CLK 230 or 320 Cabriolet ?

[pepe]

Toying with the idea of a new (to me) car and am thinking of the two above,prob about 1999/2000 looking at the specs they both seem pretty similar fuel consumption wise, only a couple of mpg in it. So anything else for or against the above. obviously the 320 is going to be smoother i take it. any advise ?

 

[Sp!ke]

Definately get the 6 cyl engine if possible IMO.

 

[pepe]

just found another thread debating this issue so no need to wear your typin fingers out guys. what about the older (say 1993/94) SL300 cabriolets. anyone know anything about them, MPG etc ?? what would make more sense clk or sl. id want a warranty and the ones supplies by garages are usually rubbish, when i bought my C250 had a 3 month warranty but only covered claims to max of £300, so bought a 3rd party warranty for £200 which covered everything inc wear and tear upto max £5000 per claim. But they are only available for cars under 10 years old and less than 100k miles.

 

[sym]

: transmission begins :

Get Silver

: transmission ends :

 

[GrahamC230K]

I would go with the 320. Still torqey (really all the 4 cylinder 2.3 has going for it), similar BHP and is a newer engine I guess.

 

[esox]

Theres nothing really wrong with the 230,i do not find it rough,coarse or sounding "like a flatulent Dyson",in fact it is a very torquey engine for its size and nearly 200 bhp and 140+ mph is ample-it really can shift when you want it to.Mind you,i have never driven a Merc v6,having had diesels for about 8 yrs previous,the thought of running a Mercedes v6 scared the hell out of me!

 

[jaymanek]

but the effortless cruise of the CLK 320... love it!

jay

 

[silverclk230]

Fuel consumption was important to me as I have opted out of the company`s car scheme. Mine does 27mpg average (short journeys) and I have seen 33mpg (all motorway). The 230 komp is a great engine. When you get the engine revving well it really flies. Biggest problem I have had is keeping it below the legal limit. I bought my car on condition/mileage/price/colour rather than engine size, that said I would test drive both and see which one you prefer. Make sure you get auto trans. (IHMO)

 

[Tan]

just found another thread debating this issue so no need to wear your typin fingers out guys. what about the older (say 1993/94) SL300 cabriolets. anyone know anything about them, MPG etc ?? what would make more sense clk or sl. id want a warranty and the ones supplies by garages are usually rubbish, when i bought my C250 had a 3 month warranty but only covered claims to max of £300, so bought a 3rd party warranty for £200 which covered everything inc wear and tear upto max £5000 per claim. But they are only available for cars under 10 years old and less than 100k miles.

I say go for the SL... maybe i am not impartial tho.

The better engine to go for with economy in mind is the SL320.. dunno the figures but thats what i hear. The SL is a classic and to be honest with the release of the new shape the 129 series cars now look even more special.

Regards warranty I have a policy with the AA and its very good and let the main dealers carry out all the work.

 

[Tan]

SL + points: Looks, Time less classic, hold value well, still attract attention, look far more expensive than they really are, VERY VERY WELL BUILT,

SL -ve points: Getting a little old..age is nothing but a number, some parts can be exbensive, its rear seating is limited..tho i recently fitted 3 people in the back.

 

[guydewdney]

my mums CLK is for sale - over in redhill near the airport. and shes honest

pics / detals in the classified section.

 

[guydewdney]

SL + points: Looks, Time less classic, hold value well, still attract attention, look far more expensive than they really are, VERY VERY WELL BUILT,

every sub 20K SL 129 i saw was fecked (if you will excuse the language). loose trim, splits, fading etc. and no sace for a passenger (not that theres any in a CLK......)

 

[fuzzer]

my old 2.4 V6 ATE fuel .. not just a little bit. I was getting about 210 miles out a 65 litre tank :S

 

[esox]

and no sace for a passenger (not that theres any in a CLK......)

My CLK makes an exellent family car!-loads of room in the back for the kids.Also you have controll when they get in and out-you cant trust kids to open their own door without banging into something About fuel consumption,mine averages about 27 (thats with lots of shortish journeys)and up to 35/36 on long ones.

 

[Flash]

230K is good engine but if u can try and get the 320.

We were in a similar dilemma up and till last week… between a 320 or 500 Cab – since this is for my wife I told her at end of the day that it was up to her – I wanted the 500 all along – I told her to take into consideration that the folding mechanism is going to add a bit of extra weight… and she said to do as I please (therefore I’ve now speced the car as a 500 but still have quite a bit of time to change the final spec for other goodies….).

And before anyone says anything yes its going to be Brilliant Silver !!! Looked at dark colours but due to scratches and dirt showing Silver will do nicely… and my wife and I both love Silver…

Flash

 

[Flyer]

My CLK makes an exellent family car!-loads of room in the back for the kids.Also you have controll when they get in and out-you cant trust kids to open their own door without banging into something

I agree - loads of room in the back. Certainly never had any complaints from passengers. I have at boat at Lake Bala and we go camping there - you wouldn't (well, esox you probably would ), believe the amount of stuff you can get in a CLK. Next time we go, I'm going to lay it all out and take a pic

About fuel consumption,mine averages about 27 (thats with lots of shortish journeys)and up to 35/36 on long ones.

Checking my Excel spreadsheet, my average, over 12 months, is 27.3, with a best of 101.98 ( ) and a worst of 5.22 ( )

 

[Shude]

My CLK makes an exellent family car!-loads of room in the back for the kids.

I agree - loads of room in the back.

Bear in mind that both these opinions come from coupé owners, not cabriolet owners! You might find that because of the bulky roof mechanism there is slightly less room in the rear of the cabrios! I have sat in the rear of a CLK cabrio and there was enough room, but I was sitting on the passenger side, the driver's side was almost zero legroom due to the seat position of the driver, although this can be true of any car.

 

[guydewdney]

Bear in mind that both these opinions come from coupé owners, not cabriolet owners! You might find that because of the bulky roof mechanism there is slightly less room in the rear of the cabrios! I have sat in the rear of a CLK cabrio and there was enough room, but I was sitting on the passenger side, the driver's side was almost zero legroom due to the seat position of the driver, although this can be true of any car.

not a CL

 

[Shude]

not a CL

What are you talking about?! The CL is one of the worst for it! Unashamedly selfish the CL has bugger-all rear space, considering the size of the car!