SLK 32 AMG v CLK 55 AMG (Engine)

[SLacKer]

Been thinking about getting a coupe recently and like the look of the CLK 55 AMG (W209 I think) the newer one 2002-.

Now how do the engines compare. Would I be disappointed with the NA V8 compared to the kick in the pants V6 Kompressor. Or does the V8 tourqe more than make up for it. I have also read that they can be a bit of a problem reliability wise (although so is the SLK apparantley and I have not had the problems).

I am keeping the SLK32 not swapping it. I am looking for a local one to test drive but no luck yet - there is a great one in Scotland but it is a bit of a treck for a test drive.

Also isn't there a non AMG V8. If so what is the difference between that and the AMG V8?

Edited by SLacKer on Thursday 21st August 10:57

[shadowninja]

W209.

There's a lot more low end torque and the sound is great esp with a sports exhaust. The supercharged version is only available on the SL55. (DMS charge about £15k to supercharge the normal CLK55 engine.)

[SLacKer]

OK. Thanks for the correction of the model code.

So V8 sounds good which is a tick......anything else.

Edited by SLacKer on Thursday 21st August 11:04

[DRIFT KING]

There is a non-AMG V8 - it's in the CLK500 model. It's got less power (but powerful enough) and it is quieter and has better MPG figures. Both are really nice and smooth though.

[shentodj]

My wife has a W209 CLK500 convertible. It's quite quick (306bhp)- noticably faster once above 60mph, than the Golf VR6 that it replaced. However, it depends what you like. The CLK is very quiet, even with the roof down you hardly hear the engine or exhaust (although I'm sure an aftermarket system could change it). We like it because it is so subtle, relative to the performance it provides. It's a sign that I'm getting old!
FYI: MPG has averaged 19 over the last 10K miles.

Regards,
Shentodj

[SLacKer]

shentodj said:

My wife has a W209 CLK500 convertible. It's quite quick (306bhp)- noticably faster once above 60mph, than the Golf VR6 that it replaced. However, it depends what you like. The CLK is very quiet, even with the roof down you hardly hear the engine or exhaust (although I'm sure an aftermarket system could change it). We like it because it is so subtle, relative to the performance it provides. It's a sign that I'm getting old!
FYI: MPG has averaged 19 over the last 10K miles.

Regards,
Shentodj

So the AMG is around 60 BHP on the 500.....

Having been used to the supercharged surge of power I guess that the V8 has a wider torque band so will gather pace more smoothly would that be correct.

[dougt]

I don't know about SLK's, but my CLK 55 has noticably better acceleration than the E46 M3 I had before. It also feels subjectively quicker in a straight line than my friends V8 Vantage convertable (and yes, he was trying).

I came up against a new model XKR on the motorway the other day, you know the sort that comes flying up behind when you're in a queue and expects the world to jump out of his way. Up until the point where I deemed it prudent to lift he couldn't keep up by some margin. Of course I have no way of knowing how hard he was trying, but looking at the speed he built up to I suspect he was in maximum effort mode.

Anyway, it's quick enough for me and rather too quick for the wife :-)

[Mustow]

shadowninja said:

W209.

There's a lot more low end torque and the sound is great esp with a sports exhaust. The supercharged version is only available on the SL55. (DMS charge about £15k to supercharge the normal CLK55 engine.)

They do a superchaged V8 on the CL as well - around 500bhp I think. Worth a look if you want a big engined V8 coupe.

Edited by Mustow on Friday 29th August 17:51

[SLacKer]

Mustow said:

shadowninja said:

W209.

There's a lot more low end torque and the sound is great esp with a sports exhaust. The supercharged version is only available on the SL55. (DMS charge about £15k to supercharge the normal CLK55 engine.)

They do a superchaged V8 on the CL as well - around 500bhp I think. Worth a look if you want a big engined V8 coupe.

Edited by Mustow on Friday 29th August 17:51

I have never liked the interiors on the CL



Don't like the wood look...... I am sure the V8 KOMPRESSOR goes like stink though

I think a good look for a CLK 55

[Callughan]

SLacKer said:

Mustow said:

shadowninja said:

W209.

There's a lot more low end torque and the sound is great esp with a sports exhaust. The supercharged version is only available on the SL55. (DMS charge about £15k to supercharge the normal CLK55 engine.)

They do a superchaged V8 on the CL as well - around 500bhp I think. Worth a look if you want a big engined V8 coupe.

Edited by Mustow on Friday 29th August 17:51

I have never liked the interiors on the CL



Don't like the wood look...... I am sure the V8 KOMPRESSOR goes like stink though

I think a good look for a CLK 55

If you like the aesthetics thats another issue, however having owned both I can say the CL's interior is far better quality and fit than the CLK. The CLK has plastic everything and a cheap feel which I don't feel is appropriate in a £50K+ car(when new).

On a plus side the CLK was more fun to drive.

[SLacKer]

Callughan said:

If you like the aesthetics thats another issue, however having owned both I can say the CL's interior is far better quality and fit than the CLK. The CLK has plastic everything and a cheap feel which I don't feel is appropriate in a £50K+ car(when new).

On a plus side the CLK was more fun to drive.

I take your point about the quality. It is just the wood colour that is all I prefer a darker tone to any wood almost black or no wood at all.