|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
AMG cars
I must admit, I have been beaten by the AMG bug lately. Since AMG becomes part of Mercedes, are AMG cars really that much better than the stock cars? I understand they have better power plant, but are they relatively reliable? The reason I ask is that I have been eyeballing 2001 or later model CLK55 AMG. Any thoughts?
__________________
95 R129 04 Infiniti G35.5 BS 10 X204 Last edited by elau; 07-23-2005 at 09:08 PM. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
It's an AMG parts cost a fortune and they suck gas. If want a cheap ride buy a Honda. But if you want to have one heck of a sweet GT car the CL55 will work.
AFAIK they get a different engine and exhuast. Along with bigger brakes and different suspension parts. Also the AMG cars seem to get some body work sometimes, and seem to come with all the options.
__________________
1999 SL500 1969 280SE 2023 Ram 1500 2007 Tiara 3200 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Do they really suck down that much more gas, or is it just that they inspire you to push the pedal all the way down so often? I have internal MB sales training material for the 2001 E-Class model that rates the E420 at 22/33 city/highway (maybe a bit optomistic for most drivers) and the E55 at 20/30. That doesn't seem too bad a drop to me for the extra horsepower. Any besides when you are paying that much for a car (w. insurance) gas probably won't amount to much more than 5-10% of your overall cost, amortizing the purchase price over 10 years anyway.
__________________
Jason Priest 1999 E430 1995 E420 - retired 1986 420SEL - retired |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Well like anything if you drive with a ligh foot the mileage will be decent.
I can't imagin a twin turbo 469hp V8 would be good on fuel. I was drolling over a CL55 at the dealer last winter. Black on black it looked sick, if I had the $124k they were asking I would have bought it. Car and Driver tested an SL65 AMG last month, according to them it feels like a rocket is strapped to the back of it. I guess it will slam you back into your seat from 2krpm to redline in every gear at pretty much any speed. If you want to pass someone you just need to bend your big toe.
__________________
1999 SL500 1969 280SE 2023 Ram 1500 2007 Tiara 3200 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
I'd make sure it was Starmarked. I heard somewhere about a guy who blew an engine and it was 60k for a new engine from AMG.
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
If I could afford a new AMG, I sure wouldn't be worried about gas mileage. Hell, I can't afford a new anything (at least not anything I'd care to own) and I still don't worry about gas mileage.
We have a gas problem when it's rationed...not when it costs more.
__________________
1989 300 SEL that mostly works, but needs TLC |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
The current "AMG" is different from the pre-acquisition days. Their production numbers are higher, although most people don' realize their numbers are roughly what Ferrari generates in street cars annually. So, a certain amount of the exclusivity has vanished. Aufrecht and Melcher have moved on, one running the DTM series and the other in semi-retirement after recently selling his interest in MKB tuning. While the cars still produce gobs of power, especially with the new V-8 debuting later this year, the 155 mph limiters mean that a Porsche Boxster S will pass one on the open road.
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
We have a SLK32 AMG. It gets about 26 mpg on the highway. But we have not taken it on a trip since it was broken in. So I figure 27 now.
Only problem we had was with a faulty trunk latch. When you move the top, the trunk latch would get so difficult to open my wife could not do it. But I doubt that has anything to do with AMG. Dealer replaced locking mechanism. Seems OK now. Don't like the harder seats in it.
__________________
Lawrence Coppari 2002 SLK32 AMG 2005 Acura TL 1987 328GTS 1986 944T |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
From my experiences, we see quite a few less problems with the AMG variants of a model line. Powertrain reliability is top notch, but most MB's still are. There aren't nearly as many little electrical gremlins, or at least it seems that way at my shop (50,000 sq ft MB facility). I loved my CLK when I had itt, but it always left me wanting another standard transmission car. I had no problems whatsoever in the two years I owned it. I drove the ever living hell out of it as well. You will spend big bucks replacing tires and brakes at much shorter intervals than what you're probably used to. All of the cars are very heavy, but still stop quickly and handle reasonably well. Pay to play I suppose.
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
AMG Cars
I recently purchased an '01 CLK55 and I think this is one great machine. I get a thrill evertime I lay into the throttle and you will love the sweet sound of this engine as its climbing toward redline. It has been reliable but I can see how you can go through tires if you get carried away. Its a solid feeling vehicle and the brakes are fantastic. I love this car!
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
I think the W208 CLK 55 is one of the better looking cars Mercedes has ever made. It can also pull in over 26 MPG on the highway, which isn't great, but isn't bad for a car with that power.
__________________
Ali Al-Chalabi 2001 CLK55 1999 Dodge Ram 2500 Cummins Diesel 2002 Harley-Davidson Fatboy Merlin Extralight w/ Campy Record |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I have a 2002 CLK55 that I purchased new in June 2002. To date, it has covered just 23,000 miles and averages around 20mpg in town and up to 27 highway. It hauls ass when you want it to (ask Suginami or the Cap'n), but is very docile and luxurious as well. Compared to the CLK430, virtually every option came standard on the AMG (except COMAND, phone and CD changer). This car is loaded with every possible gadget you could dream up....I purchased the extended warranty for peace of mind, but have had fewer issues with this car than with any other vehicle I've owned to date. Parts can be pricey (front rotors and pads are $$$), but mine is used as a third car so these items aren't replaced as often as would be on a daily driver. My first set of tires lasted a little over 16,000 miles, but I've seen others get as much as 25K out of a set, which is miraculous seeing as how soft they are. I think the treadwear rating is 220. My advice? Drive it....decide for yourself. BTW, AMGs are 'plentiful' in the U.S. To me, however, the car remains very special and I have enjoyed each and every time I slip behind the wheel. According to the kind folks at the AMG Owners Club in Germany, they only made 3,381 of the W208 CLK55, worldwide. Roughly 1/2 were imported here, so even though a couple thousand may have landed on our shores, you won't see this body style in an AMG every day. I see many more CL55s, S55s and SL55s than the original CLK (208s). I have never hit the 155mph limit of the car, so being limited in this case is not an issue for me. However, a call to RENNtech or Kleemann will solve your top speed issue if you so desire.... Best of luck in your decision. Feel free to PM me if you have any other questions/concerns. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Please elaborate. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Don't be afraid of an AMG....AMG is your friend |
Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
93' Mercedes 500E- are they that grand? | 86560SEL | Off-Topic Discussion | 31 | 09-15-2011 06:26 AM |
AMG History: was the '92-'93 190E Sportline the first AMG - MB factory collaboration? | c43amg | Mercedes-Benz Performance Paddock | 37 | 06-10-2008 12:45 PM |
What's this car? Odd W124 AMG | pentoman | Mercedes-Benz Performance Paddock | 4 | 04-13-2005 12:43 PM |
Aren't Volvo's also great cars? | Hurshi | Off-Topic Discussion | 20 | 12-14-2003 02:20 AM |
AMG Cars | c43amg | Mercedes-Benz Performance Paddock | 95 | 05-21-2003 11:18 AM |