Took back a 33K mile 2003 CLK 320 convertible after just 3 days of ownership. There were a long list of issues, some of which were failures of the dealership, or damage done to the previous owner, and not Mercedes’ fault, which caused me to return it. I will only list my opinion of the car itself (excluding dealership / damage issues) after a 3-day "test drive":
Pros: One of the most stunning body styles on the road – absolutely gorgeous. Tight and fast, a blast to drive.
Cons: Annoying turbulence in cockpit. Ludicrous BabySmart system. Electrical problems (expected). High service costs (expected). Uncomfortable seats.
My key gripe about the car is turbulence in the cockpit. I have had many convertibles, and they all score differently in this regard. I could drive my 1992 Camaro 70 mph on the freeway wearing a ball cap and it wouldn’t blow my hat off. Buffeting in the CLK starts at about 35-40 mph. Mercedes either never tweaked this car top-down in a wind tunnel, or just didn’t want to make the changes necessary to correct this problem. For me, this is a critical area for a convertible. Why have a drop-top that is annoying to drive with the top down? The wind screen didn't help much, added to the wind noise, and the verticle screen kept slipping off.
My other big issue was BabySmart. I didn’t want to spend $100s of dollars for a car seat with a transponder in it, when practically every other carmaker out there has something better. Also ... the transponder and sensor in the seat were just two more things that could break down.
Electrical and other: Stereo was on the fritz with multiple issues. Alarm was doing weird things. Window jiggled when being lowered.
Again, there were dealer issues (hadn’t done some things they said they would) and other minor damage I discovered subsequent to purchase that cumulatively pushed me to return the vehicle. Having said that, I am no longer considering a CLK, primarily because of the wind turbulence. I could probably live with the other issues in light of the performance of the vehicle, but why drive a convertible that isn't fun when the top is down?
Pros: One of the most stunning body styles on the road – absolutely gorgeous. Tight and fast, a blast to drive.
Cons: Annoying turbulence in cockpit. Ludicrous BabySmart system. Electrical problems (expected). High service costs (expected). Uncomfortable seats.
My key gripe about the car is turbulence in the cockpit. I have had many convertibles, and they all score differently in this regard. I could drive my 1992 Camaro 70 mph on the freeway wearing a ball cap and it wouldn’t blow my hat off. Buffeting in the CLK starts at about 35-40 mph. Mercedes either never tweaked this car top-down in a wind tunnel, or just didn’t want to make the changes necessary to correct this problem. For me, this is a critical area for a convertible. Why have a drop-top that is annoying to drive with the top down? The wind screen didn't help much, added to the wind noise, and the verticle screen kept slipping off.
My other big issue was BabySmart. I didn’t want to spend $100s of dollars for a car seat with a transponder in it, when practically every other carmaker out there has something better. Also ... the transponder and sensor in the seat were just two more things that could break down.
Electrical and other: Stereo was on the fritz with multiple issues. Alarm was doing weird things. Window jiggled when being lowered.
Again, there were dealer issues (hadn’t done some things they said they would) and other minor damage I discovered subsequent to purchase that cumulatively pushed me to return the vehicle. Having said that, I am no longer considering a CLK, primarily because of the wind turbulence. I could probably live with the other issues in light of the performance of the vehicle, but why drive a convertible that isn't fun when the top is down?