Sasquatch1

OK, before you all flame me for posting this. I really would appreciate some insight from owners. So here it is. I have been an owner of a 2002 CLK 320, great car sold it and bought a 2008 CLK 550 loaded. Totally awesome car loved it dearly. Sold it to by a truck to haul kids horse around. Decided can't live without a Benz so here I am looking again. Have narrowed it down to a 2003 CLK 500 1 owner with around 35K loaded with NAV, Kelyless Go, 6 Disc, Sunshade, etc. and a 2003 CLK 55 AMG with around 25K again a 1 owner clean history. This car has no options. The CLK 500 has had the dreaded radiator failure and did contaminate the trans about 10K miles agao. The 55 has had nothing done to it other than normal maint. no gaskets, radiator repair, suspension repairs, etc. Not sure if it has Valeo radiator or not. There is about a 4K difference between the cars. I plan on having a Kleeman installed on either one. I know the main differences between the cars just more curious about ownership experience and driving impressions. Also, I drive about 80 miles a day what kind of fuel economy can one expect from a 55? Sorry for the long post, but there are pros/cons to both cars and I just can't decide. Thanks!!

Chappy

Serious question: What is your fuel budget? 55 or 500 V8s with a Kleemann is not going to be a fuel miser on your 400 weekly commute miles.

Sasquatch1

Well it is currently around 700 a month in the 12.5 MPG truck I'm driving. I never really think about gas or what it cost. It is a necessary evil in life. I can't drive a Prius. I was just wondering if the 55 sans the Kleeman will be around the CLK 550 which I could get 26MPG at times. Thanks.

elijah

I can tell you the 55s MPG is nowhere near the 500s. I drive mostly in city environments and im at the pump every 3 days (4 if im lucky). With an ECU tune you should improve a bit but it will still be a thursty little AMG.
If its not your main concern then it comes down a more confort ride vs. sport ride 500 vs. 55.
If you plan on kleemanizing your Benz I assume you are looking for some serious power so why not go with a 55? Shop and look around you should be able to find a 55 with way more options for a decent price. Take you time...

betrezra

I've never heard someone mention AMG and mpg in the same discussion.

There are plenty of fine used low mlg examples of the clk500 and clk55 or clk550.... so don't rush into anything...... I love my clk55........

elijah

Lol I know what you mean. Most people who buy AMG's arent concerned about MPG but the W209 is a car that many people can now afford so I guess it had to happen.
I am not so thrilled about my 55s MPG but I am not complaining, its exclusive (to me at least) and I cherish every aspect of the car.

Sasquatch1

eliajh, thanks for the response. I'm not concerned about the mpg it was more a curiosity of what to expect as compared to my previos experience. How much more firm would you rate the ride of the 55 as compared to standard CLK? This is the kind of information and input I'm looking for. The fact the W209's are coming down in price is not what is driving my desire I have had many different cars, but just have taken an extreme liking ot these. Thanks again for the insight.

betrezra

Our family has the clk55 (2004) and a c63 (2009) w/Performance Pkg.... and I can tell you the clk55 does NOT ride harsh at all.... the C63 on the other hand is very harsh and not good for daily driving long dist.

To be honest I would not want a softer suspension than the clk55...... it would be too mushy for my taste.

Like many things suspension is a personal taste so take with grain of salt.

I bought the Clk55 because it was cheap..... it was 23K for a 20K mile amg with cpo! that is cheaper than a new accord or camry, and I needed a daily driver so I got it. I was surprised to see what I got for my money.... and now I'm in love with the thing. It is a very unassuming car, not audacious, not in your face, blends in the background, but works so well. I doubt I would have spent 70K for it new, there are better choices IMHO for that $$ (IMHO). That's the nice thing about fast depreciating AMG's..... if you can deal with driving a 2-5 yr old style.... you can get into one for 40-50 cents on the dollar.

Like the OP, I can afford a new amg...... but I like to throw the value word in the mix

elijah

What I can tell you is that the AMG is the better handling car. The suspension is stiffer but not harsh like betrezra mentionned, much less body roll when turning compared to a non AMG, it also has forged internals & its equipped with bigger brakes. The 55s top speed is limited at 155mph whereas other V8's are limited to 131mph.

I mean the AMG is just something special IMO but what you should know is that even AMG owners tend to upgrade their shocks or even upgrade to coilovers for the best handling/performance.

If you are considering kleemanizing you might want to throw in some extra $$$ for coilevers. I don't have them installed but I drove a 500 with coilovers and it handled way better than my 55. LSD might be something to consider to get all that power to the ground in a more effective manner.

lowpost

+1 - the 03 CLK500 stock suspension handles like sheet, with lots of body roll. I thought I was driving an oldsmobile. had it for 2 weeks before I changed out the suspension.

Sasquatch1

Thanks to everyone. Going to drive the 55 tomorrow weather permitting and if I like it off to the dealer for an inspection and glycol test for transmission.

Chappy

According to the Department of Energy's website (fueleconomy.gov), they list the 2003 CLK500 as having 15 City, 21 Highway with a combined estimate of 17. The 2003 CLK55 is 14 City and 20 Highway with an average of 16.

The window sticker on the 2003 CLK500 was 16/23 with average 19
The window sticker on the 2003 CLK55 was 15/22 with average 18

Hope this helps!

Coupecrazy

If it's highway driving for the most part you won't do horribly. I can hit 23 MPG or so on a 60 mile drive cruising at an average of 60 to 70 MPH. When I took a 900 mile trip I hit 24.3 MPG with two people, loaded trunk/backseat, and the cruise set at 80.