RE: Mercedes-Benz CLK500: Spotted

RE: Mercedes-Benz CLK500: Spotted

Thursday 25th January

Mercedes-Benz CLK500: Spotted

Need a V8 in your Mercedes but don't want to shout about it? This CLK500 is just £4k...



There's no denying that the current AMG Mercedes range is as strong as it's ever been: see the C63's dismissal of the new RS4 this week, the incredible GT R and the quite brilliant E63 as prime examples. There's a suspicion the new range of 53 electrified cars will be pretty good, too...

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.


See this CLK500, for example. There's more than 300hp (but very little to hint at that), a desirable black with cream colour combo and luxurious Avantgarde spec. Furthermore, unlike a CLK55 or CLK63, it doesn't face those unfavourable comparisons with BMW M cars or any other performance derivatives - this is a comfy, relaxed, V8 Mercedes cruiser, the kind that Mercedes does so well.

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

 

 

 


Author
Discussion

greghm

Original Poster:

420 posts

36 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
On a side note, I hate this marketing trend of badging cars with 63 when it is a 4 liter, 340 when it is a 3 liter ...

Cupramax

7,508 posts

187 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
Best find and 05/55 plate one and not pay over £500 road fund licence...

mrbarnett

203 posts

28 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
greghm said:
On a side note, I hate this marketing trend of badging cars with 63 when it is a 4 liter, 340 when it is a 3 liter ...
You an me both. I don't want my car pretending to be something it's not. Of course, there have been examples where it's went the other way, and I kinda like that level of modesty.

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.

tgclowes

173 posts

51 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
The C/E63 etc are iconic cars it would make zero sense to change it.

richinlondon

88 posts

57 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
if you can dodge one of the south African steel ones that rusts quicker than an Allegro in a brine bath then these are fine cars.
Advertisement

ralphrj

2,709 posts

126 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
richinlondon said:
if you can dodge one of the south African steel ones that rusts quicker than an Allegro in a brine bath then these are fine cars.
Shouldn't be difficult - they were never made in South Africa.

BimmerRossay

41 posts

43 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
greghm said:
On a side note, I hate this marketing trend of badging cars with 63 when it is a 4 liter, 340 when it is a 3 liter ...
That argument doesn't really make sense, the (3)35 has been around for donkeys but it's not a 3.5 l, just a 3 litre. Substitute model number for any BMW series.

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 shoot

Rosewood Red

330 posts

88 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
ralphrj said:
Shouldn't be difficult - they were never made in South Africa.
Made using South African steel != made in South Africa.

Max5476

566 posts

49 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
I was looking at convertible clk500's the other day, and could be quite tempted. Just worried about roof reliability.

Jimmy Recard

15,049 posts

114 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
Cupramax said:
Best find and 05/55 plate one and not pay over £500 road fund licence...
Are you a bit old?

Road Fund Licence ended in 1936!

Lotusgone

99 posts

62 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
Cupramax said:
Best find and 05/55 plate one and not pay over £500 road fund licence...
Looked seriously at one of these a year ago, but in the end spent a bit more and went for a CLS500 (on a 55 plate). More car and IMHO better-looking, especially in black with the AMG body kit & wheels. Very pleased with it.

Gez79

46 posts

118 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
But the badging issue is mainly down to manufacturers chucking out the same sized engine in various states of tune, so they've got to do something to differentiate.

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

BugLebowski

613 posts

51 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
Oh lordy, that E class estate would be a nice thing to waft about in

Bencolem

439 posts

174 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
Cupramax said:
Best find and 05/55 plate one and not pay over £500 road fund licence...
Actually best find a later 06/56 plate one and enjoy the 380hp 5.5ltr version that looks identical but is a true rocket ship. That’s the real deal.

schmalex

12,343 posts

141 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
I had a CLK500 about 6 or 7 years ago. It was an 04 played car, so the smaller 5.0 with only 306bhp. They changed to the 5.5 for some late 54 plate cars onwards iirc.

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.

moffat

942 posts

160 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
Gez79 said:
But the badging issue is mainly down to manufacturers chucking out the same sized engine in various states of tune, so they've got to do something to differentiate.

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
That wasn't the only reason for calling it a 6.3. Note that most cars, say a 2.0 are 1995cc or similar, same for 3.0 e.g. 2995cc, none of them exceed 2000cc, 3000cc etc. The M156 was 6208cc so they called it a 6.3 rightly or wrongly. So it kind of makes sense using that thinking, and it would have only been a 6.2 if it was say 6195cc

Amanitin

177 posts

72 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
Since there seems to be so much love for 'linear power delivery' and 'sound', is it possible to remove the turbo(s) from a modern engine and make it work N/A?
For the purists.

ZX10R NIN

12,110 posts

60 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
ralphrj said:
richinlondon said:
if you can dodge one of the south African steel ones that rusts quicker than an Allegro in a brine bath then these are fine cars.
Shouldn't be difficult - they were never made in South Africa.
You're referring to the W208 not the W209 which the above is.

ralphrj

2,709 posts

126 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
Me or richinlondon? The 209 was not built in South Africa.

FerdiZ28

1,085 posts

69 months

Thursday 25th January
quotequote all
Max5476 said:
I was looking at convertible clk500's the other day, and could be quite tempted. Just worried about roof reliability.
I’ve got one of the last w209s (2010) albeit a clk350. 49k miles and the roof died about a month ago. Refurbed (year warranty) pump was £400 and the relay it killed another £30. Pretty easy fit.

I love the car, great daily and can’t see myself getting shot of it soon.