CLK 320 or SLK 230K

[Ivo]

Hi all,
I'm driving a Mercedes-Benz E230 1988 and now I'm looking for something a bit newer, smaller and faster. Unfortunately my budget for a new car is maximum £2500 and that's why I'm hesitating between the CLK 320 and the SLK 230K. I know they are different classes, but I love them both and I need some advices. If you can tell me the advantages and disadvantages, the common problems and the maintenance costs, it would be very helpful!

Thanks in advance

 

[sjmaxwell]

On the CLK the 320 and 230 give similar fuel economy and of course the CLK is a 4 seater!

 

[Carrsey]

I was similar recently but went for the CLK as the back seat will be needed every now and then.. As much as i like the SLK just couldnt get away without the rear seat..

 

[Ivo]

Yeah back seats are the one thing I want also. But I assume SLK is much more lighter because of the lack of rear seats and the smaller coupe. By the way the CLK on the picture is very nice but because of my budget I'm looking for a CLK or SLK around 2000 year. Some people told me that they have a lot of problems with the electronics from that year, do you know if that's true ?!

 

[Clkrichard]

I went from an SLK 200 to a CLK 320 for back seat reasons and was very happy I did.
The SLK was a little more nimble but the CLK is so much more comfortable and has so many fun toys. Admittedly my CLK is a W209 but I have always liked the W208.
Rust of course will be a factor on either.
Now if you can find a V8 CLK ........

 

[sjmaxwell]

Yeah back seats are the one thing I want also. But I assume SLK is much more lighter because of the lack of rear seats and the smaller coupe. By the way the CLK on the picture is very nice but because of my budget I'm looking for a CLK or SLK around 2000 year. Some people told me that they have a lot of problems with the electronics from that year, do you know if that's true ?!

I had a W208 2000 CLK 230K and didn't have electrical issues just rust!

 

[stephen coy]

I've owned my CLK 230 since last November and I would say it's the best all round car I've owned. The combination of the compressor engine and 'instant' kickdown still surprises me the way it accelerates the car (on a recent motorway journey my daughter commented the car sounded like a formula one racing car when overtaking etc !)

 

[martyz]

CLK,much nicer car imho.

 

[Clkrichard]

Martyz having had both I totally agree.
No "hairdresser" comments with the CLK but with an SLK .......

 

[Ivo]

The compressor of the CLK is indeed really nice and has a great sound, but I personally think that the CLK V6 engine on the 3.2 is much more stronger than for instance the CLK 230K engine.He also should have longer live even though they have almost equal hp.

 

[m2287]

I've had an slk 230 and a clk 200... Never had a car with the 320 engine. The slk was a better car to drive, the clk felt a bit more "wobbly". The slk also had no rust whereas EVERY clk I have seen is rusty in places! Equipment levels were pretty much identical.

 

[Big L]

clk all the way, v6+

slk is a girl's car imho

 

[Clkrichard]

There is not a single spot of rust on my CLK and it has much more equipment and toys than my SLK had. I didnt have bi xenons on the SLK and love them on my CLK and SL. Electric heated seats, multiple "convenience" functions etc etc, the CLK is just a more luxurious car. The 320 V6 is a silky engine with a bit of go.
Realistically though both are good but different and it boils down to 2 seats or 4 ?