• The Forums are now open to new registrations, adverts are also being de-tuned.

Advise needed on a CLK purchase

Is this car the faced lifted model

Mercedes-Benz CLK 320 CDi Avantgarde 2dr Tip Auto 3.0

I am very tempted to view the car, would a reasonable offer of £5000 be fair?

A 2007 would be a face lift model.

Fairly average specification, might have Xenon lights as it has headlight washers but not full leather, no heated seats and no parking sensors, presumably why the rear bumper has some marks on it?

As for the offer, who knows? They can only say no but it is quite a percentage lower than is being asked.
 
I think you'd be lucky at £5k.

It probably doesn't have Xenon's, my CLK has washers but just standard halogen lights, think all CLKs had headlight washers.
 
Last edited:
I'd pass on the second one, but the first one seems to be well spec'd, didn't know you got a CLK with cloth interior.

140k is quite a lot of miles, I have no idea on diesels though. Just as everyone else has said, I also do little miles <5k p/a and diesels aren't worth it. Personally, I'd get a 240/320 (320 being preferred) as the cost difference will work out better and there is less to go wrong. Just my 2c though. :)
 
I just found out a parking permit for islington is £400 so I am now going to have to look for a 220cdi as the cost is ridiculous, that brings it down to £200 per year.

Are the 220 CDI reliable


These look ok, what are your thoughts?

Mercedes-Benz CLK 220 CDi Avantgarde 2dr Tip Auto 2.1

Mercedes-Benz CLK 220 CDi Elegance 2dr Tip Auto 2.1

I understand that the 2,2 CDi is thought of as being reliable. Both have a fairly high mileage and getting any sort of reasonable and comprehensive warranty on one at that mileage may prove difficult.

The first one has a rather confused advert mixing up full leather with Artico (PVC!) and cloth

Of the two I prefer the first, the colour combination and wheels look better as I am not a fan of the wood trim in the elegance,

The VED is a little less with this engine as well, overall though the additional £200 P.A and a slightly higher VED is not a huge amount in terms of running costs.
 
I'd pass on the second one, but the first one seems to be well spec'd, didn't know you got a CLK with cloth interior.

140k is quite a lot of miles, I have no idea on diesels though. Just as everyone else has said, I also do little miles <5k p/a and diesels aren't worth it. Personally, I'd get a 240/320 (320 being preferred) as the cost difference will work out better and there is less to go wrong. Just my 2c though. :)

The 240/320 petrol engines were dropped in the facelift model, rather nice 3 litre petrol engines available though :)
 
A long way off to view? Ask them when it was built so you can work out if it is a face lift model if that is important to you?

What is the difference in the face lift model, tbh they all look the same to me!

What should I be asking the dealer apart from the obvious questions?
 
What is the difference in the face lift model, tbh they all look the same to me!

No idea exactly but Google is your friend

What should I be asking the dealer apart from the obvious questions?

Whatever you normally ask when buying a used car, just check everything works, make sure it gets up to normal temperature around 88 Deg C) in addition ask for evidence of a gearbox fluid change, they are due at 37,000 miles, MB changed the interval a number of times and also said that is was not required then changed their minds!

Ask to lift the engine cover and make sure there is no evidence of diesel leaking from around the injectors.:thumb:
 


Bit of a drop from wanting a 3.2 litre diesel to a 1.8 litre petrol:D

It seems expensive despite the generous "price reduction", also no interior shot of the dash etc. Has rear parking sensors but little else mentioned?

A typical dealer advert, many repeated phrases some contradictory like "recent MOT"but states that MOT is due on the 30/07/14 and "recent service" followed by "last service on 01/08/2013 at 69206 miles" which strangely, and according to the advertised mileage suggests it has not moved since!
 
Last edited:
Bit of a drop from wanting a 3.2 litre diesel to a 1.8 litre petrol:D

It seems expensive despite the generous "price reduction", also no interior shot of the dash etc. Has rear parking sensors but little else mentioned?

Yes I would love a 320 but I am not prepared to pay islington parking permit charges of £400 just to park outside my own door, anything under 2100 is £200 per year.

I do agree it seems a little expensive, what's its true value £5000-5500?
 
Yes I would love a 320 but I am not prepared to pay islington parking permit charges of £400 just to park outside my own door, anything under 2100 is £200 per year.

I do agree it seems a little expensive, what's its true value £5000-5500?

Do not get hung up on what equates to an extra 55 pence per day for parking, it really is one of the smallest costs you will bear.

As for the value, I have no idea, do some legwork, run a search on Auto trader putting in those parameters of mileage, age, engine etc and get a feel for the market is a good way of assessing value.

That advert is so poorly written I would probably just ignore it. I find that when calling to establish the specification etc dealers will either not know, cannot be bothered to find out or be very economical with the truth to try to get you to view the car.
 
How are you interpreting this? :Resident permits - Islington Council

It clearly states different rates for cars registered before 2001 based on engine size and for cars post 2001 it is based on emissions;

The 320 diesel is rated at 193g/Km so according to the table it is band J at £200 P/A !!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom