Mercedes-Benz CLK500: Spotted
Need a V8 in your Mercedes but don't want to shout about it? This CLK500 is just £4k...
However, there's a problem. A small one, but a problem nonetheless. All those cars are quite aggressive and focused performance variants, as is their wont. But notable by their recent absence in the regular Mercedes range are non-AMG V8s: the only eight-cylinder models in the C- and E-Class range are the mad AMG flagships, there are models badged 500e with six cylinders (for shame!) and a proper V8 - the S500 - is more than £90k. Even that has turbos. While perhaps not a trendy viewpoint to have at the moment, we quite like a big V8 at PistonHeads, and so to see the engine's demise - inevitable though it may well be - is kind of sad.
Thank goodness for the used market! Once upon a time, as you may well remember, there was a range of '500' badged Mercs with V8s with either 5.0- or 5.5-litres of bountiful swept capacity. You could have an E-Class, an MLa CLS and plenty of other cars that embraced the charms of a V8 without the pomp of a full-fat AMG. Which is quite an appealing proposition.
And it's £4k. Four thousand pounds! As such it makes CLK500 one of the very cheapest ways into a V8 on PH, shining in the fairly ordinary ranks comprised of S-Types, old Discos and tired BMWs. The Mercedes is one of just two such V8s down there from 2006, making it one of the newest on offer.
Oh sure, it's beyond 100,000 miles, and not even the most impassioned Merc fan is going to argue this particular era was a superb one. Plus, as a later car there's every chance it will be hit with the higher road tax charge too, the CLK churning out 260g/km. There's not a lot to suggest it will be an easy ride...
SPECIFICATION - MERCEDES-BENZ CLK500
Engine: 4,966cc, V8
Transmission: five-speed auto, rear-wheel drive
Power (hp): 306@5,600rpm
Torque (lb ft): 339@2,700-4,250rpm
MPG: N/A
CO2: 276g/km
First registered: 2006
Recorded mileage: 109,798 miles
Price new: £47,490
Price now: £3,995
See the original advert here
 |
 |
 |
 |
In the late 90s, the BMW 318i had a 2.0, the 320i Had a 2.2, and the 323i had a 2.5. And more recently, the BMW 325 had a 3.0, as did the Mercedes SLK280. The Jaguar X-Type's 2.0 engine was actually 2.1 etcetera etcetera...
Hard to imagine BMW and Mercedes as being described as "modest" today.
Yes the model numbers now reference performance rather than closely matching the engine capacity.....for example mercedes.
Although some folk still think 35i is 3.5l
Hence 325d, 330d and 335d all using a 3.0 engine. (E90 shape anyway).
I was always more upset by Mercedes sticking 6.3l badges all over the c63 when it's actually a 6.2. I know it's a homage thing but sticking 6.3l on the side's is a step too far. I could live with just c63 on the back
It was truly fabulous. Utterly reliable, very, very quick in a straight line but not so hot in the corners.
They have 4 catalytic converters (1 on each downpipe and 1 on each tailpipe). Unfortunately, I broke one driving over a pothole, so we removed the innards of the 2 rearmost cats (it still easily passed the emissions test at the time) and it made the car sound simply epic!
Running costs were pretty reasonable. Driven sensibly, it would return an average of about 25mpg, servicing was too bad (apart from the spark plug chance as there are 16 of them!). The only downsides were gearbox was a little slow and the seats could have used a bit more support.
I’d have another in a heartbeat.
Hence 325d, 330d and 335d all using a 3.0 engine. (E90 shape anyway).
I was always more upset by Mercedes sticking 6.3l badges all over the c63 when it's actually a 6.2. I know it's a homage thing but sticking 6.3l on the side's is a step too far. I could live with just c63 on the back
I love the car, great daily and can’t see myself getting shot of it soon.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff