05 Clk55......
Trending Topics
Originally Posted by Chaptorial
All that being said as a whole i liked the previous gen better as far as looks good.
The 208 just looks old and dated compared to the 209, the small updates for 05 put it over the fence imho (the frameless windows alone are a huge advantage over the 208).
Originally Posted by cusdaddy
Looks nice, but I much prefer the E-55.. Doesn't this only come with the NA 5.5L engine vs. the SC'ed 5.5 in the E55?
The E55 is faster though, but the smaller and lighter CLK is more fun to drive.
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 27,921
Likes: 1,080
From: where the weather suits my clothes
Originally Posted by Shawn S
Nice car, but as long as they insist on only having a Tranny with P-R-N-D-1-2 on it, I’ll never consider buying one.
Shawn S
Shawn S

It's too blah except for the rear.
Originally Posted by Crazy Sellout
most cars come with xenons stardard these days, or the most a $500 option. Only MB can charge $990 for them 

no stock navi... fucking benzes man...
the car looks very cheap for a AMG benz. the only really nice parts i like about it are the tails and the frameless windows. but then again the red taillights are also a VERY dull red, making it look super cheap. and the reason behind this is due the the signaling peice of the taillights bc the plastic is thin and dull so it can appear red, but shine yellow when signaling.
the car looks very cheap for a AMG benz. the only really nice parts i like about it are the tails and the frameless windows. but then again the red taillights are also a VERY dull red, making it look super cheap. and the reason behind this is due the the signaling peice of the taillights bc the plastic is thin and dull so it can appear red, but shine yellow when signaling.
that car needed quad exhaust, it looked too plain otherwise. also, i too liked the wider and lower looking previous gen. it just looked so smooth and classy, this new gen is too bubbly, too previous gen cl imo.
Originally Posted by unsure
but wtf is up with blank/unmarked buttons on a $70K car? WTF??!!!
And it’s probably something that can’t be removed.
Originally Posted by zeroday
i dunno im on the fence here...love the engine/interior...but the exterior just doesn't look aggressive at all to me. i'd prefer a last gen.
All day long
Originally Posted by Minch00
You don't think 369hp is aggressive?
honestly tho, why isnt the beast in this? i mean, the slk and c will be shitting all over this car, why so conservative with the clk55 unless theyre moving it down market.
Originally Posted by ItalianStallion
....why so conservative with the clk55 unless theyre moving it down market.
Originally Posted by ItalianStallion
unacceptable.
honestly tho, why isnt the beast in this? i mean, the slk and c will be shitting all over this car, why so conservative with the clk55 unless theyre moving it down market.
honestly tho, why isnt the beast in this? i mean, the slk and c will be shitting all over this car, why so conservative with the clk55 unless theyre moving it down market.
Originally Posted by cob3683
In the next 2 years, the SLK55, C55, and CLK55 will all have new 408hp engines. This will supposedly move the C and CLK class ahead of the next M3/M4 in terms of power.
Originally Posted by Minch00
DO you know when this was happening? I'll wait until then if it's for sure.......
Originally Posted by cob3683
Supposedly by 2006 MY. The C55 has been approved to go this route and the last I heard the CLK was still in waiting.
I must find out more about this.....


that car!




