. If you cruise the freeway all the time and live for that blast on the on ramp, get a 55 or 65 CL. If you like to drive canyons, get a CLK. If you want the fastest dragster, supercharge the CLK. K is for Kleemann.

Bottom line: each to his own. But you should know that the CL is more prone to trouble and more expensive to maintain.

rays cl55

CL !

do the ECU & pulley upgrade...and its GAME OVER!

jtms

Thanks a bunch for the replies. A couple of you have mentioned the reliablilty of the Cl55 AMG. This was a concern of mine given the complexity of the engine and HP(493). Whether I get a CLK55 or CL55, I will definitely get a warranty.

I am scared to drive a CL55 b/d I think it will be game over if I do . Although, I don't want a car that can have a $8k repair sneak up on you if you are out of warranty.

AMGOODNESS

for me it was the two door vs. four door argument. the four door car was just too big. i like the coupe with a backseat big enough for adults.