RE: Mercedes E55 AMG: Spotted

RE: Mercedes E55 AMG: Spotted

Tuesday 24th November 2015

Mercedes E55 AMG: Spotted

Q-cars really don't come much more Q than this, and sleeper Merc is a bargain too.



History has not looked fondly on the bug-eyed W210 generation of the Mercedes E-Class. Its predecessor, the W124, hallowed be its name, is often held as the pinnacle of Merc's 'cost no object' engineering in the 80s. But by the time the W210 arrived, in 1995, many reckoned that was more like 'object, no cost' - certainly when it came to the rust proofing many of this generation seemed to not possess.

Building block to what we now know and love
Building block to what we now know and love
This E-Class had the misfortune to be sent into battle against the BMW E39 5 Series, one of the finest executive cars ever made, with the Merc's startled facial expression, mostly dull dynamics and frequently shonky build quality doing it few favours. The vast majority have long since descended into outright bangerdom.

It seems like there's little love for even the pinnacle of the W210 clan, the E55 AMG either. This attractive looking specimen has just popped up in the classifieds for £4,995, an asking price less than half of what you would see asked for an E39 M5 with similar miles and condition. Okay, the BMW is probably the superior car. But is it really 100 per cent better?

Half the price of an E39 M5... but is it half the car?
Half the price of an E39 M5... but is it half the car?
Because there's a lot to like about the E55. Indeed it's no exaggeration to say that it pretty much defined the archetype for what AMG road cars have become: muscular, refined and with a stonking V8 engine up front providing both cheek-flattening acceleration and a correspondingly bristly soundtrack. With 349hp on tap it couldn't match the M5 on outright grunt, but it has more torque and feels brawnier at real world speeds. It's a supremely accomplished high-speed cruiser, and respectably fleet of foot when asked to change the vector of its considerable mass. You're unlikely to buy one as a track slag, but if you suddenly realise you have to drive to Leipzig in time for breakfast tomorrow it's the perfect choice. There's got to be plenty right about a car that Dario Franchitti owns and lists among his personal favourites...

In short, the E55 was a much better rounded car that the Mercedes AMGs that had preceded it - the less powerful W210 E36 and the C36 and C43 versions of the equally rust-prone W202 C-Class. Yet these days there seems to be little difference in value between any of them, with even good ones struggling to break the five grand mark. It's a topic we'll return in more detail with a scheduled Market Watch piece we've got coming up.

Perfect for cruising, supremely accomplished
Perfect for cruising, supremely accomplished
This one seems to have been looked after well and is being sold with a full service history and - reassuring sign - reasonably fresh branded tyres. It's also been chipped and given a sports exhaust, sympathetic mods considering the untapped potential of that huge V8. Recent spending seems to include a gearbox service, which is another solid tick on the list. The car is in Fife, which is statistically unlikely to be particularly close to you, but in every other regard it looks almost dangerously appealing.

So what about problems? An E55 definitely isn't the sort of car that you're going to run for pennies, but the good news is that - while some W210s rusted like a 70s Alfa parked in the Dead Sea - others had far greater resistance from the ravages of tinworm. You'd obviously have to go over any potential purchase in detail to be sure, but this looks like one of the unaffected ones.

For the money, it's hard not to be very tempted indeed.


MERCEDES E55 AMG (W210)
Engine
: 5,439cc, V8
Transmission: 5-speed automatic, rear-wheel drive
Power (hp): 354@5,500rpm
Torque (lb ft): 391@3,000rpm
MPG: N/A
CO2: N/A
First registered: 1999
Recorded mileage: 104,955
Price new: £53,902,36 (150,000 DM)
Yours for: £4,995

See the original ad here.



Author
Discussion

diluculophile

Original Poster:

130 posts

251 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
A lot of engine for not much money.
I'd save up for an E39 M5 instead. Ten years down the line, that will still be worth a few quid, whereas this will be in a breakers yard.

KillerHERTZ

942 posts

198 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
As per the article, you need to look for rust EVERYWHERE!

AH33

2,066 posts

135 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
I had a CLK of a similar vintage. You arent joking about the rot, I think mine was held together by rust.

muppet42

331 posts

205 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Brave pills on standby for a potential purchaser or is it actually surprisingly cheap to run? Relatively speaking anyway for a V8.

Interesting the rear tread depths are listed as 7mm on one side, 4 on the other I thought. A mate's Dad ran one of the lower models for a few years though not sure how reliable it was. Switched to a Lexus GS for a few years and now has a CLS alongside an SLK, which maybe says something about the way the brand has had it's ups and downs.

I do think it's a decent looking thing though, the AMG kit and wheels really help bolster it out into a smart and understated saloon - not as blingy as many of the latest AMG offerings. I've got vivid memories of Tiff powersliding this on Top Gear too with that bassy engine soundtrack in amongst the smoke biggrin

I'd still probably go for an E39 though...

Fetchez la vache

5,572 posts

214 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Soft spot for these, I have.
Sleeper it is not.

Goatboy

291 posts

234 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
I have run mine for nearly 4 years. It is mechanically spot on but rusting to death. It is my station car and has been reliable, fun and surprising cheap to run. Outside of the first service where it needed discs, pads tyres all round!!!£££

If it passes the MOT this year then I will probably ship it for a couple of grand while I still can.

Cracking motor and it only cost me 2700 to buy. IMO the tinworm got them all and any claiming not to have just been lucky not to notice through the paint or its been fixed.


Adrian E

3,248 posts

176 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
I'm biased in owning an Audi S8 4.2 of similar vintage, but as an ownership proposition it's a lot less worrying than this! Similar money, so just as unappreciated with teens fuel economy, but it won't melt if left out in the rain and they don't really go wrong.

The E39 M5 deserves its place at the top of the pile - I wish I'd bought a half decent one when they dipped to £10k-ish territory - but the majority of V8 saloons from the period just aren't worth big money. Must be some period road tests that put these cars together? Be interesting to see where values and reputations are now they've aged...

Hub

6,434 posts

198 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
" some W210s rusted like a 70s Alfa parked in the Dead Sea - others had far greater resistance from the ravages of tinworm. You'd obviously have to go over any potential purchase in detail to be sure, but this looks like one of the unaffected ones"

Looks like it has had some paint as the front wing looks a different shade to the door!

djt100

1,735 posts

185 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Interestingly the latest issue of modern classics has a E39 M5 on the front cover and compares it to the later shape e class and a few others but not this is the same age group. I really like these the rust does worry but its not got all the mercs from that ere yet, and in the future these will only increase in value due to rarity.

unsprung

5,467 posts

124 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all

Are the terms "q-car" and "sleeper" interchangeable? Any distinctions in the definition of one versus the other?

Just curious. (enlighten me!)

StarmistBlue400

3,029 posts

218 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
The M5 suffers from rust too. Mine had it in the usual spots (Boot, wings/arches)

Once a £50K+ car they are always going to cost a lot to fix when they go wrong.

Despite being a dog I miss my M5, epic cars.


AC43

11,486 posts

208 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
It's a shame they couldn't make the paint stick properly as otherwise these are fabulous cars.

FELIX_5

952 posts

197 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
The infamous rust issue is probably why this is now 50 shades of grey, look at that front wing compared to the door.........

SFO

5,169 posts

183 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
the rusting is a disgrace

Krikkit

26,527 posts

181 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
unsprung said:
Are the terms "q-car" and "sleeper" interchangeable? Any distinctions in the definition of one versus the other?

Just curious. (enlighten me!)
Not as I understand it.

Q-car comes from the Q-ships in WWII, sleeper is a simpler colloquialism.

SturdyHSV

10,095 posts

167 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
muppet42 said:
Interesting the rear tread depths are listed as 7mm on one side, 4 on the other
They have an open differential and presumably the owner enjoys lots of throttle hehe

King Steffy

64 posts

137 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
I'd rather have an 4.0 V8 XJR of that vintage...I'm bias...I've had one for many years now & love it to bits : )

RG02GEE

20 posts

173 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
My mates dad had one of these when we were younger, the speed really was incredible for a car of that size, but then i had a MK2 1.3 Golf at the time so the yardstick was rather short frown

griffin dai

3,201 posts

149 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
I kept mine for just under a year, lost almost 4K in 11 months though!! Prices just plummeted for some reason!!




Nice motor though, quick & comfy but repair bills were big, had to go frown

MrHooky

196 posts

142 months

Tuesday 24th November 2015
quotequote all
Adrian E said:
I'm biased in owning an Audi S8 4.2 of similar vintage, but as an ownership proposition it's a lot less worrying than this! Similar money, so just as unappreciated with teens fuel economy, but it won't melt if left out in the rain and they don't really go wrong.

The E39 M5 deserves its place at the top of the pile - I wish I'd bought a half decent one when they dipped to £10k-ish territory - but the majority of V8 saloons from the period just aren't worth big money. Must be some period road tests that put these cars together? Be interesting to see where values and reputations are now they've aged...
Ditto. Paid £4,800 for mine. To my eyes these Mercs look horribly dated. Also lusted after an E39 but a decent one was probably £12k in the same condition as the S8...