CLK 63 AMG convertible

Personally, I drove both a CLK63 Convertible and the E63 back to back, and I felt like the CLK63 had some subpar build quality. I know I'm going to take hell for that statement, the car being a Mercedes and all, but I feel that the W211, as well as the CLS63, and even the CL63, are all built better.

The CLK63 I drove only had 9K miles on it and to be honest, the 280K '99 Toyota Camry I was driving at the time felt like it was better built.

 

Ours (2007) have never left us stranded.
We'd buy another.
There are only two options: the gas headlights and automatic trunk closer; else their fully loaded.
Harmin stereo can use an upgrade (we added an amp and subwoofer in the trunk).
Only weakness is the car doesn't have limited slip (only one rear tire burns rubber).
Drive train is fast (very fast accelerating car) and really drives/handles well at legal speeds.
It is one of the only four seat convertibles available.
Yes they are rare, I understand there are only 300 in the US.
CLS has more gadgets, yet it is not a vert.

 

The question is, do you need the rear seats? If not, I would get a slightly used certified SLxxx.

 

I should hope that a 2007 model car (that presumably is still under warranty) would never leave you stranded, LOL!