Anyone got or had one?
I’m looking at the 2006 1.8 auto version.
What real world MPG figures do you manage?
Anything else to be aware of?

If you are worried by MPG why are you thinking of a drop top automatic ?

Have you thought about a maserati?

I’m not worried about it, I’d just like a better idea of how the real figures compare to what the makers claim. My current car averages 41 compared to a claimed 43, Merc quote 33 and if it really gets close to that then I’m fairly happy.

you want the clk 350, and to hell with the mpg! 4cyl mercs are gutless, 6 cylinder minimum and get the 7g auto its a hoot….

I have the 3.0 six pot diesel. It’s a big car the 1.8 will be gutless

I have the SLK and on motorway trips I get over 40mpg

Mine is the 5.5 V8 with an aftermarket supercharger added. I would recommend the same for you if you want fuel economy.

🙂

I wouldn’t call 184hp gutless…

Wait until you try 596BHP of supercharged fun and you might reconsider

WCA – looking a that you are also the slowest vehicle on the motorway!

Well yes, compared to something like that then it would seem slow! I’m after something comfortable and auto as my partner can’t drive a manual. Convertible would be nice for the summer, Mercs have loads of kit as standard plus they are well built and reliable (or so I’ve read). The CLK is that bit bigger than the SLK which will help me cart around my junk (read guns…).

My current car has rain sensing wipers and auto headlight which I would hate to not have again!

The CLK is that bit bigger than the SLK which will help me cart around my junk (read guns…).

Drug dealer special sir, paying in cash sir 😉

🙂

Had Mercedes sorted out their rust problem by 2006?

Considered a Volvo C70?

I would agree the 1.8 wont be up to much, and probably give worse mpg than WCA’s.

Quite dull to drive too

2013 C220 here. 7G box and about 47mpg (not sure if that helps…)

Sadly the Volvo is too wide to fit in my drive. Surprisingly the CLK is only 20mm wider than my MiTo.

I am a big fan of most Mercs. The ML430 was the worse car I have ever owned though.

SLK auto is okay but don’t expect the flippy flappy paddles to change gear exactly when they want to, a standard Mercedes thing of assuming their car knows best. Same with stability and traction controls

Its only the post 2006 cars that have 184bhp. 2006 cars have 161bhp and it is not much to push 1800+Kgs of car plus its occupants and belongings. At least it’s supercharged so will have a good spread of torque.

I can comment based on a similar type of car, a 3 series convertible with the metal roof.

We had the 3.0l 6 cylinder diesel (197bhp) and it was great fun, economical and very easy to drive. I tested a 4 series with the 2.0l 4 cylinder diesel and although only 7bhp down it felt awful and bought a Q5 instead.

In my opinion cars like the CLK and 3 series convertible drive best with a larger engine with lots more torque.

Make sure you drive a few to really see our they feel. The 350 gets good reviews and a neighbour has had one from new now for over 3 years.

^^^ That speedo up there appears to have the numbers in km/h even though it says mph on it…..! 🙂

not too bad!

My Dad had a 55 reg CLK350 for a couple of years. No idea of fuel consumption but it was a a nice comfy car.

I’d agree with the general feeling that small engined convertibles are a bit rubbish though. I had a BMW 323i Convertible and it was noticably more sluggish than the otherwise identical coupe & estate I’d owned before it; those had been were fine. I’d imagine a 318i convertible to be hateful and the equivalent Merc likewise.

Erm.. that 1.8ltr engine in your CLK you’re interested in is the same engine I had in a BClass Merc in 2008 and, well the engines fine, bit lacking power but the MPG was atrocious at 32mpg at best.. and the car only either had me/me & the Mrs or Mrs in.. and occasionally my bikes (very occasionally)
The CLK is a large car, it’s a 2+2 and it’s quite heavy..
Nice enough, solid enough and a nice place to sit..
Just don’t expect the MPG to be any good, sorry to bring bad news.

I’ve done a bit more research and amazingly the 3.2 V6 is a lot more economical than the supercharged 1.8.

I had a BMW 323i Convertible and it was noticably more sluggish than the otherwise identical coupe & estate I’d owned before it; those had been were fine. I’d imagine a 318i convertible to be hateful

I would jolly well hope so too, a convertible is bought for other reasons than speed.

^^ That I would believe.

But you might be paying a little more for the car…

I’m back on again. Mines an 2008 diesel v6 3.0l. I’ve done about 75000 miles in it at 37mpg. It’s nippy rather than proper fast. Think it’s about 240bhp but it has a mountain of torque.

curvature – Member

Hi mate, any chance you can email me mate? johski1518@gmail.com

I’ve seen your posts on your Lads Genesis Core 24, I’m about to buy on possibly and need to ask a few questions about your wheel build etc..

Thanks mate,

John

^^^ That speedo up there appears to have the numbers in km/h even though it says mph on it…..!

No, it is in case you derestrict it. Currently restricted to 206mph