Mercedes-Benz Forum banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
2000 E320S4M
Joined
·
1,945 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I am thinking about getting a C43 or CLK430 in a few years to replace my fast 95 GTI VR6 (second car).

I wanted to know which you would prefer and why. Lets stick with model year 99.

My wife and I currently have a '02 ML320, so the second car does not have to be a sedan.

Please let me know your opinions and why you would pick one over the other.

Thanks.
 

·
Registered
CLK55/G500/E55/ML55/etc.
Joined
·
1,242 Posts
Although underneath, the cars are very similar... the result is completely different. L...

Although underneath, the cars are very similar... the result is completely different. Let's ignore the obvious comparison that the C43 has four doors and the CLK only two (besides, neither really have useful back seats... the C43 seats are in my opinion too small for a four door, so it was a poor choice for me... luckily the extra doors ease access to the small seats).

I have both a C43 and a CLK55 and they mostly do not overlap in functionality. Although a large percentage of components are shared, the CLK handles much better; it's much quieter inside due to the use of much more sound deadening material; and there are some differences due to 1999 v. 2001 models. Also, the attention to detail in the CLK can be noted: dual zone climate control, courtesy lights in the doors (the hole in the door is there for them in the C43 but they were never available in the US), rear sun shade (also not available in US), nicer materials used throughout, and apparently the factory pays better attention to fit and finish on the CLK.

All this results in a car that has a MUCH higher resale value than the C-class. CLK320 seems to be the resale value leader, with a 3-year old car in very good condition with average miles, selling for over 75% of its new purchase price.

Hope that's helpful in some way. Personally I think the CLK is ugly, but I can't argue with how much better it is than the C-class. I've been trying to improve my C43 to the level of my CLK, but it's expensive and time consuming!

-s-
 

·
Registered
99 C43 AMG
Joined
·
12 Posts
I have a 99 C43, and love it. Terribly fun to drive. Mine is lowered on chrome stock whe...

I have a 99 C43, and love it. Terribly fun to drive. Mine is lowered on chrome stock wheels. My brother in-law just got rid of his 99CLK430.

Performance wise, there is no comparison. The C43 specs at 302 lb/torque, and you really feel it all the way through the speedometer. The faster it goes, the more comfortable it gets. Its really a sports car dressed like a 4 door sedan. The CLK 430 takes a significant more time to catch up to speed. I will admit that the CLK 430 looks better.

I would go with the C43, or a CLK 55 if you can find one at a reasonable price (yeah, right!) For what you get in terms of performance and fun, in the high $20k to low $30k...its a bargain. Drive both, and see for yourself.

Good luck.
 

·
Registered
99 C43 AMG
Joined
·
12 Posts
Just to clarify, I meant the C43 being in the high 20k to low 30k. The CLK 55 is no where...

Just to clarify, I meant the C43 being in the high 20k to low 30k. The CLK 55 is no where near that price range. I will say this, once you go AMG, its hard to go back to a regular MB.
 

·
Registered
98 mecedes c43
Joined
·
69 Posts
i have a 98 c43 and a 2001 e320 when i drive the e320 and then the c43 it 110% difference....

i have a 98 c43 and a 2001 e320 when i drive the e320 and then the c43 it 110% difference. when i first go from the e320 to c43 it pins you back in the seat till you get used to the gas pedal. i would go with the c43
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top