CLK 500 Buying Advice

[assadahmed]

Hi all.

Having managed to source a very nice 330i e46 saloon (in Oxford Green no less) which has proved very reliable in the last 2 years, I'm thinking of adding a CLK500 to my fleet. I like the idea of cruising around in a car with a nice interior and engine. I would only use the car on the weekend to drive from Reading to East London and back. Is it a good car or should I go for 540i?

I always like to stay on top of servicing to prevent any possible issues. I don't mind spending money on the car now and again but don't want a car that would be constantly unreliable and a money pit.

I wondered what other owners thoughts are on these cars and it would also help a great deal if some good examples of models currently for for sale could be linked. Money wise the cheaper the better. I don't really want to spend more than 5k and only would spend 5k if it was a particularly good example.

I tend to decide on if a car is worth buying from a reliability point of view on the basis of its MOT history. A lack of failures is probably a good indication that the car has been looked after right?

[Miglia 888]

Love our CLK 500 5.5 Sport.

There's a significant difference in liveliness between the pre-facelift CLK 500 5.0 M113 with the 5 speed auto, and the post-facelift CLK 500 5.5 M273 with the 7 speed auto:
M113 5.0 has SOHC 3v heads & twin spark plugs - 302hp & 339 ftlb.
M273 5.5 has DOHC 4v heads with VVT & single spark plugs - 383hp & 391 ftlb.

Effortless overtaking with 0-60mph in 5 / 0-100 in under 12 / 70mph cruising at under 2000 revs & 30mpg if you really want it, from the 5.5.
The sport suspension is supple yet controlled, with road noise nicely suppressed, the gearchanges as smooth as silk, and a thunderous roar available from the sports exhaust on demand.
Noticeably quicker, more powerful & more torquey than the older (and more expensive) CLK 55 AMG with its 5 speed box, too.

It's well worth spending a bit more to get the later 5.5 if you're after a CLK 500, as all the extra performance comes with no fuel consumption penalty & half the costs at spark plug change time, plus you avoid the rust issues that affect many of the earlier cars which aren't fully galvanised.

That's if you can find one - there are only about 120 CLK 500 5.5's on the road in the UK, compared with around 600 of the older 5.0's

I wanted a CLK 500 Sport 5.5 convertible, but there are only about 50 Sport 5.5's on the road, with approx. just 20 of those being convertibles. I missed out on two that came up for sale in almost two years of searching - they both sold the same day they listed, at full asking price, and the pricing guides didn't accurately reflect the values they actually sell for.

Had mine for four years now, and it's been great - still makes me grin every time I drive it.
CLK 500 5.5's don't come up often, but if you can find one, you won't be disappointed.

There's no CLK 500 5.5's on PH atm, but there's one CLK 500 5.5 (a convertible) on AT here:
https://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/202...
MOT history shows nothing unexpected: tyres, brakes, and front arms are consumable items on any larger engined W203 & derivatives.
HTH.

[eddy77]

Great cars and superb value....if you can find one. Around 5 years ago I wanted a CLK 500 Sport cabrio. Impossible to find and I ended up with a CLK350 Sport cab instead. Great cars and incredible value these days.

[shentodj]

My wife has had a 2003 clk500 elegance cab for over 15yrs now.
At the risk of tempting fate,its been a very painless experience.
when we first got it, it had been in showroom for over 6mths and I think this was why we had issues with several hood micro switches at
the main dealer. No further similar problems since sorted.

Had a crank sensor replaced, a couple of electric seat (headrest) issues, and a door module replaced; window stopped going up.
Not bad for 15yrs, but then I run Range Rovers so I'm used to much bigger bills.

Lovely, very understated, not slow, very comfy, most practical (biggest rear seats and boot) of its class. Cheaper road tax than later ones.
Not the least bit sporty, no noise, no steering feedback, but classic looks and surprisingly no rust for 03 Merc that lives on drive.
Never gets a mention in any car mags either. Saabs, Audis and Volvos seem to get more.

Won't be changing it any time soon, as worth practically nothing, and wife still enjoys it.

[assadahmed]

So whilst trying to find one that ticks all the right boxes for a decent price I have stumbled across a 03 E55 which seems to be a good example. I am going to view it tomorrow morning. The larger size suits me as it's a car I will mainly use to move around with the kids on the weekend.

It's covered 114k and has a main dealer history until 2015 at 94k and then serviced privately. It's MOT history is good.

The car is imported which I will ask more about tomorrow.

Are these cars considered reliable is it too risky???

Edited by assadahmed on Sunday 24th May 20:33

[evojam]

Early E55's had a few niggles that were ironed out on the later cars.Approach miley examples with caution,they can take the miles but can get very expensive when things start to wear out at higher mileages.Modified examples will have been driven hard so need careful checking.

[J4CKO]

Miglia 888 said:

Love our CLK 500 5.5 Sport.

There's a significant difference in liveliness between the pre-facelift CLK 500 5.0 M113 with the 5 speed auto, and the post-facelift CLK 500 5.5 M273 with the 7 speed auto:
M113 5.0 has SOHC 3v heads & twin spark plugs - 302hp & 339 ftlb.
M273 5.5 has DOHC 4v heads with VVT & single spark plugs - 383hp & 391 ftlb.

Effortless overtaking with 0-60mph in 5 / 0-100 in under 12 / 70mph cruising at under 2000 revs & 30mpg if you really want it, from the 5.5.
The sport suspension is supple yet controlled, with road noise nicely suppressed, the gearchanges as smooth as silk, and a thunderous roar available from the sports exhaust on demand.
Noticeably quicker, more powerful & more torquey than the older (and more expensive) CLK 55 AMG with its 5 speed box, too.

It's well worth spending a bit more to get the later 5.5 if you're after a CLK 500, as all the extra performance comes with no fuel consumption penalty & half the costs at spark plug change time, plus you avoid the rust issues that affect many of the earlier cars which aren't fully galvanised.

That's if you can find one - there are only about 120 CLK 500 5.5's on the road in the UK, compared with around 600 of the older 5.0's

I wanted a CLK 500 Sport 5.5 convertible, but there are only about 50 Sport 5.5's on the road, with approx. just 20 of those being convertibles. I missed out on two that came up for sale in almost two years of searching - they both sold the same day they listed, at full asking price, and the pricing guides didn't accurately reflect the values they actually sell for.

Had mine for four years now, and it's been great - still makes me grin every time I drive it.
CLK 500 5.5's don't come up often, but if you can find one, you won't be disappointed.

There's no CLK 500 5.5's on PH atm, but there's one CLK 500 5.5 (a convertible) on AT here:
https://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/202...
MOT history shows nothing unexpected: tyres, brakes, and front arms are consumable items on any larger engined W203 & derivatives.
HTH.

I think they are probably quicker even than you quote, my CLS always amazed me how fleet it felt and that is a bigger car, think the CLK is under 1700 kilos and the CLS 1850, so a good 150 plus kilos lighter. Car and driver managed 4.7 to sixty for the CLS, I think Mercedes downplayed the performance figures on paper to distance it from the AMG cars, which werent really any quicker from standstill as traction was the main issue until higher speeds.

Sublime engine in a subtle package.