Most reliable MB 2004/2005

[flango]

A neighbour popped round today and is wanting to buy a V8 MB vintage 2004/2005 and was asking me in my opinion which was the most reliable, now I have my opinion but thought I would throw it open to the panel, your choices are

E500 (pre facelift) W211
CLK 500 W209
S 500W220
CLS 500 W219
CL 500 W215

So what do the panel think! Pros and cons of each please

Cheers and TIA

 

[Stratman]

The E and CLS have SBC which while not a reliability problem in itself, will sooner or later decide the brakes have been used too many times and demand a trip to Mercedes for an expensive fettling.

The CL has ABC (Automatic Body Control aka active suspension), which has been known to go wrong and costs around £1000 per corner to put right, the pump which drives it all costs even more. It's also not famed for the reliability of its many electrical gizmos.

I'm not sure about the S (airmatic suspension?) and CLK, it depends how many doors your neighbour prefers.

 

[E270 Owner]

Buying any 10 year old car has its pit falls.

Get him to buy the car and allow £1500 spare cash (at least) for fixing any problems in the first 2-3 months if not immediately after buying.

Depending how OCD he is on fixing the little things like trim, paint, switch gear, interior fittings wear and tear etc etc ..then he could have £1500 bonus money if the mechanical's and electrical's have no faults.

 

[Stratman]

Re my previous reply (post #2), ABC is of course Active Body Control

 

[bpsorrel]

From my experience, if he can stretch to a 2006 211, he'll have a pretty bullet proof car. Same would apply to a CLS of course, but they cost a bit more. 500 V8 is a great engine, it's just the SBC to worry about in the pre 06 models.

 

[flango]

From my experience, if he can stretch to a 2006 211, he'll have a pretty bullet proof car. Same would apply to a CLS of course, but they cost a bit more. 500 V8 is a great engine, it's just the SBC to worry about in the pre 06 models.

He can't stretch to facelift 2006 so the plan was to buy as new he could afford then put a bit to one side to cover repairs

 

[grober]

CLK 500= simplest car if its just a V8 burble he wants

 

[W4E300]

CLK 500= simplest car if its just a V8 burble he wants

i had the back cats removed and a neat new exhaust fitted to my 500 convertible and I can't see why you'd want anything else....it sounds superb, with that lovely "speedboat burble" at tick-over.....and it's plenty quick enough too.

Sent from my iPad using MBClub UK

 

[flango]

CLK 500= simplest car if its just a V8 burble he wants

That matches my view exactly, CLK is the simplest of all the cars and the easiest to maintain and should be pretty bullet proof if you can find a well maintained one in the first place Interestingly enough he told me he had just tested a CLK 320 and whilst he was impressed with the performance, ride and handling he said it was poverty spec, so I told him to go drive the V8. Then he can decide if it's really a V8 he wants or just a quick MB Please keep the comments coming

 

[Will]

As said - CLK500. No complicated/expensive SBC or ABC/air suspension issues.

Engine should be bulletproof. Just look for a facelift 209 model. Or could a CLK55 come in on budget - tend to be much better specced than the lesser engined models, extra performance is a bonus and servicing/running costs very similar overall

 

[GH421]

W124 500E - The best a man can get

 

[C240Sport97]

CLS/E 211 with Airmatic DC is leagues ahead of any CLK for ride and handling

 

[moakesr]

A neighbour popped round today and is wanting to buy a V8 MB vintage 2004/2005 and was asking me in my opinion which was the most reliable, now I have my opinion but thought I would throw it open to the panel, your choices are

E500 (pre facelift) W211
CLK 500 W209
S 500W220
CLS 500 W219
CL 500 W215

So what do the panel think! Pros and cons of each please

Cheers and TIA

I have advised friends and neighbours not to buy any MB from the Chrysler lost decade, i.e. 1997 - 2007

Chrysler, now owned by Fiat, says it all

 

[flango]

I have advised friends and neighbours not to buy any MB from the Chrysler lost decade, i.e. 1997 - 2007 Chrysler, now owned by Fiat, says it all

I've bought 4 x MB for family and friends In the last 4 months as posted on here, all have been mint and so far trouble free.

I have owned my W208 230k1997 vintage for 7 years it is absolutely mint has no rust whatsoever and has been totally bombproof in that time

My BIL W208 320 2001 vintage also mirrors the above I know there are issues with cars in this period and maybe the W208 is better than most but you simply can't write off all MB cars in this period

Also the fiats I've owned and still own (JSWMBO Punto) have been some of the most reliable cars I've owned and contrary to popular opinion have not rotted either

 

[E270 Owner]

And Fiat own Ferrari

Says it all huh

I have advised friends and neighbours not to buy any MB from the Chrysler lost decade, i.e. 1997 - 2007

Chrysler, now owned by Fiat, says it all

 

[moakesr]

And Fiat own Ferrari Says it all huh

....and so Fiat is the same quality as Ferrari?

Statistically there will be good and bad examples of any manufacturers cars, but there are trends such as electroplates in gearboxes and airmatic suspension which are a cause of concern when recommending MB cars of that period.

I accept many members will have reliable MB's from that period, and that is a good thing, but being risk averse, I would not recommend cars from that period where in my opinion, which I accept is just my opinion and not a proven fact, the cars were built to a lower quality standard than previous. Once I can afford a post 2007 E class or S class, I will get rid of my Lexus and go back to MB for my daily driver.

All of this is IMHO and I accept other peoples opinions and experiences will be different.

 

[wemorgan]

Most W208 and W210 have quite rusty bodywork when compared less premium cars. That doesn't make them unreliable, just unsightly when left to decay.

 

[E270 Owner]

....and so Fiat is the same quality as Ferrari?

Statistically there will be good and bad examples of any manufacturers cars, but there are trends such as electroplates in gearboxes and airmatic suspension which are a cause of concern when recommending MB cars of that period.

I accept many members will have reliable MB's from that period, and that is a good thing, but being risk averse, I would not recommend cars from that period where in my opinion, which I accept is just my opinion and not a proven fact, the cars were built to a lower quality standard than previous. Once I can afford a post 2007 E class or S class, I will get rid of my Lexus and go back to MB for my daily driver.

All of this is IMHO and I accept other peoples opinions and experiences will be different.

I was merely repeating the same "tarred with the brush" attitude you applied to Chrysler MB.
You are arguing with yourself.

And the comment on MB rust buckets before that period stand heads above all later problems, but none any different form other manufacturers quirks and defects, Mazda oil pumps Audi oil pumps
Fiat gear boxes Ford diesel pumps vauxhall swirl flaps and egrs etc etc etc