Mercedes-Benz CLK500: Spotted

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...


Engine: 4,966cc, V8
Transmission: five-speed auto, rear-wheel drive
Power (hp): 306@5,600rpm
Torque (lb ft): 339@2,700-4,250rpm
CO2: 276g/km
First registered: 2006
Recorded mileage: 109,798 miles
Price new: £47,490
Price now: £3,995

See the original advert here




P.H. O'meter

Join the PH rating wars with your marks out of 10 for the article (Your ratings will be shown in your profile if you have one!)

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
Rate this article

Comments (69) Join the discussion on the forum

  • greghm 25 Jan 2018

    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 25 Jan 2018

    Best find and 05/55 plate one and not pay over £500 road fund licence...

  • mrbarnett 25 Jan 2018

    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 25 Jan 2018

    The C/E63 etc are iconic cars it would make zero sense to change it.

  • richinlondon 25 Jan 2018

    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.

View all comments in the forums Make a comment