CLK320 2004 vs. CLK350 2009?
11-05-2012, 11:59 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
CLK320 2004 vs. CLK350 2009?
I am completely new to the CLKs.
(Owned a few w107s and a C230 Coupe and 300ce and drive my relative's C300.)
What is the difference between the 04 320 engine and overall car and the 05-09 350 engine? Is there any problem with the 3.2 engines that you guys know of?
The CLK320 04 has 51k miles. Well taken care of, convertible.
The CLK350 09 is a coupe, 30k miles. Will have to go into major debt for it. Not thrilled.
(Owned a few w107s and a C230 Coupe and 300ce and drive my relative's C300.)
What is the difference between the 04 320 engine and overall car and the 05-09 350 engine? Is there any problem with the 3.2 engines that you guys know of?
The CLK320 04 has 51k miles. Well taken care of, convertible.
The CLK350 09 is a coupe, 30k miles. Will have to go into major debt for it. Not thrilled.
11-06-2012, 01:36 AM
#2
MBWorld Fanatic!
The answer would be quite lengthy and this probably belongs in the W209 section rather than the AMG section. That said, here are a few notes about the later W209s. Here are some notes about the earlier W209s. The bottom of this page discusses the M112 based 320. The later direct injection 3.5 liter vee sixes that are discussed at my website are not the same as the early ones.
Aside from the upgraded engine, the later cars have seven speed transmissions. They get slightly worse economy around town (not that you'd notice), better economy on the highway (you will notice), and are more powerful. If you test drive a V8 powered CLK, you'll think the six is terribly slow. If you test drive a CLK63 you won't care about fuel economy, keeping the planet green, or anything with six cylinders.
There are no problems with the 320 that I know of (and I do pay attention to these things). Do the maintenance and it'll probably run several hundred thousand miles.
I will assume you know about the issues with the early 350s. If you buy one, you may want to check whether the recall work has been done.
Aside from the upgraded engine, the later cars have seven speed transmissions. They get slightly worse economy around town (not that you'd notice), better economy on the highway (you will notice), and are more powerful. If you test drive a V8 powered CLK, you'll think the six is terribly slow. If you test drive a CLK63 you won't care about fuel economy, keeping the planet green, or anything with six cylinders.
There are no problems with the 320 that I know of (and I do pay attention to these things). Do the maintenance and it'll probably run several hundred thousand miles.
I will assume you know about the issues with the early 350s. If you buy one, you may want to check whether the recall work has been done.
11-12-2012, 05:46 PM
#3
Senior Member
Thread Starter
The answer would be quite lengthy and this probably belongs in the W209 section rather than the AMG section. That said, here are a few notes about the later W209s. Here are some notes about the earlier W209s. The bottom of this page discusses the M112 based 320. The later direct injection 3.5 liter vee sixes that are discussed at my website are not the same as the early ones.
Aside from the upgraded engine, the later cars have seven speed transmissions. They get slightly worse economy around town (not that you'd notice), better economy on the highway (you will notice), and are more powerful. If you test drive a V8 powered CLK, you'll think the six is terribly slow. If you test drive a CLK63 you won't care about fuel economy, keeping the planet green, or anything with six cylinders.
There are no problems with the 320 that I know of (and I do pay attention to these things). Do the maintenance and it'll probably run several hundred thousand miles.
I will assume you know about the issues with the early 350s. If you buy one, you may want to check whether the recall work has been done.
Aside from the upgraded engine, the later cars have seven speed transmissions. They get slightly worse economy around town (not that you'd notice), better economy on the highway (you will notice), and are more powerful. If you test drive a V8 powered CLK, you'll think the six is terribly slow. If you test drive a CLK63 you won't care about fuel economy, keeping the planet green, or anything with six cylinders.
There are no problems with the 320 that I know of (and I do pay attention to these things). Do the maintenance and it'll probably run several hundred thousand miles.
I will assume you know about the issues with the early 350s. If you buy one, you may want to check whether the recall work has been done.
I may be getting a 2004; what were the tail light and grille upgrades on the cars in 06? I can't see the difference... ? Been a 107 and 203 owner for so long, not a CLK person until now.
11-12-2012, 06:50 PM
#4
Super Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLK55 AMG
in the picture threads there are plenty of photos of the cars, and they will point out the new shapes vs old shapes. but to give you an indication of the change in tail lights in 2006:
old:
new:
old:
new:
