Lowest Mileage (Arctic White) just popped up - just 454mi!
Member
Joined: Aug 2021
Posts: 176
Likes: 59
From: NYC
500E - CLK BS
Sigh, I remember this time.
Back in 2014, I was considering a 2007/8 SL65 and a CLK63 BS. They were both halo cars for me, but wildly different. In the end, a gloss black SL65 was one of my all time favorite cars, so after very much back and forth, I purchased a 2008 SL65 for a little over $50k. I remember that the CLK63's with "normal" miles were in the mid-50's, with some a little higher in the low 60's. Cars with accident history were in the mid-40's. I so wanted to purchase one, but the SL65 called to me more.
Fast forward to today, with the SL having been sold in 2019 at a $30k loss, and the CLK 63 BS's with no upper end in sight
. Now of course, the examples we're all seeing are the cream of the crop, but even "regular" examples are at least in the $120k range and climbing. From an financial standpoint, and from a fun standpoint, the CLK 63 BS would have been a wiser choice. But 'tis life! And overall, the SL65 was probably a "better" car, and I had a ton of fun in it with the top down and the V12 roaring away, but it just happens to be a $100k swing compared to selling a BS today 
.
Back in 2014, I was considering a 2007/8 SL65 and a CLK63 BS. They were both halo cars for me, but wildly different. In the end, a gloss black SL65 was one of my all time favorite cars, so after very much back and forth, I purchased a 2008 SL65 for a little over $50k. I remember that the CLK63's with "normal" miles were in the mid-50's, with some a little higher in the low 60's. Cars with accident history were in the mid-40's. I so wanted to purchase one, but the SL65 called to me more.
Fast forward to today, with the SL having been sold in 2019 at a $30k loss, and the CLK 63 BS's with no upper end in sight
. Now of course, the examples we're all seeing are the cream of the crop, but even "regular" examples are at least in the $120k range and climbing. From an financial standpoint, and from a fun standpoint, the CLK 63 BS would have been a wiser choice. But 'tis life! And overall, the SL65 was probably a "better" car, and I had a ton of fun in it with the top down and the V12 roaring away, but it just happens to be a $100k swing compared to selling a BS today .
Member
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 140
Likes: 73
300SEL 6.3
Sigh, I remember this time.
Back in 2014, I was considering a 2007/8 SL65 and a CLK63 BS. They were both halo cars for me, but wildly different. In the end, a gloss black SL65 was one of my all time favorite cars, so after very much back and forth, I purchased a 2008 SL65 for a little over $50k. I remember that the CLK63's with "normal" miles were in the mid-50's, with some a little higher in the low 60's. Cars with accident history were in the mid-40's. I so wanted to purchase one, but the SL65 called to me more.
Fast forward to today, with the SL having been sold in 2019 at a $30k loss, and the CLK 63 BS's with no upper end in sight. Now of course, the examples we're all seeing are the cream of the crop, but even "regular" examples are at least in the $120k range and climbing. From an financial standpoint, and from a fun standpoint, the CLK 63 BS would have been a wiser choice. But 'tis life! And overall, the SL65 was probably a "better" car, and I had a ton of fun in it with the top down and the V12 roaring away, but it just happens to be a $100k swing compared to selling a BS today .
Back in 2014, I was considering a 2007/8 SL65 and a CLK63 BS. They were both halo cars for me, but wildly different. In the end, a gloss black SL65 was one of my all time favorite cars, so after very much back and forth, I purchased a 2008 SL65 for a little over $50k. I remember that the CLK63's with "normal" miles were in the mid-50's, with some a little higher in the low 60's. Cars with accident history were in the mid-40's. I so wanted to purchase one, but the SL65 called to me more.
Fast forward to today, with the SL having been sold in 2019 at a $30k loss, and the CLK 63 BS's with no upper end in sight
. Now of course, the examples we're all seeing are the cream of the crop, but even "regular" examples are at least in the $120k range and climbing. From an financial standpoint, and from a fun standpoint, the CLK 63 BS would have been a wiser choice. But 'tis life! And overall, the SL65 was probably a "better" car, and I had a ton of fun in it with the top down and the V12 roaring away, but it just happens to be a $100k swing compared to selling a BS today .
Member
Joined: Apr 2019
Posts: 186
Likes: 125
From: Northeast
2021 AMG GT BS 2008 CLK63 BS 2011 AMG SLS
For sure keep the one on the left! Such first world problems Don! JK keep the low mileage one on the right. Keep it another year and it'll go up another 8%.
Member
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 140
Likes: 73
300SEL 6.3
Not actively selling but open to offers. As you can see from the pics... The car is mint! Being that a 450 mile one just sold for around 250k... What should a 8300 mile one be worth.....?
