Continuing the theme of shite buying ideas...

[Cavcraft]

...how stupid would it be to buy an old (1998/9-ish) CLK 320? I recall someone (Albert?) saying the 230 Kompressor models were slightly wank, but looking at the prices you can get them for, and reading owner's comments of pretty decent economy figures the 320 seems quite bargainous to me.

 

Another hopelessly stupid idea or are they half decent enough and any common faults to look out for? It'd have to be an auto and none of that Avantgarde shite with the nasty looking cloth interiors.

[Pete-M]

They certainly drive well enough, and they're not particularly sluggish.

 

The 200K is a bloody disaster. Noisy, rough, shite on fuel and expensive to tax. 320 is a much better choice.

[Albert Ross]

'Twas not I. I quite like them, and would have a rust free jobbie any day, if the Wife would let me.

[CIH]

the interior will likley be falling to pieces

[Cavcraft]

*Sorry Albert.

 

Glad you mentioned the 200 Pete as I'd considered one until I saw the fuel economy then read your comments. It would appear the consumption of the 3.2 is probably the same or slightly better than my 323i (2.5) and although the absence of two door will something of a pain they do look a nice car.

I think it's time to trawl Pistonheads and Autotraitor and see what's happening...

[Guest Leonard Hatred]

You just need a trophy wife to go with it.

[Cavcraft]

She is blonde and has a 'tramp stamp' tattoo on her lower back but I'm not sure about the 'trophy' bit.

[warren t claim]

Buy it! Imagine all the sunbed shop assistants you'd get to shag!

[dollywobbler]

Does a trophy wife mean she lets you hold her ears?

 

Actually on topic, I quite like the first generation of CLKs, but nothing after that.

[Mike D]

I didn't realise til today, that the CLK is based on the C Class rather than the E!

 

Engines are good, I had an E class, and it went bloody well with the 320, oil changes get expensive as they take around 9.5 litres! Spark plugs are an expensive change too, as theres 12 of them. The only thing i'd say look out for is the gearbox (722.6) and rust. My saloon grenaded the box at teh weekend, before that it had a tendency to blow its oil out at 3K revs plus.... Merc said they were sealed for life units to start, so none really got fluid changes, the later cars that use the same box have a 40K recommendation. The merc fluid is expensive, 12 quid odd a litre, and they take about 10 -12 of them!

 

A mate has a 2000 CLK320, and he had to have the front wings and bootlid sorted due to rust.

 

Dealer prices for parts are suprisingly reasonable.. and if you take one for a test drive and it's knocking from the front over bumps, it's just the anti roll bar bishes, and theyre an easy and very cheap fix

[Mike D]

Economy wise, i have quite a heavy foot, and was getting around 23mpg round town, and a 400 mile round trip at 85 rolled in at 28mpg

[Cavcraft]

Cheers Mike. Some owners reported mid twenties minimum, maybe because the CLKs are fairly areodynamic compared to more 'housebrick' four door saloons? I'd have thought a 3.2 motor was pretty unstressed too and wouldn't need much right foot action to waft along?