2006 Mercedes-Benz CLK-Class

AdChoices

What's New

The 2006 Mercedes-Benz CLK-Class receives updated exterior styling, including a new grille and new taillights for coupes and cabriolets. The CLK350 replaces the CLK320, powered by a 268-horsepower 3.5-liter V6 engine with a seven-speed automatic ...
The 2006 Mercedes-Benz CLK-Class receives updated exterior styling, including a new grille and new taillights for coupes and cabriolets. The CLK350 replaces the CLK320, powered by a 268-horsepower 3.5-liter V6 engine with a seven-speed automatic transmission. The CLK350 also receives new wheels and a new front apron, while the CLK500 is updated with a more sport-oriented interior and AMG exhaust. New active front head restraints are standard for entire CLK line.
More
Quick Facts
  • Engine: 268 - 362 horsepower
  • Seating: 4 passengers
  • Driving Range: 262 - 459 miles
  • Drive: Rear-Wheel Drive
  • Cargo Capacity: 8.6 - 10.4 cu. ft.

Video Reviews

There are no 2006 Mercedes-Benz CLK-Class video reviews. However, the following might be helpful:
2006 Mercedes-Benz CLK-Class Video Review
2009 Mercedes-Benz CLK-Class
The CLK is a luxurious 2-door available in coupe or convert.

User Reviews

The community thinks...
  • Styling9.3
  • Performance9.1
  • Interior9.0
  • Quality8.7
  • Recommendation8.7
Owner
  • Styling6.0
  • Performance8.0
  • Interior4.0
  • Quality3.0
  • Recommendation1.0
Terrible M-B Experience by sargebehr on 10/01/2010. Trim: 2006 Mercedes-Benz CLK350 Coupe, Owned 2 years.
2
Pros: Style, class, features.
Cons: Expensive repairs and maintenance, legendary M-B unreliablity, seats are uncomfortable, lack good lumbar support, instrument panel is too 'gimmicky' to be functinal (what's wrong wioth simple gauges?), overall poor retention of resale value.
Overall review: I expected much more from M-B - I own a 2006 Honda Accord EX-L V6 Coupe, along with this C LK350 Coupe; it's twice the car at half the cost of the M-B. In appropximately 53,000 miles, the M-B has cost in excess of $3,400 in repairs (fuel injection system failure, brake failure, electrical problems, transmission leakage), not including regular maintenance (which is far more expensive if done at the dealer than the Accord is) - the Accord has nearly the same mileage and to date no repair costs, just regular maintenance. Why can't M-B build a reilable car at least the equal of the Japanese brands? Once you're inside the Accord, there is no difference. I'm in the process of selling this car and have found that it's lost a great deal (percentage) more of its initial cost (both were bought CPO used) than the Accord has - this might have something to to with M-B's reputation for being unreliable and expensive to operate - as soon as I can unload it, it's gone - I'm sticking with Honda.
Review ID: #549133 Is this review offensive?
advertisement

Search local listings

powered by:

Recently Viewed Cars

View favorites
BB06 - 9/14/2014 7:04:14 PM