Mercedes-Benz CLS 500 (C219) | The Brave Pill
Lower roof, higher appeal
Successful pioneers are always quick to discover that imitation follows hard on the heels of flattery. These days the idea of giving something with more than two doors a lowered roofline and then claiming it is a coupe is no more radical or original than fitting it with a wiper stalk. It’s a trend that has inspired some truly horrendous-looking cars, several of which have worn Mercedes badges. Yet one glance at the first-gen CLS which kicked the thing off shows just how good the chop top can look on something long, low and sleek. It’s a genuine shock to realise that such a fresh-looking piece of design is on the cusp of its 20th anniversary.
Before anybody gets too het up, I appreciate that Mercedes didn’t pioneer this part of the market. At the original CLS press launch several British journalists demanded to know how Merc’s claims to be breaching a new segment squared with the fact Rover had done much the same thing with the P5B Coupe nearly 40 years earlier. The blank expressions on the faces of the Merc execs suggested they were entirely unaware of the Rover’s existence. But it is fair to say that, until Merc reanimated it, the idea had been in long-term hibernation.
While its innovative styling gives plenty of opportunity for black polo neck nerding, our Pill has been carefully selected for another very obvious point of appeal. It dates from the happy time when Merc was still putting big engines into cars without demanding buyers also went for an AMG version. So while most British CLS buyers opted for the V6 diesel, our Pill is packing the much more compelling option of the 5.0-litre ‘M113’ V8. This is in a relatively relaxed state of tune - making 302hp, and likely some muscular noises as it does so - and always suited the CLS especially well. Even after 18 years and 112,000 miles this one should still have most of that muscle left. For £4,500 it looks like excellent value compared to the dowdier Merc V8 alternatives for the same or less.
While the stylish exterior is entirely different, the C219 CLS has a very close relationship with the W211 E-Class under the surface. Mechanically they are pretty much identical, with the CLS sharing its dowdier sister’s wheelbase and sitting on the same floorpan, with common suspension components, engines and transmissions. So the good news is that parts supply for the oily bits is every bit as good as it is for the contemporary E-Class.
But there is a negative side to the shared heritage as well. Like the E-Class, the CLS is a product of Mercedes’s long era of shonkiness, the period throughout the late nineties and noughties when the brand gave up on solidity and reliability and to prioritize snazzy new technology, the ambition to fit this often running far in advance of the corporate ability to make it work.
Being a well-equipped CLS 500 our Pill is going to feature most of the available failure points, including both the Sensotronic electric brake booster that is infamous for expensive borkage as well as height variable AIRMATIC suspension. On the plus side, this is definitely working at present, the vendor demonstrating its potency by having selected the raised ride height setting, which is why there seems to be about two inches too much space at the top of the wheelarches. But AIRMATIC is also well-known for pricey pump failures. Squinting at the interior shots also suggests our Pill has the radar cruise control which would have been another £££ option at the time, as well as the bi-xenon headlights. It seems fully laden for a non-AMG version.
While the CLS was given keener chassis settings than those of the E-Class it was still much more of a cruiser than a bruiser, especially on air suspension. The driver’s seat position is indeed low and coupe-like, and from memory the C219 steered pretty nicely. Less impressive is visibility - hindered by the front pillars and pretty much wiped out rearwards by the letterbox rear screen. Legroom is respectable, pretty much identical to that of the E-Class, but the fashionable roofline means that taller occupants struggle to fit comfortably in the back. Which must have been inconvenient to any of the Russian gangsters drawn by the car’s visual menace and wanting to transport a full cargo of hefty henchmen.
Our Pill’s MOT history resembles the flag of Burkina Faso – near equal amounts of red and green. The good news for a Merc of this era is that there is only one reference to any kind of structural corrosion, which is reassuring given the C219 shares the tendency to rust as its less snazzy contemporaries. The single mention was an advisory for a grotty front sub-frame in 2020, this of the milder ‘not seriously weakened variety.’ Apart from that the only use of the c word in the online history has been in reference to brake pipes and exhaust brackets.
More concerning is a fail with an airbag warning light illuminated in 2017, one that hasn’t returned since, plus a ‘fuel system component leaking’ in 2020. Aside from those there have been several other flunks for worn suspension components – the C219 being well-known for the rapacious consumption of bushes and control arms – as well as mis-aligned and nonfunctioning lights. Keeping the suspension in fettle is likely to be akin to painting the Forth Bridge - as soon as you’ve replaced everything it will be time to start again.
Yet that need for care and attention is definitely priced into our Pill, which is just an ageless registration away from fooling Daily Mail caption writers into thinking it's worth at least three times as much as it is. It certainly looks much fresher than any of the other Mercs you could buy wrapped around the same engine. In short, a very stylish way to get a dose of valedictory value fun.
More specifically the weak point of this is era can be electronics yes, such as the SAMs ( signal acquisition modules/ etc. The SBC pump can if you're lucky be replaced by Mercedes under goodwill, if not it can refurbishment for a few hundred £ by mobile specialists.
The airmatic Suspension is relatively simple, the major cost is the air struts themselves. However labour to diagnose and fix the system is not especially complex or difficult. The air compressor and air lines are cheap and easy to replace and it's fairly easy to tell which is the culprit.
If you own or drive a CLS 219 or AMG 211 looked after from this era, then compared it with a W212/3 or accompanying CLS , you will find it more comfortable, the fit and finish of the body interior is usually more consistent, and no cheap interior materials are to be found especially around the centre console door pockets unlike on the new models.
On the topic of rust, the W210,220 and 203 C class could be quite bad , especially the pre facelift models.
Again the W211 and 219 were better galvanized and parts such as the bonnet and front wings were aluminium, at least on the AMGs. But at this age, driven in Britain, of course is likely to be some corrosion on the car somewhere, .
I shouldn't imagine an E60 or an early XJ350 is a much more appealing prospect as regards reliably; something, something, GS430 - well fair enough, if you can find one.
The interiors are nice, solid places esp. if you're buying a top-spec example (which a V8 probably will be) with the "everything leather" pack - sort of an intermediate step to the horizontal band style of the future. Mine didn't have Command; considering the functionality of such gen.1 control systems, retaining a purely analogue interior was no bad thing (and looks better.)
What really sticks in the memory, interior-wise, was the buttons in the wood sections of the console. The holes through which they emerged were simply holes drilled in a bit of veneered and lacquered HDF, the edges were sharp and with the button depressed you could see the raw, unfinished edge of the board. Even in the early 2000s that was a bit crude...
The interior looks nice but the buttons on the steering wheel date it, and I can only hope they feel more substantial than similar buttons in other MBs of this period
I’m surprised there’s no proliferation of AMG badges adorning the rear as one finds with so many non-mSport BMWs but that’s a bonus.
Big problem nowadays would be the electronics as they’re incredibly complex. The air suspension is pretty cheap to sort now I think. Drivetrain is bulletproof, and it’ll be sensible tax as that’s pre 2006. Downside is there’s only four seats - I’ve no idea why they did that.
Great cars, and great value now too. Far more interesting than an E class. £4500 - what else can you get for that?
2003 E320cdi was the best overall car I've ever owned, 4 years (100 to 140k) and genuinely problem free. 2007 CLS63 (still own), 2008 S320cdi....etc. The CLS having the underpinnings of the W211 from my experience isn't a bad thing.
My other half owned a 2009 CLS350cdi which she used as her daily car for three years and other than servicing it needed a window mechanism and some camber bolts, otherwise it was a great car.
I know looks are divisive and I sit on the side that really likes how these look, maybe the Marmite looks are part of the appeal. I do think the front end on it's own isn't the prettiest, but the overall aesthetics and lines really work for me. Mine isn't going anywhere...
£4,500 for a 5.0 V8 with a practical but unique looking shape I think is a bit of a winner.
I had the later 5.5, needed a suspension pump (£104, fitted in an hour and a bit), a blanking plate on the back of the engine due to an oil weep (£34) and a few ball joints/suspension links which are dirt cheap. brakes are cheap, tyres not too bad.
A Conti GT doesnt have a cheap spares supply, 4 more cylinders, 2 turbos and 2 extra driven wheels.
The engines on these are solid, rocker cover gaskets go but not a massive deal, otherwise go on forever.
Never going to be cheap to run but 4k per annum, just buy another !
Lovely thing though, wafts along nicely, but get the 5.5, it has another 82 bhp and similar, maybe better fuel consumption, i.e. not very good, reckon on 18/20 knocking about, 27/28 on run, saw 30 once on the computer, was so momentus I took a photo.
They are, or were a hard sell, a car to make cheeky bids on it seems, I sold my 2008 5.5 for 5k like six years ago and that was hard work. To be honest, its not as nice, but still pleasant, get the diesel, fast enough and will do 30 plus most of the time, 40 on a gentle run.
The Merc CL was the competitor to the Continental and running costs like the S Class are higher but even then I spent £1,200 on my CL this last 10 months. That even shares parts like the engine, gearbox with similar era E and CLS models.
I had the later 5.5, needed a suspension pump (£104, fitted in an hour and a bit), a blanking plate on the back of the engine due to an oil weep (£34) and a few ball joints/suspension links which are dirt cheap. brakes are cheap, tyres not too bad.
A Conti GT doesnt have a cheap spares supply, 4 more cylinders, 2 turbos and 2 extra driven wheels.
The engines on these are solid, rocker cover gaskets go but not a massive deal, otherwise go on forever.
Never going to be cheap to run but 4k per annum, just buy another !
Lovely thing though, wafts along nicely, but get the 5.5, it has another 82 bhp and similar, maybe better fuel consumption, i.e. not very good, reckon on 18/20 knocking about, 27/28 on run, saw 30 once on the computer, was so momentus I took a photo.
They are, or were a hard sell, a car to make cheeky bids on it seems, I sold my 2008 5.5 for 5k like six years ago and that was hard work. To be honest, its not as nice, but still pleasant, get the diesel, fast enough and will do 30 plus most of the time, 40 on a gentle run.
Not sure about the 5.5 vs. the 5.0, as in a recent model guide for the R230 SL, the MB Club magazine said "The M273 [5.5] pre engine number 2739...30088611 is probably best avoided because of possible worn timing chain guide gear".
Maybe I was lucky, or careful enough to buy a decent one, but I'm a bit surprised to see this in the Brave Pill section.
Overall I think with Mercs of this vintage, a good well-cared for example will be average for running costs, a bad one ruinous. None approach Japanese levels of reliability IME. That said, with a V8 model I think it's worth it if you get a good example.
I had the later 5.5, needed a suspension pump (£104, fitted in an hour and a bit), a blanking plate on the back of the engine due to an oil weep (£34) and a few ball joints/suspension links which are dirt cheap. brakes are cheap, tyres not too bad.
A Conti GT doesnt have a cheap spares supply, 4 more cylinders, 2 turbos and 2 extra driven wheels.
The engines on these are solid, rocker cover gaskets go but not a massive deal, otherwise go on forever.
Never going to be cheap to run but 4k per annum, just buy another !
Lovely thing though, wafts along nicely, but get the 5.5, it has another 82 bhp and similar, maybe better fuel consumption, i.e. not very good, reckon on 18/20 knocking about, 27/28 on run, saw 30 once on the computer, was so momentus I took a photo.
They are, or were a hard sell, a car to make cheeky bids on it seems, I sold my 2008 5.5 for 5k like six years ago and that was hard work. To be honest, its not as nice, but still pleasant, get the diesel, fast enough and will do 30 plus most of the time, 40 on a gentle run.
Not sure about the 5.5 vs. the 5.0, as in a recent model guide for the R230 SL, the MB Club magazine said "The M273 [5.5] pre engine number 2739...30088611 is probably best avoided because of possible worn timing chain guide gear".
The 5.0 is a nice engine but the 5.5 adds a useful chunk more performance, plus a seven speed, rather than 5 speed gearbox. The facelift came in 2008 and changed the mirrors, exhaust tips, steering wheel and some other bits but you can get a pre and post facelift with the 5.5.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff