Mercedes CLK- What to look out for?
Mercedes CLK- What to look out for?
Author
Discussion

cammy33

Original Poster:

251 posts

204 months

Monday 8th October 2012
quotequote all
As above I fancy a CLK. It would be around 1999/2001, Is this the period where Merc's rust really badly & if so what years are best? Also is there any engines or gearboxes to avoid?

K321

4,127 posts

247 months

Monday 8th October 2012
quotequote all
rust

clarkmagpie

3,700 posts

224 months

Monday 8th October 2012
quotequote all
Mine was tatty and rusty but a great cruiser, so comfy and went very well.
V plate 320 sport.
Massive miles but the only thing that failed was a fuel pipe.
Still good looking cars I think.

ajb85

1,124 posts

171 months

Monday 8th October 2012
quotequote all
As this age, stick to the trusty V6s and not the slightly thrashy 4 pot Kompressors. As above, the 320 is the best all rounder although the V8 430 can be had for the same money, retunrs similar MPGs, goes very well indeed and sounds like an AMG. Auto gear boxes are Mercedes forte on these silky smooth engines and don't tend to give issues. Climate control systems can go a little funny, other than that I think it's just down to perishables, some of which can be expensive. Conclusion: Lovely cars!

cammy33

Original Poster:

251 posts

204 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
Well I need to start my search for a 430 with no rust.

ajb85

1,124 posts

171 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
cammy33 said:
Well I need to start my search for a 430 with no rust.
They're either rusty, or they're not. And if they're not you can guarantee the paint will look fresh on the front wings.
They also do a good impression of E39 5 series, i.e; rust round the boot lock and the bottom edge of the boot lid.

LeoSayer

7,823 posts

273 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
A friend drove a Y reg 320 for over 100k miles and hardly had any trouble.

I think the twin cats failed very early on and the computer display LCD needed replacing. That was it.

AC43

13,614 posts

237 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
I had two C Classes of that era. The 2000 one (year not engine) had perfect paint. The 1999 one was appalling. Arches front and rear went frilly at 8 year and again when I was selling it. It was going where the roof bars met the roof (very expensive fix) Tiny "spiders" all over the bodywork where stone chips had got under the undercoat and water had got it. And I had to get the sills patched at about 10 year/70k.

Be careful - there are good ones out there but a bad one can be very very bad.

kev b

2,756 posts

195 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
The 4 cylinder models are prone to cracked exhaust manifolds, they cost £500 to replace and are next to impossible to find s/h. Be aware that the "slight blow from the downpipe" might mean a big bill.

Dr Interceptor

8,183 posts

225 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
Don't believe all the comments regarding the rust - they don't all rust, certainly rust is no more common on these than on any other comparable car of a similar age such as the Jags (XK8s with rusty floor pans anyone?)...

We have a 2002 (52) E430 estate - its a lovely engine, goes well, very reliable and returns decent economy figures (27ish on a decent journey). It has no rust on it anywhere, the paint looks factory fresh - 146k miles too. We also had a 1997(P) E230 estate, 180k miles, no rust.

Find a good one that has been looked after, with plenty of MB stamps in its book, and you won't go far wrong.

SVX

2,188 posts

240 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
Major things to look our for on the W208 is corrosion, which seems to affect the middle of its production life, early models seem to stand up well as do very late post 2000 models. Paint fix (i.e. thicker coating of the water based paint that caused the trouble) was put into production in the 2000/2001 MY.

As mentioned in other posts the 320 V6 is a very very reliable engine as is the 5 speed auto transmission.

I personally took a W202 C240 from 80K to 176K, and apart from bubbling on the wheel arches it wore the miles incredibly well and it's only foible was it liked a drop of oil (1 litre per 2000 miles approx).

Other than standard consumables, Mercedes of that era do tend to go through lower ball joints and steering dampers and if it has the climate control option, then the controller unit in the dash can fail.

I'd look out for late CLK 430 AvanteGarde in a dark colour, and of course buy on condition, not mileage.

CLK 55 AMGs of that era are also great, but consumables are specific to that model and suffer from the AMG tax.




PaperCut

640 posts

176 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
Avoid the non-Kompressor 2.0, manual gearboxes and Elegance trim, cloth seats and early examples IMO.

IMO, the 320 is the best all-rounder and looks smart in Avantgarde trim or with the AMG pack bodykit. There's plenty out there so you can afford to be picky.

As for rust issue, well every car is different so 10 minutes looking around the exterior will tell you to avoid or buy.

infradig

978 posts

236 months

Tuesday 9th October 2012
quotequote all
Apart from the obvious paint problems,check under the carpet in the passenger footwell.. There's a drain plug that gets blocked on the bulkhead and water ends up in a large plastic plenum chamber for the heater,which is behind the glovebox. When this eventually overflows it cleverly pours behind the soundproofing and three layers of carpet to the floor pan ,where Mercedes have thoughtfully put relays,ecu's and other electrical bits. Don't just feel the mat,that will stay dry,actually lift out the carpet section. On the plus side when dried out ours seemed ok and the dodgy electrical 'foibles' - engine not switching off when key removed,wipers coming on with reverse,cured themselves.