2005 Mercedes-Benz CL65 AMG Long-Term Road Test

Comments

• mercedesfan Member Posts: 365

  December 2013

  That fuel economy doesn't surprise me. MB's big V8s and V12s have historically returned considerably better fuel economy than the EPA rates them for. My old S550 (with the M273) was rated for 24mpg highway, but I regularly got 28+mpg on my highway slogs.

  0
• quadricycle Member Posts: 827

  December 2013

  @mercedesfan: Yes, the stops in the EPA cycle are what really hurt these cars because of the power and weight since they have to hold a certain acceleration. They do really well in light effort scenarios though and I have seen that same 5.5L get better th

  0
• 06scooby Member Posts: 3

  December 2013

  woot woot! I got called out in a post!
  
  yeah that car is sooo cool! and I can't believe how cheap you got it. And for the gas mileage, remember that's a net downhill. Its not as kind coming back as I've made that slog from Reno to LA many times on the east side of the sierras.
  
  As for the chain requirements in California, their system drives me absolutely nuts for the fact that they don't allow dedicated snow/studded tires in lieu of chains on 2wd vehicles for the lowest chain control (which is about 80% of the time). We have 1 4x4 for that very reason, just so we can go into Cali, into the mountains without having to chain up at the slightest threat of snow, otherwise we'd have dedicated snow tires on our Mazda if that allowed us to pass through the lowest chain control.

  0
• fordson1 Unconfirmed Posts: 1,512

  December 2013

  I really like this LT car...with the NSX and the GN, you paid a much higher percentage of those cars' MSRP than with this car. Even the '96 ES300 cost you a fairly high percentage of the original price, and that was a car with a million miles on it and not a very up-to-date car in a technology sense. This CL65 has much more of the feature set we expect in a modern car. Plus it's just about mint and was just a freaking steal.

  0
• kevm14 Member Posts: 423

  January 2014

  Yeah it'll be great if it proves to be maintainable by mere mortals (and DIY types - bring this car to the dealer and bend over). There's something about powerful cars and EPA ratings that makes me think your experience is typical. Take my own experience with my 05 CTS-V. This LS6 in a Corvette was known for upper 20s on the highway if you go easy but the CTS-V has like 750 lbs on the Z06 and is less aerodynamic. So the original EPA rating (remember this is a pre-08 car) was 15/23. On the revised system, that dropped to 13/21. Needless to say, on the open highway, I was pleased to see this car could pull down back to back tanks of 25mpg plus the occasional 26mpg. No kidding. And with 3.73s it's not even geared super tall like the Corvette.

  0