Audi A4 3.0 Cabriolet Sport Quattro Or 320 Clk

[Lordjellybelly]

When I sell my TR6 and my 98 240 C class, soon I hope, I`m going to combine my love of the open air with a little more comfort than the TR6 allows. Has anyone had both a CLK 320 and the Audi A4 3.0 cabriolet quattro and been able to make a comparison? Driving each and comparing spec is one thing but it would be interesting to read an owner`s views.

 

[OmniCognateNeutronRangler]

Well, I think most people here would suggest the Merc. It would surprise no one for me to suggest the Audi over the Merc. Having had both (although neither were convertable) I would say Audi's are much better built and much more reliable. However, you already have a Merc so know the ins and out of owning one and my experiences should probably not be taken as typical.

I think both cars look great and both ooze class so it's actually quite a difficult choice.

I've attached a link to the place I bought my Merc from that has an Audi convertable for sale (and quite a nice beemer). They've had the Audi for quite a while so you could beat them down on price. Also check ebay and autotrader as Baynards tend to advertise teh same car for as much as £2000 cheaper on those sites than they do on the fourcourt.

http://www.baynards.com/htm/5item.htm#start

http://www.baynards.com/htm/7item.htm#start

which ever you go for I'm sure you'll be happy. They are both lovely cars.

 

[jon_harley]

When I sell my TR6 and my 98 240 C class, soon I hope, I`m going to combine my love of the open air with a little more comfort than the TR6 allows. Has anyone had both a CLK 320 and the Audi A4 3.0 cabriolet quattro and been able to make a comparison? Driving each and comparing spec is one thing but it would be interesting to read an owner`s views.

I haven't owned the Audi but I did test-drive the CLK320 and an Audi A4 cabriolet (similar engine but not the quattro version) on the same afternoon last year, which made comparison pretty direct. Handling was good in both but suspension on the A4 was far harder on the A4 than the CLK Avantgarde - at 60 you could feel every lump and bump in a newly resurfaced A-road. Not comfortable at all. (Although a mate of mine has one and doesn't seem to mind it.)

We thought the equipment in the CLK was much better designed and laid out, but a lot of that is aesthetics. I particularly find Audi's red dashboard displays hard on the eyes.

The biggest difference between the two is in the back. The CLK's boot is almost double the capacity of the A4, and the CLK's back seats are big enough for adults. The A4 is really just a glorified 2-seater; behind me there was only two inches of legroom, the A4's front seats don't tip forward to allow people in and out, and when the roof operates, it intrudes into the rear seat headspace banging any adult back there on the head!

 

[Timechaser]

I havent owned the Audi but have test driven the CLK and the A4 (and the 3-series) cabrios.

When you enter the cars, the first thing you will notice is the distinct elegance of the merc's interior. It is much much better built than the 3 series or the Audi - both of which look distinctly plasticky.

The second thing is with the rear seats - I own a W209 350 and have had 4 adults in the car several times, with no issues (including a 4 hour drive). In the A4, when we were test driving, the wife struggled to fit into the back. Similar issues with the beamer. The boot in the A4 is also pitiful.

The engine in the 320 is much much better than the 3.0 in the Audi (even if you want to compare the 3.2 Quattro, I would still go for the 350). As already mentioned, the Audi's ride is also much harder. Another distinct irritant for me was the audi's steering - definitely wooden, without any feedback. The CLK's steering is no great shakes either but is much much better.

Oh - and lastly, you get a far higher amount of goodies as standard on the merc. Besides which, where I stay - everyone and his uncle has an A4 Cabrio...

 

[shj]

Audi,Audi,Audi