bzliteyear

Hi all,

I've looked at quite a few cars, and it looks like the top 2 candidates are a 2002 CLK55 cab w/ 75k miles and a 2006 CLK55 cab with 82k miles.

Can you guys pls comment on reliability between the two?
I can get 2 yrs/24k warranty on the 2006 for $2,400...is that worth it? I would do it in a heart beat for E or S-class with the ABC or Kompressor/bi-turbo, but wanted everyone's input. The 2002 CLK55 cab I don't think I will be able to get warranty for.

Btw, I realize the 06 has more leg room and updated interior and stiffer chassis, while the 02 drive more RAW and looks a bit more masculine. Any other input regarding the two differences would be appreciated.

Thanks everyone.

P.S. The price is $15k vs. $22k.

Patrick

M-bENZ

neither. Throw in another $5k get the E55 W211.

Andy

Chappy

I've heard of people having trouble with the W208 tops. On the other hand, early W209 transmissions leaked and some had trouble with the radiators. Not sure if the '06 would be affected.

I would go and drive both - and see which one 'speaks' to you (braking, handling, features, etc.). If you still can't decide, spend the money and have a thorough PPI done on both.

My suggestion is usually to buy the newest, best condition with the lowest miles you can afford.

Good luck and let us know your decision.

bzliteyear

Chappy - thx for input(nice wagon, esp w/ AMG wheels).

Btw, while test driving a 2002 CLK55 cab recently, the top refused to open/go down...nice call on the top having issues. Another seller separate said they had replaced cable also.

Will go check out the 06 CLK55, particularly the chassis stiffness and the supposedly larger rear seats leg room.

PL

Chappy

I owned a '91 300CE for a long time. Why did you sell your W124 cabrio?

bzliteyear

The W124 cab was a great car...super reliable and fun, but I barely drove it 5k miles in 4 yrs. Since I have 2 kids and winter coming, I thought I'd sell it and buy another convertible one day(plus it wasn't my first choice for interior beige interior). Not surprisingly, it sold pretty quickly...but now I'm missing it big time.

By chance(daily browsing, LOL), I saw a 2002 CLK55 with similar miles/price to my W124...so I started giving it some thought(I miss my E55 engine/nimbless). The 2002 led to finding a 2006 CLK55...for a little more money. So now I'm in between the two...not life or death, but just a fun distraction.

Patrick

dkaf

I have the 2002 clk 55 cab and have had NO problems. I bought it with 50,000 miles 4.5 years ago. I now have 119,000 miles. When it rains heavily, there is a very small drip at the top of the drivers side door. Not a big enough issue for me to even deal with. The digital clock on the dash went out at about 70,000 miles and MB replaced the entire speedo tach cluster without any questions. Rag top motor has been flawless. On Command navigation is terrible but it is an 8 year old gps system. The car is built extremely solid. In my opinion, when MB created the w209 they ruined the clk. The w208 is bold and masculine. I would recommend this car in a minute. So much fun to drive.

bzliteyear

Congrats on your car - that sounds like a GREAT ownership experience. The current situation is a CLEAN 2002 cab with 80k miles is probably $16-18k, and a clean 2006 cab w/ 80k is probably $22k. The 2006, I can buy extended warranty, and the 2002 I probably can't. Therefore, I'm a bit torn since the difference not BIG enough to make this a no-brainer. If I can find a clean 2002 CLK55 cab for $13k in CA locally, I think I'd take that over a $22k 2006. However, for $5k difference, I'm leaning toward 2006.
PL

rondocap

I'd go for the newer 2006 CLK, as well. First of all, it is actually a bit different of an engine - just like in the C55 AMG vs the older E55, S55, CLK55, etc. I think it has 362hp vs 342hp, but there is also a bit more weight involved.

The 2002 is a nice car, and has an unique look, but I'd go for the 2006 as it is more updated, both the interior and the exterior, and you can get a warranty for it.

Even though these cars do not have ABC or other such troublesome items, they still have a lot of parts that can go bad after a few years and are expensive, this is where a warranty will help. Alternators, suspension parts, motor mounts, etc - especially when you start to get up there in the 80k+ mileage.

Perhaps another car you can take a look is a BMW M3 convertible from a few years ago, very fun to drive as well and you can find a nice example in your price range and year range.

dkaf

I can understand that. Both are great cars, just a matter of personal preference. For comparison, I paid $33k for mine with 50k miles and it was 4 years old when I bought it.

betrezra

I bought my 04 clk55 with 20k miles for $21K....... with CPO warranty. very attractive prices on these machines now.

bzliteyear

hi all,
just bit the bullet on the 2006 CLK55 cab...will get by Thanksgiving and post pix. still have another week to decide whether to get warranty or not.
any more input from you guys would be appreciated.
it has 82k miles and the VMI is fairly short/clean.
the motor mounts were just done last week, so i'm thinking the lower control arm is the only thing?(was noted by MB dealer during PPI), but i think only $500 vs. warranty for $2500)+.
where i'm having issue is that $2500 is only for 2 yrs/24k miles, but i'll probably only drive it 2k miles per yr - so that's quite expensive on a per miles basis. i'd love to get a 7 yrs/24k miles as i'll probably not even reach that, LOL
PL

Nachtsturm

I think you made the right choice. I just recently drove a 2004 CLK55. What a difference in interiors. I prefer the exterior looks of the 208, but the interior of the 209 is superb.

cobrab19

i just recently bought a 03 clk55 coupe and its awesome!
i was looking at the 2002s also but i like the interior/exterior of the w209.
in my opinion the newer models are better, handles great also!

dkaf

You can't go wrong with either. My 2002 CLK55 with 119k miles still handles great with no suspension changes or mods. Enjoy!