MERCGUY

Ok, I have a lead on a sweet 04 CLK55 with all the goodies. I have an 03 M3 CAB today and while I love the car I sort of miss my last benz (c320 2002).

AM i insane or can the two cars not be compared? Forget the fact that the M3 is a CAB, because I would have the same question if I had the hard top M3.

Stupid high grade headache sort of questions but what do you guys think? The money is about the same so thats not a issue....

Anyone out there make this exact move? (M3 to CLK55 or 500)

Also will the CLK55 be faster than my M3 CAB? I hear different stories depending on what I read....

I know this is a biased question due to being a Merc forum.

Thanks for the feedback.

King///AMG

Well, I looked at many cars (including the M3) before making my purchase. For me, I look at the M3 as a more sporty, less luxurious vehicle. I wanted to go with a car which could get by on drop dead gorgeous looks, as well as take on many cars in the process. So, the only balance I could find was in the CLK55 AMG. Nice looks, nice perfomance. You can take it to a drag strip, as well as to an awesome restaurant with confidence... Jus my 2 cents... Plus, bragging about owning a "Benz" has its advantages...

MERCGUY

most of what has crossed my mind during my M3 v CLK55 evaluation. I guess I need to go drive the beast and see what my right foot thinks :-)
It will be nice to not have to wind the **** out of it to get it to go FAST.
My friends tell me I go through cars like underwear...its actually getting emabarassing. I guess its better than crack!

Chappy

Yes, if a CLK coupe.

MERCGUY

column

moa4r

glad i'm not the only one w/ur problem makes me want to sometime, you know??

anyway, I say, in your case, keep the m3. Its still a comfortable car (the clk will be more comfortable) but the convertible factor is a definate plus; only way I'd change would be for a clk500 or 55 convertible GL

MERCGUY

with the M3 CAB gets too me. I should have known it when I bought the car, duh it is a convertible. I also cant track it since most tracks dont allow you to run a convertible.

Soo the open top is not so much of a loss in my opinion...

moa4r

in that case, its a no brainer!! (unless you're trying to make excuses for yourself to buy that new car??!!!)


j/k GL man, it really is a tough choice. What color clk are you thinking about?? Also, you may want to wait for an '05 model, which apparantly will have some updates (18" wheels, quad exhaust, interior upgrade, etc.)

pnadin

I have moved from an 03 M3 to an 04 CLK55. Although I miss the M3's handling, everything else is much better, especially the rumbling V8 engine.

I loved the M3 and I did panic a few times while waiting for delivery of the CLK55 but now I know I would not go back.

What you lose in handling you will gain with the engine and ride comfort. The M3's engine is pants in comparison. No more kangaroos on cold starts and no more poor exhaust noises. The CLK55 is infinetly better. What a noise.

As for speed, I think the M3 has the edge on 0-60 (no tests, just what I feel). The CLK55 is harder to quick start off the line due to wheel spin but this is remedied with wider tyres.

I am wondering what my next car might be and am tempted to test drive the Maserati coupe (I am limited by needing 4 seats). Otherwise I expect I will replace with the next CLK55 with 4 exhaust pipes.

Anyone here driven the new Maserati Coupe ? How does it compare ?

Cheers
Paul

LOH

I couldn't be happier with my CLK55 (w208). I came from an e36 M3 and never seriously considered the e46 M3 despite the glowing reviews. I was looking for what was in my opinion a step-up and the M3 package just didn't appeal to me anymore. I personally don't consider them direct rivals. I occasionally miss the involvement of a manual transmission but it's rare and soon forgotten every time i redline this V8. I've never owned a car that so easily makes me smile and laugh just from the sound and power. I usually start the car with the door open and just today stuck it in 2nd gear and feathered the throttle just to hear the subtle pops and crackles from the exhaust. I couldn't be happier.

I've always thought 3-series convertibles were totally unacceptable with respect to chassis flex. Although I only have a test-drive to compare, I believe performance-wise (specifically acceleration) that these cars are neck and neck. Cab vs. coupe on either side probably favors the coupe.

As for the Maserati, it's a beautiful car and for me really has a difficlut to pinpoint magnetism. It's fast as hell and also has a engine/exhaust note to die for. The cambiocorsa transmission is fun but flawed and ultimately not quite ready, for me at least. The problem is that I wasn't particularly impressed with the conventional manual gearbox. The shift action just wasn't terribly precise nor satisfying however it could have been that particular car. The spyder had some chassis flex but less than BMW's. The interior is different. The instruments aren't terribly attractive to my eye and are difficult to read. The stereo/nav is a little odd but you don't buy this car for ergonomics. It's a nice place to be and definitely feels special but ultimately not what I'm used to with mass-produced cars but I think that is the point. In summary it's a beautiful, fast, rare car that just didn't leave me with a lot of confidence in it's value. Despite the generous 4yr/50k warranty, I didn't get the impression it would hold together like it should with daily use. Of course I have no proof. The resale is horrible with used cars selling in the $60k range for low-mileage examples. After saying all that, it's so fast and beautiful you almost forget all the other stuff. In the end I couldn't justify what I felt would cost me more than I wanted to spend at this point in my life. But man what a ride.

MERCGUY

this car sickness has spread (or started?) clear accross the Atlantic.
Your post and the one after were spot on and continues to make me consider the switch. Although the Wifee will kill me if I continue to talk about this switch.

The looks of the CLK55 W209 body are outstanding with a set of AMG 18's or 19's... the dual exhaust is nice but not sure if it worth waiting till 05. Unless the 05's are reaching our shores in the next few months...then maybe its a consideration


I guess in my gut it comes down to the cars I grew up with, all low rev high torque V8's, so the rumble and the lazy power must be ingrained in my head and right foot. The M3 is an incredible car and I do love it for many reasons (hence the tough choice), if I were suicidal I'd get both cars and be done with it. My rational side says we don't need two cars like this, as I would always be late for work trying to decide which key to grab off the counter . Although my wife would probably take the M3 before I left the house...

I feel some sort of strange comfort in knowing that there are other individuals out there that spend inordinate ammounts of time trading, changinfg and buying cars on a near yearly basis. I'm thinking we should add a section to this forum call 'Car Adicts Annonomys' . We could meet weekly and discuss our addiction.

PALESSE dont even get me started on the the sweet sounding Masarati...

lucycat

<< Anyone out there make this exact move? (M3 to CLK55 >>

I went from an '02 M3 Cab to an '04 CLK55 Cab. From the variety of responses, you can see how individual it gets, but for what it's worth -- besides being an addict, you sound like you enjoy the performance aspects of a car, and in my opinion, unless you do a lot of mods to your CLK, you are going to miss the handling of the M3 -- A LOT! I do.
The CLK is a beaut, and you can't beat the feel and thunder of an 8 cylinder, but the car is SOFT, and you are not going to see that responsiveness to the steering wheel. It will respond to your right foot, but that may not be enough for you.
I never realized there would be so much difference between the M and the AMG, but as I have been told, "they are 2 very different cars, meant for 2 very different driving experiences".

AMIL

i came from a 330ci what i really miss most is my tranny, i dont like this slushbox ****

AMG FANATIC

I haven't owned any of the 2 cars, but FWIW here is my .02.
If you have driven both(which I suspect you have), buy the one your gut tells you to go with. For eg, if you wake up in the morning, which car do you think of first? This may seem like silly advice, but in the end you really have to WANT to own the car. Good luck with the decision.

Jon200

did u hv 6spd or auto in your bimmer?

AMG///Merc

I've been avoiding this thread for fear of writing a book, but I can't resist adding my two cents here. I had an 02 M3 with the SMG transmission (which was fantastic, and undoubtedly will be the norm in a few years) that I traded in on my 03 CLK55. I'm sure that you're researched both quite a bit, and if you are still interested, I can go into real detail about the differences between the two, but for now I'll just explain my logic in the trade. In terms of ultra-high performance driving, the M3 is the better car, specifically in regards to handling, but I believe that the difference is considerably less than what most people assume. I've even heard a few less-than-knowledgable people remark that all MB car can't handle well, and they obviously haven't driven a CLK55, which from what I understand is the best handling V8 AMG car (until the SLK55 anyway). I think that the CLK55 had about 90% of the M3's handling capabilities, especially on the street, which leads to my main point...

I don't know what it's like out your way, but around here there's just too much traffic and other obstacles to deal with that don't allow all-out-*****-to-the-wall driving. There's just no way it can be done safely, and because of all of the idiots on the road, all the driving skill in the world won't help you. I'm rarely able to drive hard for more than a few moments at a time. I probably spend 85-90% of the time going slow, stuck behind a line of cars, and that's when other aspects of the car become more important, the interior especially. In my humble opinion, the CLK55's interior is fantastic. It fits my style perfectly. It's very sporting and it's very nice quality despite some controversy with overall MB quality.

The interior of my car wins people over every single time. So far everyone likes the car when they first see it, but their intrerest and general "awe" level increases dramtically once they're in the car. The guages are beautiful, especially at night. I love that almost-white indigo blue. It's really pretty, and I really "ooohed and aaaahed" the first time I turned my lights on. I do wish that the tachometer was bigger, but with the automatic, it's not a big deal.

The overall interior quality is very nice, and the aluminum trim is real aluminum, even in the instrument panel. I like how certain parts of the instrument back panel are engraved, like the fuel and temperature gradients, etc. That's some real nice attention to detail. The seats are excellent, and it's good leather. I could go on and on. The CLK55 interior is just awesome imho. I like it much more than my M3's interior, although that was very nice as well...

I guess the bottom line is that there is little difference in performance between the two cars, and I believe that the CLK55 is just a nicer car in every other respect. If you're looking for a little road-side attention, you'll get plenty in either car, but I noticed a remarkable increase in attention when I got my CLK, mostly from the local college girls, so it's not just older people that like it...

One thing to note is that you might not like the way the CLK55 handles initially. I didn't at first, but once I realized that you have to drive it a certain way, the car handled great. Specifically, the CLK55 responds best to an aggressive throttle. You can't trail brake through a corner or be with "nuetral" throttle and steering inputs. You'll get allot of understeer that way. It's definitely best to go into the corners a tiny bit slower, turn in earlier, and throttle your way through the corner. I liked the handling much better once I understood how the CLK55 likes to be driven. Understand that you'll go through tires fast though. I had my P-Zeros on the wear indicators around 9000 miles (with no burn-outs!) I have Goodyear Eagle F1 GS-D's now (junk) so we'll see how long these last.

One of the definite benefits of the CLK55 is if you are looking for a good platform for a tuner car. The car definitely has very high quality, and even 10+ years from now it will still be a very nice car, so it's definitely a "keeper" of a car. Combine that with a drivetrain that is known to be very reliable and capable of close to 600 hp, a very stiff chasis, an aerodynamic, good looking coupe body, and a good wheel/tire/suspension set-up, you'll have yourself one seriously nice car!!

One of the magazines compared the E46 M3 against the previous generation 208 CLK55 and while they ultimately picked the M3, it was very close. I recall them saying that they would drive the CLK55 and declare it the winner, but then they'd drive the M3 and say that's the winner, only to change their mind again after another drive in the CLK55. It was that close. I guarantee you that if a CLK55 and M3 were to race, the winner would be the better driver. Anyway, I'm sorry for my scatter-brained, kind of disordered rant about both cars (I'm extremely tired), but I hope that it helps some. Don't hesitate to ask if you have questions about either car. By the by, I spent about 11,000 miles in the M3, and my CLK55 has close to that number now (Just for reference purposes)


Best regards,
Matt

pnadin

Thanks AMG///Merc for taking the time to write. It was an enjoyable read.

I've had my 04 CLK55 for nearly 4 months and love it.

If you were to write a prioritized list of attributes that you want in a car, what would be at the top of your list.

Here is my list with my rating out of 10 for each car in brackets - red denotes winner.

Stunning exterior (CLK 8/10 - M3 7/10)
Supercar engine noises under acceleration (CLK 7/10 - M3 3/10)
Acceleration off the line (CLK 5/10 - M3 9/10)
Acceleration at motorway speeds (CLK 9/10 - M3 7/10)
Acceleration at low speed (CLK 9/10 - M3 9/10)
Firm but smooth ride (CLK 9/10 - M3 3/10)
Good traction (CLK 3/10 - M3 9/10)
Sharp handling / cornering (CLK 7/10 - M3 9/10)
Interior design/craftmanship (CLK 9/10 - M3 8/10)
Paddle shift gear change (CLK 3/10 - M3 7/10) Audi system is best
Smooth auto box (CLK 9/10 - M3 3/10)
Responsive throttle (CLK 7/10 - M3 9/10)
Comfortable long distance cruiser (CLK 9/10 - M3 4/10)
Tactile switches and knobs (CLK 6/10 - M3 8/10)
Quality materials (CLK 8/10 - M3 6/10)
limited rear slip diff (CLK 0/10 - M3 10/10)
ergonomic controls (CLK 7/10 - M3 9/10)
reliability (CLK 9/10 - M3 9/10)

Top speed isn't on my list because I never break the speed limit

I also have to add room for kids in the back (ideally with sound proof compartment) and it must fit in the garage.

The exercise of prioritizing this list actually helped me understand why I prefer the CLK over the M3.

What would your list look like ?

Cheers
Paul

Chip

Never breaking the speed limit. OK. In Colorado the state patrol is very active so I just really never cruise much more than 10mph over. With CLK 55 I don't spend a lot of time behind trucks and RV's. That's what makes this car worth it. I can pass so much faster than any car on the road it's stunning. Also you don't have to slow and brake for corners like the rest of the masses. I get from A to B quicker than anyone else.

It out handles my old E-55 and is much more reliable. Never driven a M-3.

MBToGoNow

Hmmm... Curious... If you're going slow stuck in traffic 90% of the time, then why pay ~$17K more for the AMG over the CLK500 which would do just as well in those conditions and almost as well as in those "few moments" when you drive hard?

LOH

Quote "Hmmm... Curious... If you're going slow stuck in traffic 90% of the time, then why pay ~$17K more for the AMG over the CLK500 which would do just as well in those conditions and almost as well as in those "few moments" when you drive hard?"


I see your point and understand the argument but for me it's difficult to express in words. You just have to experience it for yourself and it may appeal to you or maybe not. The performance increase may not seem easy to justify when it's most apparent during a relatively small percentage of your driving but for me it's worth it. With the CLK430 I had, adequately fast as it was, more frequently than you would think, there were instances where I wish I had just a little more performance. I never get that with this CLK55. The added bonus for me is exclusivity. The obvious next AGE old question is modded CLK430/500 vs. CLK55 but that's another thread.