CLK 270 or 320

[imuir]

Thinking of buying a CLK diesel about 10-12k to spend should I opt for a 270 or a 320,want auto and sport spec,is it worth looking at the 220 thanks.

[slippery]

Drive them. All totally different 4,5 or 6 cylinder engines. As the oomph goes up, the MPG goes down, so you pays your money and takes your choice.

[pointedstarman]

Had a C270cdi and was completely underwhelmed. Haven't had a 320cdi but have been in several and it's a much, much better engine. I didn't think the mpg differed that much but would bow to others with better knowledge. I thought the 270 was a poor engine, particularly when you look at engine size vs power/economy.

[Brent Chiswick]

I've got a CLK 320 and the engine is a real gem. Spadeloads of torque and economy not too bad at c.34mpg around town and up to 45 or so on a decent run. A friend had the 270 in a C Class and it really wasn't a terribly good engine by comparison.

[imuir]

Sounds like 320 is the one to have, thanks

[Jonnie B]

I have a 320 sport great car & engine.
But just so your aware it eats rear tyres.
5 to 8 thousand miles a set.
Lots of torque.

John.

[imuir]

Wow I got more miles than that from my Z4MC, why so much tyre wear?

[Brent Chiswick]

imuir said:

Wow I got more miles than that from my Z4MC, why so much tyre wear?

Because of the huge amount of torque available from very low revs, it is all too easy to spin up the rear wheels - until the ESP stops the fun that is.

But don't worry about it, it's all part of the enjoyment the 320 engine gives you.

You could, on the other hand, be quite boring about it and drive with a lighter right foot, but where's the fun in that?