![\"Black](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/germany\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/88a6e33d-65c0-49f8-8262-0f66611bc7f0.jpg\" "\\"Black")
<\/a><\/p>\nPlanet R\/Randy Lorentzen|Car and Driver<\/p>\n
There’s also little doubt that the drive toward such common goals as noise and vibration reduction, enhanced safety, drivability, and better emissions and fuel-consumption performance has led to inevitable similarities in the two products. We’ve observed that BMW and Mercedes influence each other in corresponding ways because of their shared marketplace.<\/p>\n
BMW, it seems safe to say, has driven Mercedes on a quest for sportier performance and a more colorful driver experience. Conversely, it is thought that Mercedes pushes BMW in search of more refinement and comfort. These engineering imperatives are on a converging arc, perhaps threatening to merge the personalities of cars from both companies in a uniform expression of German automotive excellence.<\/p>\n
But if that were happening, we’d surely see it first in the two companies’ most expressive products. Such as in the pair of cutting-edge, autobahn-eating coupes we see here. But, as you’ll soon see, these two cars reflect quite different approaches to meeting the needs of the world’s most discerning consumers.<\/p>\n
2nd Place: Mercedes-Benz CLK55 AMG<\/p>\n
There were times during the three-day duration of this California test when our two driver\/voters stood alongside this car and agreed that this was the pick, no matter how large the price differential between it and the M3. And then we’d drive another set of roads, and our resolve would once again blur.<\/p>\n
But the reasons for our initial admiration are easy to explain. The CLK-class is one of the nicest-looking cars on the road, and it isn’t hurt any by the addition of AMG bodywork and those cool 17-inch monoblock wheels. The black-on-black CLK55 just oozed muscular self-assurance–an image that was instantly confirmed the moment the 5.4-liter V-8 fired into a big-lunged waffling idle.<\/p>\n
For Sale Near You<\/p>\n
See all results for used 2001 Mercedes-Benz CLK-class for sale near 20147![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.caranddriver.com\/_assets\/design-tokens\/fre\/static\/icons\/arrow-right-regular.e879c19.svg\")
<\/p>\n
Endowed with 376 pound-feet of torque at 3000 rpm and with gadgets such as a dual-volume intake manifold to spread the torque as far across the engine’s range as possible, the car moves effortlessly on a dab of throttle, wafting away on a wave of lazy energy.<\/p>\n
Dig deeper for acceleration, and the 5.4-liter V-8 instantly thrusts the seatback against your lumbar vertebrae and holds it there at an undiminished pressure for a full sweep of the tach needle. As the revs rise, the engine’s voice changes from a muted burble to a stirring small-block snarl, catapulting the car to 60 mph in 5.0 seconds and through the quarter-mile in a healthy 13.6 seconds at 106 mph.<\/p>\n
All this with an automatic transmission, remember, albeit one with very little torque-converter slop and shifts that are performed with firm precision at full throttle. They even sound like fast manual cog swaps as the powertrain controller cuts engine power for the instant it takes the five-speed planetary geartrain to hook up another range. Mercedes’ Touch Shift manumatic mode enables a driver to control shifts even more, of course, and we found it particularly handy at keeping the car in a lower gear for corner entries. Less handy, we thought, was the system’s tendency to kick down at some corner exits. On Buttonwillow Raceway Park’s western track loop, where we wrung the pair out, this would occasionally boot the CLK’s tail into power oversteer.<\/p>\n
Fortunately, the CLK55 is blessed with a benign chassis, progressive handling, and nicely damped yaw motions. Despite its higher-rate springs, tighter shocks, and thicker bars, the AMG-tuned Benz still has that characteristic syrup-coated response, where the controls are cushioned without being sloppy or remote.<\/p>\n
The sight of Webster swinging through the Buttonwillow bends in long, perfectly steady power slides was testimony to the CLK’s stability and balance. And yet somehow the car’s damped responses made it harder to circulate at 10\/10ths intensity for quick lap times.<\/p>\n
The steering has a fabulous, meaty weight to it, but it’s isolated from the contact patches by a film of that syrupy refinement. And the brake pedal is just too squishy underfoot for the first few degrees of travel before it bites down with disproportionate fervor.<\/p>\n
Paradoxically, the fractionally less-communicative, less-responsive nature of the car’s handling (when compared with the razor-honed moves of the M3) provoked more driver error when we were really pressing. For example, Webster noted in the log that he was unwilling to push the CLK55 beyond 60-to-70 percent of maximum effort on the wriggly mountain roads that made up much of our test loop.<\/p>\n
“There’s very little road communication,” he wrote. “On the track I could learn that the bounding around does no harm, but here I’m not about to risk it.” Understand, please, that this is a matter of fine distinction. Most people who drive the CLK55 come away thinking it’s about the best-handling car they’ve ever driven. Without the M3 there to highlight its quotidian priorities, the CLK is pretty stunning. Besides, like the M3, it has an electronic stability program to shield inexpert drivers from huge errors of judgment. Plus, it has many other virtues: a huge trunk with split-folding rear seatbacks to further optimize luggage space; a full-size spare tire; a full complement of airbags; an excellent dual-zone climate-control system; a killer stereo; Tele Aid emergency and concierge services; and a SmartKey ignition system with one-touch automatic starting.<\/p>\n
HIGHS: Magnificent engine, elegant styling, opulent atmosphere.
LOWS: Squashy brake pedal, slightly numb steering, manumatic still butts in.
VERDICT: A truly classy coupe you can use with pleasure every day.<\/p>\n
For the needs of most well-heeled drivers, the CLK55 is pretty much the cat’s pajamas. The torquey nature of that husky V-8 combined with its fantastic sound and low-rev cruising capabilities make the CLK an easy car to live with. And even with its taut underpinnings, one can readily imagine it as the everyday transport of a respectable financier.<\/p>\n
Then there’s the image that accompanies the three-pointed star, plus that AMG badge on the back. You know, even in second place, this car can’t lose.<\/p>\n
1st Place: BMW M3<\/p>\n
BMW’s M3 has just hit our shores, and it flaunts the Bavarian company’s engineering prowess from every angle. Under the hood is a naturally aspirated 3.2-liter in-line six-cylinder engine advertising its 103-horsepower-per-liter output with a hood bulge, a four-tailpipe exhaust system, and a range of harmonics that rivals a Wurlitzer pipe organ’s.<\/p>\n
Flown from the Fatherland specially for this test, the M3 you see here has a six-speed manual transmission. Sequential-shift semiautomatic versions will also be available some time in the future, but the six-speed manual matches the character of the car so perfectly, we have to wonder how much better it could be with the sequential system.<\/p>\n
Early in the test, we thought the BMW would place second because of its slightly less approachable nature. Despite a longer wheelbase and shorter overall length than the CLK, the M3 struck us as having a pretty choppy ride. But not everywhere. On some surfaces, we discovered, the M3 actually feels more supple than the CLK.<\/p>\n
We think this might be due to its being softer in roll, which allows it to accommodate alternating left-right undulations better than the roll-stiff Benz, which flips its whole body in response to these surface deformations. Over normal lateral surface breaks, the M3 clomps pretty badly, but its shocks are calibrated well enough to take much of the edge off the impacts. The levels of refinement are better than ever in this new M3, but the elevated performance potential has clearly called for some pretty disciplined chassis settings.<\/p>\n
With a 333-horsepower engine that spins willingly to 8000 rpm, you’d perhaps expect a raw power delivery. But the M3 has a surprisingly broad usable torque range, aided no doubt by its dual-VANOS variable cam timing system, making it almost as easy to drive around town as the CLK.<\/p>\n
The straight-six makes some truly stirring sounds, starting with the typical straight-six growl overlaid by a peculiar exhaust-resonance buzz, then building to a berserk high-rpm snarl as the needle wends its way to the 8000-rpm redline.<\/p>\n
As it does, the M3 pulls like a demon, passing the 60-mph mark in 4.7 seconds and tripping the quarter-mile lights in 13.4 seconds at 106 mph. Being a six-speed manual, this includes full driver participation and bags of aural and tactile feedback. Since the shifter slips so smoothly into and out of the six slots, this all adds to the fun. The only downside to the transmission is its reverse-gear position\u2014up and left of the first-second gate\u2014which is all too easy to reselect when you’re trying for first gear after backing out of your parking spot.<\/p>\n
The clutch is firm and direct, and the car offers about the best throttle response you can have, given the row of six separate throttle bodies adorning the cylinder head. In contrast to all these high signal-to-noise control devices, the steering felt, at first, a little overassisted for a car with such unadulterated communication levels.<\/p>\n
But that was on normal roads. Once we had circulated Buttonwillow raceway and traversed the Mt. Pinos Pass from Frazier Park to California 33, we were won over by a mechanism that makes the CLK’s steering feel almost woolly in comparison. The other initial concern\u2014that of prominent understeer\u2014was also mollified by our experience on the track, where the car pushed perceptibly in slow, low-gear corners but was much better composed in high-speed bends; and in the mountains, where the M3 would turn in with brilliant intensity and follow the direction of the driver’s hands with delightful accuracy.<\/p>\n
As Webster noted in the log, “It seems to handle better in high-speed corners, where acceleration squat doesn’t lighten the front end. The steering’s too light for my taste, but few cars are as quick through mountain twisties as this one.”<\/p>\n
And as we discovered at the track and in the mountains, the M3 has incredible brakes. With a stopping distance from 70 mph of only 155 feet, the binders proved virtually fade-free, with just about perfect pedal action and feel.<\/p>\n
HIGHS: Incredible engine, sweet steering, silky gearbox, hi-fi driving experience.
LOWS: Lumpy ride.
VERDICT: Still the standard of the industry, but perhaps a little extreme for nonbelievers.<\/p>\n
Yes, the M3 is more tightly focused on the sporting side of its role as passenger transportation, and perhaps that favors the CLK for its everyday versatility. But the M3 still has a couple of surprises up its sleeve when we look at purely utilitarian issues. One, its trunk is only one cubic foot smaller. Two, it actually offers better rear-seat space than the Benz, with 37 cubic feet versus 33, and it has better rear headroom, thanks to a less-pronounced fastback profile.<\/p>\n
And, uh, we should mention that it underprices the CLK55 by more than 20 grand. We think that’s a pretty convincing closing argument, don’t you?<\/p>\n
![\"2001](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/germany\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/87bdc291-ff63-4c1c-9837-0eca64ea697b.png\" "\\"2001")
<\/p>\n
Car and Driver<\/p>\n
![\"Specs](\"https:\/\/www.caranddriver.com\/_assets\/design-tokens\/caranddriver\/static\/icons\/specs-panel-title.ba7e501.svg?primary=%2523000\" "\\"Specs")
Specifications<\/p>\n
Specifications<\/p>\n
2001 BMW M3
Vehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 2-door coupe<\/p>\n
PRICE
Base\/As Tested: $47,407\/$49,851<\/p>\n
ENGINE
DOHC 24-valve inline-6, aluminum block and head, port fuel injection
Displacement: 198 in3, 3246 cm3
Power: 333 hp @ 7900 rpm
Torque: 262 lb-ft @ 4900 rpm<\/p>\n
TRANSMISSION
6-speed manual<\/p>\n
CHASSIS
Suspension, F\/R: struts\/trailing arm
Brakes, F\/R: vented disc\/vented disc
Tires: Michelin Pilot Sport
F: 225\/45ZR-18
R: 255\/40ZR-18<\/p>\n
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 107.5 in
Length: 176.8 in
Width: 70.1 in
Height: 54.0 in
Passenger Volume, F\/R: 48\/37 ft3
Trunk Volume: 10 ft3
Curb Weight: 3440 lb<\/p>\n
C\/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 4.7 sec
100 mph: 11.8 sec
1\/4-Mile: 13.4 sec @ 106 mph
150 mph: 34.5 sec
Rolling Start, 5\u201360 mph: 5.2 sec
Top Gear, 30\u201350 mph: 9.8 sec
Top Gear, 50\u201370 mph: 7.4 sec
Top Speed (gov ltd): 155 mph
Braking, 70\u20130 mph: 155 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.84 g<\/p>\n
Interior Sound
Idle: 49 dBA
Full Throttle: 81 dBA
70-mph Cruising: 73 dBA<\/p>\n
C\/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 16 mpg<\/p>\n
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
City\/Highway: 16\/24 mpg<\/p>\n
—<\/p>\n
2001 Mercedes-Benz CLK55 AMG
Vehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 2-door coupe<\/p>\n
PRICE
Base\/As Tested: $69,247\/$71,114<\/p>\n
ENGINE
SOHC 24-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 332 in3, 5439 cm3
Power: 342 hp @ 5500 rpm
Torque: 376 lb-ft @ 3000 rpm<\/p>\n
TRANSMISSION
5-speed automatic<\/p>\n
CHASSIS
Suspension, F\/R: control arms\/multilink
Brakes, F\/R: vented disc\/vented disc
Tires: Michelin Pilot SX
F: 225\/45ZR-17
R: 245\/40ZR-17<\/p>\n
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 105.9 in
Length: 180.2 in
Width: 67.8 in
Height: 54.0 in
Passenger Volume, F\/R: 47\/33 ft3
Trunk Volume: 11 ft3
Curb Weight: 3520 lb<\/p>\n
C\/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 5.0 sec
100 mph: 12.2 sec
1\/4-Mile: 13.6 sec @ 106 mph
150 mph: 35.5 sec
Rolling Start, 5\u201360 mph: 5.2 sec
Top Gear, 30\u201350 mph: 2.7 sec
Top Gear, 50\u201370 mph: 3.1 sec
Top Speed (gov\/ ltd): 158 mph
Braking, 70\u20130 mph: 167 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.86 g<\/p>\n
Interior Sound
Idle: 45 dBA
Full Throttle: 74 dBA
70-mph Cruising: 69 dBA<\/p>\n
C\/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 16 mpg<\/p>\n
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
City\/Highway: 17\/24 mpg<\/p>\n
C\/D TESTING EXPLAINED<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"From the June 2001 issue of Car and Driver. Cars such as BMW’s M3 and Mercedes-Benz’s CLK55 AMG…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":77157,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[20955],"tags":[6213,28527,15293,56706,15295,15298,21042,56705,39588,42606],"class_list":["post-77156","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-bmw","tag-bmw","tag-collection-from-the-archive","tag-content-type-default","tag-contentid-e6c826fa-c06a-4233-abdc-6d6a39b34dbc","tag-displaytype-standard-article","tag-issyndicated-false","tag-locale-us","tag-shorttitle-2001-bmw-m3-vs-m-b-clk55-amg-comparison-test","tag-sponsored-false","tag-subsection-comparison-tests"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/germany\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77156","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/germany\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/germany\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/germany\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/germany\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=77156"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/germany\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77156\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/germany\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/77157"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/germany\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=77156"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/germany\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=77156"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/germany\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=77156"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"Two](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/germany\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/d4ef41e8-7abd-41f3-b7ca-089f10e701d2.jpg\" "\\"Two")
<\/p>\n