MB CLK430 vs. BMW 540i Sport

[Adam230K]

hi Guys,

Thought i'd put this up for discussion. As most know i'm in the market for a reasonably powered V8, and the C43 is just uninsurable, but for some wierd reason i can get insurance on these 2 beasts at around £900 per year, with the clk being actually slightly cheaper!

I'm torn between the two, i've been in and driven the 540, its a monster and its very comfortable to say the least, great cabin and seems to be really well built.

But on the other hand i have the CLk430 which is arguably better looking, and possibly slightly better performance (because i'm guessing its lighter than the 540), same-ish engine (275bhp vs 286bhp as book figures), where the beemer has VANOS (some form of variable valve timing) which will give it some slightly better performance over the rev-range. (i know i sound so **** right now!)

Automatic transmission is another preference but not a must. And i'm sure in terms of equipment, there's not much comparison to be had between these 2 cars when they're maxed out in terms of options.

To round it off, i am more of a performance oriented person, i do buy cars for the engine and performance rather than the looks (i wouldn't care if i drove a garbage can with 4 wheels which performed like a ferrari in a straight line), but i like to be comfortable when i drive.

What do you guys think? pros and cons? fire away!

Add: Howard has kindly agreed to let me see what his car is like, so i guess that will help a little bit!

 

[lynall]

I have an E430 and to honest its not that fast once it picks its skirts up its like a bullet but sometimes i am thinking come on get going! i would describe it as quick but not fast if that makes sense.

Will do max speed anywhere but its the getting there at lowish revs can be dissapointing sometimes, its obviously shifting as the other cars are going backwards it just doesnt feel fast.

Wifes last e class a 320 was the same.

I reckon the engine can do the business, its the gearbox that makes it sluggish, a gearbox reset makes it a little better but not much.

You will find the 4.3 litre engine is quite rare in any merc and for some reason they are very cheap

Hope this helps



Lynall

 

[lynall]

Ps but unlike the bmw the engine is unburstable and doesnt have dodgy cylinder liners nikasil coating i think do a google big problem new engine



Lynall

 

[A210AMG]

2 Door Classy coupe or 4 door box saloon.

Depends what you need? do you need easy access to rear seats (kids?)

I would go for the CLK I would think ALL are auto and if you don't need the space a nicer looking car than the BMW imho.

The BMW will no doubt be a nice car but it looks nothing special, lots of manuals and they are horrible in a 5 series just feels wrong changing a gear in such a car. Also as already mentioned careful which engine you choice with the problems they have had.

So CLK 1 bm 0 for me

 

[flango]

This one depends on the age of the car you are thinking of as there are pro's and cons to both sides of this if you let us know the approx year I'll throw in my 2p, had a bit of experience with the BMW V8's in the 540 & 740, big difference between BMW & MB if you blow an engine or suffer engine damage some other way

 

[Howard]

The 430 V8 is renowned for being slightly lazy off the line , but once it's going ......

Don't get me wrong , burying the throttle off the line is enough to dispatch most things , but there is a moments hesitation ...

CLK430 is booked as 6.4 seconds to 60 , and i would say that this is correct , maybe a little faster , maybe not ....

TBH it's enough power for most situations. I'll take you for a spin at Ollys and show you . You won't find a manual one as i don't think they made them. They are tiptronic though , tap the gearlever left to shift down and right to go up. Acceleration can be quite savage doing it this way ...

 

[GrahamC230K]

Comparing the E39 5 series to the w208. For me the E39 seems the newer car although they are practically the same production period.

I considers a 540i Sport and I found when i was looking that actually there weren't that many about, especially sports. Almost seemed to be a premium with the M5 not really far off to purchase. So I conclude M5 You never know, check the insurance but I guess if a C43 is out the M5 may be too, but cars do vary.

Not really keen on CLK's, the w208 does nothing for me, so my choice would be the BMW. A fully loaded one if poss, quite possible with a 540i.

 

[W210 Fan]

My choice would be the CLK as I dont like beemer interiors, I know you have already stated you would drive a garbage can but could you really live with that interior styling? it looks like they gave it to the apprentice who could only draw straight lines, and im not saying that as a merc/anti beemer fan, its the reason I dont drives beemers,

best guess is to drive both of them and make your mind up on that as chances are people on here are going to be a bit biased towards the star, I hear beemers drive better and if I was to drive one it would have to have no interior - a track day car

 

[peterg1965]

I asked a similar question about a decent V8 on a BMW forum, having owned 3 BMWs recently - E60, E91 and E92. Whilst I am decided on the CLK500 the concensus on there was very much pushing me towards the ALPINA B10. Its horses for courses. I think the B10 (the old shape E39) looks dated and the interior is not nice.

 

[Adam230K]

Thanks for the feedback fellas, i really do appreciate it.

As for the year... i wont go over the 2001 model for the 540 or the clk430.. since the VED kicks in and starts to become expensive.

As for options... 540's seem to be more spoilt with alot of things as standard that the MB doesn't have. 540's after 2001 have bi-xenons as standard. And most of these beemers have a screen and very nice spec, and to be fair, this particular model doesn't suffer from the Nikasil lining incident which happened years ago.

BUT... the 540 does have a long list of "common issues", and most of them are actually engine related (particularly the cooling system, radiator etc and the VANOS, that can get noisey which is very costly to fix, and happens around 100k-ish miles). These are all ENGINE problems, which i never hear of on mercs (or i do, but its very rare!).

The one thing leaning me towards the merc (as from previous experience) is that i know it will still last alot better than the beemer and will be more reliable and i can sleep easy when i give it a good lashing. And if its as old fashioned as the w202, then i really dont see a problem in maintaining it.

Another thing that a friend said to me is that the when buying a merc/bmw if they are of the same class, both second hand, you can almost bet your socks that the bmw has been driven harder than the mercedes because younger people tend to buy it and thrash it, where mercedes attract more mature buyers. This could be a bad general statement, but i kind've see into his logic.

Keep the suggestions coming!

 

[W210 Fan]

As for the year... i wont go over the 2001 model for the 540 or the clk430.. since the VED kicks in and starts to become expensive.

The VED change has been put on hold but best to buy pre 01 just incase it comes back,

And if its as old fashioned as the w202, then i really dont see a problem in maintaining it.

thats the reason im ditching the S class and have gone for the CLK, its easier to do anything to it as its more simple motoring, I assume you know the CLK is built on the W202 platform but the front is styled to look like the E class hence the twin headlights???

 

[Howard]

Theres a few little bits that I have on my 430 ( June 2001 ) that dad doesn't have on his ( Mid 2000 ) ...

Mine can have mileage display ( MPH ) on the dash screen , the side windows go down half an inch when you open the door to make it easier to close for example ...

Sadly mine falls into the £210 a year tax bracket , and dads is firmly in the £185 a year bracket , so i guess i'll have to live with some tax increases ...

Dads has the Bose audio kit , and to be honest , i can't notice a lot of difference between it and mine ( non-Bose ) so don't get too hung up on that .

 

[Adam230K]

The VED change has been put on hold but best to buy pre 01 just incase it comes back,



thats the reason im ditching the S class and have gone for the CLK, its easier to do anything to it as its more simple motoring, I assume you know the CLK is built on the W202 platform but the front is styled to look like the E class hence the twin headlights???

I dont doubt you one bit. If what you're saying is really true, then you've possibly swayed me alot in the clk's favour... i love my 202's cuz they're so easy to maintain and they are quite solidly built.

 

[W210 Fan]

Ah the font of all knowledge...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W208

 

[MPG]

In the past I've owned a BMW 840 & a 740 Sport (E38), both of which featured the 4.4 V8 with 5 speed steptronic box. With both cars the engines & gearboxes were flawless.
Personally, I'd recommend the 740 over the 540 any day. It's just personal preference, but I always found the 5 series incredibly cramped in the rear - unlike the E38. Get one with the stiffer springs and dampers offered by the sport pack & it's a lovely way to travel. Admittedly, it's no out and out sportscar, but for "real world" motoring I found it hard to beat.

 

[lynall]

See here http://www.meeknet.co.uk/E32/Nikasil.htm he's a BMW fan but it all sounds plausible



Lynall

 

[Adam230K]

Hey lynall, as far as i know, the BMW E39 V8 (M62?) engine was not affected by the Nikasil bore linings incident that happened to BMW and Jaguar.

But it does have its fair share of "common issues"...

 

[jamesk]

The 4.4 BMW engine was catagorically NOT affected by nikasil.

In reality the nikasil engine was/is in some ways better than the replacement steel liners so I read. The only potential problem with nikasil was it's reaction with the high sulphur content in fuel prior to sometime in 1998, where the laws changed afaik. The 4.4 litre engine was fitted to all E39 540's, which were produced from mid 1996 onwards.

I have never been in a CLK 430 but have driven an S430 which I assume is the same engine? I own an E34 540i, which is the nikasil variant and only 4.0 but the same 286bhp as the 4.4 (some German tax reason so they limit the power on both). I would honestly say that the BMW lump was quicker and felt very powerful once above 3-3500rpm. Clearly the S-class is larger and heavier than a CLK though so not a direct comparison.

Sorry for rambling - nikasil conversations are a pet obsession of mine. I've never had any trouble i might add