[}]I owned one and other than the electronic gremlins was a fairly good car. I am not sure that the added value for the additional cost was worth it but you do get the "rarity" of the AMG which is becoming less rare every year.ChiCLK430 - 2/28/2005 2:54 PM
2002 CLK 55 AMG
Any problems with the CLK 55 AMG?
I suggest owners of the CLK 430 dont sit in the 55 AMG and drive them.lnguyenh - 3/1/2005 11:08 AM
You gain 10K miles, a year newer, and a faster engine for few thousands, not to mention other stuffs they added on. That's a good deal!
Big difference my friend!Castorpimp - 3/2/2005 10:33 PM
You've piqued my interest, how much faster does the 55 feel compared to the 430? I love the way the 430 pushes you into the seat, I can't imagine the rush of the 55. the 0-60 time isn't that much faster though is it?
Very well put.clk55fan - 3/3/2005 12:03 AM
To answer your question...
Yea, you'll feel a bit of Gs when moving off from a standstill in the 430, but in the 55, it's a whole other story.
My very first time I stepped on it, to be honest, I then realized why they called it the beast.
If you get a chance, test drive one say at a dealership, and I bet you too will be sold. If you are ever in SoFl
pm me and we'll hookup so you can experience it for yourself.
ChiClk is right about driving one and then going back to
your 430...it just doesn't quite feel the same.
I can't imagine how the E55 is....that's my next car. The Caddy STS V is of similiar performance and a lot less $ and it is said to drive pretty firm. Anyway
that's about 3-4 years away.